Destroyer Squads - which Legions used them?

[Bung]

@Gorgoff

I never read them as a penal troop.

They are noted as a necessary evil and shunned, maybe considered tainted but i havent found anything that says serving in a Destroyer Squad is used as a punishment.

 

You dont give forbidden weapons of Mass destruction to convicts at least that common sense is in the Heresy.

[MegaVolt87]

@Gorgoff

I never read them as a penal troop.

They are noted as a necessary evil and shunned, maybe considered tainted but i havent found anything that says serving in a Destroyer Squad is used as a punishment.

 

You dont give forbidden weapons of Mass destruction to convicts at least that common sense is in the Heresy.

 

Even though they are convicts, they are still marines. The ones that would turn such weapons on their fellow legionaries, such other crimes would be just skipped straight to execution as punishment, not put in a penal unit like destroyers. Primarchs giving the keys to the nut house to their problem sons still works out due to the psychological bond between primarch and legionary. 

Edited June 27, 2020 by MegaVolt87

[Pacific81]

Many thanks for the replies guys. Painting heavily weathered armour is a neat idea; I'm not sure how I'll do that at 8mm scale but will give it a go!

 

Re. the convict/penal troops where is the reference for that? I've had a read online (the usual - lexicanum etc) and can't find any reference. I do think logically that makes little sense - that you would give your most unreliable (and troops that don't follow orders?) your most lethal weaponry inc. nukes!

Edited June 27, 2020 by Pacific81

[infyrana]

Crysos Morturg of the Death Guard is a base example of a primarch side lining a legionnaire and sending them out of sight. Worth a read to get another take on them.

[Bung]

Crysos Morturg of the Death Guard is a base example of a primarch side lining a legionnaire and sending them out of sight. Worth a read to get another take on them.

 

I have read about him, and sticking him into Destroyers is just part of the Death Guard Mary Sue Story.

 

Short:

Main caracter is generally diskliked but skilled and even gets a leadership position.

MC even gains magic power (here psyker)

Is even more disliked by his superior and gets one of the worst and thankless jobs assigned.

MC is finally betrayed by his peers and supriors.

MC stays a leader and still fights for the good side against his peers and superior which turned bad.

 

Its some sort of story you had already and it shows one of 2 things: first lazy writing for a Mary Sue caracter or how dumb post humans like primarchs are.

 

If i want to get my guys killed, why not just stick tthem into an assault squad and send them on a mission with near zero survival expectation? 

Would have been way faster than to stick them into Destroyer Squads.

 

Sorry for the harsh words, but Crysis Mortugs story is another example for bad caracter writing in the Heresy, could have been done better and less Mary Suey. Its like the Eragon story in 40k.

 

There are other takes on Destroyer Squads in the Legions.

Sanguinus made them wear masks and traditional names, so that their real names and honor staay untainted.

Salamanders only use that weapons only against non humans so there wouldnt be much dishonor.

 

 

Here are my reasons why Destroyer Squads are probably not convicts and rather trusted warriors willing to do the dirty work for humanities sake.

I take on some real life stuff to explain my view.

 

I quote  the 40k wiki here.

 

 

 

Alongside certain factions of the Mechanicum, only Astartes Destroyer Squads were sanctioned to use such forbidden weapons within the forces of the Imperium by the Emperor's command. Radiation-based weapons, bio-alchemical munitions and the burning horror of Phospex were amongst the components that comprised the Destroyers' dark arsenal -- weapons which irrevocably tainted the ground on which they were used. During the long nightmare of the Age of Strife, such weapons of mass destruction rendered many once life-sustaining human colonies uninhabitable charnel houses.

 

Thats a point were we have already been.

We have seen what happens by the use of chemical and nuclear weapons and their long term effect.

Chemical weapons have been used in WW I and have been mostly banned since then for the use against humans.

Or look up the effects of Agent Orange used in the Vietnam war and its effects on civilians.

Look up what happend at the Bikini Atolls and the long term effects of the nuclear weapon tests.

 

Thats the sort of weapons Destroyers are meant to handle, not even mentioned their fantasy counterparts liek the life eater virus etc.

 

Now there are still nuclear weapons ready to use on planes, sup marines etc.

They are not handled by convicts but by really trusted and emotional stable human beings that know apout thier responsibility.

 

People like Stanislav Petrow:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/world/europe/stanislav-petrov-nuclear-war-dead.html#:~:text=the%20main%20story-,Stanislav%20Petrov%2C%20Soviet%20Officer%20Who%20Helped%20Avert,War%2C%20Is%20Dead%20at%2077&text=Early%20on%20the%20morning%20of,the%20outbreak%20of%20nuclear%20war.

 

Thats my idea of the mindset marines need to be considered for serving in Destroyer Squads or even command them.

 

If you want to know what happens if a commander of such weapons goes nuts watch Stanly Kubriks Dr. Stangelove from 1964.

[Gorgoff]

"Is even more disliked by his superior and gets one of the worst and thankless jobs assigned. "

Q.E.D.

In Deathguard the destroyer cadre is a penal.

 

"They are noted as a necessary evil and not shunned"

That is plain wrong.

Here is a direct quote from their fluff:

 

"Considered dishonerable by some legions [...] Space Marine destroyers are often shunned and deemed somehow tainted by their battle-brothers"

 

Like I already said the BA are an obvious exception, but that is clearly written in their fluff.

 

"They are not handled by convicts but by really trusted and emotional stable human beings that know apout thier responsibility. "

 

Again plain wrong.

Another quote aboute Destroyers (and Moritats*)

we find in book 7 page 228 in the red box.

 

" in every Legion [...] there where those who the horrors of all they had witnessed and all the bloody deeds they had done [...] mutilated their soul damaged their minds to such an extent that they were no longer men, no longer space marine in truth, but something hollow and murderous beyond reason. [...]

final peace was offered, [...] or a place in a destroyed cadre."

 

Getting whacked or serve in the destroyers.

I rest my case.

There are legions where destroyers are seen as a regular unit who just happen to have special equipment. Iron Warriors come to mind and I bet my money on World Eaters as well, but in most Legion this simply wasn't the case.

And besides both legions suffer a severe case of PTSD as a whole to be honest. Blood Angels too are crying madmen and let's not talk about the pyromaniacs of the Salamanders. :)

 

 

 

 

 

* They are seen as "dishonerable murderes" as well and guess what? These are the only characters who can join destroyers and command them so no "really trusted and emotional stable human beings".

That's just not true.

Edited June 28, 2020 by Gorgoff

[Scammel]

I think we're looking at something inbetween; my take is not so much 'punishment detail' as 'weaponised PTSD ward'. I don't get the sense that these guys are disgraced so much as considered broken or mentally ill with all the stigma that's attached to that, and thus the 'final peace' on offer really is considered a mercy. I don't see anything to suggest that these marines are shunned prior to joining the Destroyers.

 

The behaviours that would warrant outright censure or punishment - incompetence, cowardice etc. - are not the kind of behaviours you want exhibited in your expert unit with access to the very best weaponry you have. Our analogy should be something like the Death Company, not Penal Legions.

[Pacific81]

I think you are both arguing about different things. I'm not sure I would go as far as Death Company, who have become almost mindless (again - you wouldn't give someone in that state of mind a nuke!) but are so far along the PTSD route that the Destroyers would be the only place to go, other than euthanasia. 

 

To me 'Penal legion' makes me think something like the Dirty Dozen - underhand scum who disobeyed orders and would be in jail (I'm not sure that could even fit with the definition of a Marine since at least 2nd edition 40k!) - And again I don't think that's who you would have holding on to your deadliest weapon. What would have happened if Private Pile had had rad grenades?! :) 

 

Yes as @gorgoff says the use and type of marine would be different for each Legion. For Death Guard, World Eaters etc. you can imagine it would be something they just do every two weeks on a Tuesday. For other Legions, Ultramarines etc. you can imagine it being a place for Marines who are at the end of the road. 

[Bung]

"Is even more disliked by his superior and gets one of the worst and thankless jobs assigned. "

Q.E.D.

In Deathguard the destroyer cadre is a penal.

 

 

" in every Legion [...] there where those who the horrors of all they had witnessed and all the bloody deeds they had done [...] mutilated their soul damaged their minds to such an extent that they were no longer men, no longer space marine in truth, but something hollow and murderous beyond reason. [...]

final peace was offered, [...] or a place in a destroyed cadre."

 

Getting whacked or serve in the destroyers.

 

 

 

Well in case of the Death Guard, the whole Legion is a Destroyer cadre for their love of chemical weapons. 

 

The other side, Book 7 is something i cant take really serious without Bligh.

What you quoted there is something idiotic writing without research. They should have at least read the wiki article about PTSD.

On the other side i had talked with some officers responsible for nuclear weapons and well thats so far off from real life its just idiotic. It wants me to gauge out my own eyes to forget i read that.

 

I mean give an unstable marine the case to nukes or a can of life eater virus? PTSD can lead to self destroying tendencies. 

Giving someone the keys to some nukes, whose probably dancing with suicide?

Seems like a realy dumb idea.

 

Would be far easier to give that Marines a Zap Brannigan leader and let them go like:

[Elzender]

The way I see it, the legionaries assigned to the destroyer cadres are usually those that are deemed "expendable" by their officers, due to the unstable nature of their weaponry and their side effects on the users. Thus, I can see why some legions would put their problematic or "unruly" marines as destroyers, rather than more disciplined marines that can be more useful in the long term.

 

One thing we have to consider is that marines are not really human when it comes to their psychology (I admit I haven't read book 7 so I'm not familiar with the lore there). What we consider problematic or unruly for human standards might be considered a reason for the outright execution/servitor conversion of the marine. An unruly marine is not one that would consider betraying or abandoning his fellows, but rather one that might not obey instantly the orders of his sergeant or that can get carried away in the heat of battle. Are those marines still useful and perfectly capable of fighting? Yes, but they might not be ideal to have them in critical situations where discipline is key, and their progress in the legion ranks is likely to be limited. Considering that during the Crusade legions had plenty of resources, I can see the legion deciding to just replace them, and send those marines to the destroyer cadres. There they are given weapons that will likely end up killing them, and told to go wild. The officers will try deploy them away from the main forces, or in situations where the collateral damage is deemed acceptable. And there, those marines will be put to their best use, nuking/burning/poisoning enemies to their heart's content. Legions don't need these guys to be precise, hyperefficient and perfectly in sync with the rest of the force, they just need them to erase a chunk of the enemy and hopefully live to fight another day.

 

As for the big nukes, artillery grade phosphex and big nasties, I guess those are only available to the officers of the cadres, which are likely the less unstable of the bunch and thus have good judgement enough to know when to use them or not.

 

Regarding PTSD, I cannot really talk about that as I have no experience about it. However, marines probsbly do not suffer the kind of psychological problems that real life soldiers develop. They are trained and hypnoindoctrinated their whole lives for battle, so it is unlikely they will face the psichological backlash of war and its horrors. I would think they are more likely to start reveling in it, to the point where they only focus on killing more and more enemies, leaving behind other tactical considerations. That does not mean they are not highly trained elite soldiers with a genetically ingrained sense of brotherhood and loyalty to their legion brothers, and thus very unlikely to cause a friendly fire incident. The moment that happens, I'm guessing that marine gets a round/chop to the head or a lobotomy to become a servitor.

[SkimaskMohawk]

@bung

 

Funny enough, that's pretty much how the raven guard moritats roll. In their Primarchs book, they unleashed about 30 moritats on a space installation next to a sun; exfiltration was an "optional objective" to be achieved. 46% survival rate for them achieving all objectives was considered a solid success lol.

Edited June 28, 2020 by SkimaskMohawk

[Bung]

@bung

 

Funny enough, that's pretty much how the raven guard moritats roll. In their Primarchs book, they unleashed about 30 moritats on a space installation next to a sun; exfiltration was an "optional objective" to be achieved. 46% survival rate for them achieving all objectives was considered a solid success lol.

 

Yeah, thats ab it of problem with the lore how its written for Destroyers.

I can see giving Marines that have gone problematic suicide missions and weapons that are not that save. Like "do or die" or even better "do and die, too".

But giving them general access to all sort of mass destruction weapons and other stuff just doesnt fit for me.

 

And i wouldnt seen troops for such missions as penal troops, as some others may think.

They may be disliked, broken, dishonored name it. But i havent found anything that tells me they are a penal troop in the strict sense of punishment.

 

More like some sort of Forlorn hope.

Medusan Immortals (which maybe assigned there for not brushing their teeth) are more of a penal troop to me.

[Gederas]

@bung

 

Funny enough, that's pretty much how the raven guard moritats roll. In their Primarchs book, they unleashed about 30 moritats on a space installation next to a sun; exfiltration was an "optional objective" to be achieved. 46% survival rate for them achieving all objectives was considered a solid success lol.

Yeah, thats ab it of problem with the lore how its written for Destroyers.

I can see giving Marines that have gone problematic suicide missions and weapons that are not that save. Like "do or die" or even better "do and die, too".

But giving them general access to all sort of mass destruction weapons and other stuff just doesnt fit for me.

 

And i wouldnt seen troops for such missions as penal troops, as some others may think.

They may be disliked, broken, dishonored name it. But i havent found anything that tells me they are a penal troop in the strict sense of punishment.

 

More like some sort of Forlorn hope.

Medusan Immortals (which maybe assigned there for not brushing their teeth) are more of a penal troop to me.

Look at it like this:

 

Destroyers weapons affect even Astartes, including themselves. So if the enemy doesn't kill them, their rad weapons will. Or if the rad weapons don't kill them, it'll make them crippled enough during engagements that they'll get killed during battle.

 

IE: Give unstable WMDs to the Unstable WMDs

[SkimaskMohawk]

It gets a little tricky to say what behaviour is worthy of censure or categorized as unstable, since every legion has their own particular views on what's acceptable. Emperor's children and ultramarines follow a pretty strict hierarchy and discipline is incredibly enforced, while the world eaters, wolves and scars are more relaxed in those regards.

 

I think the first basis for being part of the destroyers is causing too much collateral damage, even by legion standards. That can also fit in with them being problematic/penal troops/whatever since they don't quite follow the fire discipline of the standard legion units. So send them to the ranks where they're called in when their negative trait can be used as an asset; they're only called in to conduct the most scorched earth pogroms possible.

 

Imo the moritat is the extreme end of psychologically unstable marine, where they're pretty much just a serial killer in marine form at that point. The destroyers have more benign problems in comparison.

[Noserenda]

Destroyers arent penal or suicide troops, sure their weapons are dangerous and debilitating long term but its really long term with marines, years, not hours. Attitudes vary across the legions obviously but there are plenty of examples of marines serving with them long term and them being (relatively) normal and proud of what they do even if the rest of the legion does not get it. 

Main ones being the Ultramarines companies in the Guiliman primarch novel and Skane in various ADB worldeater stories. 

[STC Logisengine]

The thing is that while all Legions field Destroyers, they way they go about it is very diverse, so is their attitudes towards their destroyer battle brothers.

 

Most have Destroyer cadres attached at chapter/millennial/Host-command level, while some organise this at legion command level and disperses this force to each expedition fleet as needed.

 

Most are a standing force, some are convened and equipped only when the need arises like the Blood Angels and the Salamanders.

 

Then there is the Dreadwing of the 1st Legion. Wich is its own scary singular thing, of whom the destroyer cadres of the other legions are a mere shadow of an imitation.

Read the Lion primarch novel, for the dreadwing is pure, glorious, insanity when they open the vaults. :D

[MegaVolt87]

Being an assault marine isn't much of a punishment IMO. You get to be first into combat, kill important stuff/ people/ xenos, potentially die heroically outnumbered on a mountain of enemy dead.

 

Destroyer- your super human body slowly degrades from the most morally questionable weapons in existence, constant pain from degrading body and likely to just die from your afflictions off the battlefield. If that isn't a lasting punishment for a super soldier I don't know what is. 

[The Ironic Warrior]

I've always read it as astartes who have a tendancy towards violence and generally mercing civilians get thrown into Destroyer Companies, and those Companies are held at arms length until they're needed. Although once the Heresy really gets into swing I don't see any reason why the Traitors wouldn't be totally OK with using them on worlds they really didn't care about (Looking at you Tallarn).

 

But in general, whether they are regular astartes who are baddies, or convicts given a chance of redemption, I think the truth behind your own Destroyers can be anywhere in between those; every legion would do it differently so you can realistically get away with whatever tickled your fancy as your own Destroyer background. I'm personally running mine as simply Astartes who've always excelled at murdering their fellow man, so Horus threw them into Destroyer Armour and just went "OK boys, this is now your day job. One phosphex bomb each and make sure they're all dead".

[Bung]

Being an assault marine isn't much of a punishment IMO. You get to be first into combat, kill important stuff/ people/ xenos, potentially die heroically outnumbered on a mountain of enemy dead.

 

Destroyer- your super human body slowly degrades from the most morally questionable weapons in existence, constant pain from degrading body and likely to just die from your afflictions off the battlefield. If that isn't a lasting punishment for a super soldier I don't know what is.

Destroyer can have Jump Packs too and i doubt Space Marines ever had a retirement plan.

[MegaVolt87]

 

Being an assault marine isn't much of a punishment IMO. You get to be first into combat, kill important stuff/ people/ xenos, potentially die heroically outnumbered on a mountain of enemy dead.

 

Destroyer- your super human body slowly degrades from the most morally questionable weapons in existence, constant pain from degrading body and likely to just die from your afflictions off the battlefield. If that isn't a lasting punishment for a super soldier I don't know what is.

Destroyer can have Jump Packs too and i doubt Space Marines ever had a retirement plan.

 

 

Except how you die and when is very important to a Sapce Marine, being a destroyer isn't something most legionaries would volunteer for when they could be doing anything else. That's why their numbers are clearly bulked up with marines who did wrong by the legion/ commanders as a punishment. 

[Myrmidon]

Interesting trend... with a really complex answer. The true function, position, composition and "prestige" of the destroyer cadres in the legions is pretty confusing, due to the few sources of information we have, the huge discrepancies between them (both in-universe and between lore writers) and the idiosyncratic way of the legions. Are legion destroyer cadres an elite unit, a penal unit, a necessary evil, or just a useful tactical/strategical tool? Long answer short, all of them at once I think.

 

To put it plainly, the destroyer cadres are the NBC specialists. The Emperor was conquering the galaxy and reuniting Humanity, and thus destroyers are a last resorce military asset. It is vrey bad for propaganda to nuke with radioactive isotopes and cover in Phosphex your future subjects. But in some cases (deviants, xenos) it is needed. Hence, the reputation for belonging to a destroyer cadre. The astartes are the embodiment of the high ideals of the Crusade; the destroyer is a dark reflection of them, the reminder that sometimes, some measures need to be taken.

 

Going to the origins, let's go to the first template of what would become the Legiones Astartes: the Hexagramation of the First Legion. In their Six Wings we can see the first iteration of the tactics and battle doctrines of the legions. The Dreadwing are the core of what would become the destroyer - but not only that. The function of the Dreadwing was total annihilation of the enemy and the use of esoteric weaponry from the Old Night. When the situation was required, those weapons were used, as simple as that. Being part of the Dreadwing has no further connotation but and affinity for those weapons and tactics further improved through specialization, in the same way the Stormwing was with close quarters assault or Ironwing for mechanized warfare. The First is first and foremost a pragmatist legion; each asset has its use. Phosphex and radiological weaponry is not less "honorable" than close quarters fighting or aerial assault. But it must be used cautiosly and whenever the situation demands for that.

 

This approach fits with most of the legions we know. The Ultramarines for example (the 22nd Chapter, "the Nemesis") maintain their destroyer cadre. They are a little outsaider to the legion due to both being mostly Terran and their core doctrine of total annihilation which is conflicting with Guilliman's usual approach to warfare. But, first and foremost a pragmatist, Guilliman and the command of the XIIIth are not going to throw away experienced and seasoned troops on a form of warfare that sometimes is necessary or unavoidable. Hence, this dark reputation among their ranks. However, reputation and sanction have nothing in common. On the other hand, an astartes does not "volunteer"; they are tools created for warfare, and they have no free will. If their officers consider them suitable for the destroyer corps, they will join. Same as the marksmen go for the tactical and heavy support squads, and the swordmen go to the assault cadres.

 

This standard approach has some twists worth mentioning. The most notorious case is the Death Guard, in which one could consider a whole legion of destroyer marines. One can see again the perception on the "honorability" of these weapons and units. For Mortarion, there is nothing wrong with them. The XIVth officer corps doesn-t even consider them to be a "necessary evil", but a very useful tool and their standart modus operandi (one can say they are even too ready to use them).

 

Are destroyers a penal units in some legions? Well, first of all, there are no "penal units" in the legions. The lore is consistent. First, an astartes, even in the times of the Crusade, gopes through a process of psycho-indoctrination that makes them less inclined to incur in those behaviours worthy of penal sanction: disobidience of orders, desertion, pillaging... scarce and rare even among those legion framed for their ill-discipline like the Night Lords, World Eaters or the VIth pre-Russ. The most common unruly behaviour was that of too much collateral damage, but this was dealt through sumary execution by the Opsequari corps and its descendants (Chaplains, Wardens, Ophalim...) our was included into the core of the legion approach to warfare.

 

A whole different thing is this idea of "fall of grace". This though is not a penal but a personal sanction based on an officer or (usually) a primarch criterion. As such, we can see the case of Morturg (and I agree, it is a case of terrible character writting) or the Raven Guard (the old Terran way was too much for Corax freedom-fighter past). It is not so disimilar in concept to units like the Vth Sagyar Mazian, the "red-handed" Night Lords or the Medusan Immortals. They are frowned due to some "moral" standards running on the legion core of beliefs, but not what we could consider a penal unit. I agree that the high lethality of the destroyers is suited for those "fallen from grace" individuals, but still, not their only destiny (more on that to the last point).

 

An especial approach goes for the Blood Angels and the White Scars. Their primarchs and legion tactics frown their use a step further from the "necessary evil" territory, but they understand sometimes these measures are needed. So, we have the Angel Tears on one side, who, due to the idiosyncratic psychology of the IXth, have developed a way to use the destroyer corps to avoid the astartes to fall too deep into this brutal warfare (a risk too high for the sons of Sanguinius). The White Scars Karaoghlanlar are also full of ritualisctic practices for their use; being under the Stormseers (librarians) control meant that their use would come from a consensus and deep thought and never used lightly. As we can see in these examples, for these legions destroyers units were feared and ill-omened, but not considered as "penal" or "disposable". Just a dark path to walk that in the most dire circumstances was needed.

 

The Salamanders are interesting too in their Pyroclast units. The use of destroyers was heavily disliked by Vulkan, hence the transformation of this unit into something suiting the Promethean Cult. Why bathing whole planets in burning promethium is acceptable while doing the same with radioactive isotopes it's not is beyound my understanding, but here we have a legion which doesn't frown destroyers but instead shapes them into their own style. Similar, we can see the Word Bearers adapting their destroyer cadres to a specific task in the form of the Ashen Circle. Again, the destroyers suffer a new iteration to reflect the legion's ideals.

 

Finally, as some have mentioned, it makes little sense for the destroyers to be a penal unit made by unruly, PTSD or untrustworthy marines. First and foremost, its plain stupid to give such a powerful weaponry to that kind of astartes. Secondly, I highly doubt that in the strict disciplinarian Legiones Astartes there are enough individuals fullfilling this to conform a sizable destroyer corps, and those individuals would by dealt in more direct ways. Third, a destroyer is not a berzerker. On the contrary, they are highly specialized marines. They require special and rare armament and proper training in their use and tactics. They are short range combat specialists (not melee though), who use highly dangerous arcane weaponry which can become a double-edged sword with ease. The resource investment for each destroyer astartes is really not worth of a penal troop.

 

To sumarize, I would say destroyers were originally as intended another unit of the legiones astartes (as we can see in the Dark Angels). Unlike other troops, there was a lot of discussion and controversy on their existence (i.e., the XIVth vs the XVIIIth), but not on their efectiveness. What is clear is that even in the case they were set appart from their fellow legionaires due to their brutal ways, they were not penal troops: they required specialized training and weaponry and fullfilled a very specific niche in the battlefield, and thus should be considered a highly specialized elite force.

[Bung]

Thank you @Myrmidon.

You wrote it better than me.

 

As for the fire and Salamanders.

Think about forest fires and how Nature grows back. Ash can be used as a fertilizer while using the chemical aproach favored by the Death Guard leaves only a wasteland.

 

Its part of the reborn through fire from the Promethean Cult.

[Gorgoff]

Guys, please stop trying to use unrealism as an argument against canon fluff or I'll bury you under megatons of unrealism which they call warfare in 30k. Allmost no part of their take on war would actual work so stop taking things to seriously.

It's made up fantasy sci-fi BS.

Read the fluff and role with it and if you don't like it, make your own stuff up but don't pretend it to be canon because that is what we are talking here.

"Secondly, I highly doubt that in the strict disciplinarian Legiones Astartes there are enough individuals fullfilling this to conform a sizable destroyer corps, and those individuals would by dealt in more direct ways."

And yet it is canon.

Some legions do however like book 7 told us. Not which legions though.

Obviously not UM, WB, BA, SW, WS because they have been already meantioned not to.

Perturabo even make some of these flawed individuals one of his commanders.

 

 

"First and foremost, its plain stupid to give such a powerful weaponry to that kind of astartes."

Angron and Perturabo would like to have a word with you.

 

"they were not penal troops"

Mortarion would like to have a word with you, too.

 

"

Well, first of all, there are no "penal units" in the legions. "

Except for Immortals, or destroyers at least for the DG. ;)

 

Edit: and stop using PTSD. Obviously astartes are no humans. Shellshock is a whole different thing to them as it is to us. It triggers their urge to kill. :)

Edited July 1, 2020 by Gorgoff

[Bung]

@Gorgoff

My main problem is, there are alot easier ways to get problematic marines killed than giving them extra training and rare specialised weapons.

 

Then the short paragraph in the side of the unit entry (Black Book 1 and the Red book) sounds more like a description of a caste of untouchables. Someone needed to do the job but not liked for doing it.

 

But except for a few legions we dont know how they handle the recruitment for the Destroyer cadre.

[Pacific81]

@Myrmidon - that's a really well written post, enjoyed reading it. 

 

@Gorgoff - I understand what you mean - 30k/40k is very much more fantasy than science. Let's not forget the entire premise of 30k and for the 40k universe itself has been set up because Horus got stabbed by a magic sword. 

 

That being said, there is such a thing as suspension of disbelief, and it being broken. We can't know about the warp, about bolt weapons or gene-hanced soldiers (well.. not much). But we can know about psychology and expected behaviours and it cracks the suspension of disbelief of the setting if those things are broken, no matter how much flowery magic/sci-fi they are surrounded by. 

 

To give a round-about way of explaining, I watched a film called King Arthur not all that long ago (2017 Guy Ritchie one). At the start of the film the good guy's castle is being attacked by Oliphant type things the size of tower blocks, being ridden by wizards firing fireballs. All fine, it's a fantasy film. But, there is a moment where the defending king (I forget the actor) rides his horse directly off the battlements so he can leap onto said giant Oliphants. The horse falls to its death some distance below...

And that was it - stop. Suspension of disbelief broken. I'm not big into riding but have some experience, and in fact anyone who knows about horses knows that there is no way you could ever persuade one to leap to its death off a cliff edge, no matter how noble the cause. So giant elephants, wizards firing fireballs, all fine. Suicide horses - nope. 

 

To bring that around, I think it's the same kind of thing here. Yes the Astartes are post-humans, but we are told time and time again they are subject to the same emotional failings (again going back to Horus and the Heresy..), and they feel jealousy, anger, sense of loss and honour. So, if someone had a problem with authority and didn't follow orders? You probably wouldn't give them a gun and turn your back on them. Someone lost their marbles after the loss of their unit, or their perceived failing//lack of courage? (and other things that relate to mental anguish, whether you want to call it PTSD or whatever). Again, not trustworthy. 

 

Coming back to films again, would it have been a good idea to give this guy the keys to a tank or caches of napalm?!