Can you be a true 40K fan...

[b1soul]

...and still desire a reduction of Grimdark in the literature?

 

This is an honest question. Like I've said before, I don't mind some large helpings of Grimdark here and there. I'm just not a fan of the setting being smothered by it. Of course, one man's smothering is another man's under-serving.

 

In my view, grimdark should always remain a significant theme avaliable for any BL authour to explore...but I'm OK with it not being the central motif in almost every story. whereas some fans prefer a vast darkness, I prefer a vast darkness undercut by the light of a single torch. That's why I liked the general thrust of the Gathering Storm.

 

At what point does 40K cease being the old 40K? Have we already reached that point? What if the Imperium becomes more and more like Guilliman's dream of Ultramar?

 

What in your view is more fundamental or essential to 40K...the factions, technologies, entities etc. OR the motif of stagnation, hoplessness, fatalism etc.?

[Dizzyeye01]

I think before the Gathering Storm there was still some hope to be had in the 40k universe in general, after all if there is no hope then what is the point of living and why bother fighting? The only difference is that now there is a bigger figurehead in Guiliman coming back from the edge of the grave and trying to bring some reformations to the Imperium. The problem with Guilimans' plan and with the Imperium at large is that due to the size of it and the nature of the warp itself is that the Imperium is large seperated and whole worlds can be lost merely due to a serf or something like that making a mistake on a report. Even the news of Guiliman himself returning form the dead has not been heard across the whole Imperium and some forces and Crusades are still fighting the old battle of survival in ignorance of the changes being brought around. If anything, with Gathering STorms it's shown that some worlds have actually been time displaced in terms of time going quicker for them but say a neighbouring system has only had a day go by. 

 

To me, Gathering Stom has allowed 40k players more choices in terms of where they set their battles. If they want to keep to the 'old times' then it's entirely possible whereas if others want to be a part of say the Indominus Crusade then go right ahead. The setting is what we make of it. Yes, the Imperium has had some reinforcements but on the other hand  Chaos has gotten stronger itself and we've already seen at least 2 daemon primarchs come out to bring ruin to the Imperium. In short, the more things change it also stays the same.

[Warpmiss]

I personally like 40k for both the factions and their aesthetic and the grimdarkness of the far future. However, for a storytelling perspective, I think that in order for the motifs of Grimdarkness to be more effective and/or have a greater effect we need some room to breathe AKA take a break from the grimdarkness for a while so when it comes back it hits you harder.  

 

I doubt GW would completely remove 'grimdark' from 40k, though, as it is one of its defining factors.

[Marshal Rohr]

I think you can be a 40k fan and make it however gritty, dark, or hopefully as you want it to be. It’s the alterations of the foundational portions of the background that really get the jimmies rustled.

[Kelborn]

I'm a fan as it combines sci-fi and fantasy elements and makes something new of them.

I'm a fan as I can somehow do whatever I want within the setting.

I'm a fan of the recent releases.

I'm a fan of grimdark.

 

I do not believe that Dark Imperium took the "grimdarkness" from 40K. Everything is pretty screwed within this galaxy. The war has just entered its next phase. Chaos all over the place. Imperium more desperate than ever (with half of it nearly lost). Even more menacing Xenos threats: unified Aeldari, biggest Ork Waaagh ever, Tyranids are getting closer each day, Necrons establishing their old realms again and Tau taking the advantage out of this mess.

 

And even if you don't agree (which is natural; everyone got his or her own pov) you are not forced to play the newest stuff. You can still do a game set in about 33.M - 40.M and skip the recent releases like Primaris. There's still enough to play with.

 

So overall, I still consider myself to be a fan. I'm just skipping those parts I don't like.

[b1soul]

"It’s the alterations of the foundational portions of the background that really get the jimmies rustled."

 

I guess the question is what level of grimdark is foundational.

[cheywood]

You need hope to have crushing dissapointment, so I rather like the idea of 40k becoming a universe of highs and lows as the Imperium struggles for survival. Guilliman comes back, everything seems like it will get better, but the truth is he is but a match in the dark of the void. That seems more interesting than exploring an almost entirely downward cycle ad nauseum.

 

I'd also say there's no such thing as a true/untrue fan of 40k (and most fictional universes). If you like and consume the game and lore you're a fan at some level. If you don't do said things then you're not a fan.

[SchultzChaos]

But how is it too much grimdark within the books? Could you give some examples?

Is it the whole "the world is doomed, it just takes a damn long time to kill it off"?

 

My experience with the literature is that mostly the grimdarkness is used as a set piece, while good characters are still good and evil characters are still evil. Chaos baddies or xenos uglies usually don't win because as a author for BL you have to respect a certain set of BL-rules. Like good guys win and all that (I would like to get a reference here, but I'm quite sure that LJ Goulding told us this in one of the BL-threads). I think that story element in itself is a problem, because it takes away a big part of the suspense.

 

Grimdark for me would be, for example, a better representation of the psychological and traumatic effects of war on the soldiers of the Tanith First. Gaunt's Ghosts have been fighting a long time, yet they carry no significant trauma on their mental health. A character exploration in relation to the idea of "duty only ends in death" would have been an awesome way to show the grimdarkness of the far future. That would show meaningful consequenses of the grimdark on the living and breathing characters within it. Instead most book's about epic - in the pop-cultural way of speaking - heroes clashing with dark forces and their victory over it. Sure there is cloning facilities where babies are vat-grown to become bell-carrying dolls, but when did someone amongst the imperial population stop aghast about that fact? Grimdark is usually used as a glorified set piece, in my meaning.

[Phoebus]

I don't think we see enough Grimdark to begin with.

 

Remember thate amazing illustration Karl Kopinski did, of the Ecclesiarchy? Or, hell, the nightmarish visions John Blanche had of the setting? Most Warhammer 40,000 fiction doesn't come close to capturing that kind of monstrously Gothic dystopia. That's what I want!

[Xisor]

Yes. Next question!

 

---

 

Less peevishly: Some of the 'less Grimdark' is still very grim, it just has a very distinct tone to it; not being utterly hopeless as compared to overwhelmingly depressing.

 

Case in point: I enjoyed both "The Siege of Castellax" and "The Tyrant of the Hollow Worlds", both fine reads, but each tells a fairly bleak (in principle) plot, with very different feels to the novels.

 

And, certainly, we're not the gatekeepers of what it means to be true to Warhammer.

 

Plenty of folk resent the focus in Grimdark over a sort of punk dystopia; not absolutely awful in every way, but a bit topsy-turvy compared to what is commonly viewed to be a "sensible SF setting".

 

I'd be happy to see some of that blended in - Necromunda is a great bit for it, but it'd be interesting to see what other sort of imaginings might make of the raw material that 40k's model line offers up.

[Petitioner's City]

Good question. My immediate thought was, 'Was Gudrun "grimdark"?' Economies mean that there is always a glittering centre to the majority's marginal destitution. 

[Roomsky]

For a second I thought this was a tactical strike against a particular Frater, glad to see that's not the case.

 

I think the idea of being a "true" fan of any media unfailingly cultivates a cancerous community, and I think 40k is a special case in that its probably more extreme than similar franchises. 40k is pretty exceptional for the sheer amount of contradiction present in the setting, and honestly, I doubt anyone's interpretation is actually "correct". 40k is a collection of people's headcanons, bastardized from the lore they like, potentially across decades, and expunged of the lore they don't. 40k is basically whatever you want it to be, so long as you can justify it. 

 

I agree with Phoebus, most works don't usually live up to the monstrous insanity I'd like, but I don't claim I'm any more or less real a fan than someone who prefers their settings a tad more reasonable/

[veterannoob]

yup, as long as the narrative/fluff/lore/aesthetics of the game still appeal to me. 

[b1soul]

To me, a well-executed example of intense Grimdark would be "Wrath of Iron" by Chris Wraight.

 

I wouldn't mind it if the setting overall becomes significantly less Grimdark than that that as it progresses past the Indomitus Crusade.

 

I would still welcome some stories like Wrath of Iron, but I would be OK if they become a minority.

[SchultzChaos]

But aren't they already a minority?

[mc warhammer]

a true fan  (or tru phan) must live the grimdark.

 

insist on introducing yourself by your bolter and chainsword handle irl whenever you meet someone new. accuse relatives of lying and claim descent from the primarch himself whenever they invite you to a family gathering. do not indicate when driving around corners.

 

death is nothing compared to vindication

[b1soul]

@SchultzChaos

"But aren't they already a minority?"

 

Are they? I don't have exact stats

[mc warhammer]

@SchultzChaos

"But aren't they already a minority?"

 

Are they? I don't have exact stats

 

i can only go off what i've read and the vast majority, even in the horus heresy, don't seem overly grimdark. i haven't read WoI, though. even stories like GiF and trange demise of titus endor seem more in line with melancholic or straight up tragedy than anything excessive.

 

but maybe i have't read enough 30/40k

[Phoebus]

mc warhammer,

 

Happily, my B&C handle is my real-life first name. If I claim descent from a Missing Legion, can I get out of the family argument requirement - seeing as how anything I would say would be redacted?

[Knockagh]

If you want less of a dirty 40k feel there is lots of Sci Fi fiction out there to float your boat. Star Wars is there and many others. 40k as a brand has a look and a feel. To advance the storyline is great, to tweak with the background is natural and advoids stagnation of 40k but to change the grim dark culture would be suicide for a successful brand.

[b1soul]

Does Grimdark sell though? That seems like a separate debate.

 

EDIT: A dirty, gothic aesthetic can exist without a dominant grimdark motif

[Knockagh]

It seems to be doing pretty well. Although I’ve not seen sales figures. Is there a suggestion that 40k Black Library sales are poor?

[Warpmiss]

Does Grimdark sell though? That seems like a separate debate.

EDIT: A dirty, gothic aesthetic can exist without a dominant grimdark motif

True, grimdark may not appeal to the masses but isn't it one (dare I say 'the') of the defining factors of 40k?

[SpecialIssue]

Well, what is the definition of GrimDark?

 

Look at the opening blurb to this universe. The introduction, the foundation on which a new reader to the rulebook to get started in the 90's would have to read, and that has been put at the start of every rulebook since. You know the one, that mentions the Emperor as a

 

"rotting carcass writhing invisibly with power from the Dark Age of Technology... the Carrion Lord of the Imperium... for whom blood is drunk and flesh eaten..."

 

"Forget the power of technology, science and common humanity... forget the promise of progress and understanding... for there is only an eternity of carnage and slaughter and the laughter of thirsting gods."

 

What do these images conjure up? There is not a mention of honorable combat, exciting warfare, or even an embattled humanity. It instead only offers a picture of nightmare and horror on a terrifying scale (and is always accompanied by illustration to back that up, of a corpse wired into an archaic throne, wreathed in dark fog). On the macro stage, as a setting, this is the center of 40k grimdark, the motif on which the entire setting rests. Nightmare and horror.

 

Does that famous blurb still set the stage and convey the atmosphere and focus of 40k accurately?

 

Where humanity is recognized to be just as monstrous as any of the terrors it faces. Where technology is no salve to our entrapment, as it's promises of power are often just as terrifying as the enemies faced and lead down just as dark paths. For me, Grimdark isn't just a window dressing of gothic architecture, 'old timey' bastardised latin titles and ways of speaking, or even that 'the bad guys win all the time'. It's more of an environment, a feeling, the black choices and terrible, losing struggles that now must be made due to ancient folly and tragedy. And there is no easy way out.

 

I think we've already passed the point where this original opening blurb no longer fits with the tone and characterization of 40k.

 

One of the things I like is that 40k was one of the few settings to embrace the fact that everything ends. Why should Man be different? There is a reason the setting was chosen to take place when the Imperium and mankind seemed to be against truly impossible odds. If the creators had originally wanted to give the Imperium a fair fight and chance at winning, they would have started the setting like that. And if you wanted to believe in the hope of potential salvation, it was given in the vague hopes and prophecies on the return of the truly legendary primarchs.

 

See, for me grimdark is integral to the macro setting as a whole, but not so much on the individual story level. The setting is so vast that many people may live out their lives perfectly fine, without ever grasping the terror on a galactic scale, or participating in horrific atrocities. For that is another theme I think is important to 40k - if you want heroes, lights in the darkness - look to the common man, and the powerless. The closer to power you are in the realms of man, the closer you are to corruption, the closer to inhumanity and the closer to the grimdarkness of the 41st millennium.

 

As for whether 40k needs grimdark - I say yes unequivocally. Bolters, power armour, space elves and tanks in space are all great - but they are shallow and unfulfilling without the setting's futility, tragedy and the themes of darkness that cast shadows and depth over them.

 

Without these central motifs, IMO 40k is a rudderless pastiche of common tropes ported into space, with nothing special to say itself, and otherwise indistinguishable from other High Fantasy if you take the far-future tech away. Something that has curbed its original twisted, messy and open-ended vision in favor of a safe and digestible narrative.

[Phoebus]

I couldn't love that post more, SpecialIssueAmmo!