The limits of Grimdark, Grimderp, and Suspending Disbelief

[MrDarth151]

I feel Guilliman was a mirror of Lorgar in a lot of ways, including being as deceived by his own interpretation of the Emperor's grand plan as Lorgar ever was by Chaos.

 

Guilliman's high-minded ideals can't stand up to the reality of what the Emperor was about.

 

Are you trying to deliberately bait me into a rant?

 

But a war can only be eternal if no-one can achieve victory. That's a stalemate, no matter how many ups or downs there might be.

 

Yes. And?

 

 

It's not just the Imperium versus Chaos, either. It's anyone versus everyone. The Imperium could crush the T'au Empire easily, for instance, if only it weren't beset by so many other foes demanding time and resources to fight off.

 

Except we never see Imperium actually utilise the resources it is said to have.

 

And don't get me started on T'au.

 

 

I'm sympathetic to arguments like, "One deus ex machina shouldn't be countered by another," but of course 40K is nihilistic - "there is only war" is not a statement that allows for anything else.

 

You cannot possibly be serious.

 

 

There can never be anything more than a temporary peace, or a temporary setback, or whatever - not just because "there is only war", but also of course for as long as Games Workshop wants all of its factions to remain viable, none can be destroyed.

 

And the fact that I question the execution more than the premise has gone completely over your head, hasn't it.

[Phoebus]

I feel Guilliman was a mirror of Lorgar in a lot of ways, including being as deceived by his own interpretation of the Emperor's grand plan as Lorgar ever was by Chaos.

 

Guilliman's high-minded ideals can't stand up to the reality of what the Emperor was about.

Can't they? When I read this, I get that feeling that either Guilliman's ideals are being seen as more than what they are, or that the Emperor is seen as purposely monstrous -- or both.

 

I mean, let's face it: Ultramar is a "utopia" only within the context of M31. It, too, depends on Astropaths and enslaved, lobotomized servitors. It, too, exists on a perpetual war-footing, around which centers the whole of their society and its industry. At the risk of making a massive generalization, Ultramar is essentially a loose amalgam of Rome and Sparta with monumental architecture and sculptures balancing out a rather totalitarian government (at least insofar as the core of his Five Hundred Worlds is concerned). Guilliman is fair-minded and just only insofar as people do as they're told. While he's not absolutist or callously ruthless (he'd rather let Illyrium do their own thing rather than exterminate its population), I think it's understood that Guilliman wouldn't entertain his subjects rejecting the Imperium on a scale great enough to affect his plans or his Legion's needs.

 

By contrast, unless the series shows us otherwise, it's probably not fair to lay blame for the state of Humanity in M30-31 on the Emperor's feet. The Emperor, too, is certainly ruthless in the sense that he's willing to achieve his goals through total war. It's not clear to what extent he could've achieved his aims through diplomacy or a more enlightened approach to empire-building, but I think it's fair to say that the Emperor -- as depicted -- is driven by pragmatism, not cruelty. He doesn't, e.g., institute de-facto psychic slavery via the Adeptus Astra Telepathica because he's a giant jerk. Most of the overt cruelty and violence of the Imperium during the Great Crusade strikes me as a by-product of human society (Terran and of the diaspora alike) being dystopian to begin with. His take on the universe strikes me as similar to what we've seen in Frank Herbert's Dune novels: the Emperor thinks in terms of the species, and does so with a long-game perspective. Within that lens, the Emperor isn't opposed to Guilliman trying to make Ultramar something better, but also can't be bothered with making the other Primarchs do the same because ultimately that's meaningless compared to the end-goal.

[Ascanius]

You cannot possibly be serious.

 

How is a universe in which "there is only war" not nihilistic?

[MrDarth151]

 

You cannot possibly be serious.

 

How is a universe in which "there is only war" not nihilistic?

 

 

... Because there is more to the universe than just a tag-line?

 

Just like the Imperium is "Worst regime imaginable" in the opening crawl only because it's not true under any decent moral and literary analysis, both in and out of the universe.

 

"There is only war" does not stand up to any decent literary analysis either. And you know. Common sense?

[Huggtand]

"In the grim darkness of the far future there is only war" is a very good tagline but it’s not the whole picture. Only a certain percent of the Imperium can be dedicated to war for it to function.

 

We could in the same vein say that “in the USA there is only war” since they have been involved in armed conflicts 222 out of 239 years since 1776. But we know that for the average citizen in USA they live normal life’s and only know about these conflicts through the media. I can image that it’s (almost) the same for a big part of the 40k imperium. 

 

It would also be very boring if all there where in 40k was war. Then we wouldn’t have for example Rogue Trader RPG 

[Huggtand]

 

You cannot possibly be serious.

 

How is a universe in which "there is only war" not nihilistic?

 

 

That’s an interesting question, but what do you mean with nihilistic?

 

The most common definition of nihilism argues that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. That does not seem to fit 40k, since both mankind and many other species do feel they have an objective meaning with their existence (to rule the galaxy ). The common human also believes in the God Emperor and that every human has a value in His service.

[MrDarth151]

Nihilism is even worse in that regard. It's...

 

Okay, you know how people say that conflict is the soul of drama? What people actually mean is that MEANINGFUL conflict is the soul of drama.

 

Nihilism, at least existential nihilism, deals with utter MEANINGLESS of actions and life in and of itself.

 

Nihilism goes against most basic writing principles. You cannot do that. Or rather, you can, but it's really, really, really, stupid.

 

Hell, even disregarding that, 40k from economic perspective is reliant on retention of clients that commit resources, such as very significant amounts of money and time, and you cannot do that if you basically go "Yeah, every story we ever told, every codex entry you ever read, every battle your tiny dudes in armour that you spent days putting together and painting, and paid hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds for, fought? None of it matters.". It's basically the biggest investment killer there is.

 

Emperor on the Golden Throne preserve me, I REFUSE to believe anyone that has even remote idea of how fiction works could base franchise that's supposed to run for years, hell, decades, around bloody nihilism.

[Huggtand]

I think most would use the term hopeless instead of nihilistic in describing 40k

 

From an outside perspective that has changed over time. When I started in RT there where a slim hope for mankind even if the setting was Grimdark. Now a day the prevailing trend among the authors seems to be that’s there is no hope for anybody except Chaos or Tyranids.

 

Whatever you like hope or not in the setting both narratives has a meaning we as an readers can invest in

[Phoebus]

No, the introductory paragraphs of Warhammer 40,000 novels do not inform every part of this setting, but I do believe they capture the essence of the Imperium of Man. No, not every imperial planet is a horrific hell-hole where human life holds no value beyond its production capacity and unquestioning obedience to the Throne. On the other hand, I think it’s probably fair to say that, over a long enough timeline, that an Imperial world becomes one form of dystopia or another. The more direct the influence of the Imperium, the worse things are.

 

Are there exceptions to the above? Sure.

 

Of course, that’s just where M41 is concerned. I don’t think anyone would challenge the notion that M42 is worse across the board.

[bluntblade]

Regarding good old Terra, it was terraformed. The Emperor brought its seas back. It's definitely still on the mend as of the Heresy, but vastly better than in the Age of Strife.

[MrDarth151]

No, the introductory paragraphs of Warhammer 40,000 novels do not inform every part of this setting, but I do believe they capture the essence of the Imperium of Man. No, not every imperial planet is a horrific hell-hole where human life holds no value beyond its production capacity and unquestioning obedience to the Throne. On the other hand, I think it’s probably fair to say that, over a long enough timeline, that an Imperial world becomes one form of dystopia or another. The more direct the influence of the Imperium, the worse things are.

 

Are there exceptions to the above? Sure.

 

Of course, that’s just where M41 is concerned. I don’t think anyone would challenge the notion that M42 is worse across the board.

 

To which I would counter argue that it is contrary to what we are being told about how Imperium works. We have been explicitly told that it has no capability to influence words directly in such manner.

 

A proper dystopia is not something one achieves casually. It requires a lot of deliberate planning and execution that, we are being told, Imperium is not capable of. It's contrary.

 

Regarding good old Terra, it was terraformed. The Emperor brought its seas back. It's definitely still on the mend as of the Heresy, but vastly better than in the Age of Strife.

 

What would be the source for this?

[Huggtand]

No, the introductory paragraphs of Warhammer 40,000 novels do not inform every part of this setting, but I do believe they capture the essence of the Imperium of Man. No, not every imperial planet is a horrific hell-hole where human life holds no value beyond its production capacity and unquestioning obedience to the Throne. On the other hand, I think it’s probably fair to say that, over a long enough timeline, that an Imperial world becomes one form of dystopia or another. The more direct the influence of the Imperium, the worse things are.

 

Are there exceptions to the above? Sure.

 

Of course, that’s just where M41 is concerned. I don’t think anyone would challenge the notion that M42 is worse across the board.

 

Oh, I agree with you on that point. My comment was just to point out that a normal random citizen probably only see war in the various media.

 

As for how hellish the normal life is in the Imperium it's hard to say since mostly it's up to the authors. Take the different worlds in the Eisenhorn series for example. Most of them were not horrific hell-holes but rather "normal societies". Shure often the ruling elite is often a bit extravagant with certain vices  and there are maybe more poverty than in your modern time but it's not so different from what we know today. In contrast to that we have hive worlds that really are horrific hell-holes by our standards like Necromunda.

 

So even if the overall setting in the Imperium is a religiously bureaucracy nightmare where the Administratium extends to every aspect of life, there is a bigger narrative freedom on the more local level. In my meaning that's one of the things that gives the 40k setting its strength.

 

That the setting in M42 is a bit bleeker (mostly for one half) is no understatement  I do like it though, since it gives us even more narrative options than we had before.

[Phoebus]

To which I would counter argue that it is contrary to what we are being told about how Imperium works. We have been explicitly told that it has no capability to influence words directly in such manner.

Told by whom? What I’ve seen explicitly stated is that the various facets of the Imperium cannot exert direct control or guarantee consistent/timely communications and travel — which in turn makes logistics a nightmare. In broader terms, that means the Imperium can’t guarantee all its armies dress and train like Cadians, or that all its worshippers adhere to the same rituals, etc. The negative aspects of the Imperium, however, are both mainstream and predominant.

 

Again, you can focus on the exceptions to the rule if you like, but the fact of the matter is that the products that seek to bring this setting to life rarely focus on those.

 

A proper dystopia is not something one achieves casually. It requires a lot of deliberate planning and execution that, we are being told, Imperium is not capable of. It's contrary.

It’s not contrary because it wasn’t achieved casually.

 

It’s not like the million worlds the Imperium is supposedly comprised of were “Not Bad” to begin with, and that they’d have been comparatively reasonable places to live in absent the Adeptus Terra. The Imperium of Man was preceded by a millennia-long nightmarish existence engineered by malignant sentient powers of godlike scale and power. Following the Horus Heresy, the Imperium deliberately put in place social, economic, and military structures meant to ensure Humanity’s survival. The Adeptus Terra did this everywhere they went, to the extent that they could. What we’ve seen, time and time again, is that those structures are maintained at the cost of human freedom. What’s also plain to see is that, generally speaking, the larger the society these structures are applied to, and the more the Imperium expects to get out of it, the worse their effect is.

 

For example, if you’re on a sparsely populated planet on the fringes of Imperial space, and aren’t on Sector Command’s radar because they’ve got much more important fish to fry and your world doesn’t have any notable resources, you’re probably not going to register the full awfulness of the Imperium. The Adeptus Terra don’t exist to make peoples’ lives miserable just for the sake of it, so you’ll likely be left alone. Throw massive veins of adamantium in that world, though? That same population will be worked to death. All efforts to mine the planet will undertaken without concern for environmental impact or long-term health considerations. People will be shipped in to supplement the existing workers. Hives will be built to house them, with no thought to how awful their lives will be. If the slowly-poisoned planet cannot sustain the ever-growing workforce, the people will have to make do, or be fed slab or a soylent green equivalent (as with one Space Wolves novel). All this will be enforced through draconian laws and overseen by a heartless bureaucracy.

 

That’s the long-term future of an Imperial world. Not pre-Perturabo Tallarn or pre-Heresy Ultramar. Those places exist as cautionary tales — as tragic reminders that the Ruinous Powers will not allow people to live in peaceful, well-ordered, prosperous places. The Imperium is committed to a never-ending war of galactic proportions, to deny those same Ruinous Powers, and the things they will do to ensure their war-footing leads to the destruction of its own planets and people as surely (if not as swiftly or cruelly) as Chaos would.

[Ascanius]

 

How is a universe in which "there is only war" not nihilistic?

 

That’s an interesting question, but what do you mean with nihilistic?

 

The most common definition of nihilism argues that life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. That does not seem to fit 40k, since both mankind and many other species do feel they have an objective meaning with their existence (to rule the galaxy ). The common human also believes in the God Emperor and that every human has a value in His service.

 

This is a very personal view, I suppose.

 

A universe in which war is the baseline state to which all things inevitably return is one in which there is no room for any real meaning.

 

It doesn't matter that the Emperor has a vision for human evolution into a perfected psychic species, or that humanity collectively believes it's destined to rule the galaxy, because any "meaning" that justifies the slaughter and destruction of war is ultimately meaningless. The beliefs of those within the setting that there's a purpose to it all aren't really relevant. Either their goals are inherently destructive, to themselves as well as their enemies, or they're utterly deluded that victory is possible.

 

If you're fighting forever, your victories are meaningless because you can never stop fighting to enjoy them. Sure, individuals don't spend their every waking moment fighting, 100% of the universe isn't consumed in battle 100% of the time, but if war never stops then you're fighting just to stay alive to continue fighting. You can never build anything that won't be torn down by your enemies in time. You can never safeguard anything you cherish from being captured or destroyed by your enemies.

 

I don't agree with the fascist idea that the struggle for resources or dominance is the way to improve oneself or one's people. To be extremely glib, war is nothing but a heartbreaker, friend only to the undertaker.

 

("Fascist" isn't a careless label, either, since the idea of improvement through violent conflict is at the heart of all fascist ideologies.)

 

I don't believe in an inherent purpose to actual reality, either, but there isn't a systemic roadblock to people creating meaning for themselves, either individually or collectively; in 40K, there is (and most factions' idea of "meaning" is ultimately delusional).

[Ascanius]

Hell, even disregarding that, 40k from economic perspective is reliant on retention of clients that commit resources, such as very significant amounts of money and time, and you cannot do that if you basically go "Yeah, every story we ever told, every codex entry you ever read, every battle your tiny dudes in armour that you spent days putting together and painting, and paid hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds for, fought? None of it matters.". It's basically the biggest investment killer there is.

 

You seem pretty convinced that every customer of Games Workshop has to be emotionally invested in 40K, and that a nihilistic universe renders that investment meaningless.

 

I would say that neither of those statements are necessarily true. They might be true of you, even of many people, even of the majority, but they're not inherently true.

 

It's like people who look down on 40K because it's not a better-than-real-life escapist fantasy - that might be what they want out of their fiction, but it's not wrong that it's otherwise.

 

But look, I don't want to change your mind; it doesn't matter. I hope that we'll both find things to enjoy about 40K in the next few decades.

[mc warhammer]

 

Hell, even disregarding that, 40k from economic perspective is reliant on retention of clients that commit resources, such as very significant amounts of money and time, and you cannot do that if you basically go "Yeah, every story we ever told, every codex entry you ever read, every battle your tiny dudes in armour that you spent days putting together and painting, and paid hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds for, fought? None of it matters.". It's basically the biggest investment killer there is.

 

 

Emperor on the Golden Throne preserve me, I REFUSE to believe anyone that has even remote idea of how fiction works could base franchise that's supposed to run for years, hell, decades, around bloody nihilism.

 

based on this, would it be fair to assume that hobbyists must be leaving in droves on account of this massive buzzkill? i would guess this slap-in-the-face is also causing book sales to drop. i honestly have no insight into the numbers

 

or is it that black library actually doesn't actually have any of these themes and some people on this board are barking up the schopenhauer tree? 

 

as someone who has worked (on and off) as a professional screenwriter and generally in tv and film for more than a decade, i haven't been aware this problem until today. especially for a niche audience that against all "logic" seem to enjoy it. i mean, people seem to have liked the nihilistic stuff in fight club and macbeth for whatever reasons. but then again, i've only worked in mainstream entertainment, where you don't run into these themes.

[Huggtand]

 

This is a very personal view, I suppose.

 

(snip)

 

I don't believe in an inherent purpose to actual reality, either, but there isn't a systemic roadblock to people creating meaning for themselves, either individually or collectively; in 40K, there is (and most factions' idea of "meaning" is ultimately delusional).

 

 

If your core belief is nihilism I won’t argue that with you. Nothing I write will change your view that everything is without meaning.

 

But I will argue that there is no roadblock in the 40k universe for people to create meaning for themselves, either individually or collectively. A personal belief in purpose or meaning of existence is just that, personal; nothing is stopping them for filling their life with a meaning, if just the basic to fight and survive another day. Collectively, you personally may find their idea of meaning ultimately delusional, but in universe they don't. Most sentient species do seem to find their survival worth fighting for 

 

What we as readers personally reads in to the setting is of course another thing (as it should be) 

[MrDarth151]

This is going to be a long post and I'm to portion posts so that I can address specific points better. Apologies in advance; I know this kind of formatting irks some people.

 

 

To which I would counter argue that it is contrary to what we are being told about how Imperium works. We have been explicitly told that it has no capability to influence words directly in such manner.

Told by whom? What I’ve seen explicitly stated is that the various facets of the Imperium cannot exert direct control or guarantee consistent/timely communications and travel — which in turn makes logistics a nightmare. In broader terms, that means the Imperium can’t guarantee all its armies dress and train like Cadians, or that all its worshippers adhere to the same rituals, etc. The negative aspects of the Imperium, however, are both mainstream and predominant.

Again, you can focus on the exceptions to the rule if you like, but the fact of the matter is that the products that seek to bring this setting to life rarely focus on those.

 

And since the exact same problems would influence their ability to make the worlds horrible, I don't precisely see how you do not see contradiction here.

 

I consider it contrary exactly because of that. Hell, your own counter example is rife with that, but we will get to that in a second.

 

 

The Adeptus Terra don’t exist to make peoples’ lives miserable just for the sake of it, so you’ll likely be left alone.

 

On the contrary, considering how often things are horribly just for the sake of Grimdark, I would say they exist precisely for that.

 

 

Throw massive veins of adamantium in that world, though? That same population will be worked to death. All efforts to mine the planet will undertaken without concern for environmental impact or long-term health considerations. People will be shipped in to supplement the existing workers. Hives will be built to house them, with no thought to how awful their lives will be. If the slowly-poisoned planet cannot sustain the ever-growing workforce, the people will have to make do, or be fed slab or a soylent green equivalent (as with one Space Wolves novel). All this will be enforced through draconian laws and overseen by a heartless bureaucracy.

 

So let me get this straight.

 

You need to establish multiple logistic lines constantly bringing in new workers, because you are going to work them to death. You will inevitably lose some of the ships transporting them. Then you are going to bring somewhere between hundreds of millions and tens of billions tons of material to house to population you have forcibly resettled in cities that need to be built of super-materials, because they would collapse in on themselves otherwise. Then, when the malnutrition strikes, you are going to feed your workforce with their corpses, which will cause them to die within months because human bodies neither contains nor are capable of producing many substances we need to survive. And that's assuming they have appropriate amount of water, and are not working in heavy, dangerous conditions. You know, like miners do?

 

I'm not even going to mention waste of military power needed to keep the workers that you happily murder in line, planets being pissed because you steal their populace in addition to the tithes they already pay, and having to establish a massive bureaucracy to oversee this mess.

 

So your counter-argument is an example that requires Imperium to spend massive amounts of resources and manpower, including very valuable spaceships that will inevitably be lost in the logistic nightmare you have created... just so you can have Imperium be evil and their worlds dystopian.

 

All to gain resources that you could get much easier through the appropriate use of propaganda and proper mining equipment which Imperium must have, because it would be literally impossible to sustain their wars otherwise.

 

And after all of that... you wonder why I find Grimdark stupid?

 

 

That’s the long-term future of an Imperial world. Not pre-Perturabo Tallarn or pre-Heresy Ultramar. Those places exist as cautionary tales — as tragic reminders that the Ruinous Powers will not allow people to live in peaceful, well-ordered, prosperous places. The Imperium is committed to a never-ending war of galactic proportions, to deny those same Ruinous Powers, and the things they will do to ensure their war-footing leads to the destruction of its own planets and people as surely (if not as swiftly or cruelly) as Chaos would.

 

Honestly, current day Ultramar does not seem so terrible either.

 

 

You seem pretty convinced that every customer of Games Workshop has to be emotionally invested in 40K, and that a nihilistic universe renders that investment meaningless.

 

I would say that neither of those statements are necessarily true. They might be true of you, even of many people, even of the majority, but they're not inherently true.

 

Of course it isn't inherently true. On the other hand, it is true for enough people that I have hard time assuming that business oriented GW was going for it.

 

Usually, it takes a lot investment to keep up buying things that put a major dent in your monthly budget and free time. 40k is definitely one of those.

 

It's like people who look down on 40K because it's not a better-than-real-life escapist fantasy - that might be what they want out of their fiction, but it's not wrong that it's otherwise.

 

It's not. Because I do not want 40k to be better than real life. I want it to pass the minimal level of competence that should be expected of empire that managed to survive longer than written language and has not collapsed at any point, which is to my knowledge unprecedented amongst when we take historical polities into account.

 

 

But look, I don't want to change your mind; it doesn't matter. I hope that we'll both find things to enjoy about 40K in the next few decades.

 

I find things to enjoy about 40k all of the time.

 

What grinds my gears is when people are telling me that I just don't get it and all of the criticism I've defended my favourite universe from for all those years I've been it's fan are not only correct, but actual point of the setting.

 

I find it both sad and incredibly annoying.

 

 

based on this, would it be fair to assume that hobbyists must be leaving in droves on account of this massive buzzkill? i would guess this slap-in-the-face is also causing book sales to drop. i honestly have no insight into the numbers

 

No way to tell. Statistic is a science, and I don't have the relevant data.

 

 

or is it that black library actually doesn't actually have any of these themes and some people on this board are barking up the schopenhauer tree?

 

I have literally thousands of hours put into literary analysis for philosophical and ethical themes. I have read over hundred Black Library novels. The only one I felt was outright nihilistic was Master of Mankind, and even that is arguable, depending how deep you go into vagueness of it and it's placement in time.

 

 

 

as someone who has worked (on and off) as a professional screenwriter and generally in tv and film for more than a decade, i haven't been aware this problem until today. especially for a niche audience that against all "logic" seem to enjoy it. i mean, people seem to have liked the nihilistic stuff in fight club and macbeth for whatever reasons. but then again, i've only worked in mainstream entertainment, where you don't run into these themes.

 

Yeah, because those are given in short portions. Fight Club is pretty good, but how many times can you watch it before you get sick of it?

 

Basing a story around nihilistic ideas can lead to great things. Basing a setting with hundreds of books exploring it... not so much.

[Phoebus]

And since the exact same problems would influence their ability to make the worlds horrible, I don't precisely see how you do not see contradiction here.

Because they really don’t.

 

The problems the Imperium faces prevents it from exerting direct control. It doesn’t prevent it from cataloguing a world as having X resources and meriting Y tithe levels over a long enough period of time. Once it does, it puts into motion whatever ruthless means it requires to exploit what it wants. In plain words, the tragedy of the Imperium of Man isn’t that it can’t exact, e.g., precious fuels from Phantine; it’s that its appetite for said fuels won’t ever end and it doesn’t care what happens to the people of that planet so long as the tithe is met.

 

On the contrary, considering how often things are horribly just for the sake of Grimdark, I would say they exist precisely for that.

Sorry, but that’s nothing more than you injecting your perspective unto the universe. That’s no better than me writing off, I don’t know, the movie The Disaster Artist because things in it are funny just for the sake of it being a comedy. The Adeptus Terra are what they are within the context of their setting — nothing more, nothing less. They came unto their own after a cataclysmic war between the heirs of an already nightmarish existence against infernal forces utterly inimical to humankind. What they do is informed by equal measures of ignorance, religious fanaticism, ruthless pragmatism, and the lack of empathy the previous breed in them.

 

Throw massive veins of adamantium in that world, though? That same population will be worked to death. All efforts to mine the planet will undertaken without concern for environmental impact or long-term health considerations. People will be shipped in to supplement the existing workers. Hives will be built to house them, with no thought to how awful their lives will be. If the slowly-poisoned planet cannot sustain the ever-growing workforce, the people will have to make do, or be fed slab or a soylent green equivalent (as with one Space Wolves novel). All this will be enforced through draconian laws and overseen by a heartless bureaucracy.

So let me get this straight.

 

You need to establish multiple logistic lines ...

It’s really not that hard to understand. The very simple mathematics of this boil down to: are, e.g., the fuel sources of Phantine of sufficient quantity and quality to make it worthwhile for the Imperium to invest sufficient manpower and resources to extract them? If the answer is yes, then the Imperium of Man places less consideration in the freedom, quality of life, and longevity of the human beings it sends there an it does in the strategic value of resources that will enable its war-footing.

 

And after all of that... you wonder why I find Grimdark stupid?

The problem that I have with your argument is that it hinges on blanket assumptions and generalizations. You’re decrying the fact that the setting doesn’t subscribe to conventional logic seemingly without considering that what we deem to be logical is the result of certain advancements and conditions that don’t exist in this setting. Terra circa M30 shares far more in common with the Australia in Mad Max: Fury Road than Philadelphia circa 1787. All of this is the result of the Ruinous Powers putting humanity through hell. That’s the context that informs the Imperium of Man and the Adeptus Terra. Being opposed to all the awful stuff that happens in this setting is like me being upset with Homer for using greedy, lustful, and envious gods to set up human conflict.

 

Honestly, current day Ultramar does not seem so terrible either.

Relative to Chaos? Sure.

[MrDarth151]

I am slowly starting to get annoyed.

 

 

Because they really don’t.

The problems the Imperium faces prevents it from exerting direct control. It doesn’t prevent it from cataloguing a world as having X resources and meriting Y tithe levels over a long enough period of time. Once it does, it puts into motion whatever ruthless means it requires to exploit what it wants. In plain words, the tragedy of the Imperium of Man isn’t that it can’t exact, e.g., precious fuels from Phantine; it’s that its appetite for said fuels won’t ever end and it doesn’t care what happens to the people of that planet so long as the tithe is met.

 

What you are describing is exactly what exerting direct control is.

 

Unless you are suggesting that people of the Imperium are so stupid they cannot notice they are being exploited in incredibly inefficient manner?

 

 

Sorry, but that’s nothing more than you injecting your perspective unto the universe.

 

And you are twisting my arguments so that you can avoid answering my criticisms.

 

But sure, continue to imply that I am a fool that cannot read properly, it's endearing me to your points so much.

 

 

 

The Adeptus Terra are what they are within the context of their setting — nothing more, nothing less. They came unto their own after a cataclysmic war between the heirs of an already nightmarish existence against infernal forces utterly inimical to humankind. What they do is informed by equal measures of ignorance, religious fanaticism, ruthless pragmatism, and the lack of empathy the previous breed in them.

 

And you know, completely inefficient group that has killed planets by their incompetence, and I cannot remember the last time they have been portrayed as anything other than a constant road block for protagonists.

 

No, wait. I think Abnett might have some decent ones, but he is not writing 40k, now, is he?

 

Also, pragmatism? Don't make me laugh. Grimdarkness killed off all of actually pragmatic people, leaving only fools that think that cruel choices are the best choices, and will sacrifice valuable resources towards that goal.

 

 

 

It’s really not that hard to understand. The very simple mathematics of this boil down to: are, e.g., the fuel sources of Phantine of sufficient quantity and quality to make it worthwhile for the Imperium to invest sufficient manpower and resources to extract them? If the answer is yes, then the Imperium of Man places less consideration in the freedom, quality of life, and longevity of the human beings it sends there an it does in the strategic value of resources that will enable its war-footing.

 

Look, my political philosophy is a combination of Machiavellianism and utilitarianism. I am not questioning you line of argument because I care about freedom, quality of life and longevity of fictional people on a made up planet.

 

I am questioning it because you came with one of the most inefficient ways to exploit people I have ever seen. My line of criticism is practical, not moral.

 

You might be fine with levels of incompetence that verge on parody, but I'm not. I want Imperium to be ruthlessly pragmatic. Not clowns that deliberately waste valuable resources because they set out to maximise grimdarkness, instead of actual gain.

 

Morality has no place here. Bringing it up doesn't counter my argument, because I never made criticism from moral principles.

 

 

 

The problem that I have with your argument is that it hinges on blanket assumptions and generalizations.

 

So does yours. And everyone's, for that fact, because we don't have actual resources for anything else.

 

 

 

You’re decrying the fact that the setting doesn’t subscribe to conventional logic seemingly without considering that what we deem to be logical is the result of certain advancements and conditions that don’t exist in this setting. Terra circa M30 shares far more in common with the Australia in Mad Max: Fury Road than Philadelphia circa 1787. All of this is the result of the Ruinous Powers putting humanity through hell. That’s the context that informs the Imperium of Man and the Adeptus Terra. Being opposed to all the awful stuff that happens in this setting is like me being upset with Homer for using greedy, lustful, and envious gods to set up human conflict.

 

Oh, that's a good laugh.

 

I am not opposed to the awful stuff. I am opposed to the stupid stuff. Or, to quote a certain someone.

 

What bothers me is when things are dumbed down or artificially made worse than they should be, in order to support the story.

 

See, what annoys me is that it is somehow okay for you to make complaints in that vein, but not me.

 

 

 

Relative to Chaos? Sure.

 

Relative to the rest of the Imperium.

[Phoebus]

What you are describing is exactly what exerting direct control is.

Actually, no. What I’m pointing out is that the Imperium of Man, hampered as it is by highly imperfect and unreliable modes of communication and travel, is nonetheless able — on a long enough timeline — to impose tithes on its planets in accordance with their perceived worth.

 

Unless you are suggesting that people of the Imperium are so stupid they cannot notice they are being exploited in incredibly inefficient manner?

You call them stupid. I call that you imposing real-world values on a setting that exists within a completely different context. Meaning, people whose socio-economic starting point was Terra circa M31 have a completely different definition of “stupid” than you do when it comes to societal viewpoints. People who, over a period of 10,000 years are repressed and brutalized into a state of ignorant servility are going to be even less equipped to question what is being done to them.

 

And you are twisting my arguments so that you can avoid answering my criticisms.

 

But sure, continue to imply that I am a fool that cannot read properly, it's endearing me to your points so much.

That certainly was not my intent.

 

And you know, completely inefficient group that has killed planets by their incompetence, and I cannot remember the last time they have been portrayed as anything other than a constant road block for protagonists.

 

No, wait. I think Abnett might have some decent ones, but he is not writing 40k, now, is he?

Of course he has. I never pretended that there aren’t exceptions to the rule; I argue that the setting makes it clear that the mainstream reality is far more nightmarish than the nicer planets Abnett’s described.

 

Also, pragmatism? Don't make me laugh. Grimdarkness killed off all of actually pragmatic people, leaving only fools that think that cruel choices are the best choices, and will sacrifice valuable resources towards that goal.

You’re right: words mean things, and I used the wrong one. What I’m trying to convey is that the Imperium of Man isn’t motivated by ideals, but what it perceives as its reality and its requirements.

 

I am questioning it because you came with one of the most inefficient ways to exploit people I have ever seen. My line of criticism is practical, not moral.

Again: no one is arguing that the Imperium of Man is efficient. What I’m trying to convey to you is that the Imperium of Man is not “stupid” in a vacuum. It’s “stupid” because it was raised in continues to exist under a set of circumstances that don’t encourage innovation or rational thought.

 

So does yours. And everyone's, for that fact, because we don't have actual resources for anything else.

My argument boils down to this: the setting’s context drives its mainstream portrayal, to whose rule there are exceptions. There’s no assumption involved there. My argument includes generalizations by virtue of referencing the setting itself, which isn’t fully fleshed out. That doesn’t make them inaccurate, though. “The Imperium of Man is an oppressive realm of largely ignorant fanatics” is a generalization. It’s also a very fair description of the mainstream Imperium.

 

You don’t value the setting’s core theme? That’s fine! That’s your right, and no one here should be telling you that you have to like it. Literally the only bone of contention I have with your line of argument is that you’re so worried about the Imperium of Man being inefficient and wasteful while seemingly refusing to consider that the circumstances allow for it to be thus.

 

See, what annoys me is that it is somehow okay for you to make complaints in that vein, but not me.

See, what annoys me is when someone whose argument is predicated on ignoring the context of something tries to score cheap points by, well, taking something I said out of context.

 

Because, let’s face it: there’s a pretty big heap of difference between planet-based void shields or orbital bombardment being as strong or weak as the author needs them to be... and an intellectual property’s design team proposing that a millennia-long galactic dark age caused by god-like forces would result in an empire ruled by ignorance, fanaticism, and oppression.

 

Relative to the rest of the Imperium.

Sure. No disagreement there.

[USNCenturion]

Isn’t there a corner you guys can hash this debate out in privately? This has taken on quite a nasty life of its own the last few days.

[Phoebus]

You’re right, man. I apologize for causing a distraction.

[MrDarth151]

One last post for the road.

 

I will not pursue this line of discussion after I'll clarify some things.

 

 

Actually, no. What I’m pointing out is that the Imperium of Man, hampered as it is by highly imperfect and unreliable modes of communication and travel, is nonetheless able — on a long enough timeline — to impose tithes on its planets in accordance with their perceived worth.

 

And has, since at least two edition ago, been noted to leave the planets alone if said tithe is fulfilled.

 

You are arguing that they possess a level of control that I have never seen actually enacted beyond major worlds.

 

You call them stupid. I call that you imposing real-world values on a setting that exists within a completely different context. Meaning, people whose socio-economic starting point was Terra circa M31 have a completely different definition of “stupid” than you do when it comes to societal viewpoints. People who, over a period of 10,000 years are repressed and brutalized into a state of ignorant servility are going to be even less equipped to question what is being done to them.

 

I feel like that if it was the case, we would have a lot less rebellious planets in the Imperium.

 

Fringe worlds certainly don't feel so, considering betterment of fate is one of the cited reasons of them defecting to Tau.

 

Also, yes, if someone murders their entire population through forced labour and they don't react at all, I would call them stupid. Especially since the forces guarding them are most likely locally drafted.

 

 

 

That certainly was not my intent.

 

Then I apologise for the accusation.

 

 

 

Of course he has. I never pretended that there aren’t exceptions to the rule; I argue that the setting makes it clear that the mainstream reality is far more nightmarish than the nicer planets Abnett’s described.

 

No, I mean he literally is not writing 40k. From what I understood from my discussion with ADB some time back, editorial pretty much forbids everyone else from writing 40k like he does. It appears he has special dispensation.

 

 

 

Again: no one is arguing that the Imperium of Man is efficient. What I’m trying to convey to you is that the Imperium of Man is not “stupid” in a vacuum. It’s “stupid” because it was raised in continues to exist under a set of circumstances that don’t encourage innovation or rational thought.

 

Actually, I am arguing that Imperium of Mankind must be efficient.

 

 

 

My argument boils down to this: the setting’s context drives its mainstream portrayal, to whose rule there are exceptions. There’s no assumption involved there. My argument includes generalizations by virtue of referencing the setting itself, which isn’t fully fleshed out. That doesn’t make them inaccurate, though. “The Imperium of Man is an oppressive realm of largely ignorant fanatics” is a generalization. It’s also a very fair description of the mainstream Imperium.

You don’t value the setting’s core theme? That’s fine! That’s your right, and no one here should be telling you that you have to like it. Literally the only bone of contention I have with your line of argument is that you’re so worried about the Imperium of Man being inefficient and wasteful while seemingly refusing to consider that the circumstances allow for it to be thus.

 

There are such circumstances. Sure. We can agree on that, at least.

 

 

 

See, what annoys me is when someone whose argument is predicated on ignoring the context of something tries to score cheap points by, well, taking something I said out of context.

Because, let’s face it: there’s a pretty big heap of difference between planet-based void shields or orbital bombardment being as strong or weak as the author needs them to be... and an intellectual property’s design team proposing that a millennia-long galactic dark age caused by god-like forces would result in an empire ruled by ignorance, fanaticism, and oppression.

 

I am not ignoring context. You are simply mistaken what the nature of my complaint is.

 

Because it's actually the same as yours. Only much larger in scale.

 

You see, the problem here isn't that the Imperium of Mankind is ruled by ignorance, fanaticism and oppression.

 

The problem is that it survives like that, while also waging multiple interstellar wars at the same time.

 

And that just doesn't add up. Inertia is the counter-argument I hear most often, but inertia doesn't really work in this context. The Imperium is still roughly the same size it was ten thousand years ago. Most of it should be gone.

 

The difference between mine argument and yours, is that I include the strategic layer of warfare in my complaints, while you focus on tactical. What's the difference between writer deciding that his orbital bombardment will only be kiloton strong, even though we saw it break continents a book ago, and writer deciding that Imperial Logistic suddenly works great/fails utterly depending on what he needs to happen? Both are contrived so that the plot can move forwards.

 

And that is my point. I take your complaint, and apply it to entire strategic level of Imperium of Mankind. Either they are geniuses that can keep an empire which should totally not work going, or they are fools and the Imperium should be long gone.

 

I prefer the latter. And if I need to ignore canon so that I can enjoy my 40k, well, so be it. Not like GW cares that much about consistency to begin with.

 

And that's that. If you wish to pursue this conversation, I propose PMs. Or we can end it here. I have no preference.

[Ascanius]

 

 

This is a very personal view, I suppose.

 

(snip)

 

I don't believe in an inherent purpose to actual reality, either, but there isn't a systemic roadblock to people creating meaning for themselves, either individually or collectively; in 40K, there is (and most factions' idea of "meaning" is ultimately delusional).

 

If your core belief is nihilism I won’t argue that with you. Nothing I write will change your view that everything is without meaning.

 

Mmm, that's not exactly what I said; I'm an existentialist, not a nihilist. It's only the idea that meaning can be inherent that I disagree with. I'll leave it there, though, given the board's rules.

 

In 40K, though, I guess I'd say there is an inherent meaning built into the fabric of the universe, which is that everything devolves into chaos (or Chaos) sooner or later.

 

The triumph of the Imperium is that it has lasted for 10,000 years in the face of this fact; the tragedy is that it only does so by feeding countless lives into the endless grind of war while keeping the vast majority of the species in abject, enslaved misery for no greater purpose than survival at any cost.

 

It's not that I think it's impossible for someone in the 40K universe to believe that something more and better is possible; it's just that the universe is such so that such ideas fail and die, while ideas which perpetuate conflict and suffering survive. You can build an Imperium in 40K, but you can't build a United Federation of Planets. The Imperium can lay claim to territory spanning the galaxy, but it can never exterminate its enemies and enjoy the benefits of such conquest during peacetime.

 

This is partly because of the metaphysics of the universe - Chaos feeding off emotions, et cetera - and partly because every society is either trapped in fascist modes of thought or vulnerable to destruction (at the hands of the former societies or the other, wilder threats out there). It's both a philosophical and a political fact of the setting.