The limits of Grimdark, Grimderp, and Suspending Disbelief

[mc warhammer]

If I’m being honest, I think the thing I’ve consistently had the most trouble with in this universe, both in game and in lore, is the way ammunition is carried and loaded. From the basic tactical marine having, originally, no ammunition on its model, to a terminator with assault cannon and power fist being unable to reload said cannon; it really is the one thing off the top of my head that has stuck with me for the 20+ years I’ve been in the hobby. What happens when a crisis suit runs out of ammo? How is a Knight Titan reloaded in battle? Where do these guys carry all their equipment on week long campaigns? Anything short of “grots carry the orks ammo for them” kind of makes me shake my head every time.

 

It might just be my time in the gunnery department on a destroyer that gives me too much of an appreciation of how heavy, cumbersome, and necessary ammo is, but I can usually get over it fairly quickly. That just stuck out to me as something that typically breaks my immersion. More than a guys fused ribcage or planets always being perfectly inhabitable for average humans haha

yeah, i can imagine having actual knowledge and experience in areas like that would break your suspension of disbelief easier than a more casual reader like myself

[Lord_Caerolion]

If I’m being honest, I think the thing I’ve consistently had the most trouble with in this universe, both in game and in lore, is the way ammunition is carried and loaded. From the basic tactical marine having, originally, no ammunition on its model, to a terminator with assault cannon and power fist being unable to reload said cannon; it really is the one thing off the top of my head that has stuck with me for the 20+ years I’ve been in the hobby. What happens when a crisis suit runs out of ammo? How is a Knight Titan reloaded in battle? Where do these guys carry all their equipment on week long campaigns? Anything short of “grots carry the orks ammo for them” kind of makes me shake my head every time.

 

It might just be my time in the gunnery department on a destroyer that gives me too much of an appreciation of how heavy, cumbersome, and necessary ammo is, but I can usually get over it fairly quickly. That just stuck out to me as something that typically breaks my immersion. More than a guys fused ribcage or planets always being perfectly inhabitable for average humans haha

 

At least for the Knight Titan, there are loader vehicles shown in Master of Mankind, as well as arming-thralls supporting the Custodes. In the case of the Astartes, I'm of the view that they don't have spare ammunition because most Astartes are supposed to be rapid-strike forces, so they don't exactly arm for protracted firefights, and can be rearmed with supply-pods launched from the ships in orbit. They're not really like soldiers for the most part, they'd be more like fighter jets, that perform a mission, then it's back to base to refuel and rearm.

[bluntblade]

There was one frater who made a point of giving his models hefty ammo stores on their belts, come to think of it

[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.

 

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.

 

 

Then I beg your pardon, I misunderstood your viewpoint.

I still don’t agree , since we can observe inherent meaning in nature that is instinctual, but I leave it there. 

 

In 40k we are of course at the whim of the authors so anything can happen an this is just my speculation   

 

How long the Imperium of Man can last is a question I think is very difficult to answer because we must consider that it’s changing over time. If we look at the Imperium M28, M32, M41 and M42 (dates to highlight the changes) it’s still the Imperium but it’s not the same. I agree that a civilization can’t last forever under normal conditions, but we have a lot of anomalies in 40k 

 

The nature of Chaos has also changed over time I the meta narrative. Before the War in Heavens it was apparently in balance and not a threat to the physical universe. After the war, there was an unbalance with a shift to more focus of the negativity of our emotions*. It was still not really a big danger to the universe though since it could not influence it directly in any big way. With the birth of Slaanesh and the Eye of terror there are now a prospect of the whole physical universe being devoured by Chaos

(if the Tyranids don't get it first ).

 

But this is not a total certainty since there are things that can cancel out the expansion of the warp (Chaos). The Necron pylons could theoretical close the warp rifts, the Tyranids shadow could cancel out the warp and what the Orks can do collective no one knows.

 

*(this is of course debatable and for an excellent discussion on this, watch "If the Emperor had a Text-to-Speech Device", Episode 19: Warp Grumbling (YouTube))

[Wargamer]

The ammo thing has never bothered me. It's like the D&D backpack - every character has one in theory, but it's never on the artwork, it never gets snagged in a tree branch or knocks against the door as you're stealthing, it just exists in a nebulous sense. This is probably because most people in D&D are far more interested in the hero and the pointy objects he carries in his hands than the mesh of hemp and leather on his back.

[Phoebus]

Until I saw the old schematic of the Mark VI "Corvus" Power Armour, I went with the idea that the vents on the bottom of the backpack were actually ports the Space Marine could stick him clip into for an auto-reload.

If I ever become a billionaire and buy out Games Workshop, I'll make sure that becomes canon.

 

... And I'll increase the emphasis on Grimdark by at least 100%.

[MrDarth151]

 

if that was you genuinely sharing a sad moment, cool, i can accept that bit of overshare…but nobody asked anyone to die on the hill for warhammer 40k. that responsibility is on you, not on this board or games workshop.

 

I'm sad because I do find my interpretation of the 40k to be genuinely enjoyable and good.

 

 

 

stats are science. sales less so.

 

you made a statement that no IP could possibly function the way that some people on this board (and at the IP) believe it does. so you must have some assumptions on how that affects its audience? genuinely curious, not trying to catch you out or anything.

 

it's entirely possible that opinions on this board are not popular and that black library sales are plummeting

 

Well, I will note that the massive jump in profitability and profit coincides rather neatly with the reveal of return of Guilliman and introduction of his Primaris Marines, the most positive things to happen to the Imperium in... like, forever.

 

That would, however, be a massive speculation on my part. It could as well be thanks to the 8th edition dropping in. It's a poor argument at best.

 

Also, we don't actually know how many BL library books got sold. Annual reports by GW do not make the distinction when it comes to stuff sold at their own stores, or through the mail orders.

 

 

is it fair to say, given your extensive academic background in philosophy and ethics, that you have a rigorous framework for evaluating 40k that few, if any, other readers would have?

 

Yes.

 

Mind, this is not a slight against other readers. It's just that the education regarding logic, ethics and philosophy is generally poor all across the board.

 

Though, ironically, many of the stuff that annoys me I know of because I wanted to improve my own writing.

 

 

 

and that you’re saying that the majority of 40k you've encountered fits well within your framework anyway. it’s just MoM and the people on this board that are causing you to lose sleep at night, right?

 

The latter more so then the former. On its own, MoM is fine. The Emperor might be convinced that the Imperium is destined to fail, but even the best of us can have a moment of doubt.

 

What makes it nihilistic is the immediate follow up with an author afterword that takes any ambiguity out, and says "Yeah, this is the point after which the entire human race is irrevocably destined to be destroyed". Not the book itself.

 

 

 

and that's fair enough. i would say that in the majority of cases, you'd be right. if i suggested something along the lines of 40k/grimdark for any of the productions i worked on, i would have been shut down quickly and probably not asked back again. it goes against the conventional wisdom of how mainstream entertainment works.

 

(but then of course, game of thrones came along)

 

I wouldn't say that GoT is nihilistic though. Oh, it's certainly dark, but those are not the same thing.

 

Unless living dead will kill everyone next season. Then it will become nihilistic.

 

 

i'll have to dig up the analysis, but i once read a pretty good argument detailing how no fictional dystopia is sustainable irl.

 

And that much is correct. The problem is that GW wants to have it's pie and eat it: They want to have a dystopia that survived ten thousand years of constant warfare.

 

It's the reason why most dystopian stories are not that long. The longer they last, the less sense they make.

 

i have to wonder what foolproof logistics actually adds to the story. what is the overall benefit? what do we take away from the story that is enhanced by improving in this area?

 

No contradictions to annoy me.

 

Well, at least that's what I would get out of it.

 

And curbing the worst excesses of Grimdarkness would allow for some moral complexity. But I know, that's too much to ask.

 

 

 

as for suspension of disbelief itself, i'm ok with things being described as the size of stars or planetary rings and with fused ribcages apparently being a good thing in the same way i'm cool with the hulk spontaneously creating mass and optimus prime's trailer effing off to nowhere

 

Me too.

[Rob P]

I suppose i don't find it hard to suspend disbelief because I kind of imagine the 40k stories nearer to anime than live action (save maybe Gaunts Ghosts) - so my mindset is that it's a bit cartoon-y than real.

 

 

 

 

The latter more so then the former. On its own, MoM is fine. The Emperor might be convinced that the Imperium is destined to fail, but even the best of us can have a moment of doubt.

 

What makes it nihilistic is the immediate follow up with an author afterword that takes any ambiguity out, and says "Yeah, this is the point after which the entire human race is irrevocably destined to be destroyed". Not the book itself.

 

 

 

I too had this sort of problem with this plot point in MoM.

 

In the wider HH story it felt wrong that the event in this book is the thing that makes the Emperor's dream unattainable. It means that all the events after it (e.g. Siege of Terra) are more to do with whether the Imperium survives for decades (i.e. Horus wins) or 10,000 years.

 

I like/prefer the idea that the Imperium could survive or even get back on the rise, through to 40k, and that the only thing stopping this is the lack of a common plan, internal hostilities and so on.

[MrDarth151]

I suppose i don't find it hard to suspend disbelief because I kind of imagine the 40k stories nearer to anime than live action (save maybe Gaunts Ghosts) - so my mindset is that it's a bit cartoon-y than real.

 

To be honest, my view might be skewed. I started my venture into the universe with Abnett's books.

 

I find it hard to suspend my disbelief like that, because the books, as we move on with the times, started to be less of a parody, and more of a thing that's actually supposed to be treated seriously.

 

To which I say: If you are going to write the book like you would a serious story, don't be surprised that I criticise it like I would a serious story.

 

You don't even need to write everything in realistic manner. At least attempt what I would call "Plausible deniability", and create your scenes in a manner that let's me rationalise it.

 

In the end, writers will write whatever seems right. That's their privilege, and denying it would go against my most basic principles regarding creation of art. And mine is the right to not like what they write.

 

I too had this sort of problem with this plot point in MoM.

 

In the wider HH story it felt wrong that the event in this book is the thing that makes the Emperor's dream unattainable. It means that all the events after it (e.g. Siege of Terra) are more to do with whether the Imperium survives for decades (i.e. Horus wins) or 10,000 years.

 

I like/prefer the idea that the Imperium could survive or even get back on the rise, through to 40k, and that the only thing stopping this is the lack of a common plan, internal hostilities and so on.

 

Which is my point also. You don't actually need the Imperium to win. But what I would like to see is a balancing act to keep the universe not nihilistic.

 

I once heard Laurie Goulding compare Chaos to entropy, but that doesn't work. Chaos is not amoral. Chaos is immoral. Heat death of the universe doesn't care about you and your morality. It is impartial.

 

Chaos? Chaos is a faction. It is a side in the eternal war. It enslaves those that serve it, and eternally tortures those that won't do it.

 

Metaphysical aspect is as important as the physical. You could actually kill off entire humanity, and still achieve a non-nihilistic ending if you address that.

[Wargamer]

To invoke Death of the Author, the Emperor in Master of Mankind has just failed to achieve his vision. It can be assumed he's in a pessimistic mood and so may exaggerate how screwed Humanity is.

 

It's also possible that he simply cannot imagine Mankind surviving without him. That isn't necessarily true, but if that is what he believes then of course he'd declare Humanity is doomed.

[MrDarth151]

To invoke Death of the Author, the Emperor in Master of Mankind has just failed to achieve his vision. It can be assumed he's in a pessimistic mood and so may exaggerate how screwed Humanity is.

 

I'd like to think that between Master of Mankind and taking up his place on the Golden Throne, he might have his own revelation: That it could be possibly to prevail through faith of humanity.

 

I'd always found the words "Emperor Protects" to be really exemplary of that idea: That because people believe he will, he does.

 

But I'm probably being overtly optimistic.

[mc warhammer]

 

 

if that was you genuinely sharing a sad moment, cool, i can accept that bit of overshare…but nobody asked anyone to die on the hill for warhammer 40k. that responsibility is on you, not on this board or games workshop.

 

I'm sad because I do find my interpretation of the 40k to be genuinely enjoyable and good.

 

 

 

stats are science. sales less so.

 

you made a statement that no IP could possibly function the way that some people on this board (and at the IP) believe it does. so you must have some assumptions on how that affects its audience? genuinely curious, not trying to catch you out or anything.

 

it's entirely possible that opinions on this board are not popular and that black library sales are plummeting

 

Well, I will note that the massive jump in profitability and profit coincides rather neatly with the reveal of return of Guilliman and introduction of his Primaris Marines, the most positive things to happen to the Imperium in... like, forever.

 

That would, however, be a massive speculation on my part. It could as well be thanks to the 8th edition dropping in. It's a poor argument at best.

 

Also, we don't actually know how many BL library books got sold. Annual reports by GW do not make the distinction when it comes to stuff sold at their own stores, or through the mail orders.

 

 

is it fair to say, given your extensive academic background in philosophy and ethics, that you have a rigorous framework for evaluating 40k that few, if any, other readers would have?

 

Yes.

 

Mind, this is not a slight against other readers. It's just that the education regarding logic, ethics and philosophy is generally poor all across the board.

 

Though, ironically, many of the stuff that annoys me I know of because I wanted to improve my own writing.

 

 

 

and that you’re saying that the majority of 40k you've encountered fits well within your framework anyway. it’s just MoM and the people on this board that are causing you to lose sleep at night, right?

 

The latter more so then the former. On its own, MoM is fine. The Emperor might be convinced that the Imperium is destined to fail, but even the best of us can have a moment of doubt.

 

What makes it nihilistic is the immediate follow up with an author afterword that takes any ambiguity out, and says "Yeah, this is the point after which the entire human race is irrevocably destined to be destroyed". Not the book itself.

 

 

 

and that's fair enough. i would say that in the majority of cases, you'd be right. if i suggested something along the lines of 40k/grimdark for any of the productions i worked on, i would have been shut down quickly and probably not asked back again. it goes against the conventional wisdom of how mainstream entertainment works.

 

(but then of course, game of thrones came along)

 

I wouldn't say that GoT is nihilistic though. Oh, it's certainly dark, but those are not the same thing.

 

Unless living dead will kill everyone next season. Then it will become nihilistic.

 

 

i'll have to dig up the analysis, but i once read a pretty good argument detailing how no fictional dystopia is sustainable irl.

 

And that much is correct. The problem is that GW wants to have it's pie and eat it: They want to have a dystopia that survived ten thousand years of constant warfare.

 

It's the reason why most dystopian stories are not that long. The longer they last, the less sense they make.

 

i have to wonder what foolproof logistics actually adds to the story. what is the overall benefit? what do we take away from the story that is enhanced by improving in this area?

 

No contradictions to annoy me.

 

Well, at least that's what I would get out of it.

 

And curbing the worst excesses of Grimdarkness would allow for some moral complexity. But I know, that's too much to ask.

 

 

 

as for suspension of disbelief itself, i'm ok with things being described as the size of stars or planetary rings and with fused ribcages apparently being a good thing in the same way i'm cool with the hulk spontaneously creating mass and optimus prime's trailer effing off to nowhere

 

Me too.

 

 

 

in the office today, so i won't be multi quoting

 

i agree that your interpretation is all good and compelling, and i don't think this message board, LG or an author's afterward should affect it.

 

re recent sales spike: it's also hard to tease apart whether it's the positivity aspect of guilliman's return or just the overall sensationalism of that turn of events. i'll also note that chaos has received a "balance" with the reintroduction of its primarchs too

 

as far as logic, philosophy and morals are concerned, i would say that, beyond society's general lack...someone who studies in a certain field will have specific markers that they conduct discourse with, that others don't. that doesn't immediately mean those others are lacking though.

 

yeah, i can see where GoT as nihilism is debatable (but then again so is 40k), but it has been discussed as such as well as grimdark in media and academia. and there's also an argument (one i support) that the latest seasons have moved toward a traditional/trite mode of operation and lost a lot of what made the series a hit originally

 

as far as a 10, 000 year old dystopia is concerned...i'm not sure what the better alternatives are here. 10, 000 years was probably picked originally because of how impressive it sounds back in the days when believability was less of a concern. kinda like the imperium, somehow it's worked for GW...maybe longer than it should

 

and yeah, to be clear; there's a distinction between general suspension of disbelief and gripes with grimderp.

[Rob P]

It's interesting what gets different people frustrated.

 

I tend to be less interested in 40k fiction because generally the stories have little impact on the setting and a lot of characters can be a bit throwaway. The Dark Imperium stuff does help a bit with that as it enters a certain level of high fantasy (in space). But not all 40k fiction is equal and i'm not focussing specifically on my opinion of quality of writing, but subject matter, themes and impact on the setting. For example, Emperor's Gift has a real impact on the universe whilst Imperial Glory is 'throwaway' but has great themes and a good story.

 

My frustrations with the settings are fleeting. I was frustrated with MoM at the time, but i've moved on. I'm not bothered about ammo, logistics and strategy. I'm bothered about naff characters and boring plots. When I do descend into other fleeting frustrations it can be things like how I don't really get Lorgar's character - it might be me but he jumps back and forward a bit in purpose between TFH, Know No fear and Betrayer. The Council of Nikaea make no sense other than a show. The Alpha Legion are stupidly intelligent (both stupid and super intelligent). Corax is primarch level but also takes serious beats from a non-primarch. Guilliman in Know No Fear makes all of the other primarchs look like amateurs yet Horus is warmaster. The Emperor didn't explain chaos to many of the legions. And so on.

 

It's all a bit preposterous if you focus on one thing for too long, but I feel that there is scope within the setting to have large and small stories that are internally consistent and great. When we're talking about the doom and gloom of the setting as a whole you can still have stories that are not grim dark that take place in a snap shot of the universe. There is no need for each story to be lovecraftian and a mini reflection of the settings hope to despair. The wins can be wins.

 

Now all I can think of is LOTR and the thing about why didn't Frodo fly to Mt Doom on the eagles.

[mc warhammer]

It's interesting what gets different people frustrated.

 

I tend to be less interested in 40k fiction because generally the stories have little impact on the setting and a lot of characters can be a bit throwaway. The Dark Imperium stuff does help a bit with that as it enters a certain level of high fantasy (in space). But not all 40k fiction is equal and i'm not focussing specifically on my opinion of quality of writing, but subject matter, themes and impact on the setting. For example, Emperor's Gift has a real impact on the universe whilst Imperial Glory is 'throwaway' but has great themes and a good story.

 

i'm guessing that's why it used to be called "fluff"

 

 

It's all a bit preposterous if you focus on one thing for too long, but I feel that there is scope within the setting to have large and small stories that are internally consistent and great. When we're talking about the doom and gloom of the setting as a whole you can still have stories that are not grim dark that take place in a snap shot of the universe. There is no need for each story to be lovecraftian and a mini reflection of the settings hope to despair. The wins can be wins.

 

which is more or less how BL works but i think some would say that the supposed backdrop of annihilation/total loss/nihilism informs the entire stetting and renders any wins for the imperium moot

[Huggtand]

Thanks everybody for a very interesting discussion 

 

 

 

It's all a bit preposterous if you focus on one thing for too long, but I feel that there is scope within the setting to have large and small stories that are internally consistent and great. When we're talking about the doom and gloom of the setting as a whole you can still have stories that are not grim dark that take place in a snap shot of the universe. There is no need for each story to be lovecraftian and a mini reflection of the settings hope to despair. The wins can be wins.

 

which is more or less how BL works but i think some would say that the supposed backdrop of annihilation/total loss/nihilism informs the entire stetting and renders any wins for the imperium moot

 

 

 

That’s why I find it more interesting if the overall setting has a possibility for hope (just a hint ) or a stalemate. Then both losses and victories have a meaning, that I as a reader can feel invested in. It makes the enemies even more threatening because there is something to win or lose.

[Ascanius]

 

Chaos? Chaos is a faction. It is a side in the eternal war. It enslaves those that serve it, and eternally tortures those that won't do it.

 

Sidenote: the only difference between Chaos and the Imperium here is that the Imperium kills the latter.

[MrDarth151]

 

 

Chaos? Chaos is a faction. It is a side in the eternal war. It enslaves those that serve it, and eternally tortures those that won't do it.

 

Sidenote: the only difference between Chaos and the Imperium here is that the Imperium kills the latter.

 

 

What?

 

No, seriously. What?

[Ascanius]

The Imperium enslaves those that serve it, and commits genocide on those that won't serve it - or which it doesn't want serving it, i.e. xenos.

 

What other term than "slavery" would you use for the conditions of the common Imperial citizen? Sure, it might be more like the classical slavery practiced by Rome, which had its tolerable forms to the point where people sold themselves into slavery for the chance of a better life - but it was still slavery, and even these slaves were still unfree property without rights, to say nothing of the much more numerous slaves in much less tolerable conditions.

 

To put it another way, do you think citizens of the Imperium have any degree of meaningful freedom? Being able to get out of your life as a hive-city manufactorum drudge by joining the Imperial Guard or going on pilgrimage doesn't count . . .

[Huggtand]

Is there slavery in the Imperium? Yes there is

 

Is there democracy and freedom in the Imperium? Yes there is

 

The Imperium as a bureaucracy entity don’t care if a planet is a democracy, a feudal kingdom or a dictatorship based on slavery, as long as it pay its tithes and don’t threatens the stability of the Imperium, it can govern itself as it see fit. So, I wouldn’t call the Imperium at large a slavery. Being forced to pay our taxes or not have an option to declare independence from a country are something probably all of us have to deal with where we live today 

 

So how much freedom the normal citizen have is once again up to the author. The beauty of an open setting, it's wide open, from democratic agri-worlds based on the American frontier to hive cities hellholes ruled by an iron hand. But since it’s a grimdark dystopian setting I doo suspect there probably are less of the fun ones 

 

As I said in a previous post, take for example the different worlds in the Eisenhorn or the Gaunt's Ghosts series. 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 pronounced underclass than in your modern time but it's not so different from what we know today (except the sci-fi fantasy bit). In contrast to that we have hive worlds that really are horrific hell-holes by our standards like Necromunda.

[MrDarth151]

The Imperium enslaves those that serve it, and commits genocide on those that won't serve it - or which it doesn't want serving it, i.e. xenos.

 

You are comparing eternity of suffering to a single lifetime. Imperial slaves just work and die. Chaos slaves are mutilated to forever experience the torture that is sensory deprivation, because alternative is going insane and dying within weeks.

 

I understand that people don't have my professional background, and so finer details of morality involved might elude them, but come on. Chaos is portrayed as unquestioningly worse than the Imperium.

 

Also, metaphysical slavery is infinitely worse that a physical one. Physical slave always has an option to die. Metaphysical will just get brought back to life by the Chaos gods.

 

What other term than "slavery" would you use for the conditions of the common Imperial citizen? Sure, it might be more like the classical slavery practiced by Rome, which had its tolerable forms to the point where people sold themselves into slavery for the chance of a better life - but it was still slavery, and even these slaves were still unfree property without rights, to say nothing of the much more numerous slaves in much less tolerable conditions.

 

I would use the term serfs to describe them. 

 

And I don't subscribe to the idea that Imperium is has unilateral policy about anything, so yes, I don't believe all of the Imperial Citizens are slaves.

 

To put it another way, do you think citizens of the Imperium have any degree of meaningful freedom?

 

I don't think vast majority of any individuals have any degree of meaningful freedom.

 

Being able to get out of your life as a hive-city manufactorum drudge by joining the Imperial Guard or going on pilgrimage doesn't count . . .

 

If they can, they are not slaves.

 

Also, slavery and massive amounts of pilgrimages undertaken on their own resources hardly adds up.

[Wargamer]

Serfdom is most definitely a better term than slavery. People rarely move around, but when they do it's typically for military or religious reasons.

[MrDarth151]

I will also note that I would argue that Imperium of Mankind is, at its basest, meritocracy. People who have been promoted on connection, not merit, are largely exceptions, not the rule. If you are good enough, you can rule planets, become transhuman, order armies of millions.

 

Take Creed, for example. Started as a Whiteshield, through Lord General to Lord Castellan of Cadia itself. Space Marines promotions are almost entirely merit based. Even Langsung, noted for using his influence as a High Lord for his own personal gain, was noted to be an excellent naval commander, even by those who disliked him.

 

It's not that you cannot change your fate. It's just that you need to be exceptional among quadrillions of Imperials.

 

So... just like real life? How many people actually lead fulfilling, meaningful lives? How many struggle to make to the next month, even in civilised countries? Look at any country, you will find no shortage of the downtrodden.

 

The issue, I believe, is that we are fans of a very expensive, time consuming, and niche hobby. If you can actually afford to commit to 40k, which I believe most of us are, it means that we are relatively well of. We intuitively feel that Imperium is a horrible place, even though what we see in novels and codex often enough doesn't support it on rational level. And intuitive feelings are hard to disregard. Hell, they are hard to disregard to me, and I am professionally trained to recognise and avoid such interpretations, because they are considered a poor argument by people with my background.

 

Looking at it rationally? If I argue that there might be something more than inevitable destruction of Imperium and Human race, then of course I would consider a service rendered to the Imperium to be meaningful. People struggle every day to provide for their families, and sometimes just to survive. This is a common fact for our species. Upper class of first world countries is not really representative either of our history nor of our current state.

 

So yes, joining the Imperial Guard, and providing a fraction of second more time to the struggling humanity? That is a worthy thing. It is meaningful. It has value. On such sacrifices does the Imperium prevail.

 

Mind, this is only true if one does not accept the most grimdark interpretation of the setting, which I don't. And this is just an example of things that make it more worthwhile to me thanks to it.

[Moonreaper666]

Still waiting for Ciaphas Cain to meet Colonel Kubrick Chenkov!

 

 

Meritocracy is kinda wrong, more like an oligarchy mixed with a theocracy

 

 

Goge Vandire and that traitor Strab of Armageddon come to mind

 

 

I will also note that I would argue that Imperium of Mankind is, at its basest, meritocracy. People who have been promoted on connection, not merit, are largely exceptions, not the rule. If you are good enough, you can rule planets, become transhuman, order armies of millions.

 

Take Creed, for example. Started as a Whiteshield, through Lord General to Lord Castellan of Cadia itself. Space Marines promotions are almost entirely merit based. Even Langsung, noted for using his influence as a High Lord for his own personal gain, was noted to be an excellent naval commander, even by those who disliked him.

 

It's not that you cannot change your fate. It's just that you need to be exceptional among quadrillions of Imperials.

 

So... just like real life? How many people actually lead fulfilling, meaningful lives? How many struggle to make to the next month, even in civilised countries? Look at any country, you will find no shortage of the downtrodden.

 

The issue, I believe, is that we are fans of a very expensive, time consuming, and niche hobby. If you can actually afford to commit to 40k, which I believe most of us are, it means that we are relatively well of. We intuitively feel that Imperium is a horrible place, even though what we see in novels and codex often enough doesn't support it on rational level. And intuitive feelings are hard to disregard. Hell, they are hard to disregard to me, and I am professionally trained to recognise and avoid such interpretations, because they are considered a poor argument by people with my background.

 

Looking at it rationally? If I argue that there might be something more than inevitable destruction of Imperium and Human race, then of course I would consider a service rendered to the Imperium to be meaningful. People struggle every day to provide for their families, and sometimes just to survive. This is a common fact for our species. Upper class of first world countries is not really representative either of our history nor of our current state.

 

So yes, joining the Imperial Guard, and providing a fraction of second more time to the struggling humanity? That is a worthy thing. It is meaningful. It has value. On such sacrifices does the Imperium prevail.

 

Mind, this is only true if one does not accept the most grimdark interpretation of the setting, which I don't. And this is just an example of things that make it more worthwhile to me thanks to it.

[Huggtand]

The Empire is technically an autocracy (in 40k a theocratized dictatorship where the Emperor hold the supreme power  )

 

In practicality, it’s an oligarchy (Council of Terra).

 

What form of oligarchy can be up for debate since not all High Lords are chosen in the same way in the governing branches. For example, the inquisitorial representative is not chosen in the same manner as the Grandmaster of the assassins etc. From what we see in the background materials and novels there are hints of all kinds of oligarchy-variants in the different Adeptus, like meritocracy, theocracy, aristocracy, or plutocracy.

 

Personally, I would say that in practice the empire is a kraterocracy, since it's only those who are strong enough to seize power through force, social maneuvering or political cunning that ends up in the Council (it’s a bit of a competition ​ ) 

[MrDarth151]

 

Still waiting for Ciaphas Cain to meet Colonel Kubrick Chenkov!

 

Why? What would that accomplish?

 

Meritocracy is kinda wrong, more like an oligarchy mixed with a theocracy

 

You do realise those systems are not contrary in the slightest, right?

 

Also, theocracy part is debatable. While the state church holds a degree of political power, they do not rule the Imperium.

 

Goge Vandire and that traitor Strab of Armageddon come to mind

 

Two of the most incompetent characters in the history of 40k?

 

 

Personally, I would say that in practice the empire is a kraterocracy, since it's only those who are strong enough to seize power through force, social maneuvering or political cunning that ends up in the Council (it’s a bit of a competition ​ )

 

I would argue that this becomes more true as we progress up the leadership ladder. Something like Lord General up, I would believe? I think that the lower ranks rely more on meritocracy by necessity.