In the grim darkness of the far future... [Controversial]

[b1soul]

I thought Abnett's Astartes were fine in Legion, Prospero Burns, Know No Fear.

 

I suppose the UM in Know No Fear and Loken in Horus Rising come off as more human?

[MrDarth151]

I thought Abnett's Astartes were fine in Legion, Prospero Burns, Know No Fear.

 

I suppose the UM in Know No Fear and Loken in Horus Rising come off as more human?

 

Not like he is alone in that portrayal.

 

To be entirely frank: The emotionless inhuman super soldiers variant that people pine after is not really conductive to storytelling in the long run.

 

And also, Abnett is the only person to ever successfully sell me on the idea of Space Marines actually being capable of doing what they do.

[Warpmiss]

 

the fact that strong female characters from adb stands out as some sort of author trope shows how sorely it's missing in 40k books

 

i mean, nobody seems to say x author always writes "strong male characters, get a new trick"

What makes a character strong, though? What defines being strong? And what does the gender matter so much? Can females not have male role models? And what role model is there to gain from the 30K or 40K setting?

 

The thing is, at least for me as a woman growing up, is that most of my role models in fiction had to be male because what females were 'allowed to do' (as in terms of roles in a story and their personalities) was much more limited. In my case, though, I didn't have a big problem with that since I didn't care so much about the gender of a character but who they were, however I see why other women would have an issue.

 

As for characters in BL fiction, or any other fiction for that matter, I personally don't care to read about 'strong' characters unless that means 'well-written' characters. I could read about a character that is scared or is a coward 24/7 as long as the writer wrote them in a compelling way. Actually, now that I think about it, the characters I've felt the most interested in (male or female) in any book I have ever read generally had flaws like that...

 

And specifically talking about BL authors, I don't think ADB is the only one writing 'strong' female characters, I think every author I've read has included some female characters at some point or another in their stories. EDIT: The problem in the case of 40k novels is that since many of them are centered around SM, adding female characters is sometimes a bit tricky, I guess. There can be those working in the spaceships/admech/AM/etc, but if the story is about a SM team during a mission, female characters are going to be few and far between.

Edited March 16, 2018 by Warpmiss

[bluntblade]

I'd say supporting Astartes characters are one of Abnett's best assets. Just look at his Luna Wolves.

[Phoebus]

It's not so much a character pattern, as it is structural one. ADBs novels follow largely similar pattern: There is a Space Marine protagonist who is conflicted, yet highly exceptional, there is one/two major supporting characters, humans, who interact with the Marine protagonist to varying degree and so on, and so forth.

Can you recognize how broad a description that is?

 

On that, we are going to have to agree to disagree. Ultimately, the nature of the universe prevents meaningful internal conflicts.

You’re right, we will have to agree to disagree.

[Lord Marshal]

I never understood why Abnett was as popular as he was, that’s not to say I dislike him he just doesn’t stand out for me. This thread has helped me see why. I can enjoy many different 40k/30k books but I’m into GW mainly because of the Astartes, most of his best books have focused on normal Humans which is inherently less interesting to me.

 

It's the opposite for me. Fiction involving Astartes is the quickest way to make my eyes glaze over, at least for the most part. There's a few standouts but for the most part I stick exclusively to the mortal/non-Imperial stuff. I think for that reason Abnett is probably my favourite Black Library author.

 

Reading this thread I'm surprised more of you aren't begging ADB to write a Sororitas book. 

Edited March 17, 2018 by Lord Marshal

[MrDarth151]

 

Can you recognize how broad a description that is?

 

Of course. It is nevertheless noticeable. I personally don't mind them, but I have no trouble understanding why some might.

 

 

You’re right, we will have to agree to disagree.

 

*Shrugs* I wasn't the one to argue for the interpretation of the universe that makes every action futile. I've lost count how many times people told me that its canon.

 

Internal conflicts are all, at it's base, rooted in ethics. 40k, as intended, is moral and existential nihilism.

 

I just ignore it nowadays, because it makes enjoying it hard.

 

Even with that caveat, I have to say that most of internal conflict falls kinda flat to me. This stems from my personal experience as an ethic; I find that most writers cannot for the live of them make internal conflicts that look meaningful to me. I've had this problem with Argel Tal, for example.

 

 

Reading this thread I'm surprised more of you aren't begging ADB to write a Sororitas book. That seems a great deal more... productive than token female ship officer.

 

I want Sisters of Silence book more. I find them far more interesting.

[Marshal Rohr]

‘There is a book with characters, one of which is important enough to be the main person the book is about because when you try and make a book about a bunch of different people you kind of lose your focus and go off on a tangent about Dorne and a marriage proposal and some stupid Ironborn only edgelords care about. This main character has views and sometimes this view goes against the main groups view, other times it lines up, and sometimes it is reluctant. Depends on the book in question, because almost none of them are about the same thing. There are other people in this book too, and they also have views. Some have vaginas. Like half of them. Which is more than most books, but just about right for reality. None of these books have ever had some kind of super out there gender or racial messaging or any kind of agenda at all really, but people might think there is because the author has personal views he shares on Facebook and Twitter sometimes. So as you can see, there’s clearly a pattern.’

[MrDarth151]

Meh. If characters are good, they are good. If they aren't, they aren't.

 

I find looking for patterns to be a generally waste of time. Work should stand on its own.

[Lord_Caerolion]

But the "pattern" you mentioned is basically just "there's a main character and a supporting character". "Conflicted yet highly exceptional" is basically a description that can be applied to 99% of all main characters ever.

[Nashnir]

I am not sure where to chime in or with what context so here is my rant about the HH series so far.

1. The Sigilite:

The guy is second in command. Yet everyone just brushes him aside and cite 'For the Emperor' every chance they get. This was made painfully clear in the beginning of 'The First Heretic', The Garro series, interactions with Dorn etc.

Malcador should just slap the s*** out of the primarchs and out right kill everyone else for the disrespect he is shown.

2. The Custodes:

They are his personal guard, his companions. Highly skilled intellectuals who are the Emperor's go to for almost everything. They are shown in the entirety of the literature as dull, without humor, single and close minded. Even if they slaved away in the depths of Imperial palace for ten thousand years, I see no reason why they would lose their intellect.

Every description by everyone tells they are highly trained, they keep themselves up to date with all the events in the imperium; Yet when push comes to shove and they have to be depicted first hand, they just come off as arrogant and ignorant snobs whose only good for a few scenes of a battle and for some random character to comment how fearsome they were.

3. The Primarchs:

These beings are so mighty, fearsome and intellectually above everyone that the occupy only one dimension. Forget leading legions in the the eternal darkness of 40k, the insecurities, the shallow ambitions and shortsightedness these guys posses will put them out of contest in some local election in today's world.

Horus:

For one of the most pivotal character, Horus' fall was one of the worst. The Entire HH series hinges on Horus' fall and his motivations thereon and they couldn't spare an entire book to subtly move him. Instead they had to have a showdown like some anime between Magnus and that stain and somehow have some have Horus consider merit in that blabbering mold.

I have run out of time.So, I will conclude it here.

Edited March 19, 2018 by Nashnir

[Lord_Caerolion]

I'd say the Custodes are humourless because their role is to protect the Emperor, and his favoured son just turned half the Legionnes Astartes against them, and are on their way to Terra with 9 Legions at his side, seeking to kill the Emperor.

 

In regards to them being intelligent though, I'd recommend reading Emperors Legion, it shows the Custodes in a much better light than just "awesome fighters".

[Nashnir]

In regards to them being intelligent though, I'd recommend reading Emperors Legion, it shows the Custodes in a much better light than just "awesome fighters".

 

'The Emperor's Legion' and 'The Master of Mankind' depict them well; Love those books.

But they are the central characters there and it would be tough to depict them otherwise. Also, in those books, they are depicted in isolation i.e.surrounded by themselves and the sisters.

I am talking about their appearance in other works where they are alongside other Imperial subjects.

Edited March 20, 2018 by Nashnir

[MrDarth151]

But the "pattern" you mentioned is basically just "there's a main character and a supporting character". "Conflicted yet highly exceptional" is basically a description that can be applied to 99% of all main characters ever.

 

*Sigh*

 

What I mean is that the books are structurally similar enough that an inattentive reader might confuse them for pattern.

 

And when I say that looking for patterns is meaningless I mean that almost everything in modern SF and Fantasy has been done already by someone else. In generalised terms, patterns apply to the genre, not individual writers.

 

Execution is what matters. And all BL writers are hit and miss on that score, so it's not that helpful either.

 

I don't recall ever reading a 40k novel that wouldn't do at least one thing I would like. Except the First Heretic maybe.

[mc warhammer]

i don't see patterns as a problem. creatives have a style, or a signature approach. you can tell a tarantino or kubrick or jeunet film. most musician's styles are instantly recognisable. shakespeare wasn't exactly experiemental...just good

 

 

 

 

the fact that strong female characters from adb stands out as some sort of author trope shows how sorely it's missing in 40k books

 

Not really. If anything, it is limiting his range when it comes to them, and creates the feeling that they are actually the same character with few changes. The feeling is largely superficial, but I do think it has root in his writing style.

 

 

i mean, nobody seems to say x author always writes "strong male characters, get a new trick"

 

Because we criticise male character much more harshly. And for that matter, I find that the ABD's habit of writing protagonist as in some way special rubs me the wrong way, and most of them are male, if we can call Space Marines that.

 

yeah, but you can see how that wasn't anywhere near the point i was making?

 

 

 

 

the fact that strong female characters from adb stands out as some sort of author trope shows how sorely it's missing in 40k books

oh please, can't throw a rock in 40k book without hitting a "strong female character", ADB isn't special where he is the only one writing them, especially not in a place as ideologically homogeneous as Black library

 

 

maybe i've been reading the wrong 40k books? and i wonder where the false idea comes from then? if strong female characters are so prevalent

 

 

the fact that strong female characters from adb stands out as some sort of author trope shows how sorely it's missing in 40k books

 

i mean, nobody seems to say x author always writes "strong male characters, get a new trick"

What makes a character strong, though? What defines being strong? And what does the gender matter so much? Can females not have male role models? And what role model is there to gain from the 30K or 40K setting?

 

idk, i'm not so concerned with the definition of "strong" as i am the perception that strong female characters are something weird that adb forces into his stories.

 

the role model thing is a tangent i'm not too interested in, though i can agree that most characters in the universe are fairly reprehensible. but that's part of why i like reading it

[TheRealMcCagh]

I can't think of too many (read: any) novels where I was introduced to a character and thought 'why the hell is this character a chick?? Author must have some hidden agenda...' Calling out an author on the sexes they choose for various characters tells me more about you as a reader than them as an author. Maybe ADB gets brought up more often around here because he engages in a lot more conversation than most other authors, which seems like a pretty poor way to treat one of the few insider perspectives we get. Fortunately, it doesn't seem like he is very thin skinned

[bluntblade]

Ditto that.

[MrDarth151]

I can't think of too many (read: any) novels where I was introduced to a character and thought 'why the hell is this character a chick?? Author must have some hidden agenda...' Calling out an author on the sexes they choose for various characters tells me more about you as a reader than them as an author. Maybe ADB gets brought up more often around here because he engages in a lot more conversation than most other authors, which seems like a pretty poor way to treat one of the few insider perspectives we get. Fortunately, it doesn't seem like he is very thin skinned

 

Dunno, I see that opinion a lot in many different communities, most of which do not interact with ADB at all.

 

Perhaps it's the more consistent writing style? Or the fact that ADB has the tendency to write his pov characters as special. I certainly never heard similar complaints about Abnett, and he is no stranger to female characters.

[Marshal Rohr]

 

 

I can't think of too many (read: any) novels where I was introduced to a character and thought 'why the hell is this character a chick?? Author must have some hidden agenda...' Calling out an author on the sexes they choose for various characters tells me more about you as a reader than them as an author. Maybe ADB gets brought up more often around here because he engages in a lot more conversation than most other authors, which seems like a pretty poor way to treat one of the few insider perspectives we get. Fortunately, it doesn't seem like he is very thin skinned

Dunno, I see that opinion a lot in many different communities, most of which do not interact with ADB at all.

 

Perhaps it's the more consistent writing style? Or the fact that ADB has the tendency to write his pov characters as special. I certainly never heard similar complaints about Abnett, and he is no stranger to female characters.

Dan Abnett invented immortal assassins working for aliens. The criticism of ADB, especially post Master of Mankind, is disingenuous. Everyone with a modicum of mental faculties sees right through it.

 

Say it with me: Every protagonist is special. This will never change, it’s not exclusive to ADB, and his protagonists tend to be - if anything - not quite as good as others. Unless, of course, Khârn the Betrayer is meant to be a pushover, the First Captain of the Night Lords is supposed to be a nobody, possessed marines are supposed to be really weak.

Edited March 20, 2018 by Marshal Rohr

[MrDarth151]

 

Dan Abnett invented immortal assassins working for aliens.

 

And has been criticised for it. Perpetuals are one of the things that are not universally accepted and have met with rather mixed reception, so it's kinda disingenuous to bring it up.

 

 

 

The criticism of ADB, especially post Master of Mankind, is disingenuous. Everyone with a modicum of mental faculties sees right through it.

 

Most of the criticism period is disingenuous. So is most of the praise. We are talking about fiction, Sturgeon's Law applies.

 

 

 

Say it with me: Every protagonist is special. This will never change, it’s not exclusive to ADB, and his protagonists tend to be - if anything - not quite as good as others.

 

Not really. ADB consistently writes his Astartes as exceptional, even amongst their kind. This, combined with the high end of Astartes effectiveness, creates certain impressions.

 

 

 

 Unless, of course, Khârn the Betrayer is meant to be a pushover, the First Captain of the Night Lords is supposed to be a nobody, possessed marines are supposed to be really weak.

 

ADB is not writing in a void. I find it bizarre that people are acting as if he did.

[Marshal Rohr]

 

 

Dan Abnett invented immortal assassins working for aliens.

 

And has been criticised for it. Perpetuals are one of the things that are not universally accepted and have met with rather mixed reception, so it's kinda disingenuous to bring it up.

 

 

 

The criticism of ADB, especially post Master of Mankind, is disingenuous. Everyone with a modicum of mental faculties sees right through it.

 

Most of the criticism period is disingenuous. So is most of the praise. We are talking about fiction, Sturgeon's Law applies.

 

 

 

Say it with me: Every protagonist is special. This will never change, it’s not exclusive to ADB, and his protagonists tend to be - if anything - not quite as good as others.

 

Not really. ADB consistently writes his Astartes as exceptional, even amongst their kind. This, combined with the high end of Astartes effectiveness, creates certain impressions.

 

 

 

 Unless, of course, Khârn the Betrayer is meant to be a pushover, the First Captain of the Night Lords is supposed to be a nobody, possessed marines are supposed to be really weak.

 

ADB is not writing in a void. I find it bizarre that people are acting as if he did.

 

 

  Alright, then. Still haven't learned your lesson. 

[Tarvek Val]

 

 

Say it with me: Every protagonist is special. This will never change, it’s not exclusive to ADB, and his protagonists tend to be - if anything - not quite as good as others. Unless, of course, Khârn the Betrayer is meant to be a pushover, the First Captain of the Night Lords is supposed to be a nobody, possessed marines are supposed to be really weak.

 

Honestly, you hit the nail on the head. The protagonist of the story is meant to be the most remarkable and memorable character of a book or other form of writing. The definition of the word "protagonist" is literally "the leading character or one of the major characters in a drama, movie, novel, or other fictional text." A protagonist does not have to be ​likable, but they ought to be memorable at the very least.

[MrDarth151]

 

  Alright, then. Still haven't learned your lesson.

 

Sure. The lesson being, if I recall correctly "Don't criticise ADB, because we are afraid he will leave". Was it you who told me that? Pretty sure it was.

 

Really now. I hardly only criticise ADB. If anything, I've had nothing but praise for his short stories. And considering I have talked with the man extensively, I find him far more receptive to criticism than most of his fans.

 

 

Honestly, you hit the nail on the head. The protagonist of the story is meant to be the most remarkable and memorable character of a book or other form of writing. The definition of the word "protagonist" is literally "the leading character or one of the major characters in a drama, movie, novel, or other fictional text." A protagonist does not have to be ​likable, but they ought to be memorable at the very least.

 

*Sigh*

 

Stacking powers and feats up on a character doesn't make them more memorable to me. Regardless of who does it.

Edited March 20, 2018 by MrDarth151

[Tarvek Val]

I would argue that ADB hardly goes into his writing with the intent to "stack powers and feats up" on his characters. His characters have depth and are cleverly written as more than just "guys with big muscles and guns".

 

Argel Tal?

Gets possessed by a daemon in the name of a truth he doesn't even yet understand so that he can do a service to Lorgar, whom he clearly cares deeply for. He receives the "gift of the gods", and it just makes him realize that, in order for humanity to survive, much of it must be destroyed and forged anew. He is a tormented character who is haunted by the last vestiges of humanity, and who is ever-mindful of his approaching demise "in the shadow of great wings". He is hardly an invincible character.

 

Talos?

A visionary who is tormented by his visions, and who despairs at the state of his Legion. A mourning son who simply wants to do right by his father's memory, and who wants his Legion to once more perform the role that they were meant to, and punish the Imperium that disavowed them.

 

A protagonist will likely come off as exceptional in some way or another; that's because the book is meant to be about them. If you're writing an autobiography, are you going to focus on the story of the person whose life you're trying to tell or on the person they ran into one morning while getting coffee? The person is the protagonist, the life story is the goal of the autobiography. In fiction, you follow the story of a protagonist; that's just how most stories go...

 

*That said, this is likely my last post in this topic. I have no interest in participating in a back-and-forth debate over whether or not ADB's characters are too overpowered. I know what I think, and that's enough for me.

Edited March 20, 2018 by Tarvek Val

[MrDarth151]

I would argue that ADB hardly goes into his writing with the intent to "stack powers and feats up" on his characters. His characters have depth and are cleverly written as more than just "guys with big muscles and guns".

 

And have I criticised that, or have I criticised their exceptionalism?

 

Or is this another case of people not knowing what I'm talking about, and making the most far reaching assumptions just to dismiss my opinions flat out?

Edited March 20, 2018 by MrDarth151