Which traitor Primarchs do you dislike the most and why

[Scribe]

Yeah, in a weird way I don't find the Traitor Primarchs elicit hate from me, any more than Sauron or Darth Vader do.

Yeah, I find it difficult to hate the better written set of Primarchs.

 

I'm far more annoyed with like..Vulkan.

[Manchu warlord]

Lorgar.  Besides from starting all this messing and being a hypocrite, he is the lamest.  His character, his fighting style, his philosophy, and his theme... they are just boring.  Oooh, First Heretic novel, I feel so sad and sorry for you Aurelian... NOT!

[Roomsky]

Curze as written by anyone who isn't named Aaron or Simon. Most traitor primarchs were made more sympathetic by the HH series, and if not at least came out even. Even Horus, arguably done little good by everything post Horus Rising, still has his moments, and the lasting good will of that first book. 

 

Curze though has been reduced to a parody of himself. His best Heresy-era antics are told in the NL trilogy and in Lord of the Night, which you may recall aren't part of the Heresy series. His portrayal in Vulkan Lives is flanderization at its peak (and sees him defeated by a naked, insane, a physically atrophied Vulkan) , Unremembered Empire does his abilities justice but barely taps into his pathos, Pharos and Angels of Caliban both stretch suspension of disbelief to breaking point by the sheer amount of times Curze has fought his brother primarchs and lived, so as to make him completely toothless, and his fate in Ruinstorm only invites an even more ridiculous manner of him being retrieved from the dark between stars. 

 

Sometimes I like to pretend he doesn't appear outside of Prince of Crows and Savage Weapons. It leaves him far more dignified and sympathetic.

[Brother Lunkhead]

I can't say I hate any of the traitor Primarchs. Most were interesting and have had their moments. I think Fulgrim was totally useless after Isstvan, especially after his ascension to daemonhood. Curze and the Night Lords sort of came into their own during the Heresy. I like the Night Lords and Curze ("like" is probably not the right word but it's functional) and I understand how prior to the Heresy the Emperor might find use for a "terror" legion kept on a short leash, but Curze? I really don't understand why the Emperor didn't put a bolt round in the back of his head when he first found him.

 

If the Emperor gave Curze a legion and set him loose upon the galaxy I shudder to think what the Primarchs of the II and XI did to cause them to be disappeared.

[Ranwulf]

Angron is probably the only character I dislike in 40K as whole, and honestly I know people love Betrayer, but ADB take on him actually made me dislike him more than if he was just a KILL MAIM BURN maniac. Of all of the traitor primarchs, I would have hoped that Angron would be the one less likely to act like a hypocrite and whine about his situation, and more willing to say that he just doesnt care and just want to wage war.

 

Would it make him two-dimensional? Oh, definitly, but I think at least it would be closer to his archetype and character as described in the old lore.

 

Ran

[bluntblade]

Lorgar. Besides from starting all this messing and being a hypocrite, he is the lamest. His character, his fighting style, his philosophy, and his theme... they are just boring. Oooh, First Heretic novel, I feel so sad and sorry for you Aurelian... NOT!

I really don't see what's boring about him. Also, what's so dreadful about his fighting style? He pulls gunships out of the air and destroys another by slinging his mace into its cockpit.

[Manchu warlord]

 

Lorgar. Besides from starting all this messing and being a hypocrite, he is the lamest. His character, his fighting style, his philosophy, and his theme... they are just boring. Oooh, First Heretic novel, I feel so sad and sorry for you Aurelian... NOT!

I really don't see what's boring about him. Also, what's so dreadful about his fighting style? He pulls gunships out of the air and destroys another by slinging his mace into its cockpit.

 

You "really don't see what's boring about him", but I do.  Okay, maybe 'boring' might not be the appropriate word; in the sense that Lorgar's character is not bland and unchanging.  But I just find his character totally unlikable and unattractive.  The more and more I read about him, the more and more I want him dead.  

He pulls gunships out of the air, okay, that's a telekine, Magus does that stuff all the time; nothing new or exciting in WH40k here.  He destroys another gunship by swinging his mace into the cockpit.  Okay, I guess its a little bit cool, just a little, but nothing badass at all, just normal Primarch superior fighting prowess.

[bluntblade]

I've never known a character's fighting style to be compelling no matter who's writing them. It's not like Corvus or Fulgrim is a martial arts movie star who can deliver entertaining action even with an inept director.

[Orwell84]

Angron is probably the only character I dislike in 40K as whole, and honestly I know people love Betrayer, but ADB take on him actually made me dislike him more than if he was just a KILL MAIM BURN maniac. Of all of the traitor primarchs, I would have hoped that Angron would be the one less likely to act like a hypocrite and whine about his situation, and more willing to say that he just doesnt care and just want to wage war.

 

Would it make him two-dimensional? Oh, definitly, but I think at least it would be closer to his archetype and character as described in the old lore.

 

Ran

 

I vaguely remember one of Angron's early bios during the 1990s. before the Index Astartes article, painting him as an honourable warrior who was first to join Horus' rebellion because he felt that humanity needed more disciplined leadership to save it from destruction. Gradually Angron and the World Eaters were drawn into ever-bloodier battles and he realised too late that they were destroying the Imperium rather than saving it, but his pride kept him fighting along the road paved with good intentions right into the Eye of Terror.

 

Then Index Astartes completely ditched this characterisation in favour of the Spartacus copy. I respect ADB and Matt Farrer's efforts to lift the character above that 2-D image, in fact I believe they succeeded, but I can't help feeling that building on first bio of Angron would've made for a far more compelling character.

 

Having said that, at least Angron being penned by some talented writers saves him from the top of my dislike list. That 'honour' I'll give to Magnus. Character trait-wise, his astounding arrogance doomed both his legion and likely humanity as a whole. Literature-wise, I just haven't found him a particularly interesting character to read about.

 

Runner-up would be Fulgrim. Oddly enough, considering they're a pack of debauched psychotics, nothing written about them before Josh Reynolds interested me overmuch or made me like or hate them either way.

[Brother Lunkhead]

 

Angron is probably the only character I dislike in 40K as whole, and honestly I know people love Betrayer, but ADB take on him actually made me dislike him more than if he was just a KILL MAIM BURN maniac. Of all of the traitor primarchs, I would have hoped that Angron would be the one less likely to act like a hypocrite and whine about his situation, and more willing to say that he just doesnt care and just want to wage war.

 

Would it make him two-dimensional? Oh, definitly, but I think at least it would be closer to his archetype and character as described in the old lore.

 

Ran

 

I vaguely remember one of Angron's early bios during the 1990s. before the Index Astartes article, painting him as an honourable warrior who was first to join Horus' rebellion because he felt that humanity needed more disciplined leadership to save it from destruction. Gradually Angron and the World Eaters were drawn into ever-bloodier battles and he realised too late that they were destroying the Imperium rather than saving it, but his pride kept him fighting along the road paved with good intentions right into the Eye of Terror.

 

Then Index Astartes completely ditched this characterisation in favour of the Spartacus copy. I respect ADB and Matt Farrer's efforts to lift the character above that 2-D image, in fact I believe they succeeded, but I can't help feeling that building on first bio of Angron would've made for a far more compelling character.

 

Having said that, at least Angron being penned by some talented writers saves him from the top of my dislike list. That 'honour' I'll give to Magnus. Character trait-wise, his astounding arrogance doomed both his legion and likely humanity as a whole. Literature-wise, I just haven't found him a particularly interesting character to read about.

 

Runner-up would be Fulgrim. Oddly enough, considering they're a pack of debauched psychotics, nothing written about them before Josh Reynolds interested me overmuch or made me like or hate them either way.

 

 

I remember those early bios of Angron too..... the romantic in me definitely prefers that Angron, but reluctantly I must say the retconed version is probably more realistic. The way Angron,s brain has been cut up and plugged in, it's amazing he functions at all. Angron hates the Emperor. He's hated him since the day he was "rescued". In the end all he wanted to do was fight and die with his back to the wall with the only people he loved and respected. Not only did the Emperor take that away from him, but he allied himself with the very people who enslaved Angron. 

 

Angron sees nothing but injustice and hypocrisy in the Empire of Man, all personified by the Emperor himself. I think Angron was always looking to properly thank his father for all he did and Horus gave him the perfect opportunity. Also, Angron built the perfect legion to deliver that thanks.

 

As far as Lorgar is concerned, I find him fascinating (at least the concept of Lorgar). He's the instrument that started it all, thanks to the machinations of Erebus and Kor Phaeron (yet another model daddy figure). I think the biggest problem is that while his writers are immensely talented, they have no real understanding of passionate religious belief or it's leadership, only it's characterchure.

[LJF]

All the primarchs have the potential to be awesome, it is their portrayal by BL authors that I often find questionable. However there is one who is consistently irritating no matter who is writing him and that would be Sanguinius who is emo as heck on the inside and a complete mary sue on the outside. I don't find such combination very pleasant.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I find terms like mary sue and plot armor trite and overused... very much so 4chan

[Sete]

Yeah, in a weird way I don't find the Traitor Primarchs elicit hate from me, any more than Sauron or Darth Vader do.

Sauron and Vader are awesome.

I hate perfect, holier than thou characters.

Like Guilliman.

Edit*

Oh traitors, Still Guilliman with his Imperium secundus. (Or whatever lol)

[godking]

For me it has to be Lorgar - he started the whole mess and was such a hypocrite too. His hate for Guilliman was totally misdirected too.

 

Second probably is Perterabo (sp?) because he is so vile but Mortarion is right up there because he is so evil and does not value his Death Guard.

 

Third is Nighthaunter now that his background got retconned... just comes across now as a psycho killer with no real direction -  funny he used to be one of my favorites when he was a tragic character.

Mortarion : the most ignorant and hypocritical of the traitor primarchs.

 

Curze : The most cowardly of the traitor primarchs almost went into a catatonic shutdown when Sanguinus proved that fate is not set in stone and that Curze did not have to turn out as he did.

[Kelborn]

I don't really hate any of them.

 

It's more disliking and despising them. ;)

 

For what its worth, I do dislike the following:

 

- Lorgar, I'm not a religious man. Thus I find someone as zealous and deluded like him somewhat annoying. BUT he's very well depicted in his Primarch book and in both novels done by Aaron. I still don't like him but his depiction was awesome.

 

- Fulgrim, I'm not very into Slaanesh and the Emperor's Children as a whole. That's why I love the Khan's line about Fulgrim doing strange things to his sons. :D

 

I can get along with the rest of them and even understand most of them like Perturabo or Angron or Magnus.

 

Curze is suffering from being overused. Yes, he's maybe the only traitor Primarch not being bound to his Legion and thus has the "sparetime" to do the stuff he did. But it was just too much. Maybe I'm biased but I love Aaron's depiction of him. It just nails the image I got of him. I honestly hope that we see his rediscovery and that the character Konrad Curze shows up again. For most of the Heresy, the Night Haunter character took over and did all the messy stuff. Oh and I enjoyed his duel with Sanguinius.

[Carach]

fulgrim. mainly because i wish they stuck to the idea of him having given up his body and soul to a daemon.

 

there's still the tiny potential that this is still the case but meh

 

it added far more to maturity and story than the "lols i learned from the daemon now im back as the complete opposite of what i was when i gave up my body cos reasons" 

 

magnus more for his tragic nature not bad story telling

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Fulgrim’s daemon body is so lame IMO .

[bluntblade]

People calling Mortarion ignorant: are you actually read up on his backstory?

 

Mortarion has grown up taking for granted that the Warp and its denizens can be controlled, because he was fostered on a world controlled by those alien necromancers. Heck, Magnus didn't understand the truth of the Warp.

[Brother Lunkhead]

People calling Mortarion ignorant: are you actually read up on his backstory?

 

Mortarion has grown up taking for granted that the Warp and its denizens can be controlled, because he was fostered on a world controlled by those alien necromancers. Heck, Magnus didn't understand the truth of the Warp.

 

Agreed

 

 

 

Yeah, in a weird way I don't find the Traitor Primarchs elicit hate from me, any more than Sauron or Darth Vader do.

Sauron and Vader are awesome.

I hate perfect, holier than thou characters.

Like Guilliman.

Edit*

Oh traitors, Still Guilliman with his Imperium secundus. (Or whatever lol)

 

 

I don't see any evidence that Guilliman is holier than thou and it's evident that he's not perfect.... however much like Sanguinius we don't see a lot of evidence from the stories that have been written so far that his  don't stink. All great strategists and tacticians throughout history have committed great blunders. Perhaps the BL writers simply feel that only showing a character's warts makes for great conflict.... I think its lazy writing. I'd like to see character fluff backed up by story.

 

As for Imperium Secunds……. lame.... lame...lame.... lame idea...… lame. This is one of those really bad ( bad) writer ideas that no amount of retconning can get rid of. Guilliman has been unfairly saddled with this.... lame idea and no amount of strategic genius can justify or undo it. I know...… some brilliant BL writer can pen a story where Big Bobby G wakes up and it all turns out to be a bad dream

[Indefragable]

This was a surprisingly hard topic to reply to.

 

If we are going to judge by writing quality in BL, than I would have to say Horus. We have very little reason to see why Big H is the man, outside of Horus Rising, and that was as much a setup for the entire setting as it was the character.

 

But to better answer your question, pretending that all 9 Traitor Primarchs were the literary passion projects of [insert favorite author here], I would have to say I dislike the most:

 

Magnus: the wisest of Primarchs did not have the wisdom to die an (unsung, tragic) hero and also  is somehow obtuse enough to not realize he's living long enough to become a villain. What, IMO, should be a tragic arc of betrayal and good intentions going so horribly wrong comes off as the pettiest and most flawed of all. Analyze any of the Traitor Primarchs motivations and his is….because he was bored? He didn't know what else to do? If he was duped by Tzeentch, then it just makes him seem even less competent (yes

 

Alpharius: the James Bond Primarch seems to have read the 4chan articles about himself instead of…you know…doing actual cool things with that mysterious nature. Case in point:

…he in Praetorian of Dorn, he does this elaborate and strategically dubious gambit to SHOW Dorn and the wider Imperium his capabilities, yet ends up dying in an ignominious way in an event that is covered up and hidden so that no one actually sees what he was trying to show them.

 

Curze: this will be a controversial opinion, but he's the biggest hypocrite of all to me. He calls out the sham that the Emperor is orchestrating, how the symphony is far more cacaphonous then the propaganda would have you believe…yet he keeps dutifully blowing on his tuba, doing his part. If he was such an enlightened rebel...why didn't he actually rebel before the HH?

 

Fulgrim: TL;DR: surprisingly one note in a bad way. Perhaps most disturbingly, I am kind of curious as to what exactly is keeping him so entertained instead of conquering the Imperium

 

...kind of funny, since all of them other than Fulgrim I actually want to like.

 

Hidden Content

 

III Fulgrim

His Primarchs novel does an incredible job showing just how cool he could have been had he not fallen. He had potential to be the best--yes, the best--of all the Primarchs yet squanders it all and becomes the most self-absorbed of them all, both pre- and post- ascension to Daemon Prince-dom.

 

IV Perturabo

Guy Haley's ending to the Primarchs novel for this guy singularly redeemed him for me (well, in a Daemon Prince kind of way). It's seriously that good. Sometimes a single moment of self-awareness is all it takes. Ok, his depiction in the Magnus Primarchs novel was pretty good as well...he's the brother that you get annoyed at because he's so meticulous and detail oriented, yet when he shows up with a his pickup to help you move hot damn are you grateful for those very reasons.

 

VIII Curze

When done well, he's what you get when you fuze Batman with the so-insane-they're-the-sanest-person-in-the-room incarnations of The Joker. Who can deny that he's inherently one of the most interesting characters in the lore? That being said...I find him the least sympathetic of all the Primarchs, for exactly the opposite reasons of Perturabo: he's too self-aware. Whereas Perturabo is an insufferable :cuss , he at least has a moment where he realizes that...and why...and for a moment...a single...moment...he almost starts to turn around. Curze, in comparison, knows better than anyone exactly who he is and the hypocrisy surrounding his very existence...yet he plays his role better than anyone. For all his yammering about the lunacy of the stage production, he reliably delivers his lines and struts his moment on the stage in direct contrast to all his meta-busting talk.

 

I just can't respect that.

 

XII Angron

It is impossible for me to be angry with Angron (heh) precisely because there is justification for why he is what he is. Even in-universe it's apparent that "rescuing" Angron was one of the Emperor's biggest mistakes, and as such Space Spartacus is sympathetic in his own way. Even if most depictions outside of Betrayer have made him one-note, he's a bit character that plays his trope well, love it or hate it. Think of him played by Ron Perlman, and there you go.

 

XIV Mortarion

Smells his own farts. His 180 from "no psykers ever!" to becoming one himself is either what makes him a tool or an interesting character depending on your view. I, for one, fall in the latter category. I always felt there was more under the surface than the Lord of Barbarus let on, especially given that he is pretty much Horus' right-hand (super)man during the HH...that counts for something, even if the alternative options (Fulgrim, Angron, etc...) were not the most impressive. The calculating, measured, and analytical strategist angle he's given in Path of Heaven really brought him up in my book.

 

XV Magnus

Curiosity killed the cat(egory 5 psyker). If ever there was a sympathetic arc for the Traitor Primarchs, Magnus is the one. By all rights, he should never have been a Traitor at all. But when post-Prospero did he flip the switch and become moustache-twirling bad guy? That's the part I don't get. Angron's arc, for all its simplicity, is just that: simple and understandable for its simplicity. Magnus, on the other hand-should have known better. The wisest of all the Primarchs who's flaw was perhaps seeking knowledge too much…should have   . It'd be like if Russ killed Malcador in 1-1 combat because Russ didn't know his own strength…what? Russ's whole shtick is being the great equalizer, the one who can (on paper) master all others in combat doesn't know what he is capable in that arena?

 

XVI Horus

If he was written better and more consistently, it would be impossible not to like him. And, by his very nature, should be impossible not to like. For that reason I can't really dislike him even if  I don't like most of his screen time so far.

 

XVII Lorgar

Lorgar is easy prey, for a variety of reasons: he "started it all," he's been described in-universe as the weakest combatant of the Primarchs, and the general non-religious attitude of the modern world. But to me, that's in so many ways what makes him interesting: he can only go up in terms of intriguing aspects. He is sort of the Little Finger (GoT reference) of the Primarchs: his ability to hang with such peerless warriors despite being not able to keep up in combat is what makes him so intriguing and powerful (I'm harping on the "weak combatant" angle for comparison sake here...I know he wasn't helpless or anything)

 

XX Alpharius/Omegon

So cool....but their mysterious stuff gets a bit annoying after a while. I want to like them so bad since they have the potential to be really interesting, but they ultimately fall flat.

 

[bluntblade]

Mortarion needs a story that will actually bear out Bligh and French's description of him as one of the best field commanders out of the Primarchs. So far we've only had the FW material for that (Conquest gives him a superb treatment, and that's considerably smaller than the part that Horus and his Sons play in that campaign).

[Brother Lunkhead]

Brother Indefragable: 

 

I really like your points.... very well thought out My only contention is with Curze…. I think he is far too insane to be labeled a hypocrite. His insanity could justify (in his mind) anything and often does. He is simply a mad dog with power.

[bluntblade]

Kurze wasn't a hypocrite. He was simply wedded to a nightmarish worldview.

[Qkhitai]

Again, it is tough to choose. I guess Perturabo? Maybe a little unfair, since I haven't really read much of him in the Horus Heresy series, but he seems like the primarch who loves his legion the least. For most of the other traitor primarchs, I can think of a fair few examples of them actually acting like fathers to their sons and showing that other, human side to their characters. Perturabo though just seems cold, like his sons are a burden to him, instead of a blessing. I don't really care much for that.

[Leif Bearclaw]

Dislike the most? Probably Magnus or Lorgar, although most of the Traitors have some issues with their portrayal, or have at least something bad about their fluff.

 

Magnus and Lorgar both suffered most from the change to 'Imperial Truth, no psykers allowed' that occurred with the HH series. Lorgar's entire arc, so heavily based in religiosity, just feels out of place now. How did the Emperor not notice Colchis was a shrine world? How did Lorgar convince an entire Legion of Iconoclast Firemen (Fahrenheit style) to completely 180 flip their core beliefs (genetic loyalty is a bad answer imo, especially if we embrace FW's 'all Legions had loyalists and traitor spiel')? The old fluff, that it was excessive faith at the expense of progress which provoked rebuke makes much more sense than nobody noticed an entire Marine Legion was proselytising religion in a militantly atheist empire. Plus his character of 'need something to worship' does very little for me, and it's all his fault .

 

Magnus? I honestly don't get why people find him so sympathetic. He was possibly the most arrogant figure in the setting, thought he knew better than everyone and paid the price for his hubris, along with everyone else when he trashed the webway. Especially when it's revealed in ATS that he had already damned himself to Tzeentch when he first 'cured' the flesh change. The fall of Magnus and the XV is tragic, but they're not innocent. When Nikea was 'Librarian Good, Sorcery Bad' rather than 'No Psyker For You!' the Sons made more sense, as their was more nuance and grey to the issue, but not any more. Now they're just arrogant know it alls, who really don't.

 

Other Traitors it's a bit more specific. The 'I am Alpharius' sneaky-sneaky stuff with the AL is just overdone. I much preferred the IS fluff, where Alphy was the young upstart with a chip on his shoulder and everything to prove.

 

Pertuarbo was fine until FW got to him. The decimation of the Legion for the crime of 'not being the best' was just, stupid. It was particularly egregious because normally FW does better than the BL/GW with these things.

 

Angron? Eh. He's fine, don't particularly like him, but he's fine and mostly makes sense. Same with Morty. A bit of hypocracy in a villain is fine (protagonists less so, stupid Nikea), especially when they undergo major change as a narrative progresses. Curze? Haven't read much of his HH stuff, but imo the definitive NL work was written long before HH with Lord of the Night (sorry ADB, Talos and co were cool, but Lord really captured the dichotomy, corruption and split personalities of Curze and the VIII for me).

 

Horus is fine, for what he is. The big bad, arguably a bit simple, and the fall should have been better handled, but it works. Could use a bit more attention it seems, but I still much prefer Horus and his Sons to Abby and the Boys in Black.

 

The one that stick in my craw most because of presentation is Fulgrim, and the EC as a whole. Firstly the change in his reasons for turning from 'Horus is just that good as a speaker and manipulator' to 'this sword is talking to me? I don't see any problems here!' is easily a top 5 worst thing the HH series has done. Then there's just the way the 'narrative voice' for the EC never matches the 'personal perspective'. IA and Betrayal go out of their way to talk about the Legion never being satisfied, that however well they do, it never seems to measure up, and past triumphs never seem to matter, they have to be chasing the next success, which is a mindset I have some major sympathy with. Yet pretty much all the EC we meet are just egotistical s. There's none of the fragility of psyche or drive to succeed that I get from the 'top down' views, just arrogance and entitlement. And this even before they fall to Slaanesh.