Ideas to improve upon Primaris Marines lore

[Blindhamster]

So, we learned in the vox cast yesterday that 10th company are trained to use phobos armor early on.

[Robbienw]

We learned they are trained to use all Primaris armour types when in the 10th company, not just phobos.

[bolvar]

I remember them saying the second wound is because of the furnace, but I don't remember where.

 

Guess that the other :cussing 22 implants doesn't do :cuss then

[Blindhamster]

We learned they are trained to use all Primaris armour types when in the 10th company, not just phobos.

Hmm true, it's interesting as it suggests primaris still go through 10th company, but we STILL don't know the details of it :/ I mean, HURRY UP GUYS!

[Robbienw]

I think its safe to assume they are in the 10th to train in all the armour types and Primaris combat doctrines, then when their training is complete they can go into a company.

[Ishagu]

I think more and more of the rigid structure in the lore will be eroded over time.

 

Whilst having the chapter organisation laid out in great detail was good, it also made it extremely difficult to modify, introduce new units, adjust the lore, etc as we see now.

 

In future we'll probably see the different companies have a core of Intercessors, Captain, etc but fully half of thr company might be dedicated to specific functions like Vanguard units, Aggressors, etc

 

This topic is a reminder that we should be patient. We've not seen the full picture yet but we will over time.

[Robbienw]

As they are all trained in all Primaris armour types and roles, I think it’s more likely you’ll see a Primaris chapter company with the standard hundred men, but they will be able to swap roles and armour types as required for missions. Full multi role companies.

[Ishagu]

Maybe, maybe not. I mean just look at the complaints we see online from people ALL the time: "Hurp, Derp, what happened to Scout company training, how do these guys fit in here?" Etc Etc

I realise now that lore was written with too much detail. It allows no freedom to expand, and that is 100% a bad thing. Even that explanation "Yeah, they change their armour depending on missions" is a bit rubbish and shoe-horned in. I'd rather they can just add new units, I don't need a silly lore justification for a new model beyond "Hey, here's some new stealth troops in Phobos armour."

 

It's incredibly tiresome to see the community whinge and complain when we get new kits, and not specifically because of dislike for the kit but some apparent offence against a fictional established organisation. Time to tear that stuff down!

 

If Tau get a new unit, or Necrons, or Eldar, it leads to no such problems. I think GW focused too much on Marines without planning for the future properly in terms of expanding the range. The Codex Astartes needs to be reduced to an engagement manual and no longer a stringent chapter organisation beyond numbers - and even that needs to be looked at. Just because something has been a certain way for a long time doesn't mean it's the best way.

 

Edit:

 

To add, this topic literally exists because GW can't add or change things without offending the existing overly specific lore. It's 100% clear that it's too regimented and constrictive and is a detriment to model releases, new designs, expansions of themes. I'm glad they are fixing it, and if it causes some upset then so be it - People need to realise that a thematic dead end is not a good thing in the long run.

[Robbienw]

But changing armour and role depending on mission is a good ability to have!

[Panzer]

It honestly makes a lot of sense too. Chapters are pretty small at just 1000 Marines. By having each Marine be able to take different gear to adjust to their current task they can work much better as an elite force.

[Leif Bearclaw]

Maybe, maybe not. I mean just look at the complaints we see online from people ALL the time: "Hurp, Derp, what happened to Scout company training, how do these guys fit in here?" Etc Etc

I realise now that lore was written with too much detail. It allows no freedom to expand, and that is 100% a bad thing. Even that explanation "Yeah, they change their armour depending on missions" is a bit rubbish and shoe-horned in. I'd rather they can just add new units, I don't need a silly lore justification for a new model beyond "Hey, here's some new stealth troops in Phobos armour."

 

 

Sorry, but no. You have a really weird way of looking at this. 'Beloved, detailed world-building' makes the new bodged fluff look like tripe? No, the older stuff must be wrong and bad now.

 

The 'old' lore doesn't leave no freedom to expand, they've just completely half ed it. The issue isn't that an explanation of how Primaris fit into the established Marine structures (especially around Primaris-only Chapter structure) is impossible. It's that the studio has decided to mess around and not tell us. It's not some sin on the part of the evil, entitled fans to want explanations for these questions.

 

Contrast Primaris with a smaller contentious addition to the Marine range, Centurions. Love them or loath them (and they certainly had their issues), nobody was in any doubt what they were, and where they fitted into the structure of Marines (specialised exo suits for assault and dev Marines). Compare to Primaris, where we have no firm info about major issues like Chapter structure, recruitment and 1st Company status.

 

If this doesn't matter to you, fine, good for you. It's great that you can enjoy what we've currently got. But could you be less confrontational and dismissive of other's issues? For some of us, this lore is what helps make the hobby fun. And it's hard to enjoy the setting when the fluff and world building around 'new thing you be excited for' is just so lacking.

 

 

It's incredibly tiresome to see the community whinge and complain when we get new kits, and not specifically because of dislike for the kit but some apparent offence against a fictional established organisation. Time to tear that stuff down!

Yeah,   world building and consistency in fiction. Let's have Calgar assassinate Gulliman and bend the knee to Abby at the end of Vigilus 2, because it turns out both are Genestealer Cultists, then they're killed off by a Ghazkull/Imotekh team up. Don't like it? Tough, it's just apparent offence against a piece of fiction, time to tear that stuff down!

 

 

To add, this topic literally exists because GW can't add or change things without offending the existing overly specific lore. It's 100% clear that it's too regimented and constrictive and is a detriment to model releases, new designs, expansions of themes. I'm glad they are fixing it, and if it causes some upset then so be it - People need to realise that a thematic dead end is not a good thing in the long run.

No, it doesn't. You're completely misrepresenting the issue. 'Do Primaris fit into 40k?' is not the same issue as 'Has the way Primaris operate (especially their differences from old Marines) been adequately explained?'. The former, there's plenty to discuss, and anything even resembling a substantial consensus may be impossible (personally, they're an idea that could've worked, implemented in a pretty terrible way, with precious little grounding in the established 40k setting). But I just can't fathom how anyone can claim that the world-building around Primaris has been anything other than shoddy as hell. Because there just isn't adequate information provided.

[Ishagu]

I am speaking strictly about the thematic dead end which is the current chapter structure and pre 8th edition Astartes lore, I'm not advocating for poor stories.

 

I am also pointing out that trying to fit Primaris into the pre-existing chapter limitations is probably a waste of effort as it's obvious things are being re-written and altered. We don't have a full picture yet.

[Boldthreat]

A conversation where I don’t agree with Ishagu!?!?!? Forgive me Brother lol.

 

I love Primaris. Every new release is exciting and I love seeing what new things GW is coming up with for the Space Marines. Part of the fun for me is figuring out where all of this stuff fits in a 1000 man elite organization. It’s the one area that I feel GW is intentionally being vague about and it’s frustrating (a bit, it’s not like I’m pissed).

 

We are on the cusp of a second wave of Primaris releases. They are getting a stand alone codex for the Vanguard... like they are some unique organization within the chapter but they aren’t. They are just the 2nd company? This contradicts the latest SM codex.

 

I’m all about freedom to innovate and the like... but they have a plan on what’s coming. They know where and how and when. When wave 3 hits are the Primaris “sternguard” gonna be second company too? When we get a new release is it gonna be another case of “these guys fought with Guilliman in the Crusade and have always been there... but they weren’t in the codex that dealt with that specific event because reasons... it is shoehorned it. It’s poorly rolled out. As a fluff guy it is. I love the new units, I’m glad they are coming! I want more... but I’d rather have an overview of a Primaris Chapter... hell redact the stuff not released yet and keep us guessing... but give me something I can sink my teeth into!

[Marshal Reinhard]

I imagine part of the reason GW being tightlipped on how exactly Primaris fit into existing chapters or their own entirely primaris' chapters, is because the fluff is still being written. Things are still being added, such as shadowspear, and the latest voxcast with Jes' goodwin suggests there' much more in the pipeline. It's not as simple to outline a primaris chapter to an exact number of companies and squads without spoiling (or forcing yourself to retcon) when stuiff like vanguard is later added to the mix.

 

I'd like to note that me pointing out what I think is the reality of the conditions for the lore situation is not me endorsing it. I would really to know more about these things and I think despite the circumstances more information both could and should definately be given. I just am under no illusion that a detailed set in stone structure like the old legacy '10 squads a company 10 companies a chapter'-structure will be forthcoming soon, if ever.

 

This is also why I'm interested in the new silver templars book, but miffed they'd hide it behind a conquest subscription.

[Leif Bearclaw]

I am speaking strictly about the thematic dead end which is the current chapter structure and pre 8th edition Astartes lore, I'm not advocating for poor stories.

 

 

I'd fundamentally disagree on both Chapter Structure and pre 8th ed lore being thematic dead ends. Chapter Structure was no more a 'dead end' than Regimental Structure for the Guard, or the progression of Aspect Warriors to Exarchs. The old lore was static, yes, but that doesn't mean it was thematically dead. Maybe I've misunderstood what you mean by 'thematic dead end'. While I don't hate the concept behind Primaris, in and of itself, I also don't see how they're theamatcially necessary. You could've replaced the whole 'new Space Marines with funky new gear' idea with 'bad times promote a new founding of Astartes, which are armed with advanced weapons developed from recovered STC X (ideally introduced in a story a couple of years previously, helping it seem less contrived)' and all the same events (and new models) can play out, but it's still in keeping with the 'old' 40k themes.

 

However, being detailed is not a world-building sin, and if the current studio paid closer attention to their world building, then better stories would result.

 

 

I am also pointing out that trying to fit Primaris into the pre-existing chapter limitations is probably a waste of effort as it's obvious things are being re-written and altered. We don't have a full picture yet.

I agree, after a fashion. Given the scope of the Primaris, some Chapter reorganisation would make perfect sense.

 

Thing is, the pre-existing Chapter organisation is all we've got atm. Especially in combined Chapters, where the question 'how do Priamris fit into the established Chapter structure' is undeniably pertinent. If they'd actually had the guts to go 'new millenium, new Chapter Structure' when the 8th ed dex dropped, that would've actually been a step in the right direction (and made some level of sense given the massive overhaul they rolled out for Marines), they could've fitted Primaris into the older Chapters, and provided the context needed for 'what does a Primaris only Chapter look like?'. But they didn't, all we got was the same old structure with generic terms like 'Battleline' replacing Tactical, Assault and Devastator. The lack of a full picture is precisely the problem, and it's a decision made by GW to keep us in the dark for quite a while now. So it seems to me the 'fault' here is with GW and their fluff/world-building, rather than the fans having unreasonable expectations.

 

I imagine part of the reason GW being tightlipped on how exactly Primaris fit into existing chapters or their own entirely primaris' chapters, is because the fluff is still being written. Things are still being added, such as shadowspear, and the latest voxcast with Jes' goodwin suggests there' much more in the pipeline. It's not as simple to outline a primaris chapter to an exact number of companies and squads without spoiling (or forcing yourself to retcon) when stuiff like vanguard is later added to the mix.

 

 

Sadly, I think you may be onto something there. I really wish modern GW weren't so paranoid and tied to model releases. It really seems to get in the way of the overall fluff.

[Ishagu]

I also think Reinhard is correct, which backs up my point that the community needs to stop attacking every release that doesn't fit into their preconceived notions and be patient for the full picture to be revealed, whenever that is.

 

As for the STC idea, that's as much as a Deus Ex Machina trope as any. I'd rather not have any more convenient rediscoveries.

[Dracos]

Sadly, I think you may be onto something there. I really wish modern GW weren't so paranoid and tied to model releases. It really seems to get in the way of the overall fluff.

Considering they’re a company that makes their money off models and just happens to have rules and lesser so fluff to supplement their main focus, that’s a fairly unrealistic expectation to hold onto.

[Marshal Rohr]

Fixing the codex being too restrictive doesn't make the old space marine lore a dead end.  ADB already said theres no difference between Primaris and Oldmarines in the current timeline. Theyre all just space marines.

[Kallas]

STCs have long been a driving force for introducing new technology. They also present as much opportunity to introduce flaws - we saw this in one of the Gaunt's Ghosts novels (I forget which one exactly) where they rediscover an STC that creates Men of Iron, but it's been horribly corrupted by Chaos.

 

STCs at least playing a part in the Primaris introduction would at least have tied it into the established lore somewhat rather than Cawl making things out of whole cloth. It could also present opportunities to create conflict, such as some Chapter(s) discovering that one of the STCs being used to create some of the wargear has been long saturated by Chaos warp taint (which might make the gear more effective but calls its suitability into doubt) leading to schism (small or large), and also create some opportunities to reduce the Deus Ex Cawl factor by a significant amount.

 

But, of course, when Ishagu is involved Primaris can do no wrong...

[Ishagu]

I'm just a light against the darkness.

[Robbienw]

A flickering light in a street lamp more like

 

No one is attacking new releases, they are just wondering where they fit into structures.  Its one of the things a lot of 40k lore fans like, how chapters are structured.  You should not be surprised people want to know this, particularly after being given this info on space marine chapters for many years.

[Brother Casman]

I've posted some musings on how I'm going to integrate the Vanguard into my Blood Ravens over here, in case anyone is interested.

 

Edited to add: I apparently posted this in the wrong thread earlier...

[Brother Casman]

Alright, let's not go down this path, yeah? We're discussing the fluff around the Primaris Space Marines and how they fit into the pre-existing Chapter structures. We don't need to make unsupported assertions and sarcastic jabs at each other.

 

=][=

 

Edited to add: I've hidden the more recent posts.

[Leif Bearclaw]

I also think Reinhard is correct, which backs up my point that the community needs to stop attacking every release that doesn't fit into their preconceived notions and be patient for the full picture to be revealed, whenever that is.

 

What counts an 'attack' though? You sometimes seem to think anything that isn't unrelenting praise for Primaris to be some kind of megalithic hatedom. It's entirely possible (for a few examples), to like the design of the Intercessors, but think the trend away from true posablity and customisation in newer kits is a step backwards. Or that the Phobos armour sculpts are fine models severely let down by the derpy legs. Or that the infantry are generally solid but the Inceptors and Suppressors are hot garbage. It's also possible to have very different reactions to the fluff vs the models.

 

The issue with the 'wait and see' approach is that it's, taken to the extreme, just apologetics for bad fluff. What's a 'reasonable' length of time for the 'full picture'? If they keep releasing models with half baked fluff behind them, when is it 'appropriate' to call them out for bungling the fluff? We end up always waiting for the next book, hoping it'll finally provide answers, only to be strung along again. It's like the FAQs, the GK sub got pretty salty as every round of FAQs they were told 'just wait, next balance pass will fix your dex', but after a few disappointments, people get increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress (or just start checking out).

 

Whereas, if the Primaris had launched with some more solid world building behind them (a more thought out and balanced 'Wave 1' would've helped too imo), there wouldn't be these structural complaints about the lack of info.

 

 

As for the STC idea, that's as much as a Deus Ex Machina trope as any. I'd rather not have any more convenient rediscoveries.

As opposed to a convenient 'suddenly entire novel arsenal'? Yes, both have elements of the contrived plot device about them, but the STC rediscovery route is more grounded in what's come before in the 40k setting. Which is why I reckon you'd have seen a far smaller backlash with that route. Especially if they'd done the proper groundwork, a book, maybe even a series, following an Explorator (could even have worked as Cawl's introduction to the setting), ending in major STC discovery. That'd make it seem far more organic and flowing, rather than the sudden hammerspace arsenal we got.

 

 

I used to like it too, but I'm not going to let past lore dampen the excitement for future releases. I see it happen far too often, mostly online however. Everyone I meet in person seems to be thrilled by it all...

And I've never met anyone irl who's an unrelentingly positive about every single new release as you are. Maybe we self select for like minded acquaintances...

 

I really don't get the mindset you're describing here. It sounds like you've decided to ignore something you like (or' used to') because you're determined, come hell or high water, to classify anything new as automatically amazing, and better than what came before. That's anathema to me. New does not automatically mean better, for either models, or fluff.

 

40k has survived for all these years on the strength of it's fluff and setting, as well as its models. We shouldn't need to throw away the old, just for the sake of the new. The new should build on, expand and improve the old (with the occasional inevitable pruning), not require the abandonment of what made the setting special to people in the first place. Holding the fluff to the standards of it's own setting, and wanting it to improve with time, is a good thing.

 

 

Considering they’re a company that makes their money off models and just happens to have rules and lesser so fluff to supplement their main focus, that’s a fairly unrealistic expectation to hold onto.

 

Sorry but I have to disagree. Ignoring for a moment that they have an entire division devoted to releasing fluff (Black Library), what I'm referring to is what the company used to do (though I know the behind the scenes reasons for the change, and they make me sad too). 'We're a model company, not a rules/fluff company' is exactly the attitude the fans pilloried the old CEO for, strange to see it now being used as a defence.

 

Even then, there are ways around the constraints. They could have done a better job on Primaris integration in Codex Space Marines, just with the current range. They could have decided to not introduce the concept of the Primaris only Chapters into the fluff until the range was better supported. They could have redesigned wave 1 to give the outline of Primaris structure, and used the following waves to fill in the gaps (instead of the 'bolt on' approach they seem to be using). It's not asking for the moon, it's wanting GW to live up to the standard they set for themselves, by the quality of their previous work.

[Ishagu]

Their intent could be replacement and not integration, in which case there is no elegant way of doing things. I don't think this is strictly the case, the Primars are more of a new angle/re-invention of a concept.

 

And yes, we should be patient. We must also remember that the Marine lore has been changed in the past.

I'd have been a lot quicker with the Primaris releases, all things being said. It's been over 18 months since wave 1 which isn't ideal by any stretch.