Dark Imperium II by Guy Haley

[Taliesin]

Novels wise Lords of Silence and Ashes of Prospero have indeed been used repeatedly as a basis for support of loyalist Primarchs.

Especially the section in Ashes, but certainly LoS as well. And it's understandable that this happened because it definitely suggests very strongly that they will be back.

 

In that sense Wraight's reaction is indeed odd.

[Apothecary Vaddon]

 

 

 

 

 

The book definitely gets better towards the second half and ends strong.

 

In Lords of Silence Mortarion says that all the loyalists will return and he even points out that he's annoyed Guilliman was the first to come back lol

 

I wouldn't take that little line in Lords of Silence as gospel. At the last Heresy meeting, I couldn't resist teasing Chris that he was being referenced online as the guy who hinted all the loyalist primarchs were coming back. First he had no idea what I was talking about, as he didn't recall writing any such thing. When I explained it, he was mortified in the most charming way (as usual).

 

All the loyalist primarchs? Including the dead ones? Who the heck is saying that?

 

 

Is... is this a joke? Genuine question. 

 

Jesus, I see that stuff everywhere. The constant "The Lion is probably the next primarch release" posts. The "Ways Sanguinius could come back" posts. The "Ways Ferrus Manus could come back" posts. The "Dorn is next" posts. The "Corax is still alive and will be next" posts. The "Russ is still alive and will be next" posts. 

 

Man, I'd love to go a day without seeing them on the electronic interwebbery.

 

Crucially, I've seen Chris's work being cited as evidence of it, which - in case I wasn't clear - wasn't intentional on his part. I apologise, however, for being a thief of joy and quencher of rumours. 

 

Uh, no. Everything I've read has nothing about using Chris' throwaway line as proof that everyone is coming back. Most of the time it's some kind of 'industry' rumor, or using hints in other novels (Ashes of Prospero ring a bell?). 

 

For example; the "ways the Lion is coming back" have been around since way before Lords of Silence, and are largely a function of the fact that multiple codices have pointed out that the Lion's snoring his ass off somewhere in that giant hunk of Rock. The 'Ways Sanguinius could come back' posts largely originated, as far as I'm aware, a little after Rise of the Primarch came out and there were rumors that Sanguinius was coming back floating around on the internet. The 'Dorn is next' posts largely the same (IIRC there were rumors of a Christmas Primarch release that year or the following year). 

 

Corax being alive post-heresy came mostly from the Sons of the Emperor anthology, so people are naturally taking that with Ashes of Prospero to try and formulate an argument for whether he could be next. 

 

Maybe I'm just not reading the same posts as you are, but nowhere am I seeing Lords of Silence being used as the primary and only argument for the return of the Primarchs. Rather it's a moshpit of rumors, bits from books/codices, and just plain old wishlisting. 

 

I'm not particularly miffed or anything about what Chris did or didn't say at some meeting, just pointing out that all these things didn't crop up overnight...they've been around for years at this point, just surprised that you'd think that it was Lords of Silence that was the impetus for the rumors in these cases.

 

 

Man, between here, Reddit, /tg/, and Facebook's various 40K groups, I've seen LoS cited as 'proof' of more loyalist primarchs returning almost as much as I've seen discussion about the book itself. I mean... you're saying you've not seen it, and there's some of it in this thread. It's literally why I replied.

 

I'm not saying it's the only indication or jokey nod. I'm saying it's not an intentional indication at all, but is being used as a major one in the current PRIMARCHS RETURNING! climate. Hell, I think there are even several YT vids that reference it in the context of the current debate. Otherwise, I totally agree with you. It's definitely a moshpit of wishlisting rather than evidence, but I thought people might like to know one of the major 'proofs' is, y'know, not true.

 

I mean, yeah, Ishagu posted that, not entirely sure how religiously adhering to it's most literal aspects versus pointing out how annoyed Mortarion was that it was Guilliman who came back first. Doesn't really seem like preaching a proof to me, but to each their own.

 

For example; if one were so inclined, one could go to the returning primarchs thread in Amicus and search for mentions of Wraight or Lords of Silence and find like, one post. We could go on and see that Ashes of Prospero was similarly quoted (and that passage read a little more straight than Lords of Silence's did, which came across more to me like Chris covering his bases in case GW does decide to release more Primarchs with a little line like that) in these kinds of discussions. Threads addressing primarchs returning do crop up, and those should probably (and understandably) have references to novels or works that seem to indicate returns.

 

In any case, my perception isn't anywhere even close to seeing LoS bandied about as proof of returning primarchs as much as talk about the book itself. Heck, even in the Lords of Silence discussion thread here, we had a page where some posts kind of strayed in that territory but the majority of the thread was discussion about the book itself and how it was pretty good. Like I said - I think we're reading quite different discussions...

[b1soul]

This discussions on this forum tend to be a lot less silly than those on /tg

[mc warhammer]

people are arguing about what the other person has seen on the internet. this is internet next level.

 

next is ravenous bugblatter beast of traal level (for the hitchhiker galaxy guide fans)

[A D-B]

 

people are arguing about what the other person has seen on the internet. this is internet next level.

 

next is ravenous bugblatter beast of traal level (for the hitchhiker galaxy guide fans)

 

 

I'm surprised, too.

 

"This is a thing that's well-known enough to come up in conversations between authors."

"Well, I've not seen it."

"No? I have, a whole bunch, but I wanted to pop in here to let people know it's not proof of anything, so y'all can safely ignore it in those discussions. Hope that's helpful." 

"Well, I haven't seen it."

 

Cool.

 

I'm not sure what Vad is trying to convince me about here, or why it's so vital he tells me I'm imagining something, but I wish him well with it.

[mc warhammer]

i did a quick google: “lord of silence primarchs” , even left out “surviving” on purpose.

 

got a bunch of reddit threads and surprise surprise, b&c. it’s a thing

[Apothecary Vaddon]

 

 

people are arguing about what the other person has seen on the internet. this is internet next level.

 

next is ravenous bugblatter beast of traal level (for the hitchhiker galaxy guide fans)

 

 

I'm surprised, too.

 

"This is a thing that's well-known enough to come up in conversations between authors."

"Well, I've not seen it."

"No? I have, a whole bunch, but I wanted to pop in here to let people know it's not proof of anything, so y'all can safely ignore it in those discussions. Hope that's helpful." 

"Well, I haven't seen it."

 

Cool.

 

I'm not sure what Vad is trying to convince me about here, or why it's so vital he tells me I'm imagining something, but I wish him well with it.

 

That's...astonishingly off the mark, but alright. Whatever makes you happy, man, roll on.

 

 

i did a quick google: “lord of silence primarchs” , even left out “surviving” on purpose.

 

got a bunch of reddit threads and surprise surprise, b&c. it’s a thing

Not entirely sure where you're going with this in relation to my point, but okay.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Thanks for clarifying this ADB. /thumbsup

[carlisimo]

Not entirely sure where you're going with this in relation to my point, but okay.

I suspect your point was misunderstood… by all of us.

 

But it also sounds like everyone here is on the same side of the argument, just not on the same side of the argument about the argument. Arguably.

 

Anyway, I recently re-read Execution Hour, the Battlefleet Gothic tie-in novel to contrast it with this series. Aside from two pages that feel like an advertisement (when they use all of the game’s special orders in a short scene), it’s what I wish we’d get more of from 40k’s marquee stories. There’s a WWII naval novel feel to some scenes, a Siege of Vraks feel in others, and lots of impending doom. Black Library is still pulling that off, just not here. The new face of 40k is unthreatening and full of cavalry riding over the hill to save the day.

 

I guess this is a “not grimdark enough” complaint - not very original, my apologies for that. Haley’s done it well in the past though (Baneblade/Shadowsword), even with good guys who were unusually virtuous for M41. Maybe the overall narrative is hard to work with.

[Bulwyf]

I don't see how LoS isn't proof. When a timeless being states flat out that all the surviving Loyalist primarchs are back in the 40k universe how is that not considered at least soft canon? It would be like the Joker telling Batman in Batman 565 (random issue number) what Joker's real name is and another comic book writer saying "Ah, sorry, that's not meant to be taken seriously".

 

I don't want to get into the "how canon is Black Library" boondoggle of a topic but explicitly stating something is different from an oblique reference or allusion.

[Lord_Caerolion]

I might as well pipe up, given I'm one of the people who mentioned Lords of Silence in the afore-mentioned Primarchs topic. Lords of Silence has a somewhat-unreliable character state that the "surviving" Loyalists return, but it mentions nothing about who returns. For all we could know, the Lion could be it. I definitely don't understand the reaching that some have done to argue that Sanguinius will return, or whatever other nonsense some people are arguing.

[mc warhammer]

the joker example is not quite on point because he's a notorious liar and his memory of his own past is inaccurate. so yeah, if he revealed his name...that would be suss as heck

 

but if the actual writer of the line is surprised at such an iron clad interpretation of his own words...doesn't that at least open up the possibility of other meanings or ways to read the text? or is wraight just unaware of what he's writing, safe in the knowledge that the internet will let him know?

I might as well pipe up, given I'm one of the people who mentioned Lords of Silence in the afore-mentioned Primarchs topic. Lords of Silence has a somewhat-unreliable character state that the "surviving" Loyalists return, but it mentions nothing about who returns. For all we could know, the Lion could be it. I definitely don't understand the reaching that some have done to argue that Sanguinius will return, or whatever other nonsense some people are arguing.

 

i still vote for the return of dorn's hand

[Lord_Caerolion]

Really, I interpret it as "well, the Codex indicates the Lion is coming back, and there may be others". It's definitely not "every Loyalist is coming back, so lets theorise about how Ferrus can recover from a nasty case of missing head".

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

NAH the Lion loves to just sleep and dream of Angels.

[Apothecary Vaddon]

Really, I interpret it as "well, the Codex indicates the Lion is coming back, and there may be others". It's definitely not "every Loyalist is coming back, so lets theorise about how Ferrus can recover from a nasty case of missing head".

Yep - I feel like if you take everything in conjunction (rumblings about the Khan, Lion's always generally available to pull out at a moment's notice and has been) there are options to bring in fairly quickly to fulfill any prophecies, hints, or dreams that don't involve ludicrous events occurring. 

[Bulwyf]

the joker example is not quite on point because he's a notorious liar and his memory of his own past is inaccurate. so yeah, if he revealed his name...that would be suss as heck

 

but if the actual writer of the line is surprised at such an iron clad interpretation of his own words...doesn't that at least open up the possibility of other meanings or ways to read the text? or is wraight just unaware of what he's writing, safe in the knowledge that the internet will let him know?

I might as well pipe up, given I'm one of the people who mentioned Lords of Silence in the afore-mentioned Primarchs topic. Lords of Silence has a somewhat-unreliable character state that the "surviving" Loyalists return, but it mentions nothing about who returns. For all we could know, the Lion could be it. I definitely don't understand the reaching that some have done to argue that Sanguinius will return, or whatever other nonsense some people are arguing.

 

i still vote for the return of dorn's hand

 

He wrote the lines. Editors at BL approved the lines. It isn't some internet chicanery as ADB is somewhat trying to infer that those lines are being taken for what they are. Mortarion is talking to one of his sons and flat out states the surviving Loyalist Primarchs come back in the 40k setting. He doesn't name them but to act is if people are being "Just those crazy intrawebz kids taking things out of context" is a little insulting.  This isn't some oblique reference or allusion.

 

This went through at least two levels of proofing before it was allowed to print. I'm not trying to attack either Chris or ADB but at least give us readers some respect. We're not inferring something not intended for straight fanboy wishlisting. This is something explicitly stated as fact in that novel.

[mc warhammer]

 

He wrote the lines. Editors at BL approved the lines. It isn't some internet chicanery as ADB is somewhat trying to infer that those lines are being taken for what they are. Mortarion is talking to one of his sons and flat out states the surviving Loyalist Primarchs come back in the 40k setting. He doesn't name them but to act is if people are being "Just those crazy intrawebz kids taking things out of context" is a little insulting.  This isn't some oblique reference or allusion.

 

This went through at least two levels of proofing before it was allowed to print. I'm not trying to attack either Chris or ADB but at least give us readers some respect. We're not inferring something not intended for straight fanboy wishlisting. This is something explicitly stated as fact in that novel.

 

 

i suppose abd be lying then

 

or wraight be lying to abd

 

or

 

maybe what adb took issue with was the person he quoted who said all loyal primarchs were returning? nah, probably not that. must be the lying.

[b1soul]

@ Bulwyf

 

"He wrote the lines. Editors at BL approved the lines. It isn't some internet chicanery as ADB is somewhat trying to infer that those lines are being taken for what they are. Mortarion is talking to one of his sons and flat out states the surviving Loyalist Primarchs come back in the 40k setting. He doesn't name them but to act is if people are being "Just those crazy intrawebz kids taking things out of context" is a little insulting."

 

Concurred...Lords of Silence, Ashes of Prospero, The Last Hunt offer some hints that other loyalist Primarchs could return. Does it mean that it will happen? We have to wait and see. But fans aren't getting a bit excited for no reason. I do agree that fans who treat these hints as 100% confirmation are going way overboard, but who on this forum is doing that?

 

Similarly, I object to the idea that the visions or stirrings experienced by Mortarion, Njal, and the WS stormseer mean nothing and that the fans are being idiots. Fans are just reacting to what the authours know are tantalising bait.

[A D-B]

 

the joker example is not quite on point because he's a notorious liar and his memory of his own past is inaccurate. so yeah, if he revealed his name...that would be suss as heck

 

but if the actual writer of the line is surprised at such an iron clad interpretation of his own words...doesn't that at least open up the possibility of other meanings or ways to read the text? or is wraight just unaware of what he's writing, safe in the knowledge that the internet will let him know?

I might as well pipe up, given I'm one of the people who mentioned Lords of Silence in the afore-mentioned Primarchs topic. Lords of Silence has a somewhat-unreliable character state that the "surviving" Loyalists return, but it mentions nothing about who returns. For all we could know, the Lion could be it. I definitely don't understand the reaching that some have done to argue that Sanguinius will return, or whatever other nonsense some people are arguing.

 

i still vote for the return of dorn's hand

 

He wrote the lines. Editors at BL approved the lines. It isn't some internet chicanery as ADB is somewhat trying to infer that those lines are being taken for what they are. Mortarion is talking to one of his sons and flat out states the surviving Loyalist Primarchs come back in the 40k setting. He doesn't name them but to act is if people are being "Just those crazy intrawebz kids taking things out of context" is a little insulting.  This isn't some oblique reference or allusion.

 

This went through at least two levels of proofing before it was allowed to print. I'm not trying to attack either Chris or ADB but at least give us readers some respect. We're not inferring something not intended for straight fanboy wishlisting. This is something explicitly stated as fact in that novel.

 

 

That's not what I'm saying.

 

I see it's there. I'm not saying it's not there or the belief came out of nowhere. It's there. But I'm telling you it's not a true indicator. It's not genuine evidence of what's coming.

[mc warhammer]

has anyone accused the fans of idiocy? i've seen calls for reading the hints accurately and for varied interpretations of what those prophecies and whatnot mean.

 

fans confirming pet theories and whipping each other up into a frenzy of hype is standaard, but i don't know if it's idiocy.

[carlisimo]

 

He doesn't name them but to act is if people are being "Just those crazy intrawebz kids taking things out of context" is a little insulting.  This isn't some oblique reference or allusion.

I think everyone here assumes that some loyalist primarchs are coming back.  Those crazy interwebz kids taking things out of context are the ones saying they're ALL coming back.  The word "all" appears in the posts that started this discussion.  There was a brief flurry of editorials a few months ago about the merits (or not) of bringing Sanguinius back and how to pull it off, and some backlash by the purists (the being a little insulting).

 

Granted, I didn't see anyone get very serious about bringing back Ferrus Manus.

[rookie40K]

 

I thought it was confirmed that Ferrus’s soul was trapped in some robotic suit on something called the Blackstone Fortress?

 

He doesn't name them but to act is if people are being "Just those crazy intrawebz kids taking things out of context" is a little insulting. This isn't some oblique reference or allusion.

I think everyone here assumes that some loyalist primarchs are coming back. Those crazy interwebz kids taking things out of context are the ones saying they're ALL coming back. The word "all" appears in the posts that started this discussion. There was a brief flurry of editorials a few months ago about the merits (or not) of bringing Sanguinius back and how to pull it off, and some backlash by the purists (the being a little insulting).

 

Granted, I didn't see anyone get very serious about bringing back Ferrus Manus.

[Red_Shift]

For arguments sake, Mortarion saying the loyalists are coming back could just be what he thinks. Doesn't mean he is right. Although being psychically attuned might mean that he can somehow sense their presence.

[Bulwyf]

 

 

the joker example is not quite on point because he's a notorious liar and his memory of his own past is inaccurate. so yeah, if he revealed his name...that would be suss as heck

 

but if the actual writer of the line is surprised at such an iron clad interpretation of his own words...doesn't that at least open up the possibility of other meanings or ways to read the text? or is wraight just unaware of what he's writing, safe in the knowledge that the internet will let him know?

I might as well pipe up, given I'm one of the people who mentioned Lords of Silence in the afore-mentioned Primarchs topic. Lords of Silence has a somewhat-unreliable character state that the "surviving" Loyalists return, but it mentions nothing about who returns. For all we could know, the Lion could be it. I definitely don't understand the reaching that some have done to argue that Sanguinius will return, or whatever other nonsense some people are arguing.

 

i still vote for the return of dorn's hand

 

He wrote the lines. Editors at BL approved the lines. It isn't some internet chicanery as ADB is somewhat trying to infer that those lines are being taken for what they are. Mortarion is talking to one of his sons and flat out states the surviving Loyalist Primarchs come back in the 40k setting. He doesn't name them but to act is if people are being "Just those crazy intrawebz kids taking things out of context" is a little insulting.  This isn't some oblique reference or allusion.

 

This went through at least two levels of proofing before it was allowed to print. I'm not trying to attack either Chris or ADB but at least give us readers some respect. We're not inferring something not intended for straight fanboy wishlisting. This is something explicitly stated as fact in that novel.

 

 

That's not what I'm saying.

 

I see it's there. I'm not saying it's not there or the belief came out of nowhere. It's there. But I'm telling you it's not a true indicator. It's not genuine evidence of what's coming.

 

 

Obviously you are far more connected than I or anyone else here so your word on this is as close to gospel truth as possible. I am not trying to disagree with your real life knowledge of actual GW/BL plans. I am relieved that you can see my point in this. The book clearly states one thing that as a reader you take as not simply a hint or a prophecy or some allusion. There are any number of examples of this in fluff and lore.

 

In this case, it was stated as simple fact, as something that will already happen because Mortarion as a timeless entity has already experienced it in happening in the future. At least the future for those of us that aren't demons or Dr. Manhattan...

[Bulwyf]

For arguments sake, Mortarion saying the loyalists are coming back could just be what he thinks. Doesn't mean he is right. Although being psychically attuned might mean that he can somehow sense their presence.

 

That's not how it works or how it was explained. Demons exist outside of the timeline as human beings perceive time. Demons know what happens to them in the past, present and future. If you go find the LoS thread on here you'll see the lines that started all of this. Mortarion is talking to one of his sons and was surprised that the son didn't know about the Cadia falling or the surviving loyalist primarchs coming back to fight. Mortarion even tells him that it is because he doesn't perceive time like Mortarion does.

 

That's why this bit in the book was more than just the usual "When the Wolftime is here, and here's a checklist, and wow all the things are checked off so Russ MUST come back...right?" allusion or inference that GW or BL leaves like easter eggs to fans. This reads in the book like my telling you that I read a memo that you were getting promoted to senior manager and when I said grats, you were confused, until I told you I had read the memo  you didn't have access to read. It is stated as an absolute definite thing that already happened in the life of the person with the secret knowledge.