Seige of Terra series news

[DukeLeto69]

Will just add my voice to the support for Abnett. IMO he is still the best writer in the Black Library stable and apart from a few misfires, many of his books rank near the very top (or for me THE top) of any chart. These days the gap is closing with Chris Wraight and ADB catching (but not caug IMO).

 

Yes he dropped the ball on The Unremembered Empire (although I suspect that was written around the time Abnett and others got disillusioned by the process and management changes at GW/BL) and some argue Prospero Burns is not great (but again reasons - Abnett was diagnosed with epilepsy when he was writing that delaying release AND it had the wrong title/marketing).

 

Yet for a very small handful of not so good books he has also delivered Eisenhorn x4 Ravenor x3 Bequin x1 Titanicus Double Eagle and GG x15 (some of which are simply awesome) as well as Horus Rising, Legion and Know No Fear.

 

A few of his books suffer from rushed endings (not all though, that is becoming an urban myth).

 

He knows the weight on his shoulders in finishing The Siege of Terra. He knows he will need to bring his A game.

[Marshal Loss]

So long as he doesn't feel the need to bring forced revelations and fundamentally change our understanding of events, I'm sure he'll do a decent job. Authorial style is of course subjective, but I would have felt far safer with ADB (or Wraight, or French, for different reasons) - not just because I love his work, but because when he writes a novel you know it's going to be impeccably researched and very much beholden to older incarnations of the lore. That kind of fidelity is important and not always something Abnett observes.

[mc warhammer]

i feel like dan understands what this particular gig requires. i imagine he and other authors know there's more wiggle room in the body of the series, but that he needs to land the ending a particular way.

 

we can get a fairly good hint of symmetry from the way he kicked off the series; does anyone feel like horus rising "forced" revelations or abnettversed the heresy?

[Marshal Loss]

The HH was a very different beast back then, with different objectives and a far different gameplan. I am not confident the situation is comparable, as there were no major events in Horus Rising for him to mess with. He didn't even deal with Davin, etc. As for the ending, I sincerely hope you're correct. I'm sure a lot of work has gone into planning the final 8, and his 'visions' of the final battle in KNF were good. I hope this is too.

[mc warhammer]

mmm ok but let's consider that.

 

whether it was a different beast or not doesn't really have much impact, if dan is this rebellious cowboy that can not be tamed, i don't see how he would care then vs now.  why would the original objective of x be any more constraining for him than the current objective of y? he's the godking of the abnettverse, he shalleth make all objectives into a big "a". for abnett.

 

and the idea that there were less significant events for him to mess with...doesn't that suggest he would have more likely to run off the tracks? if horus rising was essentially a blank slate with no davin and so on, well...have it then mr abnett. make the missing primarch thanos if you wish.

[Marshal Loss]

That kind of hyperbole is unnecessary. I know you're not trying to be insulting, but it's a bit hard to be respectful of other opinions and have a serious discussion when you're throwing around absurdities like that.

 

and the idea that there were less significant events for him to mess with...doesn't that suggest he would have more likely to run off the tracks?

 

You'll note that nowhere have I said that he always does this. That was quite clearly not the point. I said I'd feel safer with an author with more demonstrable fidelity to preexisting lore. The HH was originally envisaged as being of a strictly limited scope. I don't believe that authors were given much free reign until they decided to expand the series dramatically, so it's likely that he didn't have the choice or the chance, as opposed to later on, where he started introducing Perpetuals and a whole lot of other crap I have never thought belonged in the series. The stakes are as high as they'll ever get here; the final encounter between Horus and the Emperor is the most famous moment in the entire setting. Whatever happens in that final novel will, rightly or wrongly, become the definitive moment in the BL corpus. I'll keep an open mind of course, he's earned that much, and hope that the effort they put into the HH planning meetings pays off, and it's because of these planning meetings that I'm not waving my arms around going "the HH is doomed I'm gonna burn my books ra ra ra".

 

Put simply, here we have an author with a noted tendency of inserting his own original ideas into the HH. That's it, really. You (&, I think it's fair to say based on this thread, most others) trust him and his judgement, whereas I (and some others) do not. You can point to what you view as masterpieces and I can point to what I view as garbage. That's really all there is to it. I don't think a discussion about what he's likely to do is very helpful or productive.

[b1soul]

Horus Rising felt like a completely different setting from the "current" 40K lit of the time (mid 2000s)

 

I loved how Dan made the Great Crusade era Imperium and Astartes feel so different from those of the 41st millenium. That strength is also his weakness. When he does it well, he gives diversity that still feels rooted in the setting. When he goes crazy, it doesn't feel like Warhammer

[mc warhammer]

That kind of hyperbole is unnecessary.

 

all hyperbole is unnecessary, most fun things are.

 

You'll note that nowhere have I said that he always does this. That was quite clearly not the point.

 

 

clearly, though i'm unsure how you thought that was the point i was making? you pointed out specific reasons for why abnett did not go off piste on this particular circumstance, i responded with why i didn't think it applied. initially the point was over authorial fidelity, though now it's changed course to editorial mandate.

 

 

 

What this boils down to is the fact that you (&, I think it's fair to say based on this thread, most others) trust him and his judgement, whereas I (and some others) do not. You can point to what you view as masterpieces and I can point to what I view as garbage. That's really all there is to it. I don't think a discussion about what he's likely to do is very helpful or productive.

 

 

 

i suppose it's as helpful or productive as any discussion on uncertainties can be? which is the meat of most of the speculative talk on these boards.  while you might feel what you said was unhelpful and unproductive...i don't.

 

i like messages on a message board. i like your messages too. but i'm a weirdo.

[mc warhammer]

@marshal loss

 

dude, just read your edit. please believe i mean no disrespect, my initial reply wasn't directed at you, it was more the general panic in this thread.

 

you've seen my posts, you know i go for the absurd often. i'm not going to change that.

 

appeal to extremes is a common debating technique. and who wants to have a serious discussion anyway?

[Roomsky]

I have all the faith in the world Abnett will deliver, but I can understand that he isn't really a "safe" bet. That said, I always got the impression his off-the-wall additions were his attempt to expand and fill out the setting at large (as opposed to doing so for the hell of it, or because he felt he needed to leave his mark on things), which would be a rather strange move for the capper to a 60 book series. Certainly, if French or Wraight were handed the final book we'd be in uber-safe territory, but I think Dan can more than balance his own strengths with keeping the plot on course. 

 

Of course I may be biased, most additions I've seen to the Vengeful Spirit tale over the years have been (IMO) terrible anyway. The protracted fight in Visions is especially silly, and I've spoken before on the idea of Sanguinius putting a chink in Horus' armor. I don't believe he could realistically do much worse.

[mc warhammer]

I have all the faith in the world Abnett will deliver, but I can understand that he isn't really a "safe" bet. That said, I always got the impression his off-the-wall additions were his attempt to expand and fill out the setting at large (as opposed to doing so for the hell of it, or because he felt he needed to leave his mark on things), which would be a rather strange move for the capper to a 60 book series. Certainly, if French or Wraight were handed the final book we'd be in uber-safe territory, but I think Dan can more than balance his own strengths with keeping the plot on course.

 

Of course I may be biased, most additions I've seen to the Vengeful Spirit tale over the years have been (IMO) terrible anyway. The protracted fight in Visions is especially silly, and I've spoken before on the idea of Sanguinius putting a chink in Horus' armor. I don't believe he could realistically do much worse.

pretty much this, there’s certain parameters that apply in the storytelling with beginning middle and end.

 

in the writer’s rooms and sessions i’ve experienced, an ending has to tick certain boxes and all contributors are well aware of that.

 

working on a netflix series at the moment where the writer had to remove an element in the finale which seemed to imply a new plot line. even though it was one of my favourite scenes...it just wasn’t appropriate

[Scribe]

So long as he doesn't feel the need to bring forced revelations and fundamentally change our understanding of events, I'm sure he'll do a decent job. Authorial style is of course subjective, but I would have felt far safer with ADB (or Wraight, or French, for different reasons) - not just because I love his work, but because when he writes a novel you know it's going to be impeccably researched and very much beholden to older incarnations of the lore. That kind of fidelity is important and not always something Abnett observes.

 

The bold part. I am literally pulling a 'I have no mouth, but I must scream' here because I know that regardless of my desires, Abnett is writing it. I just dont want him to, at all, and that complete impotence on my part is maddening. 

[Marshal Loss]

@marshal loss

 

dude, just read your edit. please believe i mean no disrespect, my initial reply wasn't directed at you, it was more the general panic in this thread.

 

you've seen my posts, you know i go for the absurd often. i'm not going to change that.

 

appeal to extremes is a common debating technique. and who wants to have a serious discussion anyway?

 

I'll address this briefly: step back for a moment, read my post, then read yours. It appears mocking. If you're commenting on the general tone in a thread, but then direct it in a reply at single person, it obviously runs the risk of being taken a certain way. In this case it appeared that you were implying that I was the one panicking. If something is directed at a group, make it obvious. At your best, you're one of the more pleasant people on this forum, but there's a time and a place. You can do better than that.

 

As for it being a common debating technique, I'm a Greek historian and they invented it, so I'm painfully aware of its use (and you didn't use it correctly). Why a serious discussion? Because this is the internet and people get offended if they think their favourite author is being insulted. It's why I was stepping carefully around it. You are of course under no obligation to pay any attention to anything I've said here and I'd appreciate it if you PM'd me if you have anything further to say rather than putting it here.

 

Anyway, Roomsky + Scribe (as usual) and b1soul (I must be going soft) have all made very reasonable posts, so on this particular topic I have nothing further to add at present

[mc warhammer]

 

@marshal loss

 

dude, just read your edit. please believe i mean no disrespect, my initial reply wasn't directed at you, it was more the general panic in this thread.

 

you've seen my posts, you know i go for the absurd often. i'm not going to change that.

 

appeal to extremes is a common debating technique. and who wants to have a serious discussion anyway?

 

I'll address this briefly: step back for a moment, read my post, then read yours. It appears mocking. If you're commenting on the general tone in a thread, but then direct it in a reply at single person, it obviously runs the risk of being taken a certain way. In this case it appeared that you were implying that I was the one panicking. If something is directed at a group, make it obvious. At your best, you're one of the more pleasant people on this forum, but there's a time and a place. You can do better than that.

 

As for it being a common debating technique, I'm a Greek historian and they invented it, so I'm painfully aware of its use (and you didn't use it correctly). Why a serious discussion? Because this is the internet and people get offended if they think their favourite author is being insulted. It's why I was stepping carefully around it. You are of course under no obligation to pay any attention to anything I've said here and I'd appreciate it if you PM'd me if you have anything further to say rather than putting it here.

 

Anyway, Roomsky + Scribe (as usual) and b1soul (I must be going soft) have all made very reasonable posts, so on this particular topic I have nothing further to add at present

 

 

 

this has very quickly become a subtle power thing, and not about the topic. not my jam at all. if anyone here is attempting to mock or shame...it's not me.

 

i'll let our posts speak for themselves.

 

soooo. anyone else think there's any mileage in the thanos as a primarch theory? c'mon...think about it.

[Taliesin]

Cool idea, I like it, but if we're transferring Thanos to this universe I see him more as an enemy. Thanos, The Beast Arises.

[mc warhammer]

Cool idea, I like it, but if we're transferring Thanos to this universe I see him more as an enemy. Thanos, The Beast Arises.

 

ha, i wasn't being serious. maybe i will ditch this "humour" thing the humans like to do

 

but now we're speaking of it, having read the thanos imperative, i did get (imagine?) distinctly primarch vibes from abnett's portrayal of thanos.

 

 

on topic, one thing i'm interested to see is whether or not the emperor's analysis paralysis from the old king stories carries over into the novels.

[Moonreaper666]

So long as he doesn't feel the need to bring forced revelations and fundamentally change our understanding of events, I'm sure he'll do a decent job. Authorial style is of course subjective, but I would have felt far safer with ADB (or Wraight, or French, for different reasons) - not just because I love his work, but because when he writes a novel you know it's going to be impeccably researched and very much beholden to older incarnations of the lore. That kind of fidelity is important and not always something Abnett observes.

Here is my prediction

 

-Olly is going to sacrifice himself to save the Emperor (dying for real)

 

-Horus is going to use a special attack which will permanently wound the Emperor (explains why he needs to be on the Throne)

 

-Emperor uses the souls of both Sang and Olly to cast his spell which obliterates Horus' soul (as a consenquence both Sang and Olly are dead for real)

 

-It is revealed that Drach'nyen is one of the few weapons which can permanently kill a Perpetual (Which is why Emperor should never meet Abaddon)

[caladancid]

Horus Rising felt like a completely different setting from the "current" 40K lit of the time (mid 2000s)

 

I loved how Dan made the Great Crusade era Imperium and Astartes feel so different from those of the 41st millenium. That strength is also his weakness. When he does it well, he gives diversity that still feels rooted in the setting. When he goes crazy, it doesn't feel like Warhammer

 

This is 100 percent correct, but I see it as a weakness in the way someone might say in an interview "my greatest weakness is being too much of a hard worker."

 

Dan Abnett answers questions about the Warhammer universe nobody else has even thought to ask. Eisenhorn/Ravenor and Gaunt's Ghosts were absolutely transformative.  The theme of Warhammer is "only war" or it was until Abnett showed what life is like outside war. 

 

Titanicus stands as one of the best novels written for the 40k universe and Know No Fear is one of the best books in the Horus Heresy.  Sure there have been missteps, but where he has made missteps it seems forced by the story instead of him.  The Beast Arises was rough go all around.  Unremembered Empire was part of a looooong stretch of why are we focused on this (and not all by him).

 

So at this point, why not shoot for greatness.  I love everything by Chris Wraight and the majority of ADB's stuff is good, frankly I think Graham McNeill would handle the end of the Siege in epic fashion.  But none of them have a shot at that last five percent of sit back and wow that Abnett can produce. 

[b1soul]

I think Wraight and ADB are very talented writers, but they are generally more conventional.

 

I'm less fond of McNeill. I think French has proven himself to be more consistently good than McNeill.

 

 

Back to the three titans (IMO): Abnett, Wraight, and ADB

 

Abnett pushes the boundaries of 40K. Hence why his stories could be considered innovate within BL, but could also be considered to have a rather non-40K feel.

 

Frankly, sometimes Gaunt's Ghosts and Eisenhorn/Ravenor feel like a separate universe.

 

Wraight and ADB capture the essence of 40K in that their stories could not have more 40K spirit. Their prose also has less of that punchy, modern sensibility of Abnett's. They are the champions of 40K. Dan is the consummate outrider.

[caladancid]

I think Wraight and ADB are very talented writers, but they are generally more conventional.

 

I'm less fond of McNeill. I think French has proven himself to be more consistently good than McNeill.

 

 

Back to the three titans (IMO): Abnett, Wraight, and ADB

 

Abnett pushes the boundaries of 40K. Hence why his stories could be considered innovate within BL, but could also be considered to have a rather non-40K feel.

 

Frankly, sometimes Gaunt's Ghosts and Eisenhorn/Ravenor feel like a separate universe.

 

Wraight and ADB capture the essence of 40K in that their stories could not have more 40K spirit. Their prose also has less of that punchy, modern sensibility of Abnett's. They are the champions of 40K. Dan is the consummate outrider.

Concur.

[Taliesin]

Posting here as well for those who don't read upcoming books thread:

 

 

his title will be available to order from the 16th of March as a limited edition hardback.

 

The Siege of Terra Book 1

 

After years of devastating war, Horus and his forces have arrived at Terra. But before they can set foot on the Throneworld, they must first break the defences of the Sol system. Powerful fleets and cunning defences bar their path – but can anything hope to halt the advance of the Traitor armada?

 

READ IT BECAUSE

The final act of the long-running, bestselling series starts here, with a brutal and uncompromising look at the first stage of the Siege of Terra, the war to conquer the solar system. Armies will fall, heroes will rise and legends will be written…

 

THE STORY

After seven years of bitter war, the end has come at last for the conflict known infamously as the Horus Heresy. Terra now lies within the Warmaster’s sights, the Throneworld and the seat of his father’s rule. Horus’ desire is nothing less than the death of the Emperor of Mankind and the utter subjugation of the Imperium. He has become the ascendant vessel of Chaos, and amassed a terrible army with which to enact his will and vengeance. But the way to the Throne will be hard as the primarch Rogal Dorn, the Praetorian and protector of Terra, marshals the defences. First and foremost, Horus must challenge the might of the Sol System itself and the many fleets and bulwarks arrayed there. To gain even a foothold on Terran soil, he must first contend the Solar War. Thus the first stage of the greatest conflict in the history of all mankind begins.

 

Written by John French

 

ABOUT THIS EDITION

– Vinyl cover with metal centrepiece and foiling

– Curved and ribbed spine with ribbon bookmark

– Gilt-edged pages

– Colour chapter start pages

– Includes 8 pages of colour art and a concertina map

– Delivered boxed and wrapped in tissue

– Signed by John French

– Individually numbered from an edition of 2,500

[aa.logan]

Well, that’s classy as heck. It could almost be a book for grown-ups.

 

Already nervous about missing out on it.

 

I’m quite pathetic; I’d probably pay more to pre-pre-order books. But don’t tell BL that, it might give them ideas...

[Tymell]

I'm still puzzled by the "seven years of war" thing. All timelines we've had show the Siege in 31,014, and Isstvan III was in 31,005. My maths makes that 9 years, not 7. Even counting Isstvan V would leave it at 8.

[Roomsky]

 

Snip

 

 

Now the real hype begins.

 

I mean, I don't buy LE's, but damn does that look fine. Almost as fine as the name John French on the cover, who I am now convinced can do no wrong. Perfect guy to tackle some of the logistics of the siege. But is he the perfect guy to write the naval battles therein? I don't know, maybe he does a couple things wrong.

 

The higher-end collectors are gonna have one weird looking shelf by the time this is done, though.

[Scribe]

French killed it in Slaves to Darkness. This is probably an expensive pre-order for me.