Is the drive for canonicity (or continuity) in fan cu toxic?

[Phoebus]

I would like to think that once it was understood the Heresy was going to run for more than twenty numbered novels (to say nothing of short stories, novellas, and so on), the need for a living Wiki with links to synopses of relevant material, citations to the published product, and any author notes, would have been recognized.

[Scribe]

Yes well. They clearly let a few authors run with their own little pet projects, and it become far more a setting in it's own right, than an actual cohesive and thoughtful story.

 

The number of 'shattered legion' books, is mind boggling considering how useless those legions were INTENDED to be.

[DarkChaplain]

Mortarion's thing is something that's happened multiple times, really.

 

One moment he's furious enough to send Eidolon after Typhon, the next he loves him like a brother and trusts him to his grave, while Eidolon isn't even mentioned anymore.

One moment the Lion is super mad at Guilliman, the next he only wants to get a role for himself and is totally fine with it, sticking around for years.

One moment Perturabo is this misunderstood genius, the next he he punches one of his highest captains into a dreadnought sarcophagus, (mostly because he'd have to end up in one for McNeill's Storm of Iron and Dead Sky, Black Sun, I assume)

One moment you have Khârn being a voice of reason aboard the Conqueror, coming up with a plan to contain Angron for a while, the next he's fisting Rhinos and bringing others into the embrace of Khorne.

One moment you have Alexis Polux mourn the loss of Barabas Dantioch, the next he is never heard of from again despite reason for him to be along for the ride... and you can replace this particular character with quite a few throughout the Heresy.

 

In The Beast Arises, with its staggered, batch-written books, the problem was even worse. You had David Guymer write the bext book in the series, with dramatic climax that didn't quite work out and leaves a fan favorite character dead, then the next book you get Rob Sanders telling basically the same story but involving more modern models from the Codex that shouldn't even have been around in this time period, doing the same thing but with more bolter porn, and this time it works. In the same series, you have characters being set up and then forgotten entirely the next two books, before some author remembers - in one instance, the intervening authors even denied the existence of their kind among their number.

 

...and then you have ForgeWorld come in, making a new model that goes against the previous depictions because Ahriman needed a horned helmet during the Great Crusade as well anyway, despite the horned 40k helmet having been Amon's and taken by force, and shwoop you get retcons years after the fact.

 

Honestly, if it was feasible to do a full series remake for the HH, fixing continuity issues and rewriting parts to bring them more in line, I'd probably be okay with it at this point. Looking at what authors like Michael J. Sullivan do, writing entire series before publishing the first book, so rewrites and seeding of foreshadowing and red herrings can be done properly, was never going to work with the Heresy. But going back and doing a remake at least of certain books where appropriate? I've become more fond of the idea with every retcon. At least that way, there'd be hope for retroactive consistency =/

[Scribe]

 

Honestly, if it was feasible to do a full series remake for the HH, fixing continuity issues and rewriting parts to bring them more in line, I'd probably be okay with it at this point. Looking at what authors like Michael J. Sullivan do, writing entire series before publishing the first book, so rewrites and seeding of foreshadowing and red herrings can be done properly, was never going to work with the Heresy. But going back and doing a remake at least of certain books where appropriate? I've become more fond of the idea with every retcon. At least that way, there'd be hope for retroactive consistency =/

 

I'd be super fine with that. In fact, if we could get a hyper focused 'key plot points' updated series, say 20 books max, including the Siege...fixed?

 

I'd buy that in a heartbeat.

[Fedor]

I've never minded the idea of having 30k as a setting rather than things just being a structured step by step series then done, in that sense i was glad we were getting content for the likes of the "shattered legions". A lot of the whining back in the day as soon as one or two books came out that weren't strictly tied into advancing the plot at a fast pace was very over the top imo, but It could have been much better structured though, with perhaps the main numbered series sticking closer to developing the major players, and a lot of the other flavour stuff from being published under something like a general 30k heading.

 

That way they could have avoided eventually bundling so many anthologies together as part of the main series, with content in those varying widely in importance and relevance to release date.

[BrainFireBob]

And before that spirals into a conversation this forum has danced around 600 times,

 

 

This is a tempororal proximity issue. Authors can also maintain detailed notes and staffs of content proof readers.

 

Again, this is no reason on the other side for a blanket dismissal of all authors ever at any time.

 

There exists situations where one will have access to the text, but not author statements, nor will the text make any indication that such statements exist.

 

An author is free to publish more works supporting their claims, but a reader of books should not be expected to consult other media to complete their understanding / validate their interpretation of the text.

Absolutely.

 

Later finding out the others resources exist does not make them invalud either

[BrainFireBob]

Case in point: J.K.Rowling. You'd have to be an avid follower of her social media channels to keep up with all the retcons and bum-pulled info she throws out at a whim / attempts to remain relevant.

 

As for that Holdo scene... I don't even need to talk about it itself, because Holdo, as a character, even accounting for time and experience, is such a massively different thing from the Holdo as presented for the first time in one of the Journey to TLJ novel Princess of Alderaan. I read it months before the movie released, and liked Holdo a damn lot, enough to dismiss criticisms thrown the characters' way leading up to the movie. What she ended up being in the film was just not even consistent with this canon novel they explicitly commissioned and approved as a setup piece for the movie (it also involved Crait, btw).

 

In that sense, the Star Wars sequel trilogy isn't even playing by the rules that LucasFilm/Disney/the Story Group overseeing it established day 1. Consistency, continuity, plot beats, character development, they're all subject to change on a whim, these days, and that's precisely why I stopped consuming SW media, going from near 100% completion of all Disney Canon material to one or two comic issues to finish an arc I was enjoying from a competent author ever since TLJ.

 

To wrap this back to 40k, I would hate it if similar was to happen with this franchise. We've had enough jarring depictions of special characters over the years (the Lion being one prominent and currently doubly relevant example, but there's others, like Abaddon, or Khârn, or Typhon and Mortarion, heck, even Perturabo, to a degree. And Zahariel's 180 in Angels of Caliban? Oh dear...). Avoiding more of that in the future is something I pray for.

 

I'm not really sure if GW/BL still do this today, but there used to be a time when authors would be able to receive supplementary material to read up on factions, characters and histories. I remember Mike Lee talking about this in his foreword to the Time of Legends: Rise of Nagash omnibus. He got a bunch of Tomb Kings lore and stuff about Nagash, to get up to speed. Will it have included every single reference to the character? No, most assuredly not. But it should provide all the major pieces to account for within the canon. Many Black Library authors also make it a habit to read previous material on subjects they're about to tackle, whether because it was their pitch and they've already been passionate about the subject, or because they want to do things right, is irrelevant to the results, I'd say.

 

I'd even go as far as to say that this is how it should be. Reading major works dealing with shared characters should be considered mandatory. When McNeill did not read Ahriman: Unchanged, it resulted in headscratchers for The Crimson King - a book so delayed and rewritten so much throughout McNeill's move to the US etc, it really should not have clashed with a novel dealing with the same subject matter that was released to the public years before his. Authors like Guy Haley and Josh Reynolds show much more diligence with these things, which generally results in works that offer characters at least on par with what's gone before, but most often they also manage to tackle them in such a way that potential conflicts from earlier sources get repaired, resulting in a more nuanced character by the end. Look at how Haley has approached Perturabo, or Curze, and you'll see what I mean. Josh, too, had to deal with a lot of baggage for Fabius, Eidolon and co, yet managed to create a very "Josh" Bile without being jarring when contrasted against ADB's Fabius, or Kyme's, or whoever else touched him throughout the Heresy and 40k. Heck, Haley's Guilliman also springs to mind as a character who had tons of expectations and lore riding on him, but works wonderfully even 10,000 years later, in a to him unfamiliar setting.

 

To me, this compromise is far more satisfying to see succeed and do well within the author's own plot ideas than them just taking the character, ignoring potential conflicts, and just making them be super awesome and putting the God-Emperor in a golden wheelchair before flipping off Malal. This level of consistency and diligence that authors like Josh and Haley bring to the table makes me respect their works all the more, and I have never seen it as a detriment to the quality of their works - the opposite, really. It's a sign of respect to the audience, the IP and a huge show of skill, even before all is said and done.

Called a "series bible." Standard for TV shows. Used to be standard for shared universe books- old Star Wars, Star Trek, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms. Comic industry does it too.

 

It's what content editors do.

 

40k is far from the first of its kind.

[BrainFireBob]

 

 

As for that Holdo scene...

Damnit DC.

 

But I generally agree with your sentiments. It actually boggles my mind that reading every HH entry up to the book they're writing hasn't been required for every author on the team from the beginning. Why is it only now, at the Siege, they had them do this? Mcneill himself stated in one of the False Gods afterwords that he had planned to write Horus as much more of an unrestrained :cuss until he read Horus Rising. That alone should have demonstrated from the beginning that should be necessary.

BL went back mid series to do collector's editions retroactively.

 

They've historically not been a very professional publishing house. Roc or Penguin or Tor don't make those mistakes

 

EDIT: In fairness, they are doing better. Need to get their limited editions figured out. Right now they're only enriching middle men.

Edited April 7, 2020 by BrainFireBob

[mc warhammer]

 

Case in point: J.K.Rowling. You'd have to be an avid follower of her social media channels to keep up with all the retcons and bum-pulled info she throws out at a whim / attempts to remain relevant.

 

As for that Holdo scene... I don't even need to talk about it itself, because Holdo, as a character, even accounting for time and experience, is such a massively different thing from the Holdo as presented for the first time in one of the Journey to TLJ novel Princess of Alderaan. I read it months before the movie released, and liked Holdo a damn lot, enough to dismiss criticisms thrown the characters' way leading up to the movie. What she ended up being in the film was just not even consistent with this canon novel they explicitly commissioned and approved as a setup piece for the movie (it also involved Crait, btw).

 

In that sense, the Star Wars sequel trilogy isn't even playing by the rules that LucasFilm/Disney/the Story Group overseeing it established day 1. Consistency, continuity, plot beats, character development, they're all subject to change on a whim, these days, and that's precisely why I stopped consuming SW media, going from near 100% completion of all Disney Canon material to one or two comic issues to finish an arc I was enjoying from a competent author ever since TLJ.

 

To wrap this back to 40k, I would hate it if similar was to happen with this franchise. We've had enough jarring depictions of special characters over the years (the Lion being one prominent and currently doubly relevant example, but there's others, like Abaddon, or Khârn, or Typhon and Mortarion, heck, even Perturabo, to a degree. And Zahariel's 180 in Angels of Caliban? Oh dear...). Avoiding more of that in the future is something I pray for.

 

I'm not really sure if GW/BL still do this today, but there used to be a time when authors would be able to receive supplementary material to read up on factions, characters and histories. I remember Mike Lee talking about this in his foreword to the Time of Legends: Rise of Nagash omnibus. He got a bunch of Tomb Kings lore and stuff about Nagash, to get up to speed. Will it have included every single reference to the character? No, most assuredly not. But it should provide all the major pieces to account for within the canon. Many Black Library authors also make it a habit to read previous material on subjects they're about to tackle, whether because it was their pitch and they've already been passionate about the subject, or because they want to do things right, is irrelevant to the results, I'd say.

 

I'd even go as far as to say that this is how it should be. Reading major works dealing with shared characters should be considered mandatory. When McNeill did not read Ahriman: Unchanged, it resulted in headscratchers for The Crimson King - a book so delayed and rewritten so much throughout McNeill's move to the US etc, it really should not have clashed with a novel dealing with the same subject matter that was released to the public years before his. Authors like Guy Haley and Josh Reynolds show much more diligence with these things, which generally results in works that offer characters at least on par with what's gone before, but most often they also manage to tackle them in such a way that potential conflicts from earlier sources get repaired, resulting in a more nuanced character by the end. Look at how Haley has approached Perturabo, or Curze, and you'll see what I mean. Josh, too, had to deal with a lot of baggage for Fabius, Eidolon and co, yet managed to create a very "Josh" Bile without being jarring when contrasted against ADB's Fabius, or Kyme's, or whoever else touched him throughout the Heresy and 40k. Heck, Haley's Guilliman also springs to mind as a character who had tons of expectations and lore riding on him, but works wonderfully even 10,000 years later, in a to him unfamiliar setting.

 

To me, this compromise is far more satisfying to see succeed and do well within the author's own plot ideas than them just taking the character, ignoring potential conflicts, and just making them be super awesome and putting the God-Emperor in a golden wheelchair before flipping off Malal. This level of consistency and diligence that authors like Josh and Haley bring to the table makes me respect their works all the more, and I have never seen it as a detriment to the quality of their works - the opposite, really. It's a sign of respect to the audience, the IP and a huge show of skill, even before all is said and done.

Called a "series bible." Standard for TV shows. Used to be standard for shared universe books- old Star Wars, Star Trek, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms. Comic industry does it too.

 

It's what content editors do.

 

40k is far from the first of its kind.

 

i've worked from several series bibles on each of the tv shows i've been on.

 

they vary in detail and form, quite a bit. you'd be surprised how much of it is forgotten, dismissed or rewritten either on the day of shooting or in the edit suite. on some shows it's a cage to move inside of, on others it's really just a starting point.

[BrainFireBob]

 

 

 

Case in point: J.K.Rowling. You'd have to be an avid follower of her social media channels to keep up with all the retcons and bum-pulled info she throws out at a whim / attempts to remain relevant.

 

As for that Holdo scene... I don't even need to talk about it itself, because Holdo, as a character, even accounting for time and experience, is such a massively different thing from the Holdo as presented for the first time in one of the Journey to TLJ novel Princess of Alderaan. I read it months before the movie released, and liked Holdo a damn lot, enough to dismiss criticisms thrown the characters' way leading up to the movie. What she ended up being in the film was just not even consistent with this canon novel they explicitly commissioned and approved as a setup piece for the movie (it also involved Crait, btw).

 

In that sense, the Star Wars sequel trilogy isn't even playing by the rules that LucasFilm/Disney/the Story Group overseeing it established day 1. Consistency, continuity, plot beats, character development, they're all subject to change on a whim, these days, and that's precisely why I stopped consuming SW media, going from near 100% completion of all Disney Canon material to one or two comic issues to finish an arc I was enjoying from a competent author ever since TLJ.

 

To wrap this back to 40k, I would hate it if similar was to happen with this franchise. We've had enough jarring depictions of special characters over the years (the Lion being one prominent and currently doubly relevant example, but there's others, like Abaddon, or Khârn, or Typhon and Mortarion, heck, even Perturabo, to a degree. And Zahariel's 180 in Angels of Caliban? Oh dear...). Avoiding more of that in the future is something I pray for.

 

I'm not really sure if GW/BL still do this today, but there used to be a time when authors would be able to receive supplementary material to read up on factions, characters and histories. I remember Mike Lee talking about this in his foreword to the Time of Legends: Rise of Nagash omnibus. He got a bunch of Tomb Kings lore and stuff about Nagash, to get up to speed. Will it have included every single reference to the character? No, most assuredly not. But it should provide all the major pieces to account for within the canon. Many Black Library authors also make it a habit to read previous material on subjects they're about to tackle, whether because it was their pitch and they've already been passionate about the subject, or because they want to do things right, is irrelevant to the results, I'd say.

 

I'd even go as far as to say that this is how it should be. Reading major works dealing with shared characters should be considered mandatory. When McNeill did not read Ahriman: Unchanged, it resulted in headscratchers for The Crimson King - a book so delayed and rewritten so much throughout McNeill's move to the US etc, it really should not have clashed with a novel dealing with the same subject matter that was released to the public years before his. Authors like Guy Haley and Josh Reynolds show much more diligence with these things, which generally results in works that offer characters at least on par with what's gone before, but most often they also manage to tackle them in such a way that potential conflicts from earlier sources get repaired, resulting in a more nuanced character by the end. Look at how Haley has approached Perturabo, or Curze, and you'll see what I mean. Josh, too, had to deal with a lot of baggage for Fabius, Eidolon and co, yet managed to create a very "Josh" Bile without being jarring when contrasted against ADB's Fabius, or Kyme's, or whoever else touched him throughout the Heresy and 40k. Heck, Haley's Guilliman also springs to mind as a character who had tons of expectations and lore riding on him, but works wonderfully even 10,000 years later, in a to him unfamiliar setting.

 

To me, this compromise is far more satisfying to see succeed and do well within the author's own plot ideas than them just taking the character, ignoring potential conflicts, and just making them be super awesome and putting the God-Emperor in a golden wheelchair before flipping off Malal. This level of consistency and diligence that authors like Josh and Haley bring to the table makes me respect their works all the more, and I have never seen it as a detriment to the quality of their works - the opposite, really. It's a sign of respect to the audience, the IP and a huge show of skill, even before all is said and done.

Called a "series bible." Standard for TV shows. Used to be standard for shared universe books- old Star Wars, Star Trek, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms. Comic industry does it too.

 

It's what content editors do.

 

40k is far from the first of its kind.

i've worked from several series bibles on each of the tv shows i've been on.

 

they vary in detail and form, quite a bit. you'd be surprised how much of it is forgotten, dismissed or rewritten either on the day of shooting or in the edit suite. on some shows it's a cage to move inside of, on others it's really just a starting point.

Depending on the team and driving personalities. But it *is* done.

 

And the longest running, most successful shows...seem to stick to their bible best, while allowing growth.

 

Batman doesn't kill, Superman's a boyscout alien from Krypton/Kansas, the Joker's crazy.

 

Making Batman a serial beater (it edited this?) isn't growth, it's weak writing by an author wanting to make a splash. Adding Robin due to being touched by his quest for vengeance? Growth.

Edited April 7, 2020 by BrainFireBob

[mc warhammer]

 

 

 

Case in point: J.K.Rowling. You'd have to be an avid follower of her social media channels to keep up with all the retcons and bum-pulled info she throws out at a whim / attempts to remain relevant.

 

As for that Holdo scene... I don't even need to talk about it itself, because Holdo, as a character, even accounting for time and experience, is such a massively different thing from the Holdo as presented for the first time in one of the Journey to TLJ novel Princess of Alderaan. I read it months before the movie released, and liked Holdo a damn lot, enough to dismiss criticisms thrown the characters' way leading up to the movie. What she ended up being in the film was just not even consistent with this canon novel they explicitly commissioned and approved as a setup piece for the movie (it also involved Crait, btw).

 

In that sense, the Star Wars sequel trilogy isn't even playing by the rules that LucasFilm/Disney/the Story Group overseeing it established day 1. Consistency, continuity, plot beats, character development, they're all subject to change on a whim, these days, and that's precisely why I stopped consuming SW media, going from near 100% completion of all Disney Canon material to one or two comic issues to finish an arc I was enjoying from a competent author ever since TLJ.

 

To wrap this back to 40k, I would hate it if similar was to happen with this franchise. We've had enough jarring depictions of special characters over the years (the Lion being one prominent and currently doubly relevant example, but there's others, like Abaddon, or Khârn, or Typhon and Mortarion, heck, even Perturabo, to a degree. And Zahariel's 180 in Angels of Caliban? Oh dear...). Avoiding more of that in the future is something I pray for.

 

I'm not really sure if GW/BL still do this today, but there used to be a time when authors would be able to receive supplementary material to read up on factions, characters and histories. I remember Mike Lee talking about this in his foreword to the Time of Legends: Rise of Nagash omnibus. He got a bunch of Tomb Kings lore and stuff about Nagash, to get up to speed. Will it have included every single reference to the character? No, most assuredly not. But it should provide all the major pieces to account for within the canon. Many Black Library authors also make it a habit to read previous material on subjects they're about to tackle, whether because it was their pitch and they've already been passionate about the subject, or because they want to do things right, is irrelevant to the results, I'd say.

 

I'd even go as far as to say that this is how it should be. Reading major works dealing with shared characters should be considered mandatory. When McNeill did not read Ahriman: Unchanged, it resulted in headscratchers for The Crimson King - a book so delayed and rewritten so much throughout McNeill's move to the US etc, it really should not have clashed with a novel dealing with the same subject matter that was released to the public years before his. Authors like Guy Haley and Josh Reynolds show much more diligence with these things, which generally results in works that offer characters at least on par with what's gone before, but most often they also manage to tackle them in such a way that potential conflicts from earlier sources get repaired, resulting in a more nuanced character by the end. Look at how Haley has approached Perturabo, or Curze, and you'll see what I mean. Josh, too, had to deal with a lot of baggage for Fabius, Eidolon and co, yet managed to create a very "Josh" Bile without being jarring when contrasted against ADB's Fabius, or Kyme's, or whoever else touched him throughout the Heresy and 40k. Heck, Haley's Guilliman also springs to mind as a character who had tons of expectations and lore riding on him, but works wonderfully even 10,000 years later, in a to him unfamiliar setting.

 

To me, this compromise is far more satisfying to see succeed and do well within the author's own plot ideas than them just taking the character, ignoring potential conflicts, and just making them be super awesome and putting the God-Emperor in a golden wheelchair before flipping off Malal. This level of consistency and diligence that authors like Josh and Haley bring to the table makes me respect their works all the more, and I have never seen it as a detriment to the quality of their works - the opposite, really. It's a sign of respect to the audience, the IP and a huge show of skill, even before all is said and done.

Called a "series bible." Standard for TV shows. Used to be standard for shared universe books- old Star Wars, Star Trek, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms. Comic industry does it too.

 

It's what content editors do.

 

40k is far from the first of its kind.

i've worked from several series bibles on each of the tv shows i've been on.

 

they vary in detail and form, quite a bit. you'd be surprised how much of it is forgotten, dismissed or rewritten either on the day of shooting or in the edit suite. on some shows it's a cage to move inside of, on others it's really just a starting point.

Depending on the team and driving personalities. But it *is* done.

 

And the longest running, most successful shows...seem to stick to their bible best, while allowing growth.

 

Batman doesn't kill, Superman's a boyscout alien from Krypton/Kansas, the Joker's crazy.

 

Making Batman a serial beater (it edited this?) isn't growth, it's weak writing by an author wanting to make a splash. Adding Robin due to being touched by his quest for vengeance? Growth.

 

can i ask for specifics here; which long running successful tv shows are you referring to? what was their bible like? what elements in particular were stuck to? i can almost completely guarantee that what works for one doesn't necessarily work for another. it's not an exact  science.

 

the most recent tv show i worked on was for a major US company. different directors had wildly diverging ideas, so did certain actors. the show-runner changed their approach mid way through the shoot because certain things were or weren't working. one of the characters ended up on screen almost completely different to what was in the bible ( though that character still hit the same narrative beats originally outlined). i suppose that would be the "growth" you're mentioning? but how are we measuring what is acceptable there and what isn't?

 

the only issue i can see with the reductio ad absurdum examples being given here (like batman becoming a serial beater) is that they just don't happen (or happen often), so i'm a little confused as to where we're drawing a line. there are constants that define a setting or situation or world, that allow the illusion of cohesion to be consistent. i'm just unsure of which examples of this being broken you're referring to.

Edited April 7, 2020 by mc warhammer

[BrainFireBob]

 

 

 

 

 

Case in point: J.K.Rowling. You'd have to be an avid follower of her social media channels to keep up with all the retcons and bum-pulled info she throws out at a whim / attempts to remain relevant.

 

As for that Holdo scene... I don't even need to talk about it itself, because Holdo, as a character, even accounting for time and experience, is such a massively different thing from the Holdo as presented for the first time in one of the Journey to TLJ novel Princess of Alderaan. I read it months before the movie released, and liked Holdo a damn lot, enough to dismiss criticisms thrown the characters' way leading up to the movie. What she ended up being in the film was just not even consistent with this canon novel they explicitly commissioned and approved as a setup piece for the movie (it also involved Crait, btw).

 

In that sense, the Star Wars sequel trilogy isn't even playing by the rules that LucasFilm/Disney/the Story Group overseeing it established day 1. Consistency, continuity, plot beats, character development, they're all subject to change on a whim, these days, and that's precisely why I stopped consuming SW media, going from near 100% completion of all Disney Canon material to one or two comic issues to finish an arc I was enjoying from a competent author ever since TLJ.

 

To wrap this back to 40k, I would hate it if similar was to happen with this franchise. We've had enough jarring depictions of special characters over the years (the Lion being one prominent and currently doubly relevant example, but there's others, like Abaddon, or Khârn, or Typhon and Mortarion, heck, even Perturabo, to a degree. And Zahariel's 180 in Angels of Caliban? Oh dear...). Avoiding more of that in the future is something I pray for.

 

I'm not really sure if GW/BL still do this today, but there used to be a time when authors would be able to receive supplementary material to read up on factions, characters and histories. I remember Mike Lee talking about this in his foreword to the Time of Legends: Rise of Nagash omnibus. He got a bunch of Tomb Kings lore and stuff about Nagash, to get up to speed. Will it have included every single reference to the character? No, most assuredly not. But it should provide all the major pieces to account for within the canon. Many Black Library authors also make it a habit to read previous material on subjects they're about to tackle, whether because it was their pitch and they've already been passionate about the subject, or because they want to do things right, is irrelevant to the results, I'd say.

 

I'd even go as far as to say that this is how it should be. Reading major works dealing with shared characters should be considered mandatory. When McNeill did not read Ahriman: Unchanged, it resulted in headscratchers for The Crimson King - a book so delayed and rewritten so much throughout McNeill's move to the US etc, it really should not have clashed with a novel dealing with the same subject matter that was released to the public years before his. Authors like Guy Haley and Josh Reynolds show much more diligence with these things, which generally results in works that offer characters at least on par with what's gone before, but most often they also manage to tackle them in such a way that potential conflicts from earlier sources get repaired, resulting in a more nuanced character by the end. Look at how Haley has approached Perturabo, or Curze, and you'll see what I mean. Josh, too, had to deal with a lot of baggage for Fabius, Eidolon and co, yet managed to create a very "Josh" Bile without being jarring when contrasted against ADB's Fabius, or Kyme's, or whoever else touched him throughout the Heresy and 40k. Heck, Haley's Guilliman also springs to mind as a character who had tons of expectations and lore riding on him, but works wonderfully even 10,000 years later, in a to him unfamiliar setting.

 

To me, this compromise is far more satisfying to see succeed and do well within the author's own plot ideas than them just taking the character, ignoring potential conflicts, and just making them be super awesome and putting the God-Emperor in a golden wheelchair before flipping off Malal. This level of consistency and diligence that authors like Josh and Haley bring to the table makes me respect their works all the more, and I have never seen it as a detriment to the quality of their works - the opposite, really. It's a sign of respect to the audience, the IP and a huge show of skill, even before all is said and done.

Called a "series bible." Standard for TV shows. Used to be standard for shared universe books- old Star Wars, Star Trek, Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms. Comic industry does it too.

 

It's what content editors do.

 

40k is far from the first of its kind.

i've worked from several series bibles on each of the tv shows i've been on.

 

they vary in detail and form, quite a bit. you'd be surprised how much of it is forgotten, dismissed or rewritten either on the day of shooting or in the edit suite. on some shows it's a cage to move inside of, on others it's really just a starting point.

Depending on the team and driving personalities. But it *is* done.

 

And the longest running, most successful shows...seem to stick to their bible best, while allowing growth.

 

Batman doesn't kill, Superman's a boyscout alien from Krypton/Kansas, the Joker's crazy.

 

Making Batman a serial beater (it edited this?) isn't growth, it's weak writing by an author wanting to make a splash. Adding Robin due to being touched by his quest for vengeance? Growth.

can i ask for specifics here; which long running successful tv shows are you referring to? what was their bible like? what elements in particular were stuck to? i can almost completely guarantee that what works for one doesn't necessarily work for another. it's not an exact science.

 

the most recent tv show i worked on was for a major US company. different directors had wildly diverging ideas, so did certain actors. the show-runner changed their approach mid way through the shoot because certain things were or weren't working. one of the characters ended up on screen almost completely different to what was in the bible ( though that character still hit the same narrative beats originally outlined). i suppose that would be the "growth" you're mentioning? but how are we measuring what is acceptable there and what isn't?

 

the only issue i can see with the reductio ad absurdum examples being given here (like batman becoming a serial beater) is that they just don't happen (or happen often), so i'm a little confused as to where we're drawing a line. there are constants that define a setting or situation or world, that allow the illusion of cohesion to be consistent. i'm just unsure of which examples of this being broken you're referring to.

What's confusing about the debate is absolutism in general. Too rigid checklisting monotone formulas- don't work. That doesn't make the opposite the correct answer, which is what I'm responding to.

 

It not being an exact science is the point- but the fact some can crank out hits regularly indicates it's not magic creativity or lightning, either. There's a Venn diagram of success.

 

As I understand it, the showrunner may do this, or a producer.

 

It's getting confused additionally between examples and their details. Given the HH, I think we can all agree that more coordination and scope disciplibe would have made a superior product- largely, a "key events" reference timeline the authors filled in as they went so *Outcast Dead* didn't happen, a more consistent decision on how side material would tie in (the Garro series runs in audio only, but Malcador tells Dorn at some point he has an agent that Dorn will remember, Garro comes in more scarred, different wargear; these are easter eggs for audio fans but not required for main book fans. Major things like bringing Loken back shouldn't be periphery. Broad personality portraits of each Primarch to prevent Mirtarion-whipping. None of that should be very constraining.

 

One of my favorite meta items two different authors independently did. One of the large "holes" was why Horus took so very long to reach Terra. Well, the Scars and Shattered Legions, which contained a significant portion of Iron Hands strength, were ravaging his logistics. And they either didn't survive or bother explaining it to anyone.

Edited April 7, 2020 by BrainFireBob

[b1soul]

Hindsight is 20/20 but let me indulge

 

The HH should have been split into a core series and a setting

 

The series would just be a more focused HH series running for maybe around 12 to 15 novels tops. Each novel is a huge event and they're all closely interlinked. You'd probably get at most two released per year.

 

The setting would be framed as something like a Time of Legends sandbox, covering everything from the later Unification Wars (the birth of the Imperium) to The Scouring (the direct aftermath of the Heresy). These are released separately and do not interfere with the schedule of the former.

[BrainFireBob]

Hindsight is 20/20 but let me indulge

 

The HH should have been split into a core series and a setting

 

The series would just be a more focused HH series running for maybe around 12 to 15 novels tops. Each novel is a huge event and they're all closely interlinked. You'd probably get at most two released per year.

 

The setting would be framed as something like a Time of Legends sandbox, covering everything from the later Unification Wars (the birth of the Imperium) to The Scouring (the direct aftermath of the Heresy). These are released separately and do not interfere with the schedule of the former.

This would also be good. Point is, it's in the middle

 

Edit: Autocorrect is driving me nuts recently!

Edited April 7, 2020 by BrainFireBob

[bluntblade]

I wonder if a large part of where this becomes a problem is when an audience or a part of one comes to the table with a list of demands. The cataloging of lore, which some franchises have actively encouraged, leads to an expectation that we'll be told a bunch of stuff as a pat on the back for doing our homework and knowing why it would make sense for this psyker to be the last Crimson Walker. Sometimes that's harmless and actually a nice nod.

 

Other times it leads us to be cross because a character didn't halt a scene and exposit some information that our characters don't care a jot about, rather than carrying on the matter of hand. I think the key thing here is that these references should still work as an aside. Remember how the Kessel Run sounded cool when we didn't know what it was.

 

With the complications here being that we've already had these events, in a less elaborate fashion.

Edited April 14, 2020 by bluntblade

[Apothecary Vaddon]

Hm. To answer OP's question posed in the title... if taken too far? But the same can be said the complete opposite: 'huehuehuehue everything is canon suck it trebek'. That's certainly not the same kind of 'toxic', however you want to define it, but that does to some degree disparage the entire idea of continuity, of having a timeline to tell your stories in, of wanting some things to matter. 

 

There's probably a middle ground somewhere in between that people need to hit more often.

[bluntblade]

Tbh the article which started all this was arguing for a middle ground.

[plastic_slug]

The world itself has changed a lot since Horus Rising came out 14 years ago. Options and ways to express yourself on the internet were beginning to explode and multiply. Along with that is the natural desire to get attention for oneself. So there is now a ready outlet for people eager for attention. And as there are ever more of them, they are forced to get more extreme to get any attention at all. I can think of one YouTube channel that focuses on Star Trek, for example. It is a bitter, angry place, that has easily and demonstrably gotten most of the 'news' it reports completely incorrect. Yet, it still has hundreds of thousands of followers who eat up clickbait junk. That is the era we are living in.

 

Along the way is the rise of more extreme 'gatekeeping', where 'I am super fan; what I say is the law, and other opinions are irrelevant'. As a Trek example - 'Roddenberry wouldn't have done that, therefore it's automatically garbage'. People often take it upon themselves to feel as though they are capable and qualified to speak for the whole of a community, and in 2020 they have the outlets to make them feel justified. 

 

Meanwhile, I just wish Black Library had some better editorial oversight. I don't feel the need for some uber master cracking the whip at every author and book, but failures like The Beast Arises series are especially glaring. And galling. There were seeds of greatness there in a previously unexplored era, but the sloppy, lazy work done editing and coordinating the series overshadowed them, and soured the experience. 

[bluntblade]

If we're lucky, The Beast Arises will one day be looked back on as the flawed experiment where the approach that made a Badab War/Reign of Blood/What Have You series possible.

[plastic_slug]

I think we can agree that if there ever is another project like The Beast Arises for something, it needs to have everything completed, and been editorially reviewed before any of the books come out so things can be corrected before publishing, like telling the same plot in two books, characters changing personality, plot threads dropped and ignored, etc. As I said, it was a shame, as Beast had a lot of potential and good bits, but ended up being far less than the sum of its parts due to that lack of oversight. 
 

Then again, given the zero effort, lazy approach GW seems to take to most things, expecting them to learn anything from the disappointment over Beast is probably too much to hope for. 

[Xisor]

Have I gone mad?

 

Was or wasn't the Beast Arises tremendously entertaining?

 

(With some particularly odd clunk's, including an entire novel repeated, essentially. And half the series was written before it was started, if memory serves? I Am Slaughter had sat shelved for a few years!)

 

It was blatantly a wobbly experiment from the beginning. That wasn't a surprise, because it was plainly visible.

 

Moreover, the care of it was irredeemable torpedoed by such things as GW's mad "everything must tie tightly to a model release" stance* too, which tripped the whole thing up and - I think - saw Abnett self-isolate from their corporate foolishness. (So to speak. Collaborating with someone whom working relationship is on hold with would be difficult, professionally, I imagine.)

 

But the politicking on Terra, the concept, the twists and turns, character beats, the immense set pieces, the set pieces.

 

For my preferences, it was vastly more entertaining, and engaging, and less repetitive than huge, equally wordy chunks of the Horus Heresy.

 

(And with significantly fewer pages dedicated to bland Space Marine stories of little character.)

Edited April 15, 2020 by Xisor

[Phoebus]

Admittedly, I could be missing a lot of nuance, but... I don’t think what you and plastic_slug posted are mutually exclusive, Xisor.

[plastic_slug]

I readily admit there were good characters, scenes, and ideas in The Beast Arises. Those bits did not outshine the awful editing job done on the series as a whole for me, though. In fact, diminished them to a significant degree. They could have done better, and made something spectacular. Putting out books while others in the series weren’t even finished being written was nigh criminal. 

[DukeLeto69]

Brothers you do realise that BL totally learned from The Beast Arises (a flawed experiment with some good moments) and are applying that learning to The Siege of Terra mini series!

 

Key learnings being allow time between novels do next author knows what has gone before AND writers room approach to develop blueprint.

[Xisor]

Bingo, Duke - my take on it is that the cost to do the Beast Arises *well* would have been such a big gamble that it may never have been green(skin)-lit.

 

Especially in that era - it would either have been put back much later (and so knock-on impact of prolonging more aimless HH, fewer cross-pollination books, less well informed/practiced SoT), or just outright cancelled, with "I am Slaughter" released as some sort of odd curiosity.

 

Edit: that's why I'm happy that it was the way it was - not that I wouldn't have wanted it better, but that I suspect business-wise, I don't think sales would have tolerated a more tightly managed, effort-requiring series.

 

(Of course, if the "dark time" for BL hadn't happened, and the series had proceeded as planned at inception, that could well have been everything Plastic_Slug might have wanted, and more! But I guess I'm quite accepting of the foolishness of that time, and that TBA was the bets it could be "all things considered". [Though having essentially the same event unfold in two books, but as two separate events, is an obvious messed up that really should have been caught early , even given everything... But it's such a big, obvious error that I see it almost like a... MONUMENTAL typo. Its such an odd occurrence, it's not a simple "tighten the process" to fix it.])

Edited February 1, 2021 by Brother Tyler