What's the Point of the Horus Heresy Now?

[mc warhammer]

 

 

 

 

As you keep dodging the question, can you name ANY series of this scope that actually had a tight and consistent narrative? You insist its an easy and basic thing to do but i dont think reality bears that out.

I don't think you're fully comprehending my position

 

Similar series would likely fall under the tie-in fiction category, with corporate/commercial priorities driving a fair chunk of the creative decision-making

 

Your argument is kinda like saying...YouTube doesn't run with the screen off, so it must be extremely difficult and a test of human ingenuity to design a video app capable of running with the screen off.

No... My argument being ive easily read a dozen similar tie in series and none of them keep to what you are describing, even single author series suffer significant drift and bloat, my argument is that its inevitable on the scale these things operate at even when its relative titans like Star wars/trek or D&D.

 

Can you name a series which meets your "easy" standards?

i'm also guessing the other properties don't have an "everything and nothing is canon" policy too

 

 

I despise that concept, probably more than anything else associated with GW.

 

i wasn't sold on the approach when i first heard it either. my original take was closer to the one B1 (seems) to be implying here; that it's a simple and convenient way to hand-wave mistakes and invite sloppy writing.

 

but that was a reaction based on very little information on how it actually works. adb went to great lengths to talk about the mechanics of it in the eyes of the IP peeps and the creatives and it started to sound like a really elegant and unique way to build a fictional universe.

 

if anything, i think they don't lean into the concept enough. the concept is cool, the execution is lacking.

[Scribe]

I normally hang off anything ADB says, but its the one thing he never was able to convince me of. I think it remains horrible in concept and execution. Different perspectives, great. Events still occur, truth exists.

[mc warhammer]

this is probably not the discussion for this thread, but i don't think the approach means that truth doesn't exist or that events don't occur.

[DukeLeto69]

I don’t really like the everything is cannon nothing is cannon approach either. It does seem like a conceit to provide wriggle room for mistakes.

 

However, I do like the unreliable narrator concept AND history is written by the victors concept.

 

So I guess that can be overlaid?

 

I would like that played up more by GW (if not BL) by having Codexes very much written from perspective of their faction with their take on events in the timeline - actively contradicting entries in other codexes...

 

Eg. It was an Imperial victory! No it was an Eldar victory!

Edited August 25, 2020 by DukeLeto69

[mc warhammer]

i don't get the impression that it was to allow mistakes. i mean, mistakes will happen. i can't think of many (or any) works of fiction; film, tv, novels comics that don't contain goofs of some sort. but the BL authors have gone to great lengths to impress on us that 'loose canon' isn't used as an excuse to be sloppy. and i prefer to believe them.  because at the end of the day, they're still artists, and artists care about their art. maybe more than we do. they don't want to be let off the hook for mistakes.

 

i see 'loose canon' as doing two things:

 

creative freedom:

it allows adb to write the black templars closer to his preferred vision rather than their updated one and for that to be ok because he isn't beholden to what's been "updated" in the studio writing. but loose canon doesn't allow abnett to double down on the primarch of the white consuls by screaming "everyone's a primarch if eisenhorn says so! he's a primarch, she's a primarch, YOU'RE a primarch. it's my truuuuth.".

 

dismissing the idea of hierarchical canon:

remember when people used to debate that black library wasn't real? before we accepted that it was legit, like the studio and forgeworld? those were sweeter, more innocent pre-covid times.

 

for me, as a concept, it's brilliant. it's fluid, it's alive. dynamic. in a way, it's also more honest.

 

but on your point about more intentional and blatant contradiction, duke, i totes agree. a lot of people might not think so, but i do reckon "prospero burns" and "a thousand sons" did that well. also, MoM's depiction of magnus at the palace through a custodian's eyes when contrasted with the same scene in aTS.

Edited August 25, 2020 by mc warhammer

[DukeLeto69]

@mcwarhammer - oh I agree. Wasn’t saying it was a deliberately sloppy approach to lore that enabled sloppy writing (lore wise) but rather a framework that can make allowances for accidental lore mistakes or changes.

 

Now some if those changes can actually be positive and get picked up to replace existing lore.

 

Also don’t for one minute think ANY author working for BL sets out to ignore the lore (actually blame there lies with Editors who need to be wordsmith, plot and IP guardians).

 

However, it doesn’t take much of a stretch to say that ADB is a lore junkie/guardian (particularly skewed to 2nd edition) whereas Swallow plays wild and loose (and hops between IPs a lot as a jobbing writer).

 

As for lore transgressions - remember the criticism Abnett gets for Eisenhorn and grav cars? Well guess what pops up in Wraight’s Bloodlines! Grav cars are a thing lore wise now (grav tanks too thanks to Custodes and Primaris) but in early 2000s Abnett was taking flak!

 

So lore changes and adapts and loose cannon allows for that.

[mc warhammer]

didn't think that you were, duke. i just like to run with a topic sometimes

 

different levels of authorial devotion is going to come with a shared universe written by a mix of freelancers. i'm ok with that, but then again, i've only ever read one swallow book.

 

i'd just add to your "lore changes and adapts" that there's also a lot of space in between the lore that exists. so some of the lore is being discovered and filled in for the first time.

[mc warhammer]

thinking about what i'd like from a heresy reboot: traitors with real grievance and have them play out as misguided rebels first rather than going straight to evil.

[Jareddm]

thinking about what i'd like from a heresy reboot: traitors with real grievance and have them play out as misguided rebels first rather than going straight to evil.

Mortarion seemed to be going that way at some point, but it never really got the spotlight it deserved.

[Lucerne]

i don't get the impression that it was to allow mistakes. i mean, mistakes will happen. i can't think of many (or any) works of fiction; film, tv, novels comics that don't contain goofs of some sort. but the BL authors have gone to great lengths to impress on us that 'loose canon' isn't used as an excuse to be sloppy. and i prefer to believe them.  because at the end of the day, they're still artists, and artists care about their art. maybe more than we do. they don't want to be let off the hook for mistakes.

 

i see 'loose canon' as doing two things:

 

creative freedom:

it allows adb to write the black templars closer to his preferred vision rather than their updated one and for that to be ok because he isn't beholden to what's been "updated" in the studio writing. but loose canon doesn't allow abnett to double down on the primarch of the white consuls by screaming "everyone's a primarch if eisenhorn says so! he's a primarch, she's a primarch, YOU'RE a primarch. it's my truuuuth.".

 

dismissing the idea of hierarchical canon:

remember when people used to debate that black library wasn't real? before we accepted that it was legit, like the studio and forgeworld? those were sweeter, more innocent pre-covid times.

 

for me, as a concept, it's brilliant. it's fluid, it's alive. dynamic. in a way, it's also more honest.

 

but on your point about more intentional and blatant contradiction, duke, i totes agree. a lot of people might not think so, but i do reckon "prospero burns" and "a thousand sons" did that well. also, MoM's depiction of magnus at the palace through a custodian's eyes when contrasted with the same scene in aTS.

Honestly, I headcanon that flub as the White Consuls having "Primarch" as part of a title for their Chapter Master, as part of their whole thing as one of Robute's spawn.

[Moonreaper666]

 

 

thinking about what i'd like from a heresy reboot: traitors with real grievance and have them play out as misguided rebels first rather than going straight to evil.

Mortarion seemed to be going that way at some point, but it never really got the spotlight it deserved.

Do you think Mortarion will kill Khan in the Siege? Kinda makes sense because it would explain why he didn't care that Guilliman returned in Lords of Silence

[Xisor]

As you keep dodging the question, can you name ANY series of this scope that actually had a tight and consistent narrative? You insist its an easy and basic thing to do but i dont think reality bears that out.

I think an example that totally supports your case, and I think also totally(?) predates the Heresy, is The New Jedi Order, a 19(?)-book Star Wars EU series set 20+ years after Return of the Jedi in which (mild spoiler)

A Galaxy Far Far Away is invaded by an alien civilisation invading from beyond the galaxy (a Galaxy Farther Farther Away?).

Sure, it came from a new-to-the-property publisher (Del Rey over Bantam), but given that even Disney can't manage this properly, it's not exactly wrong to criticise people oversimplifying things. (And the snark's well-placed, IMHO.)

 

It met with a lot of opposition and huffing and puffing, shedding quite a lot of the built up enthusiasm as it trundled along. 

 

And it still didn't maintain perfect order - books coming out of chronological sequence, books being written but cancelled (because Lucas didn't like the direction!), stories being widely ridiculed in fan-memory etc.

 

It doesn't seem to be fondly remembered by many.

 

And what's more? The first three tightly-told Heresy books couldn't even manage this. 

 

---

 

I'm not convinced it's trivial to manage that level of continuity and thematic overlap, not in the slightest.

 

In fact, everything I've seen suggests to me it's quite the contrary: getting one (1) author to stick to their story is difficult enough, book to book.

 

Tolkien had to thoroughly revise parts of the Hobbit when he belatedly realised he could link it all together properly. And Tolkien wasn't a money-spinning hack who had their livelihood on the line - he was some bookish goon more interested in exploring his own ideas than pinning down a tight strategy to outsource his vision to a team of subsidiary writer-brains. And he didn't manage himself that well, let alone anyone else.

 

It's a rare thing to get something with that sort of consistency - not a ten-a-penny problem that people can't solve "because they can't be bothered"*, I think even if they could, the flesh is weak. (And the mind ain't much better.)

 

---

 

* I think there's also a huge bundle of unavoidable personality psychology  afoot in this. Some people not only "don't care" about this level of detail, but getting them to fixate on it is tantamount to some sort of peculiar torture - they'd walk away from a gig long before they submit to your "mad schemes". So I suppose I should speak with some compassion then that I kinda understand where people on the other side are coming from: for other people seeing this continuity discrepancy, this thematic 'not having your story straight' sort of lack of attention to detail is inconceivable, and in their gut feels like it must be due to laziness or contempt or wilfulness or spite, how could someone not just do it the normal, right way?! The answer, I suppose, is that on topics like this, there's a fundamental conflict in people's natures. Some people can't abide that inattention, some people can't conceive of value or virtue in being that pedantic. I'd say "never the twain shall meet", but this isn't a Mark Twain forum, and they obviously meet all the time: when an author exhibits the traits of one side, and a reader has the traits of the other. And for completeness: I think I massively fall on the pedantic side of things. (And I think the people that think lowly of books I enjoy very likely come from the other side of this particular gulf, but my insight's not great.)

[SkimaskMohawk]

 

 

i don't get the impression that it was to allow mistakes. i mean, mistakes will happen. i can't think of many (or any) works of fiction; film, tv, novels comics that don't contain goofs of some sort. but the BL authors have gone to great lengths to impress on us that 'loose canon' isn't used as an excuse to be sloppy. and i prefer to believe them. because at the end of the day, they're still artists, and artists care about their art. maybe more than we do. they don't want to be let off the hook for mistakes.

 

i see 'loose canon' as doing two things:

 

creative freedom:

it allows adb to write the black templars closer to his preferred vision rather than their updated one and for that to be ok because he isn't beholden to what's been "updated" in the studio writing. but loose canon doesn't allow abnett to double down on the primarch of the white consuls by screaming "everyone's a primarch if eisenhorn says so! he's a primarch, she's a primarch, YOU'RE a primarch. it's my truuuuth.".

 

dismissing the idea of hierarchical canon:

remember when people used to debate that black library wasn't real? before we accepted that it was legit, like the studio and forgeworld? those were sweeter, more innocent pre-covid times.

 

for me, as a concept, it's brilliant. it's fluid, it's alive. dynamic. in a way, it's also more honest.

 

but on your point about more intentional and blatant contradiction, duke, i totes agree. a lot of people might not think so, but i do reckon "prospero burns" and "a thousand sons" did that well. also, MoM's depiction of magnus at the palace through a custodian's eyes when contrasted with the same scene in aTS.

Honestly, I headcanon that flub as the White Consuls having "Primarch" as part of a title for their Chapter Master, as part of their whole thing as one of Robute's spawn.

Which chapter master? The white consuls have two lol

[mc warhammer]

*had two

Edited August 26, 2020 by mc warhammer

[b1soul]

To be clear, no one is saying it's super-easy or effortless to maintain overall consistency throughout a fictional series. It's certainly not like snapping one's fingers.

 

Sounds like some folks are saying BL de-prioritized consistency because it is essentially impossible to maintain.

 

I'm saying no, BL probably de-prioritized continuity because it does take a committed effort (just not as staggeringly difficult as some are claiming)...and there's limited commercial incentive to enforce it. On top of that, some BL team members aren't even that passionate about overarching consistency. They have genuine creative preferences against an overarching approach. Hence the timeline hiccups, shifting personalities, changing homeworlds, etc.

 

@ Noserenda

You're not addressing the fundamental issue. If you look at my analogy...how many video apps are designed to be capable of running with a turned-off screen? There is limited commercial incentive or desire to make that effort.

 

It's not about how nigh-impossible it is (even though, again, the product development would not be effortless or even "easy"). It can be done, just with a dedictaed effort...it's really more about how much the company actually wants it.

 

Based on BL's messaging, it's just not a priority of theirs and they're fine with a loose approach. We buy up the HH series regardless.

Edited August 27, 2020 by b1soul

[Karhedron]

Do you think Mortarion will kill Khan in the Siege? Kinda makes sense because it would explain why he didn't care that Guilliman returned in Lords of Silence

I doubt it. It has been established lore for a long time that the Khan survives the Heresy. I don't think they would start messing with that although I guess they could throw a curve-ball in there. Khan's survial is pretty much just a footnote that leads to his disappearance in the Maelstrom. Many of the other surviving Primarchs have well established disappearance legends (Dorn, Russ, the Lion and now Corax). I guess it wouldn't make much difference to lore or setting if Khan dies in the siege as he doesn't do anything significant after it.

[Pariah32]

I for one would like BL to take some big steps to change the old fluff. I for one would be down with the Khan being killed (as long as it is done very well and he goes out bloody). However, my 40k white scars lore is lacking somewhat, does the khans disappearance reflect much or referred much in current white scars culture at all? 

[b1soul]

No primarch has done much after The Scouring. Khan fits the general rule.

 

Frankly, killing Russ or the Lion would not affect the setting more than killing someone less popular like Dorn or the Khan. None of these characters are in play.

 

The Lion being asleep on the Rock is a lie. He's a corpse on his deathbed held in stasis. That's the horrific secret each DA Supreme Grandmaster must bear.

 

Dorn was stabbed to death by Chaos cultists with plague blades, as hinted in BL.

 

Russ and Corax were slaughtered in the Warp.

 

The Khan fell somewhere in the Webway or at the Siege.

 

Vulkan chose to die his final death during the War of the Beast.

 

None of the above would have any impact on the current setting as it is. Would GW ever do something like this just to appease fans who want to shake up the old lore? Probably not. It goes against business sense.

[Karhedron]

The Primarchs are in play on the tabletop. While GW don't seem to be in a hurry to rush out more, I think it is safe to see we will see them in future for suitably momentous events. For this reason, I doubt they will off anyone unexpected in the Siege books. The uncertain missing status of several loyalist Primarchs works just fine for GW as it stands. There is no need make it harder to bring back any of them than they need to. They even went out of their way to give Dorn a potential back-door to his existing death. Vulkan is a Perpetual and frankly that is a big enough mcguffin for him to pop up anytime that is dramatically appropriate.

[mc warhammer]

surprise guest appearance by heritor a

[mc warhammer]

unpopular opinion: thinking more on this, i would've liked 30k to be vastly divergent to the myths of it present in 40k. even the historical accounts. in the same way that if we were ever to travel back and find the historical inspiration for the king arthur myth, it and he would be almost unrecognisable as the legend we're familiar with.

 

sanguinnius having black hair was a step in the right direction there

[SpecialIssue]

unpopular opinion: thinking more on this, i would've liked 30k to be vastly divergent to the myths of it present in 40k. even the historical accounts. in the same way that if we were ever to travel back and find the historical inspiration for the king arthur myth, it and he would be almost unrecognisable as the legend we're familiar with.

 

sanguinnius having black hair was a step in the right direction there

 

Well, the stillborn concept of the rebellion staring out largely as a political/secular conflict that only turned to the nightmare of the warp later would have been one of the ways this could have been achieved.

[Scribe]

I'm sitting my car, I moved into a new place a few days ago, and finishing moving my in-laws out of their place, and it hit me.

 

The Heresy is a Tragedy because it's the only logical conclusion to the Emperor's choices.

 

It's not the story of the Imperium. It's the story of the Emperor, who in his repeated behavior (Thunder Warriors, Astartes, Primarchs) his hubris (made a deal with Chaos) his inability to look at the consequences of hiding the truth of the universe from the Primarchs....

 

All of it adds up to the Emperor getting what he had coming to him. An eternity of suffering, his dreams twisted into a parody of what he claimed to want.

 

It's a tragedy in the classical sense.

 

No?

[Lord_Caerolion]

Well, he did think he could literally reshape reality and metaphysics.

[Roomsky]

So, here’s another point I’ve wanted to articulate for a while about the Heresy ballooning into what it is now. While, in theory, a much tighter proper series was possible as an alternative, most people tend to overlook who was writing when the series started and what such a straightforward publication would look like.

 

So what do we know about the circumstances around those early books? Well, we know they weren’t going to cover things like Nikea because they were sticking to events that happened during the Heresy; so we can assume flashbacks at best. A more limited A-to-B series also leaves no room beyond cameos for legions not involved in major engagements, so outside of the Siege and Isstvan we get no Alpha Legion, Night Lords, or World Eaters. We get no Dark Angels, no Space Wolves, no Raven Guard or Salamanders. We get no White Scars until Terra. There’s not room beyond the initial books for minor events like Chondax, Alaxxes, Corax’s folly, etc.

 

We also know the series was being written by the most prolific authors at the time, so atop Abnett we’re looking at more Mcneill, Counter, and Swallow. What most people call a concise narrative is likely ¾ incredibly contentious authors. No time for ADB, Wraight, French, Thorpe, or Haley. We also know Mcneill was originally to cover Calth before scheduling conflicts rolled in, and authors getting first shot at their 40k legions means we still get Fear to Tread.

 

So what are we left with? More than likely, a collection of disparate events outlined in old codices to cover the Heresy’s major battles, probably with some running narratives involving remembrances, Garro, etc threading the novels. If we assume an even split of authors, a 12 book series may have looked something like this:

 

Horus Rising - Abnett

False Gods (Davin) - Mcneill

Galaxy in Flames (Isstvan III) – Counter

Flight of the Eisenstein – Swallow

 

Fulgrim (Isstvan V) - Mcneill

Phall - Counter

Tallarn - Abnett

Fear to Tread (Signus) - Swallow

 

Calth - Mcneill

Siege of Terra 1 - Counter

Siege of Terra 2 - Swallow

Siege of Terra 3 – Abnett

 

And that, or something similar, would be that. 4 years in the Heresy series ends with no First Heretic, no Scars, no Praetorian of Dorn, no Legion or Prospero Burns or Know no Fear or Betrayer etc etc etc. The series is over before any of the depth Forgeworld added can be retconned in, and titanic engagements like Isstvan V get, at most, 100 pages as at the end of Fulgrim; there’s no time for more. Hardly ideal and hardly the glorious, tight narrative people say never happened only because of greed. It was never going to be 5-7 more books by Abnett, flawlessly tying everything together. If it wasn’t Battle for the Abyss it was going to be something else, and I shudder at the though of Mcneill getting to write Calth.

 

So, uh, yeah. I’ll stick with the 60 book mess, please.