Changes to the Horus Heresy Fluff - The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly

[DukeLeto69]

1 hour ago, Noserenda said:

So three badly incomplete books if they are just acts of a larger story then? By the definition of the structure. Thats somehow worse than just building it as a trilogy.

You may not think you are but you are defending this, and fairly obnoxiously in places, some of us just want the ending we were promised, not stretched out for another year so Black Library can pad out their sales graphs a bit.

Brother if it came across obnoxiously rather than amusingly then I apologise to anyone who may have felt burned.

 

i just find it amusing the level of upset for something nobody has yet read.

[Karhedron]

I may be in the minority but I feel sad the HH series is coming to an end. I have looked forward to the new instalments and now I will have to find some new series to fill the gap. While the main series did meander off, I was never in a rush for it to head to Terra. We have always known what the destination would be, I have enjoyed the journey. And there have been some surprise gems along the way. While Imperium Secundus may not be a greatly beloved arc, Pharos is a great book showcasing some really nice character work against the larger backdrop.

[DukeLeto69]

56 minutes ago, Lord_Caerolion said:

Is it really so wrong to want what Black Library promised the series would be? They went into this promising “hey, we learned our lessons from the Heresy, this new series is going to be tightly controlled and stick to a tight plan”, only right at the end to say “lol nope, the last book is definitely two, maybe three, who can really say for sure?”

 

As for condescending portrayals of why people might not like this, you could also say that the only reason TO like it is “yay Daddy Abnett write more book!”

I’d been hesitant about Abnett finishing the series before, given a whole lot of his books end with him suddenly realizing he needs to finish things, so inserts a short “oh yeah, then we won and things were good for now”, always feeling rushed. 

I could level accusations of condescension at some brothers on here for the ongoing and incessant criticism of Abnett. The rushed ending trope is totally overblown. He has done that maybe three or four times max, and yet it is cited as if he is guilty of doing it in 50+ novels. 

 

It just starts to feel a bit tribalist.

 

Fact remains that nobody has read this book(s) yet. And I stand by what I say regarding “bloat” (ie that this specifically is not bloat) and that having more than one final volume is not something that it is fair to level at Abnett.

[Lord_Caerolion]

I’ll agree that the issue with the blame not being fairly laid at Abnetts feet, it’s something that the management of BL are responsible for. 
 

For better or worse, though, Abnett has developed a reputation for… controversial changes and additions to the lore. 

[System Sound]

7 hours ago, Lord_Caerolion said:

I’ll agree that the issue with the blame not being fairly laid at Abnetts feet, it’s something that the management of BL are responsible for. 
 

For better or worse, though, Abnett has developed a reputation for… controversial changes and additions to the lore. 

While I do agree that some of Abnett's changes are a bit hit or miss, some of you really and I do mean Really need to let go of those old HH stories from the 90s...

[Nagashsnee]

1 hour ago, System Sound said:

While I do agree that some of Abnett's changes are a bit hit or miss, some of you really and I do mean Really need to let go of those old HH stories from the 90s...

 

Why? Like i am not being sarcastic, but why should any fan of the setting HAVE to let go of key cannon. Old, set, established canon.  An empire of a million worlds, trillions of humans, uncounted xenos, planets and star systems without number. Why MUST we have to let go of changes rather then authors actually do some work and make cool new things/additions that let everyone be happy? 

 

Abnett has show he is very very good at this, he has an entire corner of the 40k universe where he has done a FANTASTIC job of making new, popular, exciting lore. Its what made him famous in the BL sense. Even in 30k, the white scars, world eaters, mechanicum, so many areas to grow and add too without crashing against 20 year old lore. Widely regarded as the BEST parts of the HH series.  So in all seriousness why does anyone NEED to let go the HH lore? The thing that allowed this giant series of book to be born in the first place.  

 

Some of you really and i do mean REALLY need to let go of the need to retcon the existing HH lore from the 90s. 

[DukeLeto69]

10 minutes ago, Nagashsnee said:

 

Why? Like i am not being sarcastic, but why should any fan of the setting HAVE to let go of key cannon. Old, set, established canon.  An empire of a million worlds, trillions of humans, uncounted xenos, planets and star systems without number. Why MUST we have to let go of changes rather then authors actually do some work and make cool new things/additions that let everyone be happy? 

 

Abnett has show he is very very good at this, he has an entire corner of the 40k universe where he has done a FANTASTIC job of making new, popular, exciting lore. Its what made him famous in the BL sense. Even in 30k, the white scars, world eaters, mechanicum, so many areas to grow and add too without crashing against 20 year old lore. Widely regarded as the BEST parts of the HH series.  So in all seriousness why does anyone NEED to let go the HH lore? The thing that allowed this giant series of book to be born in the first place.  

 

Some of you really and i do mean REALLY need to let go of the need to retcon the existing HH lore from the 90s. 

Nobody has to let go of anything but maybe accepting that what they previously liked is not how it is may let them find some peace? To quote myself from another thread...

 

If, that’s IF, there had been a definitive series of HHbooks published previously, then changes to the lore could be classed as a retcon. However, all we have had before were some high-level short stories from William King and a very messy (timeline/chronology wise) Collected Visions book(s) written by Alan Merritt based on a card game.

 

The HH black library series and the FW black books are all that actually matters now. They will be canon. You may not like it better than what has come before, but what came before was not definitive.

 

PLUS everything that came before (in the real world) was written from the perspective of a 10,000 year old legend. The BL books and FW books are “present day” retellings of what ACTUALLY happened not the dilution, creative fantasy, and propaganda of 10,000 years of the IoM! 

[System Sound]

31 minutes ago, Nagashsnee said:

 

Why? Like i am not being sarcastic, but why should any fan of the setting HAVE to let go of key cannon. Old, set, established canon.  An empire of a million worlds, trillions of humans, uncounted xenos, planets and star systems without number. Why MUST we have to let go of changes rather then authors actually do some work and make cool new things/additions that let everyone be happy? 

 

Abnett has show he is very very good at this, he has an entire corner of the 40k universe where he has done a FANTASTIC job of making new, popular, exciting lore. Its what made him famous in the BL sense. Even in 30k, the white scars, world eaters, mechanicum, so many areas to grow and add too without crashing against 20 year old lore. Widely regarded as the BEST parts of the HH series.  So in all seriousness why does anyone NEED to let go the HH lore? The thing that allowed this giant series of book to be born in the first place.  

 

Some of you really and i do mean REALLY need to let go of the need to retcon the existing HH lore from the 90s. 

DukeLeto said it better than I did. It's old lore that was just there to give some background for the wider setting. And I'm not saying that the end needs to change dramatically. But some piece should be moved around.

[Nagashsnee]

2 hours ago, DukeLeto69 said:

Nobody has to let go of anything but maybe accepting that what they previously liked is not how it is may let them find some peace? To quote myself from another thread...

 

If, that’s IF, there had been a definitive series of HHbooks published previously, then changes to the lore could be classed as a retcon. However, all we have had before were some high-level short stories from William King and a very messy (timeline/chronology wise) Collected Visions book(s) written by Alan Merritt based on a card game.

 

The HH black library series and the FW black books are all that actually matters now. They will be canon. You may not like it better than what has come before, but what came before was not definitive.

 

PLUS everything that came before (in the real world) was written from the perspective of a 10,000 year old legend. The BL books and FW books are “present day” retellings of what ACTUALLY happened not the dilution, creative fantasy, and propaganda of 10,000 years of the IoM! 

 

Yes and no. The Horus Heresy may not have had a BL series, but its events have been brought up and laid down in codexs, BL books, comics etc for years before the HH series was ever thought of. 

 

Saying White Dwarf saying Sanguinius died X way is not definitive is fine, what about the Codex? What about all the other BL books that referenced it? What about the original Adeptus Titanicus stuff that started the whole heresy mess. Collected visions was a book made specifically to try and codify and bring together all sorts of sources to tie in with the fantastic art of the card game, which actually also added to the HH setting.  Entire ranges or lore/minis are based on that 'not definitive' story line pretty definitively. 

 

Now BL could turn around and reveal that the Emperor has secretly been Horus trapped on the throne ever since the HH after he and sanguinius teamed up to kill him and Dorn and replaced the latter with Omegon.  Would that make everything before that 'not definitive'? Or is simple a silly retcon? Certain key elements of the HH are the stones on which 40k has been built. 

 

No it has not all been written from a future perspective, funnily enough the FW book make it super duper clear its all written by one semi reliable person. The heresy books contradict their own timelines and series of events ALLOT and BL cant even decide how many books their definitively planned siege series will be comprised of.  

 

But to be fair we are arguing canon of a IP who has stated it has no canon so what the hell do we know. 

 

 

[DukeLeto69]

28 minutes ago, Nagashsnee said:

 

Yes and no. The Horus Heresy may not have had a BL series, but its events have been brought up and laid down in codexs, BL books, comics etc for years before the HH series was ever thought of. 

 

Saying White Dwarf saying Sanguinius died X way is not definitive is fine, what about the Codex? What about all the other BL books that referenced it? What about the original Adeptus Titanicus stuff that started the whole heresy mess. Collected visions was a book made specifically to try and codify and bring together all sorts of sources to tie in with the fantastic art of the card game, which actually also added to the HH setting.  Entire ranges or lore/minis are based on that 'not definitive' story line pretty definitively. 

 

Now BL could turn around and reveal that the Emperor has secretly been Horus trapped on the throne ever since the HH after he and sanguinius teamed up to kill him and Dorn and replaced the latter with Omegon.  Would that make everything before that 'not definitive'? Or is simple a silly retcon? Certain key elements of the HH are the stones on which 40k has been built. 

 

No it has not all been written from a future perspective, funnily enough the FW book make it super duper clear its all written by one semi reliable person. The heresy books contradict their own timelines and series of events ALLOT and BL cant even decide how many books their definitively planned siege series will be comprised of.  

 

But to be fair we are arguing canon of a IP who has stated it has no canon so what the hell do we know. 

 

 

The FW semi-reliable thing is a specific mechanism to get around any goofs and contradictions they made while writing them (and it is fun).

 

i would argue that (a bit meta this) the Codexes are intended for armies being used in the 41st millennium and as such anything in them is indeed written through the lens of 10,000 years of propaganda, myths and legends. But of course they also are not because the audience is us as players not characters in-universe.

 

Actually I have always thought GW could have more fun with that but probably too hard to pull off (ie write codex fluff purely from a propaganda pov).

 

I digress. 

 

Of course there is no wrong or right when it comes to what we all subjectively prefer. Heck my own head cannon deviates fairly solidly away from GW/BL/FW in some areas (and I conflate Dune with W40k but that is waaaaay off topic). We can all like and dislike whatever we choose.

 

My point (and really the only point I am making about this topic) is that regardless of what has cone before and the validity you, I or others ascribe it, the BL books WILL be the canon going forward.

 

I very much doubt the “big beats” of the end/climax story will be dramatically changed (the Sanguinius hypothesis for example) but there will be nuance and “oh THAT’S why that happened that way” moments. I can guarantee some will hate it and some will love it and some will be “meh what was all the fuss about”.

 

But there are some fraters who, as they hate it, will point the finger of blame at Abnett saying “he ruined the HH for me”. I think that is both a bit silly and plainly disingenuous. Abnett may have more firepower than other authors but he is still very much a writer for hire operating within a big corporation’s IP. He has clearly made creative suggestions in the past that they have liked and approved. Therefore they (GW/BL) are telling us THAT is canon (and fudging with all that loose canon stuff to allow for mess ups / lore contradictions).

[Nagashsnee]

15 minutes ago, DukeLeto69 said:

The FW semi-reliable thing is a specific mechanism to get around any goofs and contradictions they made while writing them (and it is fun).

 

i would argue that (a bit meta this) the Codexes are intended for armies being used in the 41st millennium and as such anything in them is indeed written through the lens of 10,000 years of propaganda, myths and legends. But of course they also are not because the audience is us as players not characters in-universe.

 

Actually I have always thought GW could have more fun with that but probably too hard to pull off (ie write codex fluff purely from a propaganda pov).

 

I 100% agree that the FW thing is a cheat code. I will also agree that GW should use in universe writing more often and smarter then they do now.  But the codex thing heavily depends on the edition. Some editions clearly have the 'this is the lore' parts and the 'little in universe parts' much more then others. My all time fav codex was the Necron relaunch one ( the first time they got plastic kits and the monolith)  it had so many little in universe accounts, short stories and notes and it really sold to me how the universe sees the Necrons and how little they know. But also had a hefty 'these are the necrons' side for the player.   But the army books form the core of the lore, some factions have little else to live off for years at a time. And it goes beyond the writing but also heavily into the art ( especially older books were better at this). 

 

I also agree with the nuance aspect of the BL books, this is where they shine and where most of the better book lie. My issues lie with the retcons, with things like the banning of Librarians in the legion at Nikaia. Why? What nuance did this retcon add? If anything it creates a issue where all the marines on BOTH sides are breaking a imperial decree constantly.  Why? What was wrong with the old white dwarf articles saying that the Emperor smiled when a group of marines from different legions offered him the comprise he was waiting for and thus founding the librarius officially.  Did having 6 different takes of, 'holy molly the Emperor was a fool get the librarian here pronto' add nuance to the setting? I WISH we got the exploration of the founding of the librarius we deserved, where the hardliners on both sides failed and set up the anger and discontent in the 1k sons and death guard as needed. 

 

Now i am 33, that may put me in the old grouchy crowd i dont know. But changes for the sake of change are rarely in my view positive. What i do know is that things like Fear to Tread changed things for the worse and in ways the very HH series itself then had to work around or change futher. 

[DukeLeto69]

@Nagashsnee at 33 you are still a whelp to me! I’ll soon be entombed in a dreadnought! 

 

I really would love each Codex to have the lore section be completely and only written from an in universe species/faction propaganda POV that is actually contradicted (deliberately) by lore entries in another Codex.

 

ie at a simple level:

 

Adeptus Militarum = we won battle xyz

 

Necrons = we won battle xyz

 

Eldar = we find it funny the Humans and Necrons both think they won battle xyz because we were behind the scenes doing abc

Edited December 7, 2022 by DukeLeto69

[Scribe]

20 hours ago, DukeLeto69 said:

I could level accusations of condescension at some brothers on here for the ongoing and incessant criticism of Abnett. The rushed ending trope is totally overblown. He has done that maybe three or four times max, and yet it is cited as if he is guilty of doing it in 50+ novels. 

 

It just starts to feel a bit tribalist.

 

Fact remains that nobody has read this book(s) yet. And I stand by what I say regarding “bloat” (ie that this specifically is not bloat) and that having more than one final volume is not something that it is fair to level at Abnett.

 

For what its worth, I dont care about his endings. I care about the things he injects that have no past context or are retcons, or are simply wildly wrong. (Emperors Executioners, There are marines and then there are Space Wolves.).

 

If he had not pushed the Emperors Executions plot line (that we then had to endure for like a dozen books after) and Perpetuals (that we still suffer with) I would have far less issue with his contributions to the series.

 

The fact we have it on record the other authors (or author) have pushed back on his ideas, is proof enough to me that he needs to be reined in and stop putting his own spin on things that dont need to be changed.

 

EDIT: OH and the "Super Hero" book, with Curze running around like some weird ass Joker parody. Man was that one ever bad.

Edited December 7, 2022 by Scribe

[DukeLeto69]

2 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

For what its worth, I dont care about his endings. I care about the things he injects that have no past context or are retcons, or are simply wildly wrong. (Emperors Executioners, There are marines and then there are Space Wolves.).

 

If he had not pushed the Emperors Executions plot line (that we then had to endure for like a dozen books after) and Perpetuals (that we still suffer with) I would have far less issue with his contributions to the series.

 

The fact we have it on record the other authors (or author) have pushed back on his ideas, is proof enough to me that he needs to be reined in and stop putting his own spin on things that dont need to be changed.

 

EDIT: OH and the "Super Hero" book, with Curze running around like some weird ass Joker parody. Man was that one ever bad.

The Unremembered Empire is a terrible book. Abnett’s worst by far. It could have been so good, a really interesting political drama BUT instead it turned into a superhero comic book style slapdown. Hated most of it. And I say that as someone who genuinely believes Abnett is the best author working for BL (except Fehervari who is an exception).

 

i am not too enamoured with the revamped Sensei / Perpetuals storyline so far but I think the climax will seal that for me either way (trouble for me is it does not fit with my head canon).

 

Space Wolves as Emperor’s Executioners = love it. Prospero Burns is superb and totally lifted the Wolves away from being hackneyed space vikings.

 

Will also say that Horus Rising, Legion, Know No Fear are genius books. Amongst the very best of the HH. But that is subjective. You do not like Abnett.

 

You also clearly love ADB. I consider ADB to be in the top five BL authors but for me Abnett is better, especially in terms of his entire body of work. But again, that is subjective.

 

And I will continue to argue that the additions to the HH by Abnett and other authors are not “retcons” as what came before was neither extensive or definitive.

Edited December 7, 2022 by DukeLeto69

[Scribe]

1 hour ago, DukeLeto69 said:

Space Wolves as Emperor’s Executioners = love it. Prospero Burns is superb and totally lifted the Wolves away from being hackneyed space vikings.

 

 

Everything he did could have been done, WITHOUT several points of contention that lead to the whole 'watch packs' garbage as well. Thats the thing. He didnt (doesnt?) respect the rest of the lore enough to not go too far.

 

Then other (better/more respectful *cough*) authors have to come after and put his stuff back in the box so it makes sense.

 

I mean it wasnt until French's book that the Perpetual side plot even started to have a hint of relevance. 

 

For my money, Know no Fear was his best, but its also very loose in terms of what exactly a Primarch is or is not threatened by if I remember right.

[DukeLeto69]

32 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

Everything he did could have been done, WITHOUT several points of contention that lead to the whole 'watch packs' garbage as well. Thats the thing. He didnt (doesnt?) respect the rest of the lore enough to not go too far.

 

Then other (better/more respectful *cough*) authors have to come after and put his stuff back in the box so it makes sense.

 

I mean it wasnt until French's book that the Perpetual side plot even started to have a hint of relevance. 

 

For my money, Know no Fear was his best, but its also very loose in terms of what exactly a Primarch is or is not threatened by if I remember right.

But therein lies the crux of the argument and how differently we view the lore. At what point does what came before become sacrosanct and anything thereafter that deviates a retcon?

 

If you go back far enough there were no Primarchs and Horus was just a rebellious general! 

[Scribe]

7 minutes ago, DukeLeto69 said:

But therein lies the crux of the argument and how differently we view the lore. At what point does what came before become sacrosanct and anything thereafter that deviates a retcon?

 

If you go back far enough there were no Primarchs and Horus was just a rebellious general! 

 

Assuming its done while still being respectful of the rest of the lore? Its generally fine.

 

Some authors go to great length to ensure that they dont trample on other aspects of the lore. Abnett, less so.

 

I mean lets be honest. I'm absolutely not going to go back into the archives here to dig up the arguments I have already made against Prospero Burns, it could have been done better, it could have reinvented or refined the Wolves, without stepping on the toes of Legions like the Night Lords, and World Eaters. Instead, he painted them as the best of the best, the top of the food chain, and the killers of other Legions.

 

It was a travesty, and it was intentionally walked back throughout the rest of the series.

 

This isnt about refinement of lore. Its about how he packaged it. Its about stuff like Unremembered Empire that 100% makes no damn sense within the context of the rest of the series. He wrote it. Hell, I dont think his superhero romp around the city can even be salvaged, it's best to just forget he even wrote it and move on, which is 100% doable because its a book that didnt even need to exist in the first place.

 

This is the issue in a nutshell. As far as his TECHNICAL ability to write? Obviously he's a good writer. As far as his ability as a World Builder? Again, Know no Fear was fantastic. FANTASTIC, in that regard.

 

He simply takes liberties with the lore, and doesnt show enough respect to what exists, and should be used, instead just running wild if hes allowed to, and "well he's Abnett" just wont work for me.

 

Ol is a Catholic. I mean WHY? It makes no sense, NONE, AT ALL, within the setting, and the guy SHOULDNT EVEN BE AN IMMORTAL ANYWAY.

 

God, its going to just piss me off..

[jaxom]

I don't like how the Dark Angels were done. I wrote this back in 2019 and never expanded on it. I was so angry about it, that I wrote my own fan-version of the Dark Angels (after Angels of Caliban came out, but before Crusade). 

 

Quote

The Horus Heresy series will always have some mystery to where details, plot points, and how they are presented or pursed come from because it’s a collaborative work. I recommend reading the Afterword to Guy Haley’s The Lost and the Damned because it offers a view into how the sausage is made. In addition, there’s information and events from preexisting sources which had to be accounted for in one way or another. The salient pieces of information about the Dark Angels in the Horus Heresy give starting points for designing arcs (for the legion and individual characters).

 

1) Luther is placed in charge of Caliban and the recruitment-training cycle.

2) Luther and the Dark Angels on Caliban turn against the Lion.

3) The Lion and Leman Russ are part of conquering Dulan. The Lion kills the Tyrant, whom Russ had vowed to kill, and the two end up in a massive brawl. The Lion wins when Russ starts laughing about how silly the whole thing is.

4) The Warmaster orders the Dark Angels to the outer edges of expanding Imperium to get them out of the way for the initial stages of his rebellion.

5) The Dark Angels and the Space Wolves make their way to Terra together. Russ insists on breaking every rebel force on the way. When they arrive too late at Terra the Lion holds Russ personally responsible and stabs him when Russ refuses an honor duel.

6) The Dark Angels return to Caliban and are fired upon. They fight on Caliban among orbital bombardments which proceed to break apart the planet (with warp shenanigans weakening the planet). Luther psyker powers gets the better of the Lion, but he has a moment of regret and doesn’t kill the primarch. The Dark Angels recover the largest remaining shard of the planet (the Rock) and Luther, but there is no sign of the Primarch (he’s in stasis in the Rock).

 

The information does not have to be taken at face value, but one must then be careful of subverting expectations. For example Frank Herbert’s Dune establishes the enmity between feuding families by relating how one family was accused of cowardice for refusing to cross a bridge during a battle. The context and expectation is it’s a physical bridge, but a prequel reveals it was a metaphor for disobeying an order to fire on innocent civilians. The time and elegance put into an explanation can go a long way how well an explanation of “how” is received. Compare Logan’s amnesia (X- Men movies) via one minute of action and a single adamantium bullet to the state of the world in Planet of the Apes and via a three movie prequel trilogy each of which deftly built off the previous prequel.

 

Each of the previous examples also illustrate how character-driven events require motivation and actions require explanations. There are more than a single option and the difficulty is on how they are addressed. Why do the Dark Angels on Caliban fire on the returning fleet? How do the Dark Angels and Space Wolves meet up on the way to Terra? These give way points or end points, but there must also be a beginning. The choice of beginning has a major impact on world building and character arcs. Imagine Harry Potter except the story begins with Harry just arriving at the train station and his encounter with the Weaselys; we no longer have the context as Harry-the-Orphan or his abusive family. On the other end, if the story begins earlier then one has to have the appropriate narrative of how Harry doesn’t end up as a stew of neuroses and unhealthy coping mechanisms; by skipping all that, we – the reader – just go along with the long-standing “good-natured British orphan who ends up being important” archetype (Arthur, Oliver, etc).

 

Thus we establish the first question: How does Dark Angels’ tale begin compared to the other legions? The Dark Angels have a unique start. Other legions are already established when we are exposed to them. The POV and world building focuses on the legions and their role(s) in the Great Crusade (and for some, Heresy). This is the first hurdle raised by, “The Warmaster orders the Dark Angels to the outer edges of expanding Imperium to get them out of the way for the initial stages of his rebellion.” The Dark Angels did not have a previously established role in the beginning of the Heresy and so there was much room for choosing where they would first be seen. The Horus Rising trilogy and Fulgrim established expectations for introducing a legion and getting to know its culture.However, instead, in Descent of Angels and Fallen Angels, our POV focus is on Caliban and an inter-order war.

 

The problem is that, in breaking the pattern, the readers come in expecting to learn about the Dark Angels and their primarch, but barely do so. The social conventions and history we’re given about Caliban subvert expectations. The Order is not the governing planetary body under the Lion, the knights of Caliban are riven by factionalism, and the beasts of the forests are almost all eradicated. In this, the book does an excellent job of setting up a clear theme of schism.

 

The focus on schism, however, robs the narrative of any immediate import to greater tale of the Heresy, because the confrontation on Caliban does not occur until after the Siege of Terra. The narrative is continued haphazardly through short stories and the B-plot in other books. Yet it’s the equivalent of a not important cameo; like if Han Solo showed up to deliver mail in The Mandolorian. The presence of the Calibanite faction has not added any depth to the character arcs or world building upon which the Horus Heresy rests.

 

Edited December 7, 2022 by jaxom
Added link

[DukeLeto69]

9 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

Assuming its done while still being respectful of the rest of the lore? Its generally fine.

 

Some authors go to great length to ensure that they dont trample on other aspects of the lore. Abnett, less so.

 

I mean lets be honest. I'm absolutely not going to go back into the archives here to dig up the arguments I have already made against Prospero Burns, it could have been done better, it could have reinvented or refined the Wolves, without stepping on the toes of Legions like the Night Lords, and World Eaters. Instead, he painted them as the best of the best, the top of the food chain, and the killers of other Legions.

 

It was a travesty, and it was intentionally walked back throughout the rest of the series.

 

This isnt about refinement of lore. Its about how he packaged it. Its about stuff like Unremembered Empire that 100% makes no damn sense within the context of the rest of the series. He wrote it. Hell, I dont think his superhero romp around the city can even be salvaged, it's best to just forget he even wrote it and move on, which is 100% doable because its a book that didnt even need to exist in the first place.

 

This is the issue in a nutshell. As far as his TECHNICAL ability to write? Obviously he's a good writer. As far as his ability as a World Builder? Again, Know no Fear was fantastic. FANTASTIC, in that regard.

 

He simply takes liberties with the lore, and doesnt show enough respect to what exists, and should be used, instead just running wild if hes allowed to, and "well he's Abnett" just wont work for me.

 

Ol is a Catholic. I mean WHY? It makes no sense, NONE, AT ALL, within the setting, and the guy SHOULDNT EVEN BE AN IMMORTAL ANYWAY.

 

God, its going to just piss me off..

You make good points but, just as with my argument, they are mostly subjective and what you prefer or do not like. However, you avoided directly answering my question...

 

At what point does what came before become sacrosanct and anything thereafter that deviates a retcon?

 

Who determines the baseline or where that line in the sand is? What determines it?

 

Is it weight of words published on a topic? In which case the BL execution of the HH series easily trumps anything else.

 

Is it time passed? Well by the time the last SoT book is published, more time will have passed with the HH books series underway than there was from launch of the Titanicus game and Horus Rising.

 

You say “respect the lore” and others will say “expand the lore”. When it comes to Abnett, no other author has “informed” the lore as much as him. Words, concepts and ideas that he came up with are now cornerstones in the lore. I know we see this differently, but to me disrespecting the lore is things like CS Goto having back flipping dreadnoughts. Heck ADB the loremaster extraordinaire that some fraters seem to worship (great author not dismissing that at all) referenced “hover rhinos” but I am pretty sure they have a name right?

 

Also, what are your opinions on lore changes if what came before is simply bad? Or as is often the case, makes no sense? Is it not on the current lore writers and BL authors/editors to address that and make it make sense?

 

There are plenty of things that the HH series has done that doesn’t gel with my view of things about the setting. But it doesn’t cause me to take specific issue with that author. Why? Because as a shared IP, there is a whole team who need to take responsibility.

 

The big bugbear for me is the whole Knight Errant arc. It makes no sense TO ME. I HATE the way Garro and gang seem to be able to zip around the galaxy and turn up at the right place at the right time with impunity. To me that is not how this setting/universe works! What happened to warp time dilation? Effects of the Ruinstorm? Where is the huge km voidship they would need to get them anywhere via the warp? How come they seem to be able to travel in days/weeks when the setting was always about months of ship time. Do I blame Swallow? No! I blame the whole team for not picking that up. But I can just ignore that and refuse to let it detract from my overall enjoyment of the series.

 

@Scribe you just seem so angry that Abnett has the last book(s). 

[Arkangilos]

2 hours ago, DukeLeto69 said:

At what point does what came before become sacrosanct and anything thereafter that deviates a retcon?

Organic development is the answer.

 

Something that makes changes to refine the lore and make it better is fine so long as it is still recognizable, and organically develops from it. A prime example is the legions getting larger, Sanguinius not actually holding the eternity gate alone, etc.

 

Something that is not a good example, and that is stupid beyond all reason, is the Emperor killing Sanguinius (which hasn’t happened but some people are asking for it).

 

Or, another poor example (in my opinion), is the change to 21 primarchs.

 

There were twenty, not 21. Alpharius was one, not two. The legion was the last, not the first. It is not organic development to change that. It is injection, and injection is the problem. 

[DukeLeto69]

46 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

Organic development is the answer.

 

Something that makes changes to refine the lore and make it better is fine so long as it is still recognizable, and organically develops from it. A prime example is the legions getting larger, Sanguinius not actually holding the eternity gate alone, etc.

 

Something that is not a good example, and that is stupid beyond all reason, is the Emperor killing Sanguinius (which hasn’t happened but some people are asking for it).

 

Or, another poor example (in my opinion), is the change to 21 primarchs.

 

There were twenty, not 21. Alpharius was one, not two. The legion was the last, not the first. It is not organic development to change that. It is injection, and injection is the problem. 

Agreed, although we should really stick to changes or expansions on the more that have happened rather than those some are speculating might happen (ahem Sanguinius).

 

Again though a lot of this will be subjective. Personally I liked the reveal that Alpharius had a twin. I think it reflected the dual nature (and are they traitor or really actually loyal but doing their own thing sort of thing). The thing about the Alpha Legion/their Primarchs *I* didn’t like was the more diminutive stature of Alpharius and Omegon. All the other Primarchs are huge, head n shoulders taller than Astartes who are head n shoulders taller than standard humans (in sone of the artwork the Primarchs are even taller than that). See though, totally subjective.

 

You see for me I think it would be a retcon if in Legion Abnett had said Alpharius/Omegon are 10ft tall but then in a later book another author (or Abnett) said they were the same height as Astartes. But if there is no mention of their height in Collected Visions then specifying their height cannot be considered a retcon (although as I have been stating IMHO nothing prior to Horus Rising is sacrosanct).

[Taliesin]

I think the plain answer to this is that the BL novel series and the recent HH Black Books series from Forgeworld are the most recent versions of the canon.

This is how GW wants to present it, so for me, that is canon.

[Arkangilos]

1 hour ago, DukeLeto69 said:

Personally I liked the reveal that Alpharius had a twin. I think it reflected the dual nature (and are they traitor or really actually loyal but doing their own thing sort of thing).

But you don’t get that. You get 21 primarchs, with 19 being alive, 9 being loyal and 10 being traitors. It was no more dual nature than any other legion that had internal conflict on what side to join and primarchs that took time to decide. It actually ended up ruining the mystery, because one did and one didn’t.

If it were one, there would still be a mystery.

[darkhorse0607]

On 12/6/2022 at 3:50 PM, Karhedron said:

I may be in the minority but I feel sad the HH series is coming to an end. I have looked forward to the new instalments and now I will have to find some new series to fill the gap. While the main series did meander off, I was never in a rush for it to head to Terra. We have always known what the destination would be, I have enjoyed the journey. And there have been some surprise gems along the way. While Imperium Secundus may not be a greatly beloved arc, Pharos is a great book showcasing some really nice character work against the larger backdrop.

 

I know this is a late reply and the conversation has moved on a bit but I just wanted to say that I agree. The heresy series has been in my life for a decent amount of time now (although not as long as some of you), through major life changes and all the time in between. Thinking that it will be over at some point (2, 3 books later, whatever it is) makes me a little melancholic, especially when the newer series haven't grabbed me in the same way.

[Arkangilos]

2 minutes ago, darkhorse0607 said:

 

I know this is a late reply and the conversation has moved on a bit but I just wanted to say that I agree. The heresy series has been in my life for a decent amount of time now (although not as long as some of you), through major life changes and all the time in between. Thinking that it will be over at some point (2, 3 books later, whatever it is) makes me a little melancholic, especially when the newer series haven't grabbed me in the same way.

I hope it isn’t so much the end as much as the major conclusion. Meaning I hope other stories will be told but put in more like how 40K books are.

And I hope they explore GC legions. I would love to see Revenant Legion stories, or stories in the transition from the Eaters of the Dead to the Blood Angels.