Blurring between Firstborn and Primaris incoming with 10th?

[Orange Knight]

19 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

It's really not, and it is kind of weird to me that this is where your head is at on the term.

 

In human traditions the first born child typically inherits the responsibility and family honours of a distinguished line. The first-born son of a King inherits the crown.

 

First: foremost in position, rank, or importance.

"the doctor's first duty is to respect this right"

Similar: Principal, Greatest, Highest, Paramount

 

In the bible, "First-Born" is the title given to Jesus himself, so the term carries some weighty history.

 

In some recent lore the old Marines have been referred to as "Thin-Bloods" due to the degrading gene-seed prior to the introduction of Primaris. Would you refer to them as such?

 

Language carries meaning. 40k appeals to a lot of people with an interest in history and theology. The whole setting references ancient history through it's names and themes, and even the story. It's absurd to tell someone not to associate a historically relevant term with it's use in regards to the 40k setting, and I will go as far as saying that people are wholly aware of this, hence it's main use by proponents of the Primaris.

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Orange Knight

[DesuVult]

19 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

In human traditions the first born child typically inherits the responsibility and family honours of a a distinguished line. The first-born son of a King inherits the crown.

 

First: foremost in position, rank, or importance.

"the doctor's first duty is to respect this right"

Similar: Principal, Greatest, Highest, Paramount

 

 

In some recent lore the old Marines have been referred to as "Thin-Bloods" due to the degrading gene-seed prior to the introduction of Primaris. Would you refer to them as such?

 

 

Okay?  To me they seem to be called firstborn because initially some people came up with terms like "marinelet" that were a bit odd to use in conversation without potentially coming off as insulting.  The idea of the term being used as a point of inheritance never crossed my mind because I don't see it as being relevant to them versus primaris.  I never considered it as one versus the other inheriting.

 

GW does use the term as well, in the preview which showed the terminators they used the term at 1:11:34.

Edited April 6, 2023 by DesuVult

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

Let me draw a parallel for you that might make this a lot easier to understand.

 

The powers of (Cawl) can make you bigger, faster, stronger, better. (Cawl) can empower your weapons, grant you the strength beyond your current lesser existance. All you have to do, is agree to let (Cawl) reach inside your body and change you.

 

Now replace Cawl with Chaos.

 

Cute, right?

 

The thing is, Firstborn are better. They are the ones who have fought for 10,000 years to keep the empire together, facing down their twisted brothers, Ork WAAAGHs, Tyranid invasions, all of it. A 1,000 year old Sigismund did a better job at gutting Abadon than Primaris Papa Smerf, and was given more respect while doing it. 98 percent of interesting Primaris characters in the lore started as firstborn, and that's me giving a generous 2 percent for characters I might not have seen, because surely they must be out there. 

I don't particularly care that GW has slowly rolled back the lore on the Rubrican until everyone can cross it with no risk and get these oh so powerful new organs. It's just flavorless flaxid chaos-style temptation with none of the style dreamed up by some moron in GW who had no idea what they were doing.

 

 

Firstborn don't need some special reason for existing as a unit. There are 10,000 years of history there. These are the guys that have lived 500 years and killed everything that got in their way. They're great on their own merits and do not need Cawl's gifts. 'But you could be so much stronger and faster and more complete! Don't you want power? You know you want power!' No. Hericy. Cut that out.

 

[Orange Knight]

@DesuVult

 

Let's not kid ourselves. The term is a clever one, and it's use and meaning are intentional. 

 

GW themselves do not use it, outside of a single reference in a novel. The term "Thin-blood" is referenced more. (The community might use it, but they also use many terms and descriptions that would not make the official lore in a codex or novel).

 

Why not called them MkI Marines, or Primogenitor Marines?

 

If we want Primaris and classic Marines to be more closely associated, the Firstborn term also has to be dropped. It creates a divide as much as Primaris does.

 

@Marshal Valkenhayn

 

By your logic the Thunder Warriors are better than the classic Marines. Without them the Emeperor never would have unified Terra and been able to even launch the Crusade.

 

My old car served me for years before I replaced it with a newer model that has more power and fuel efficiency. 

 

You forget a simple truth of the setting. The Marine are biological weapons, same as the Primarchs. 

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Orange Knight

[Kallas]

2 minutes ago, DesuVult said:

It's really not, and it is kind of weird to me that this is where your head is at on the term.

OK will take every opportunity to promote Primaris and diminish Firstborn because they are as militant as any Firstborn proponent. Even ignoring the hypocrisy in claiming "Firstborn" is a heirarchical name when "Primaris" includes the whole 'prime' intention within it to indicate that they are superior.

 

It's always been the case that those who want Firstborn to remain want to do it for personal reasons (eg, they prefer the lore before Primaris, or they do not like the way Primaris operate either on table or lore, or both, etc). Aside from a few points made with the intent of highlighting that removing stuff is not enjoyable (ie, suggesting Primaris get removed instead: Primaris proponents kick up a massive stink but care not about suggesting the opposite), I highly doubt that any is actually suggesting getting rid of Primaris now that they're here and have been for several years; instead, people like OK want to remove Firstborn so that they get more stuff in their own preferred design, and damn anyone else.

  

2 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

In human traditions the first born child typically inherits the responsibility and family honours of a a distinguished line. The first-born son of a King inherits the crown.

 

First: foremost in position, rank, or importance.

"the doctor's first duty is to respect this right"

Similar: Principal, Greatest, Highest, Paramount

 

In some recent lore the old Marines have been referred to as "Thin-Bloods" due to the degrading gene-seed prior to the introduction of Primaris. Would you refer to them as such?

 

Language carries meaning. 40k appeals to a lot of people with an interest in history and theology. The whole setting references ancient history through it's names and themes, and even the story. It's absurd to tell someone not to associate a historically relevant term with it's use in regards to the 40k setting, and I will go as far as saying that people are wholly aware of this, hence it's main use by proponents of the Primaris.

So there is a firstborn ("A firstborn (also known as an eldest child or sometimes firstling) is the first child born to in the birth order of a couple through childbirth. Historically, the role of the firstborn child has been socially significant, particularly for a firstborn son in patriarchal societies.") and also the primogeniture ("Primogeniture is the right, by law or custom, of the firstborn legitimate child to inherit the parent's entire or main estate in preference to shared inheritance among all or some children, any illegitimate child or any collateral relative.")

 

The Primogentor is also a term well established in 40k as the Second Founding Chapters from the Ultramarines, and have a similar root to the above terms in relation to lineage/blood. Much like Primarch includes the 'Prim/prime' part, and are the Emperor's sons; the Astartes (of all stripes) are the sons of the Primarchs. This is pretty standard stuff that's been in the lore for decades. The Firstborn are those who were the first born sons of the Primarchs (ie, they are the ones using the first Astartes methods of creation; not the Thunder Warriors who did not have the same Progenoids and such). They are the ones that came first. They were made - born - first. Primaris were not first, hence why they're not Firstborn.

 

So in some ways, yes, it is heirarchical, because that's how lineage works. The problem is that you're saying it's a "snide title" to try to diminish Primaris. It's simply just an accurate statement, and one that GW has used. As for "Thin-Bloods" - that definitely sounds like a derogatory term, one specifically made to deride, and one whose accuracy depends on the degradation of the lineage: Ultramarines have typically had a strong geneseed with little degradation; others like the Imperial Fists have lost certain implants (eg, Betcher's Gland) but they are still stable. 

 

Fundamentally, it comes down to you, Orange Knight, not liking anything taking away from your Primaris. That's the long and short of it. You want Primaris, only Primaris, to be featured. We know this, and it's fine for you to want that, but understand it's the persistent approach that Primaris are better in every way (which is very much a subjective opinion) and that everyone should embrace them happily and accept losing their units to become Primaris which is harmful to the community in general. 

 

  

1 minute ago, Orange Knight said:

If we want Primaris and classic Marines to be more closely associated, the Firstborn term also has to be dropped. It creates a divide as much as Primaris does.

I've seen some bad hot takes, but this one is hilariously bad. The only reason the Firstborn term even exists is because Primaris created it. Literally every divisive issue is because of the mere existence of Primaris. Before Primaris, Firstborn were just called Space Marines.

[DesuVult]

Just now, Orange Knight said:

@DesuVult

 

Let's not kid ourselves. The term is a clever one, and it's use and meaning are intentional. 

 

GW themselves do not use it, outside of a single reference in a novel. The term "Thin-blood" is referenced more. 

 

Why not called them MkI Marines, or Primogenitor Marines?

 

If we want Primaris and classic Marines to be more closely associated, the Firstborn term also has to be dropped. It creates a divide as much as Primaris does.

 

 

Mk1 Marines is odd since primaris aren't called mk2 and could cause confusion with thunder warriors.  Primogenitor Marines is weird to say and spell in regular conversation.  Why do you keep saying "thin-bloods"?  I expect firstborn to be dropped as well as primaris.  The term only came up to differentiate them from primaris.  Before the term became popular it was a bit odd to discuss the topic because there wasn't an effective term to use.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

The term Firstborn shows up in several novels, actually. It's been adopted into the lore officially for a little while now. Think the last mention of it I saw was in Helbrecht: Knight Of The Throne, though that book had some pretty cringy bits about Helbrecth mentioning how much more Complete he felt. It also went out of its way to mention that Firstborn and Primaris were effectively equals now, with greater experience making up for extra physical ability.

 

Mind you, none of the above are things I particularly like, but they are the facts and what is written in that novel. 

[Crimson Longinus]

I really don't care about the distinction in the lore. Primaris marines just look a ton better and all I want is the keyword to go away so that I can put the primaris in old school transports (drop pods in particular.)

 

The new terminators are an interesting step, as they eliminate the difference. But what I think will be more indicative of how the things will be handled in the future is the "primaris sternguard" featured in the trailer. Will there still be separate entries for them and the OG sternguard or will there just be one unit entry?

 

Marine roster certainly bloated beyond belief, so some consolidation probably needs to happen sooner or later.

[Orange Knight]

5 minutes ago, Crimson Longinus said:

I really don't care about the distinction in the lore. Primaris marines just look a ton better and all I want is the keyword to go away so that I can put the primaris in old school transports (drop pods in particular.)

 

The new terminators are an interesting step, as they eliminate the difference. But what I think will be more indicative of how the things will be handled in the future is the "primaris sternguard" featured in the trailer. Will there still be separate entries for them and the OG sternguard or will there just be one unit entry?

 

Marine roster certainly bloated beyond belief, so some consolidation probably needs to happen sooner or later.

 

They'll probably have a weird name like "Boltguard Veterans" lol

[Marshal Reinhard]

I have spent the past 6 years not using the FB word because to me the firstborn in 40k refer to these guys

 

And only them.

[WARMASTER_]

11 hours ago, Blindhamster said:

Doesn’t make it a firstborn one either. Is the point.

 

it’s just terminators

 

p.s. I’m not invested in firstborn going away, I’m invested in it all just being marines again, so labelling things as one or the other is what I’m invested in avoiding (and so are GW apparently)

It really does though in real world terms as I’ve said before there’s a clear design distinction between the two lines and GW arbitrarily saying Primaris can wear the armour doesn't negate that fact 

 

I actually agree with you, having the “Primaris” x “Firstborn” divide was silly from the start, GW should have just called them the evolution of the model range rather than hammering home in the lore these are a new breed super duper Space Marines that are way bigger, stronger, faster with extra super special organs etc but unfortunately they did. It was clearly a tricky decision on their part and they tried to appease the most amount of people by upsetting the least amount possible… but here we are 5/6 years later and there’s definitely a clear distinction both in the model range design and lore that can’t be waved away by saying Primaris can now wear “x” armour and a Keyword change 

 

So while you can say they’re just Terminators, they’re also still a “FB” kit in the fact they they share no meaningful design ethos of the Primaris range and can used through the entire history of 40K lore from the Siege onwards something that can’t be said for a “Primaris” kit which a only valid for use since the opening of the Rift 

 

 

[Orange Knight]

I think we can all agree GW weren't as delicate as they could have been, and the introduction was extremely sudden.

 

Their biggest foible was the keyword divide. It really carved in stone the separation between the ranges, and went as far as making the two lines feel like two separate factions.

 

I am also fully on board with the Astartes modifying and fitting some of the most venerable wargear so it can be used by the Primaris. I feel this kind of thing should have been done sooner, or at the least explained in the lore.

I have no issue with Intercessors operating slightly differently from Tactical Marines, this could be easily explained in the lore as Guilliman updating the codex - something which has taken place, but the updated Veteran units should have come earlier, at some point during 9th.

[Blindhamster]

1 hour ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

That feeling of annoyance you're experiencing is what every truly loyal Space Marine fan has been feeling since GW decided to pull Cawl's pre-packaged frozen super marines out of their butt and tell us that 'No for real they're actually better in every way.'

sorry that’s utter crap as an assertion and just helps reinforce the issue of supposed superiority - you’re not even talking about the little toy soldiers or the fantasy super men, you’re actively targeting the people that love the hobby.

 

as someone that has been in the hobby for over 25 years and been a space marine fan for all of that, I take honest and justified offence at the assertion that me liking primaris someone makes me not a true fan.

 

That said, your final point that there isn’t a primaris marine on the level of skill as sigismund is true, 100%, that said there isn’t a firstborn like sigismund, he was one of a kind (as much as a fictional hero can be anyway) 

[Marshal Reinhard]

I feel like part of the discussion here can be summed as:

 

"Terminators are a classic kit, it belongs to them! Be grateful primaris wretches, you were arbitrarily allowed to share in their classic glory" vs "Classic marines just lost exclusive ownership of terminators, and they chalk it up as a win"

 

Neccessary disclaimer: The above is aimed at noone in particular as it does not accurately reflect the nuances or measuredness of any one poster or reply in particular, but rather is a by the author percieved amalgation of the arguments made by the sides in general. 

 

But I'm myopic so feel free to disregard.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

 

 

That feeling of annoyance you're experiencing is what every truly loyal Space Marine fan has been feeling since GW decided to pull Cawl's pre-packaged frozen super marines out of their butt and tell us that 'No for real they're actually better in every way.' But there is no Primaris Sigismund, and there never will be. 

 

Truly loyal fan... Does RT Crimson Fists count LOL.

[Lord_Ikka]

 

=][= As a warning to no one in particular, personal attacks are against forum rules. Keep it on topic and appropriate. Constructive arguments are fine, but make sure they stay constructive. =][=

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by Lord_Ikka

[Marshal Reinhard]

Had Sigismund been alive in the Era Indomitus he would have beaten Calgar as the first existing marine to cross the Rubicon primaris.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

9 minutes ago, Blindhamster said:

sorry that’s utter crap as an assertion and just helps reinforce the issue of supposed superiority - you’re not even talking about the little toy soldiers or the fantasy super men, you’re actively targeting the people that love the hobby.

 

as someone that has been in the hobby for over 25 years and been a space marine fan for all of that, I take honest and justified offence at the assertion that me liking primaris someone makes me not a true fan.

 

That said, your final point that there isn’t a primaris marine on the level of skill as sigismund is true, 100%, that said there isn’t a firstborn like sigismund, he was one of a kind (as much as a fictional hero can be anyway) 

 

You are a fan. None of us would be here if we weren't. But if you enjoy Primaris lore you're also a traitor. If you support the newer, bigger and supposedly better things that Cawl has created, you are part of the Primaris Hericy. It does not matter why you have turned your back on the Emperor's true angels, only that you have.

 

I've chosen to see it like this because it's honestly more fun to be fired up in a way that parallels our toy soldiers than to be actually bitter as a human. As much as I rant and show my zeal on this forum I'm not starting fist fights in the parking lot of my LGS. I do think the divide was an idiotic choice, and the blatent shilling has turned me off from finishing books I've bought, pushed me away from buying models, etc. It hasn't ruined any friendships though, and it's not going to ruin this hobby for me.

 

[Orange Knight]

1 hour ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

That feeling of annoyance you're experiencing is what every truly loyal Space Marine fan has been feeling since GW decided to pull Cawl's pre-packaged frozen super marines out of their butt and tell us that 'No for real they're actually better in every way.' But there is no Primaris Sigismund, and there never will be. 

 

I actually completely missed this statement when I skimmed over the topic.

 

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I bring up the superiority complex and smugness I can sense when people use the term "Firstborn". I understand that the Primaris were upsetting to some, but there is far too much sniping like this directed at people who have embraced them.

I have been in this hobby for 27 years. I have collected over a dozen armies, and have probably bought more classic Marine models over the last 12 months than anyone else on this forum. I have never accused a hobbyist of not being a "true fan" because they haven't embraced something.

 

This kind of negativity and sniping, something which I made a topic about years ago when I first joined this forum, is what have gradually driven me into my current stance. I was on the fence for 4 of the last 6 years, but it became apparent that there are people in the community who will not compromise on their views and refuse to see the bigger picture beyond their own immediate interest (could apply to many things, not just this topic).

 

I'm sorry, but collecting Primaris does not make me or anyone else a lesser fan, or a person who doesn't have an equally valid investment in the lore. I happen to like Primaris a lot more that the classic 40k Marines due to their looks, and the way they mirror the 30k Legion units more closely. This opinion is as valid as any other.

[DesuVult]

8 minutes ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

 

You are a fan. None of us would be here if we weren't. But if you enjoy Primaris lore you're also a traitor. If you support the newer, bigger and supposedly better things that Cawl has created, you are part of the Primaris Hericy. It does not matter why you have turned your back on the Emperor's true angels, only that you have.

 

I've chosen to see it like this because it's honestly more fun to be fired up in a way that parallels our toy soldiers than to be actually bitter as a human. As much as I rant and show my zeal on this forum I'm not starting fist fights in the parking lot of my LGS. I do think the divide was an idiotic choice, and the blatent shilling has turned me off from finishing books I've bought, pushed me away from buying models, etc. It hasn't ruined any friendships though, and it's not going to ruin this hobby for me.

 

Calling people a traitor I do not expect to end well.

 

8 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

 

I actually completely missed this statement when I skimmed over the topic.

 

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I bring up the superiority complex and smugness I can sense when people use the term "Firstborn". I understand that the Primaris were upsetting to some, but there is far too much sniping like this directed at people who have embraced them.

I have been in this hobby for 27 years. I have collected over a dozen armies, and have probably bought more classic Marine models over the last 12 months than anyone else on this forum. I have never accused a hobbyist of not being a "true fan" because they haven't embraced something.

 

This kind of negativity and sniping, something which I made a topic about years ago when I first joined this forum, is what have gradually driven me into my current stance. I was on the fence for 4 of the last 6 years, but it became apparent that there are people in the community who will not compromise on their views and refuse to see the bigger picture beyond their own immediate interest (could apply to many things, not just this topic).

 

I'm sorry, but collecting Primaris does not make me or anyone else a lesser fan, or a person who doesn't have an equally valid investment in the lore. I happen to like Primaris a lot more that the classic 40k Marines due to their looks, and the way they mirror the 30k Legion units more closely. This opinion is as valid as any other.

There is no sense of smugness from using "firstborn."  You made a Jesus comparison earlier in the thread and then ignored every reasonable response on the topic to focus on the one guy likely to be given a vacation from the thread.  You say there are people who won't compromise on their views but where is your compromise when you won't even engage in discussion with people except to claim you are under attack?

Edited April 6, 2023 by DesuVult

[Crimson Longinus]

7 minutes ago, Marshal Valkenhayn said:

 

You are a fan. None of us would be here if we weren't. But if you enjoy Primaris lore you're also a traitor. If you support the newer, bigger and supposedly better things that Cawl has created, you are part of the Primaris Hericy. It does not matter why you have turned your back on the Emperor's true angels, only that you have.

 

 

Personally I think that anyone who plays any marines that are not Rogue Trader beakies is a traitor. ;)

 

 

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

3 minutes ago, Crimson Longinus said:

 

Personally I think that anyone who plays any marines that are not Rogue Trader beakies is a traitor. ;)

 

 

 

I don't like the beaky helmets. Fight me old timer.

 

But seriously, and without my usual half joking grand standing:

 

I'm not trying to actually offend anyone here. I'm if I've been a bit too heavy handed with the ribbing and sarcasm. This is for anyone in this or similar forums who I've actually hurt. I tend not to take things on forums like this very seriously, and that can and does color my responses a lot.

[Orange Knight]

@DesuVult

 

I don't claim I'm under attack. I'm saying there is negative sniping. By the way, I have been guilty of riling up individuals myself - I'm sure everyone has done this at some pint.

 

To clarify, I lurked on this forum for years before I officially joined. For around 3 years after I joined, I had a more neutrall stance on the Primaris Vs Firstborn discussion, even though I personally do collect and like the Primaris. I think that some viewpoints are so entrenched and eternally negative towards the new models and lore that it made my own position a lot more singular as time went on.

[Marshal Valkenhayn]

Tried to write 'I'm sorry' in the above post, and for some reason this new forum hides the edit button from me. The sorry is missing and I can't put it in there.

[DesuVult]

9 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

@DesuVult

 

I don't claim I'm under attack. I'm saying there is negative sniping. By the way, I have been guilty of riling up individuals myself - I'm sure everyone has done this at some pint.

 

To clarify, I lurked on this forum for years before I officially joined. For around 3 years after I joined, I had a more neutrall stance on the Primaris Vs Firstborn discussion, even though I personally do collect and like the Primaris. I think that some viewpoints are so entrenched and eternally negative towards the new models and lore that it made my own position a lot more singular as time went on.

Your posts assert you feel firstborn is an insult.  You call it a snide title and say it has intentional meaning, then make references to Jesus and inheritance where "firstborn" is important.  You just stated that you can sense smugness and superiority behind it.  The way you brought that up, dodged a series of responses on the topic, and then shortly after brought it back up makes it appear to me that it is a sore spot to you and even potentially targetted given your previous statement that is is "clever."

Edited April 6, 2023 by DesuVult