GW, BL and the End of Things

[chevalierdulys]

Probably going a bit off topic - but its connected with this novel at the same time...The imperium is probably in it's weakest spot since M32 (war of the beast) probably even worse than that. Probably only comparable with the  heresy. We are talking about a divided imperium. The chaos gods are doing some strange stuff and even that fleet change sides (I think I am n ot mistaken) BUT in all honestly. What can two primarch do against all of them? IT's not just chaos, it's everyone else are against you. You lose half the imperium in one go - so half the manpower, half the fighting force etc (I don't know it's half, just assuming). Okay but they have two primarchs. Are they really a game changer? Are they as powerful as chaos gods that destroys armadas/turn an entire fleet to chaos. I think the imperium really needs something if GW wants the imperium to survive. They cannot start another 13th black crusade situation for decades  with really no plot development. Finally they advance but the imperium if it was screw now is screw times 4 or 5. What can save the Imperium? More Primarchs? The Emperor? Deus Ex Machina?

[b1soul]

What can save the Imperium is GW not writing a plotline about the fall of the Imperium.

 

In-universe, there could be multiple reasons why the Imperium doesn't totally collapse. Historically, they could take inspiration from how the Eastern Roman Empire outlasted the Western Roman Empire by many centuries (for 40K, scale that up to many millennia).

[Scribe]

21 minutes ago, b1soul said:

What can save the Imperium is GW not writing a plotline about the fall of the Imperium.

 

In-universe, there could be multiple reasons why the Imperium doesn't totally collapse. Historically, they could take inspiration from how the Eastern Roman Empire outlasted the Western Roman Empire by many centuries (for 40K, scale that up to many millennia).

 

There is no scenario where the Imperium does not fall. It would be the most comical plot armour, poorest possible writing, most amateur hour take possible.

[b1soul]

Why would GW end the setting unless it stops being profitable.

 

They could even have the Imperium lose Nihilus but cling on to Sanctus for a few extra millennia, but not have "current" 40K ever reach that end-point in our real world timeline

[chevalierdulys]

I don't know about you guys but I've been playing since I was teens. I Am now at my fourties.. Don't you ever thing, wish to see the end by my end? :P

[Nagashsnee]

4 hours ago, chevalierdulys said:

I don't know about you guys but I've been playing since I was teens. I Am now at my fourties.. Don't you ever thing, wish to see the end by my end? :P

No, if i had any power/say in the manner i would want to leave a hobby that is better in rules/lore/price then the one that gave me joy for my own 18ish years in the hobby. Rather then say well i got mine forget the younguns lets BLOW IT ALL UP. 

 

 

Edited April 19, 2023 by Brother Tyler

[Karhedron]

2 hours ago, chevalierdulys said:

I don't know about you guys but I've been playing since I was teens. I Am now at my fourties.. Don't you ever thing, wish to see the end by my end? :P

 

I am in the same boat and I am glad to see GW advancing the meta-plot. From 4th-7th editions it felt like stagnation with the plot frozen at the culmination of the 13th Black Crusade. GW activating some of their plot hooks like returning Primarchs and the birth of Ynnead has breathed some much need new life into the setting.

 

Having said that, I don't want to see it end. The final fall or triumph of the Imperium would mean an end to the setting. 40K is not just an ongoing storyline, it is also the shared backdrop against which our battles are fought. I kind of lost interest in Fantsay when GW killed the Old World and I have never really been able to get into AoS. I like the setting progressing but I don't want it to actually reach its conclusion.

 

The real-world reason that the Imperium won't fall is that GW don't want to kill off their cash cow. Fantasy sales had fallen to a fraction of 40K sales when they introduced The End Times so it was a slightly different situation. If you want in-universe reasons for the Imperium not to fall then there are plenty.

1. The Imperium's enemies are just as happy to fight each other as the Imperium. A good example of this is Hive Fleet Leviathan getting bogged down fighting Orks in Octarius.
2. Two of the Imperium's biggest weaknesses are ignorance and fractured institutions. Primarchs are some of the few characters who have the power, intelligence and authority to fix some of these problems. The fall of Cadia and the opening of the Great Rift could have been a death blow to the Imperium but the return of Guilliman and the launching of the Indomitus Crusade held the line. The Imperium is just barely clinging on but that has been the state of 40K lore practically since forever. That is the real value of Primarchs, they are not just impressive fighters or even tacticians. They are strategists on a grand scale and can turn the tides of wars, not just battles. They were built for the Great Crusade and the challenges of the 42nd millennium are their natural habitat, however dismayed they may be by the state of the Imperium.
3. The Imperium's enemies have self-destructive tendencies. The Necrons could have ruled the Galaxy but after the Great Sleep they are riven with madness and intercene conflict. Orks and Chaos readily turn on themselves in the absence of an external foe. In the case of Chaos, the big 4 regard each other as existential threats as great as the Emperor. Only the Tyrannids are really united in their objectives.

[Scribe]

12 hours ago, b1soul said:

Why would GW end the setting unless it stops being profitable.

 

They could even have the Imperium lose Nihilus but cling on to Sanctus for a few extra millennia, but not have "current" 40K ever reach that end-point in our real world timeline

 

Nobody is suggesting they end the setting, but if the timeline is extrapolated, the Imperium dies.

 

That's as basic a fact as we have in the setting.

[Arkangilos]

4 hours ago, Scribe said:

Nobody is suggesting they end the setting, but if the timeline is extrapolated, the Imperium dies.

I don’t think so. 
 

Like was mentioned above you have the western and eastern Roman empires (though in this case the Western Imperium is the Eastern Roman Empire).

 

The imperium in the East literally has already fallen, but it lives on in name (like the Holy Roman Empire), with a figurehead being the regent Dante (Holy Roman Emperor).

 

In the West you have the Emperor and Guilliman (who is like Justinian who tried to reclaim western Rome post fall, with Belisarius, Justininian’s general, which is imo the inspiration behind Belisarius Cawl).

 

So let’s say the Imperium Sanctus falls. Technically the imperium does fall, but you would still have the Nihilus pretending to be the Imperium still going, like the Holy Roman Empire. 
 

In that case, the Imperium can fall, but it would still exist in name. It just becomes far more feudal. 
 

20 hours ago, chevalierdulys said:

so half the manpower,

To be fair, the imperium never had full use of its manpower. Most of the time regiments were from neighboring areas. So in the galactic north you wouldn’t see hardly anyone from the middle or south of the galaxy. 
 

The only real change is that they lost half the territory under direct control. 

[Scribe]

16 minutes ago, Arkangilos said:

I don’t think so. 
 

Like was mentioned above you have the western and eastern Roman empires (though in this case the Western Imperium is the Eastern Roman Empire).

 

The imperium in the East literally has already fallen, but it lives on in name (like the Holy Roman Empire), with a figurehead being the regent Dante (Holy Roman Emperor).

 

In the West you have the Emperor and Guilliman (who is like Justinian who tried to reclaim western Rome post fall, with Belisarius, Justininian’s general, which is imo the inspiration behind Belisarius Cawl).

 

So let’s say the Imperium Sanctus falls. Technically the imperium does fall, but you would still have the Nihilus pretending to be the Imperium still going, like the Holy Roman Empire. 
 

In that case, the Imperium can fall, but it would still exist in name. It just becomes far more feudal. 
 

To be fair, the imperium never had full use of its manpower. Most of the time regiments were from neighboring areas. So in the galactic north you wouldn’t see hardly anyone from the middle or south of the galaxy. 
 

The only real change is that they lost half the territory under direct control. 

 

Sure, and "Cadia Stands."

 

It's practical ability to exist, on a long enough time frame, is still 0. Thats core, central, absolute bedrock of the setting kind of truth.

[DarkChaplain]

44 minutes ago, Scribe said:

It's practical ability to exist, on a long enough time frame, is still 0. Thats core, central, absolute bedrock of the setting kind of truth.

 

You could say the same about Chaos, Eldar, Tyranids, Necrons, every living thing in the galaxy. Because at some point far enough down the road, the heatdeath of the universe will see everything come to naught.

 

Everything dies, eventually, for one reason or another.

 

Talking about these timeframes is practically pointless, because it's so far beyond human comprehension, with so many changes and developments along the way, that what actually ends up "dying" is almost entirely different from what we're talking about right now. Especially now that the Imperium is in turmoil and actually changing in ways it hasn't done since its inception.

 

It's not the same Imperium it was before the Rift, but it's even further away from the Imperium it was during the Age of Apostasy, or the War of the Beast, or the Scouring, or the Heresy, or the Great Crusade. Terra alone has gone through so many revisions through the millennia, there's basically nothing left to it that was alive during the pre-Unification era, aside from the Emperor. Even the Custodes now are way different from back then - and we know there are survivors of the Great Crusade era (see: The Iron Kingdom's Vychellan, who talks about having known the Emperor "as a man").

 

At the end of the day it'd even be preposterous to consider this stage of the Imperium still "the same" Imperium, and we have no way of knowing where it'll end up by the time of its eventual demise - or if it can't evolve to a point where the current threats of Chaos and the Nids are no longer threatening as such.

 

The victory of Chaos might be inevitable - but that's still subject to the Imperium remaining largely stagnant, fighting a war of attrition.

Guilliman and now the Lion are breaking out of that attitude of "just holding on as long as possible" and changing the dynamics of the galaxy. We no longer have a system that outlaws any sort of innovation for ten millennia, but one that's started driving forward military innovation and reexamines strategy to better meet the foes of the 41st Millennium - whereas before Guilliman's return, the Imperium was still waging the same war it always had for the last 8 or so millennia, despite new threats appearing literally during the last 500 years, who the old doctrines no longer worked against (see: Nids, Necrons).

 

What spelled the "inevitable" doom of the Imperium wasn't that Chaos is unbeatable, or that it's somehow human destiny - it's that it was unwilling or incapable of changing, of adjusting to the times. This is no longer set in stone. It is changing, it has changed, and it's now a matter of whether it can change fast enough and learn the right lessons quickly enough.

The Emperor failed not simply because Chaos is inevitable, but because - according to multiple sources now - he was being impatient and overreached instead of taking every step as carefully as needed. He had his hands in too many projects at once, without being able to give any of them the attention it actually needed, and his house of cards fell together. He had others, like Erda, cautioning him about this stuff happening. He had others trying to pick up the pieces along the way, but those were at best bandaid fixes.

It wasn't that Chaos was inevitably winning, it was that he thought he was ready to play the long con when he clearly wasn't, and ended up being overtaken by developments, making things up as he went along, pursuing a grand scheme that he could no longer satisfy the demands of.

 

Chaos is one of humanity's most pressing problems, yes. But it's being helped along by the choices of individuals, systemic failures and complacency. It's not inherently destined to be victorious before the heatdeath of the universe. It's sentient beings speeding it up or slowing it down through their actions, inaction and spiritualism.

[EverythingIsGreat]

Good day,

 

I don't know if it makes a lot of sense for GW to kill the Imperium, but if could be a possibility. The disappearance of a faction, even the major one, doesn't mean that the universe will disappear, or that it will be the end of the wargame. There can be several plausible wargaming scenatios in a post-Imperium WH40K. Which means there can be plausible book plotlines.

But there are many possible scenarios where the Imperium survives, perhaps even triumphs. The most intriguing development for me business-wise are the rare references to extra-galactic doings. From the origin of the tyranids, to references that the Emperor had designs beyond the galaxy after it became an undisputed Imperial domain, etc.

 

Everything is great!

[EverythingIsGreat]

DarkChaplain posted at the same time as I did, so my remarks are on a follow-on post. The in-universe analysis is very good. One caveat: GW uses Chaos to push all kinds of "irrational" or unexplained situations across their properties. As Chaos' origin is sentient realspace life, presumably chaos-induced entropy in realspace will eventually starve chaos to extinction. That would be the true end of Warhammer as a concept. But in the meantime GW can blindside everybody with all kinds of novel chaotic doings that have little connection to WH40K as we know it. Why not? Chaos is irrational or non-rational, see? Can't explain chaotic stuff. I'm not pointing out anything new, but it is good to keep in mind that any future WH40K scenarios do not have to necessarily make sense to us now.

[Scribe]

If they were going to end the setting. The Imperium would be eaten.

 

This isnt to suggest that they will do so, or that the other factions will 'win'. Thats not the point.

 

The point is that the central premise of the setting, is that these are the 'last days of humanity'. A dark age to end all dark ages. The end of it all. When the monsters are breaking down the door, and we cannot even get our house in order.

 

Thats about as immutable a point as it gets, and if its NOT that, the day GW loses their minds and changes that, is the day it ceases to be 40K.

[Roomsky]

Relating back to the Lion, this is one of the reasons I chafe against "advancing the story" so much. 40k wasn't "who knows what will happen next?" before Guilliman revived. 40k WAS the end times, literally the time of ending. The reason the timeline only extended to Abaddon's 13th Black Crusade is because that is where the Imperium as the setting knows it ends. Maybe Abaddon wins. Maybe he loses and the galaxy is eaten by Nids before anyone can recover. Maybe the Necrons appear everywhere, maybe the Imperium somehow balkanizes. Maybe Orks. Part of 40ks charm was the inescapable spiral towards doom that was the backdrop. And that doom was a certainty.

 

That's kind of gone now. The trappings remain, but corporate interests have turned towards "whatever advancement of the metaplot sells will come to pass." I know it's the Doylist answer which is often unhelpful but theory-crafting about what comes next is just pointless, to me. The setting doesn't matter anymore, its rules, its mechanics, and certainly not its themes. GW decided the Lion will sell, and wants to keep the same "Imperium against the galaxy" status quo. So that's what it'll be, past works be damned. If GW decides Ferrus will sell, they'll grow him a new body. If they decide Horus will sell, they'll rebuild his soul. If they decide Sanguinius will sell, he'll pop back into existence with barely an explanation.

 

Like, mega kudos to the BL authors, they have been CARRYING the fluff from the recent editions, reframing all this ill-planned sillyness into something very much 40k. But that the studio would have outlined anything about the Lion's return that really carried on from where he was at the end of the Heresy series was 100% naivety (which I shared in!) GW said "we're bringing the Lion back, and he's ashamed of his past" and that's now the truth. Everyone fire up those novels, the BL writers will figure out how it makes sense.

 

Again, I enjoy the books. I'm sure I'll continue to do so. But the quality of these novels is often in spite of the fluff at this point, not a result of it.

[Scribe]

2 minutes ago, Roomsky said:

Like, mega kudos to the BL authors, they have been CARRYING the fluff from the recent editions, reframing all this ill-planned sillyness into something very much 40k. But that the studio would have outlined anything about the Lion's return that really carried on from where he was at the end of the Heresy series was 100% naivety (which I shared in!) GW said "we're bringing the Lion back, and he's ashamed of his past" and that's now the truth. Everyone fire up those novels, the BL writers will figure out how it makes sense.

 

Again, I enjoy the books. I'm sure I'll continue to do so. But the quality of these novels is often in spite of the fluff at this point, not a result of it.

 

Absolutely, and this is exactly what I mean when I say GW Studio, is inferior. BL (and FW) have carried them out of the fire way too many times to count.

 

Hell, the Vaults of Terra storyline was a blurb out of the Ad Mech Codex!

[EverythingIsGreat]

1 hour ago, Scribe said:

 

Absolutely, and this is exactly what I mean when I say GW Studio, is inferior. BL (and FW) have carried them out of the fire way too many times to count.

 

Hell, the Vaults of Terra storyline was a blurb out of the Ad Mech Codex!

 

Scribe, in all fairness, wasn't it ever thus? Studio writers have a different remit and scope.

I don't want to argue about semantics, but the "last days of humanity" is not the same as the "last days of the Imperium". Canonically, we are told humanity somehow survived the DAOT AI rebellion and the Old Night, even after the previous human stellar empire collapsed.

 

1 hour ago, Roomsky said:

Relating back to the Lion, this is one of the reasons I chafe against "advancing the story" so much. 40k wasn't "who knows what will happen next?" before Guilliman revived. 40k WAS the end times, literally the time of ending. The reason the timeline only extended to Abaddon's 13th Black Crusade is because that is where the Imperium as the setting knows it ends. Maybe Abaddon wins. Maybe he loses and the galaxy is eaten by Nids before anyone can recover. Maybe the Necrons appear everywhere, maybe the Imperium somehow balkanizes. Maybe Orks. Part of 40ks charm was the inescapable spiral towards doom that was the backdrop. And that doom was a certainty.

 

 

I have not read the book yet, but it is on my list of course. And I agree with the general description of the setting. But I am not sure that doom was certain, except as a typical hyperbolic proclamation. I always saw it as a literal cliffhanger, where the hero is hanging over the precipice thanks to the slimmest of supports. I think the setting ultimately is not about anyone's doom, but about the idea that in the grim darkness of the far future there is only war. Maybe it involves an Imperium. Maybe not.

[Roomsky]

A reasonable take. My focus is more on the fact that the setting wasn't building towards anything. The story was incidental to creating a compelling backdrop, and the beauty of that came from the stories you could tell within those constraints. This was tremendously helpful for a merchandise-driven game, as it organically meant new additions to any faction or model range couldn't suffer from what I'll call "narrative power creep." It didn't need to outdo itself, fluff-wise. If anything, it had to play by the rules because we know the state of the galaxy when the apocalypse starts.

 

But now we're here and the focus is on the shiny new demigods first and the everything else second. I think it's tremendously detrimental to why 40k was so good. With Gaunt's Ghosts, for instance, each new entry only needs to tell a tale that honours what came before. Those stories are (mostly) beholden to character arcs, set-up and payoff, and new elements have ingrained rules to follow. With the Lion coming back, it's "put the new setting-defining piece into play as quickly as possible."  Doesn't matter if characterization suffers or the foundations of the setting are upended, Lion sells so Lion we shall have.

[b1soul]

10 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

Nobody is suggesting they end the setting, but if the timeline is extrapolated, the Imperium dies.

 

That's as basic a fact as we have in the setting.

 

If any timeline is drawn out long enough, things die. Ten thousand years is a blink next to ten million, which is a blink next to ten billion. Even the Necrons are young at higher timescales, and there could be a heat death of the universe billions of years later...though it's interesting to think of what the Emperor intended for human souls in the long run, maybe some sort of eternal ascension into a Calm Warp.

 

As for the guaranteed fall of the Imperium within a relatively human timescale...any fictional IP owned by a company might be revised by that company or whoever acquires that company. Nothing is truly set in stone. That's the reality.

 

As a matter of principle, I'm all for GW showing us how unlikely Imperial victory is (through good story-telling), what I don't support is GW just telling us that "the Imperium must lose" from their position as the IP owner. Show us through organic development of the setting (this is what their writers are for!), don't just tell the fans via some sort of GW decree. 

 

It's like a roleplaying session where the GM just tells the players "oh, by the way, this is how my setting must end". Why do that? Just show the players through your story-telling how macro-events are likely to culminate, how bleak the outlook is. 

 

Just my strong feelings on the matter: show...don't tell

[Scribe]

29 minutes ago, b1soul said:

As a matter of principle, I'm all for GW showing us how unlikely Imperial victory is (through good story-telling), what I don't support is GW just telling us that "the Imperium must lose" from their position as the IP owner. Show us through organic development of the setting (this is what their writers are for!), don't just tell the fans via some sort of GW decree. 

 

They have already done so for decades. This is the end of days. This has been consistently reinforced for quite literally, decades.

[BitsHammer]

14 hours ago, Azoriel said:

This strikes me as being reminiscent of the scene in John Boorman's Excalibur, where young Arthur gives Excalibur over to Uryens, demanding that Uryens knight Arthur so that Uryens can surrender to an equal, and Uryens is so impressed that he does so.  Though I imagine that's precisely what the author was going for.

With other Arthurian references we have in there (such as the Fisher King who shows up in the first chapter and I'm pretty sure is the Emperor in this) I can definitely see that. The Lion doing a King Arthur bit fits in with him sleeping under the Rock and prophesied to return akin to Arthur returning for Britain in it's hour of need. Leans more into the knightly aspects of the Dark Angels than the paranoid aspects.

Edited April 20, 2023 by BitsHammer

[b1soul]

2 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

They have already done so for decades. This is the end of days. This has been consistently reinforced for quite literally, decades.

 

We're all aware of the "minute from midnight" atmosphere the 40K setting is supposed to evoke. The diabolic laughter of thirsting gods and all that. This is grim and dark. This isn't Star Trek where the future is hopeful and bright.

 

But Grimdark tone-setting is different from GW just outright stating that the Imperium is guaranteed to die within a few centuries (maybe millennia) and there is zero probability of any other outcome. Why? Oh...just the will of the Dark Gods in Nottingham.

 

I'm not aware of a GW corporate decree or a declaration by omniscient narrator to that effect. Even a statement like "there is no hope for mankind" in the setting intro could be understood as hyperbolic tone-setting or a description of prevailing attitudes. Yes, you could also read it more aggressively against the Imperium, i.e. imminent and guaranteed collapse. But I'd argue that GW has been careful to leave some room for debate...hence why people continue to debate.

 

To be clear, if I were a betting man, I'd bet against the Imperium surviving for another 10K years. Maybe the chances of that are like my chances of winning the lottery. But the setting works better imo as a setting where hope is shown to be very sparse, not a setting where hope is proclaimed to be nil. 

[Nagashsnee]

3 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

 This is the end of days. 

That time of the millennium already?? 

 

 

For real tho its the end of days whenever GW needs some drama, in universe this is probably the 359 end of days they lived thru. I mean the war of the beast probably did more damage to the Imperium ( tho it lasted far less time) then the 13th black crusade and the rift ever did.  The age of blood, the nova terra interegrim, etc, etc.

 

The imperium losing 20-50% of its territories has actually happened before.  The issue i have with the end of days statement is its been the end of day once a millennium since the Heresy....which was finally enough the end of days too. 

 

Edited April 20, 2023 by Nagashsnee

[Kelborn]

=][=

 

Have fun discussing the current state, how it will end or not end and GW/ BLs contribution to it.

 

=][=

[EverythingIsGreat]

Good day,

 

There are interviews with Jervis Johnson that were published around the time the first Adeptus Titanicus game was released (1988). Johnson stated then that a "betrayal" scenario like the Horus Heresy was a planned fluff change. Because it had virtually no impact on (costly) Citadel production. The models pre-existed, and players needed, at most, perhaps only a new paint job to have a different army, and expand their play choices away from campaigns against xenos. It was a clever move by GW that became inextricably embedded in the lore, since it affected their entire line of non-xenos miniatures while introducing chaos army lists in 40K.

 

Off the top of my head I can think of several similar possibilities where the "end times" for a certain faction in the current setting is the "beginning times" for another faction in the next setting.

 

Everything is great!