The End and the Death Part I, II, III, ...

[Phoebus]

7 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

As we have seemingly misunderstood eachother before, are you not pointing out exactly what one of the criticisms of this whole thing are?

 

That the people responsible (Abnett) did the square root of nothing to establish a character he has since made pivotal to the single largest event in the entire IP?

 

What I'm saying is that you're more than entitled to not like Olly Piers, but that the relative absence of Ollanius Perrson from the series until Saturnine almost certainly has to do with far more serious issues than Abnett just (paraphrasing here) "dropping the ball"; that Ollanius the Pious is neither here nor there where this discussion is concerned, because the people who ultimately had the final say on whether he should have been included in his original guise or should have featured more in his Persson "evolution" during Abnett's absence ultimately opted to do neither.

 

That last bit is the salient point for me: even if, for the sake of argument, Abnett was a toxic prima donna who just threw his toys in the bin and walked away for no good reason for 3-4 years, there were people who were/are employed by GW/BL for the express purpose of managing this series and ensuring it was of good quality and made sense. That includes having an idea of what the character arcs and plot lines look like across the narrative, even if only in broad strokes.

 

So again, this isn't about absolution or deflection; it's about acknowledging that, unless Abnett's departure was a unilateral one and driven by avoidable problems which he caused, more than one person probably has responsibility for certain things that fans are trying to pin exclusively on the author.

[DarkChaplain]

2 hours ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

Like the moonreaper of abnett

 

I had a good chuckle. You put my irritation earlier into words.

Still scratching my head over the 150 book reading tally while not being a big warhammer reader while only having read it for a few years apparently. There are too many contradictions for me not to want to engage with his posts anymore, and I'd recommend just skipping over them.

 

Generally agree with you, though. Just one correction: The problem with Potter weren't the Horcruxes, but the Hallows :') The Horcruxes were seeded throughout the series, on a re-read there are plenty of hints towards them. The Hallows, though? Completely out of left field in book 7, and the cloak doesn't really make sense with context of the previous six novels.

....yeah, I re-read the entire series back in Jan/Feb, for the first time in well over a decade, and the books still hold up, outside of the Hallows.

 

To get back to TEATD "wrapping up" other characters' plotlines... it'd help if they actually felt like the same characters from even just the preceding book, which for Zephon wasn't the case, and even worse so for Amit, who became strangely polite and non-angry.

 

And then we have aspects like Zahariel donning a silver(?) mask to act as the Lord Cypher, something I don't remember ever having been a thing - in fact, Zahariel recognized the previous Cypher under his hood in Angels of Caliban, when he usurped the role, and in Grey Angel, we're presented with a "Cypher" that Loken recognized, too. Which wouldn't be a thing if they were wearing a silver mask. Or at least the mask would've been remarked on.

 

This isn't even something I necessarily dislike, because it allows Zahariel to play both roles in plain sight without psychic mirages, but it's definitely not jelling with previous depictions, or the future Cypher we know. It's just another element introduced at the finish line, which needed to be introduced earlier to properly work.

 

  

47 minutes ago, Phoebus said:

What I'm saying is that you're more than entitled to not like Olly Piers, but that the relative absence of Ollanius Perrson from the series until Saturnine almost certainly has to do with far more serious issues than Abnett just (paraphrasing here) "dropping the ball"; that Ollanius the Pious is neither here nor there where this discussion is concerned, because the people who ultimately had the final say on whether he should have been included in his original guise or should have featured more in his Persson "evolution" during Abnett's absence ultimately opted to do neither.

 

The problem I have this Olly Piers is quite simple: Abnett pulled a "clever" switcheroo by introducing a character who just so happens to share a very similar name, fulfills a very similar role, but is actually a propaganda protagonist despite another character with a similar name we've had in the series since book 19 already being set up to do the thing from the fluff for realsies.

 

When introduced, Piers even introduces himself as a sort of veteran soldier, comments on the interrogator's youth, etc. For a moment, the reader is intended to think this is the first appearance of Ollanius Persson in the Siege - who last we knew was still MIA and being looked for by Grammaticus, who believed Oll should've arrived already.

 

Ollanius was introduced in Know No Fear as a guard veteran in retirement. A soldier. Even in TEATD itself, he still refers to himself as a soldier. There was no need for Abnett to split this part of the legend of Ollanius the Pious into an Oll who'll be aboard the Vengeful Spirit with the Emperor anyway and one other soldier in the mire who doesn't even go up against a Son of Horus Legionary, but a World Eater/later dies to Angron.

 

It's doubling up on the source of the legend by giving it two origins. It's Abnett winking at the reader, particularly in regards to the name of Olly Piers. This was a deliberate subversion attempt. Had he at least named him Obiwan Sherlock Clousseau or something not similar, separating this propaganda piece of Hari's from Oll himself might've been a cool choice, because in the following years and doctrine picking up on it, it might've been merged back to the memory of Ollanius aboard the Vengeful Spirit, conflating the two.

 

But that conflation of the legend now is preceeded by a deliberate diffusion of the legend just ahead of it. It could have been handled differently, avoiding the pitfalls and the wink at the audience. Heck, as a character, I liked Olly Piers and his role in Saturnine. It was one of my favorite parts of the novel. But it is rooted in Abnett trying to be needlessly tongue in cheek, introducing a substitute character for a known, established role while not touching the established character - of his own making! - at all in the same book.

Edited November 22, 2023 by DarkChaplain

[Scribe]

21 minutes ago, Phoebus said:

 

What I'm saying is that you're more than entitled to not like Olly Piers, but that the relative absence of Ollanius Perrson from the series until Saturnine almost certainly has to do with far more serious issues than Abnett just (paraphrasing here) "dropping the ball"; that Ollanius the Pious is neither here nor there where this discussion is concerned, because the people who ultimately had the final say on whether he should have been included in his original guise or should have featured more in his Persson "evolution" during Abnett's absence ultimately opted to do neither.

 

That last bit is the salient point for me: even if, for the sake of argument, Abnett was a toxic prima donna who just threw his toys in the bin and walked away for no good reason for 3-4 years, there were people who were/are employed by GW/BL for the express purpose of managing this series and ensuring it was of good quality and made sense. That includes having an idea of what the character arcs and plot lines look like across the narrative, even if only in broad strokes.

 

So again, this isn't about absolution or deflection; it's about acknowledging that, unless Abnett's departure was a unilateral one and driven by avoidable problems which he caused, more than one person probably has responsibility for certain things that fans are trying to pin exclusively on the author.

 

Wow could we ever disagree respectfully harder.

 

I'm going to go looking because I think in my Saturnine review Olly was my favorite part, and his arc actually was meaningful and resolved even if it was a subversion by Abnett. 

[TrillionSpiders]

1 hour ago, DarkChaplain said:

I liked Olly Piers and his role in Saturnine. It was one of my favorite parts of the novel. But it is rooted in Abnett trying to be needlessly tongue in cheek

 

honestly thats kinda my bigger problem with Abnett in general. purple prose is one thing, as is a wink and a nudge towards the audience but Abnett almost has a pathological obsession with the winking and nudging that it becomes aggravating. Opening horus rising with a "siege of the palace and death of the emperor" is one thing for instance, but it becomes equal parts hilarious and groan inducing to have loken looking at abaddon, future warmaster of chaos and leader of the black legion, and the justerians and remarking "wow what a black legion you have there abaddon ;>"

 

Thats too on the nose if nothing else. a bit too meta, and to an extent thats whats kneecapping teatd from being as good as it could be from what i gather.

[Lord_Caerolion]

4 hours ago, tgcleric said:

 

Don't know what that is. Is it another obscure piece of lore hidden away in a book about toy soldiers next to an advertisement to buy more toy soldiers that abnett didn't perfectly adhere to while trying to write a functional story?

 

(I paint toy soldiers so no shade on liking toy soldiers)

 

Anyways. I'm excited for Book 3. 

We get it, you’re the lone bastion of culture bringing the concept of high literature to us unappreciative proles. 
 

What you’re missing in your snark though is that Abnett isn’t being accused of forgetting fluff from White Dwarf issue 23, page 6, paragraph 15 where it CLEARLY says X. 
We’re saying he’s making blunders from the book before this one, in a series that Black Library had sold as “we understand your frustration on editorial mistakes, so rest assured we have much stricter oversight now to prevent that, and the authors are cooperating to prevent it as well”. 
 

Also, “French at his most concise is still twice as wordy as abnett at his most verbose”? Forgive me, which French book was it that had to be split into 3 massive books due to writing bloat? Was it Solar War? No, that was just one… Mortis? No, that was just one as well. Ah well, I’m sure it’ll come to me. He really should take a lesson from notedly-concise author Dan Abnett, as exemplified by that near-novella work, End and the Death volumes one through three. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

5 hours ago, tgcleric said:

It's always lucky when talented people work on projects you like. And he doesn't phone it in. That's all. 

 

Well he does phone it in, because he's part of a shared series and doesn't follow along. He doesn't put the effort in; he phones it in.

 

5 hours ago, tgcleric said:

Like a lot of what is said here this is a nonsense assumption about the readers (or the author). I like the titans a lot. The titan stuff in Helsreach is some of my favorite stuff I've read. Heck, I even liked a lot of the lore ideas in Titandeath. I didn't like Mortis cause it's incompetent plotted, the characters are unremarkable and poorly portrayed. There is little to no drama and French at his most concise is still twice as wordy as abnett at his most verbose. It's a painful slog. Nothing to do with titans. I think that's the difference is so much discussion here seems to be about how much someone likes a certain chapter or how it much it a story aligns to some lore written in a rule book. I don't care if the book was about Titans or mechanicus or whatever. I'm just interested in good stories, good prose and good characters. 

 

My enjoyment of Mortis had nothing to do with the lore written in rulebooks or my attachment to the faction of models being represented; the siege hasn't been covered by the game and I can't remember the last time, if ever, Fureans made an appearance. It was a simple book about titan combat during the siege and it performed it well, while also covering the crew of abnett's; there didn't need to be drama in that story.  And speaking of unremarkable and poorly portrayed characters, have you met my friends Amit, Zephon, Rann, Sor Talgron, Shiban, Jaghatai, and others? A character isn't good if he's a different character from every other portrayal; a story isn't good if it introduces deus ex machinas/late ass plot contrivances to create fake drama.

 

5 hours ago, tgcleric said:

He is continuing his story, while writing a new novel and trying to tie up a lot of other stories. Yeah. What he's doing is hard.

 

What story? All his novels were stand alones except for Rising, Unremembered Empire and Saturnine. What is he continuing from any stories? Ol hopping through the warp, an Alpha Legionaire getting them into the palace-ish area. Uh........nothing else.

 

What's even better is this being a chain starting with you saying "dan had too many other authors characters to wrap up" when his books are all filled with his characters, but coming out of nowhere because nothing was ever set up by abnett in the first place.

 

5 hours ago, tgcleric said:

I agree he didn't need to tie up these characters but not because they were done proper before. They weren't. Most of the fragments have more character in them then previous sections about the characters I've read. 

 

I dont think he needed to cause i don't think they are that important. But clearly he's trying to give everyone their fair share in the final story.

 

This is what I'm talking about with wild assertions and good faith discussions. Amit was certainly done properly in Echoes. Zephon was done properly in Echoes. Rann has had multiple moments and frankly was always a companion character that didn't need to be tied up. These characters either already had their fair share of time and characterization in previous novels or never deserved more in the first place. 

 

5 hours ago, tgcleric said:

I've read plenty of books that were surprisingly good, with stuff like Wraithbone Phoenix being just a solid book.

 

But yeah, in general, abnetts writing, both technically and dramatically, I have found to be very good. And I concerned about reading and enjoyable book first. Whether it's good "warhammer" is secondary to me. I get that's different than other folks. 

 

Wraithbone pheonix was a really fun book to read, and one I enjoyed more than any of abnett's siege entries.

 

You'll notice that the only argument of being a bad "warhammer book" is that abnett is using shared characters that have existed in the novels before his, and he doesn't keep the characterization or plots from the proceeding entries. It's like, idk, Brandon Sanderson regressing Elayne in Towers of Midnight and repeating conversations about Mat's luck, or making her act really dumb about the foretelling after she showed she understood the nuance in Knife of Dreams. They're bad examples of writing, and Dan's haven't payed off at all. 

 

5 hours ago, tgcleric said:

Is that a really wild opinion? Prospero Burns js well regarded. Not sure what damage control you are talking about. I've read every HH novel. And yeah, if I had to recommend one book for a Sci fi fan to just pick up and read it would still be either Horus Rising or Prospero Burns. 

 

I think Prospero Burns is just elegantly structured, with beautiful characters. It brought me into an alien culture like the best Sci fi novels do. It felt artistically driven in a way that even a lot of abnett novels don't. 

 

If thats too WILD for you to interact with... aight. 

It really kinda is. It's a numbered novel in a series. It explores a legion culture and not much else, which would be fine if subsequent entries in the series didn't actively undermine plot points Abnett introduced. How can it be the best book in the series, when the series tries to undo some of its ideas? If the Horus Heresy series never existed and Abnett simply dropped this as a standalone novel, things would be a bit different. But it wasn't, and was billed as the other side of the coin to A Thousand Sons; a book that's written worse on a technical level, but never got damage controlled by other authors. And that good reads rates as a better book, if we want to put stock in such things.

 

5 hours ago, tgcleric said:

Don't know what that is. Is it another obscure piece of lore hidden away in a book about toy soldiers next to an advertisement to buy more toy soldiers that abnett didn't perfectly adhere to while trying to write a functional story?

It's not. It's another user that goes through a lot of mental gymnastics and ignoring of facts to support a position. Kinda says a lot if we're saying "why did Zephon and Amit have a lobotomy from the proceeding Siege entry to the next?" and you're calling it obscure, hidden, and a necessary change to write a functioning story though. 

 

@DarkChaplain totally right, it's the hallows that are last-book, never-heard-of-before, main plot drivers. The horcruxes still get a bit of flak for being so late in the series, but at least those are passably well integrated. I wish the Dark King fit in as smoothly, honestly. 

Edited November 22, 2023 by SkimaskMohawk

[Scribe]

So lets look at this book.

 

The End and the Death - Volume 2 - Dan Abnett

 

First, we can all accept its large. Its the 2nd Volume of a 3 Volume set, for what was to be the capstone on a sub series, the Siege of Terra, which itself was to be the capstone on the HH.

 

I looked back at my review for Part 1, as I now struggle to see what its point was at all. You'll remember dear Brothers, that I admit that Abnett is a fine writer. He had some good scenes, and his answer on why we suffer, is a great one...but look at that book with some honesty, and then look at what this book expands upon...and despair.

 

Many words have already been spilled on how bloated this book is. So...yeah. I'm not the only one that sees it, and I'm not the only one thats called it out already.

 

If you want to get into the 'why' on the bloat? Well why do I need 6 PoV, different characters mind you, completely unrelated, on how they found a door, that either should not exist, or which opens to something that doesnt exist? Why, 201 times, do I need to be told, that time has stood still?

 

Imagine if you will, that this book (as Abnett calls it one book) was to be read as such?

 

Abnettian First Third of the Book - The clocks, the clocks, the clocks have stopped.

Abnettian Second Third of the Book - The time. Time. Time itself. The 4th dimension, that which is Time, has stopped.

 

Honestly, consider reading the first 2 as 1 entry. How many pages until we are told that the shields are down which already happened in Echos? How many pages until they Teleport to the VS?

 

That is factually the first 'new' step of the HH plot line in Volume 1, and it goes downhill from there.

 

This is not just a case of 'told, not shown'. Its told, ad nauseum.

Why are the characterizations so...inconsistent? Amit snaps and is alarmed?

This the same Amit from Fear to Tread? The same Amit from EoE? Hmm? Of course it isn't, because this is Abnett's Amit.

Same as Sigismund is a departure from the one we have read from Wraight, and ADB.

 

Spoiler

Why is Ahriman here? To rescue knowledge? I mean, sure I guess? I did enjoy that his description made me think of that old art of Tzeentch.

 

 

Anyway, the Search on the site seems broken, so I clicked and clicked until I found my thoughts on Mortis, Saturnine, and Volume 1.

 

Saturnine - Abnett was planting his Emperor as God here it looks like. I still think the only arc that actually mattered was Olly, and I think Abnett decided to get way too cute, to thumb his nose at the people who looked at the original story of the Guardsman who stood in front of Horus, as canon. "Oh you liked that eh? Sorry about that but..." I still dont care for the book and it was on the long side for the series.

 

Mortis - I liked it. It gets panned here it seems, but I liked it, and I found that it gave Oll a purpose where previously he had none. Also on the longer side.

 

Volume 1. - Dear lord, has this aged poorly. I liked it less a few days after I finished it. I liked it less before V2 came out. After finishing V2? Why even crack it open again? Utter filler. "6/10, could have been a 9. Will be an 8 if he actually finishes some of these plot lines."

 

Well, guess what folks? Did we REALLY need Book 1? Considering Book 2? Did we? Volume 1 is now a 4/10 at best. At least we got the "Why do we suffer?" from the Angel.

 

So that brings us now to the big show, right? We are going to get some things done right?

 

Well...

 

Spoiler

1. The big plot point, that I'm sure was meant to be the big stunner, is the Dark King. The Emperor DID meet/see/contend with the Gods, and he did 'steal fire', and then, on the Spirit? Well he took a lot more, and he's about to become, well, God. Not just a God, either. We are given the impression that hes going to be THE GOD. Not just the God of the Old Testament. Not the Son, the Father, the Holy Spirit. Hes God of God. King of Ages. Hes the PEAK.

We see some bible references. We see Him going back through time (as a light), Hes the light, Hes all of it, Hes God.

 

2. Until he isnt.

 

Why? Now I know this was discussed in spoilers, and we had some laughs that it was the power of friendship, but not quite.

 

He doesnt give it up for Oll. He gives it up, because in his near infinite intellect, he is asked by Oll to check himself. Oll doesnt convince him. Oll only asks him to look into it. Once the Emperor, who frankly has been under a bit of stress, does actually take the long view? He sees the trap. He sees what is going to happen.

Now, I dont think this really gets Abnett off the hook. Why couldnt the Emperor 'give it up' after he deals with Horus? No trust in himself? Perhaps? Maybe I missed it.

Now, could this have been set up better over the life of the series? Yeah. Do I hate it? No. Do I find it flawed because Valdor ALREADY HAD HIM GIVE UP HIS EMOTION THE FIRST POWER UP?

 

Yeah. Actually now that I mention it...

1. Malcador creates the first Astartes? I mean Fo mentions 'Astartes' the Bio-Scientist. Also Valdor.
2. "They are coming from inside the walls!" - EoE
3. Vulkan has to impose the Unspoken Sanction? Master of Mankind.
4. Bloodspitter vs Amit - Siggy vs Khârn - EoE/Warhawk.

I wonder if the close working relationship these guys all had, lead to some 'concept bleed' or something. There is a fair bit of this across last few years of books.

 

3. What the hell did he do to Dorn? Dorn was put on ice for an entire book and did nothing but continue the 'Plans are what makes us Human when we scratched on cave walls' from earlier books. Are we to believe he falls to Khorne in book 3, or was this just some supreme flex of "I am Dorn, and I am Steadfast".

 

4. OK, the Oll and Friends.

 

I mentioned that I have gone back and looked over the last several years of releases? Guess what.

 

I've hated Oll the whole time. THE WHOLE TIME, I have hated this Perpetual arc, and now we are here, and his friends get killed. And I did.not.care. Completely unmoved. Didnt matter to me in the slightest. No set up. No build up. No emotional pull. Nothing. So they die. Oll has a chat, the Emperor powers down, and..."OK now go trace your steps because you need to make a path for yourself to find me....right.

 

@DarkChaplain says it best.

Quote

 

Oll and co got fridged from 2016 to Mortis in 2021 without any follow-up, despite many anthologies, including a pre-Siege one, to feature him in.

Between these two appearances of Oll's, Abnett wrote....

The Warmaster (2017)
The Magos (2018)
The Anarch (2019)
Saturnine (2020)
Penitent (2021)
Sabbat War (2021, anthology, author + editor)

Surely, there would've been an opportunity to write an Oll short story for one of the Advent calendar series in there? Or anything at all? Instead of letting him hop through time and space off-screen until he was needed again?

Abnett himself didn't even touch Oll in Saturnine, the book before Mortis, and left it to John French to reintroduce Oll and his crew. Instead, he thought he was being cute by adding "Olly Piers" as the Guardsman who stood up to Horus but actually it's just a World Eater and propaganda makes it bigger than it is but actually he ends up standing up against Angron just that this part wasn't recorded in the end.... WHEN HE ALREADY HAD AN OLLANIUS THE PIOUS OF HIS OWN PRIOR MAKING. Who he didn't bother bringing into the Siege arc himself because he was busy introducing Erda instead, who got killed off in her next appearance. Another thing Abnett never substantially touched upon again.

 

 

The meat of this book, is clearly the climax of Oll and the Emperor/Dark King, plus the near afterthought of the Angel getting beaten into the floor, broken, and crucified.

 

That happens, in the last 200 or so pages, of a 750 page novel, that is the 2nd of its kind, with very little set up.

 

I dont know. I'm honestly kind of sad. Kind of relieved. Kind of tired.

 

I've thought on this over the night, and I think the Dark King was supposed to be the big play. The big swing for the fence, and its just lost in this sea of words. The micro short chapters? You just kind of consume them, spit them out, turn the page. What big questions are even in play here? Just like Volume 1, it takes the Library scene to ask the reader to even think, and even that is pretty shallow.

 

Spoiler

"What kind of society burns books." "Well yours bans them."

 

And Fo? I mean at this point? Is this just an Abnett-verse thing hes going to add in to whatever his ongoing 40K series is? I honestly couldnt care less.

 

I dont think hes going to ruin the Heresy at this point. The Emperor will kill Horus. The Emperor will go to the Throne. I dont think we are bound for any large shocker here.

 

All the various side characters that are just doing their thing?  Whats even to resolve? Their tales dont matter. The DA? The UM will arrive. We know its going to happen.

 

As a few others have mentioned, its kind of a 'what even did I read' kind of thing?

 

I read it because its finishing up a very large portion of my hobby life out of 10. Far from great, though technically Abnett is a good writer.

 

I feel this is going to be one of those 'man what if' series that we lament for a long long long time.

[DukeLeto69]

@Scribe great write up and very thought provoking. I don’t avoid spoilers because my memory isn’t great (how do all you fraters keep track of all these characters and their characterisation across almost 70 books and almost 20 years?) and even with my daunting back-to-back read challenge, it will be some time before I read tEatD. So what I am seeing in this thread is equal parts intriguing and “oh why did you do THAT?”

 

I reckon you may be spot on brother with your “if only” thoughts (which equally applies to the HH series as a whole).

 

As I have said, I will reserve judgement until I have read everything for myself (clearly) but where I have been critical of the sentiment of fraters in this and other HH/SoT threads it has been based on two things: 

 

1. Seemingly being wedded to the lore being sacrosanct and ignoring the mutable nature of this IP since the beginning (and even the in-universe position that 10,000 years have passed with much knowledge lost and other knowledge suppressed by the Inquisition et al).

 

2. Playing the ball not the man (not just Abnett but the authors in general). Some seem to point the finger of blame solely at the authors. Decrying their lack of being a team player and collaborating on a series when the irony is that there has been an extended and evolving team and they bear a collective responsibility. 

 

A question (not only for you)...based on tEatD vol 1&2 so far, do you think there is a strong/good novel within the pages/wordcount if it was to be cut back considerably? We know there are plots/storylines people do not like, but are the main beats in there? Could a Readers Digest single volume deliver a (very) satisfactory book?

Edited November 22, 2023 by DukeLeto69

[Nagashsnee]

40 minutes ago, DukeLeto69 said:

A question (not only for you)...based on tEatD vol 1&2 so far, do you think there is a strong/good novel within the pages/wordcount if it was to be cut back considerably? We know there are plots/storylines people do not like, but are the main beats in there? Could a Readers Digest single volume deliver a (very) satisfactory book?

100%,  there are in fact 2 good books! One detailing the final stand of the palaces defenders and one detailing the action on the vengeful spirit.  Plus a couple of fantastic short stories! Ever wonder about the originins of the terminus decree? 

 

The ingredients are great, there just very mixed and often not in the order that everyone finds appealing.  They are also served in those tini tiny fancy restaurant portions, which again may not be to everyones taste. But you slap 2-4 of them together and you got a plate of delicious food! 

 

 

[Felix Antipodes]

Well, that’s finished.  I was going to wait and read vols 2 & 3 back to back, but once it arrived (and I saw the size of it) I knew that wasn’t an option.  Kudos to @DukeLeto69 if he attempts this in consecutive reads as stated.

 

I’m not going to go too deep or spoilery, too late and too tired for that.  So, just my thoughts…

 

Abnett is a great writer, purple prose notwithstanding, and I actually found the micro-chapters made it a quick read considering its page count.  Some of the characterisation was off (in Amit’s case way off) but that is an occupational hazard in a series that has seen multiple authorial takes on just about every character.

 

The revelation of the Dark King didn’t come as a surprise for some reason.  For what appears to be the big swing of book two, I saw it coming a while back.

 

The fate of the companions was also a bust.  Like @Scribe I was emotionally unmoved by their deaths.  The only question it raised in my mind was why any of them survived.  Abnett has a further use for them I assume.  I hope Dorn gets a bigger role in vol 3 as he’s done bugger all so far.  I’m not sure that using characters who are known to have survived (Amit, Rann, etc) to take up significant roles post Heresy was the best way to create ‘will they survive’ tension.  Might have been better to stick to the ones we don’t know the fate of maybe.

 

I must admit I am scratching my head a bit trying to imagine what Abnett will fill Vol 3 with if it’s another brick.  750 pages of Horus vs Emperor bolter porn?  If that lasts as long as Horus vs Sanguinius it will have 500 pages of desert wandering before the main event starts - or maybe that is how long it takes to get Him from the battle scene to the Golden Throne?  I believe we will get a lengthy epilogue (Dorn rebuilding the palace while the survivors jawbone in the background?) even though the Emperor being returned to the Golden Throne should be the concluding scene imho.  They will definitely have the rest of the bros arriving from off stage to mourn the loss of dad.

 

At least Dan supplied the best descriptor for the series…

 

And dead, she lives

 

[Felix Antipodes]

15 minutes ago, Nagashsnee said:

100%,  there are in fact 2 good books! One detailing the final stand of the palaces defenders and one detailing the action on the vengeful spirit.  Plus a couple of fantastic short stories! Ever wonder about the originins of the terminus decree? 

 

The ingredients are great, there just very mixed and often not in the order that everyone finds appealing.  They are also served in those tini tiny fancy restaurant portions, which again may not be to everyones taste. But you slap 2-4 of them together and you got a plate of delicious food! 

 

 

 

Definitely this.  I felt like Dan had written a novella and a couple of shorts that were still in the drawer when the word came down to pad it out.  So he blended them in like Ahriman shuffling his tarot deck.

[DukeLeto69]

Sure others have already made this observation but there is something very meta (and ironic) going on.

 

In-universe the HH was messy. A galactic civil war involving chaos is going to be messy. The warp and chaos enveloping Terra is going to make the siege messy. In the real world the HH series is messy and SoT has been messy too and now the climax to the climax is messy!

 

Based on what I am reading in this thread though I am slightly worried. It seems we have another “Wet Leopard Growl” situation. Abnett certainly overused that term in Prospero Burns but due to his epilepsy condition getting worse he gets (from me at least) a pass for that.

 

But it seems the “time has stopped/is confused reality is twisted et al” is really being hammered home ad infinitum (and being reflected in the narrative structure and book/page layout design to underpin it). Like maybe this could/should have been dialled back slightly/repeated less. I get the impression some people are like “ok ok I get it, I really get it”!

[DukeLeto69]

@SkimaskMohawk your point above...

 

”Itexplores a legion culture and not much else, which would be fine if subsequent entries in the series didn't actively undermine plot points Abnett introduced. How can it be the best book in the series, when the series tries to undo some of its ideas? If the Horus Heresy series never existed and Abnett simply dropped this as a standalone novel, things would be a bit different. But it wasn't, and was billed as the other side of the coin to A Thousand Sons; a book that's written worse on a technical level, but never got damage controlled by other authors.“

 

I find to be an intriguing but odd argument.

 

1. It is well documented that PB was published late and out of sync with the series due to Abnett having health issues. Originally PB and TTS were to drop together (or close). At the time one of the main criticisms was that the Abnett book was called Prospero Burns when it doesn’t in that book (you see the battle in TTS). That is a marketing dept decision.

 

2. Criticising Abnett for writing a book that subsequent authors then ignored or had to undo is precisely the criticism bring levelled at Abnett now! It seems rather hypocritical (not having a dig at you just trying to discuss). Surely if an earlier book in the series establishes characterisations, plot points, lore/colour about factions etc, then whether you agree or not, that provides the blueprint for subsequent additions to the series?

 

Personally I found PB jarring at first (is this a fantasy novel?) and a little miffed at the lack of Prospero burning! However, as I reflected, I came to appreciate it as a really good book that managed to transcend the Space Wolves trope and move them away from the frankly idiotic space vikings silliness to give them something, IMHO, altogether more credible.

[System Sound]

Finally finished this... Thing.

 

80% of this was entirely poitless word salad. Droning on and on and on.

 

Just like vol 1 and it's "the end and the death! the END and the DEATH! END! DEATH!. This pointless endulgence is vanity was filled with "reality is warped, time has stopped". After about 10 "chapters" was rolling my eyes every single time it was mentioned.

 

Spoiler

And what was the point of the Dark King? If it's just brushed away like nothing?

 

I have yet to read a book that bored me and annoyed me so much, sometimes both at the same time.

 

So thank you Annett for writing something so dull that Id rather watch paint dry while listening to Indomitus by Gav Thorpe....

[caladancid]

15 hours ago, tgcleric said:

Finished my listen. So I've read and listened to Vol 1 and 2.

 

Book 1 is better. Book 2 has better highs (the whole last third).

 

Both books are better than 90% of black library. 

 

Every fan is lucky to have Abnett spending his passion and talent pulling these threads together into a compelling story.

 

Mortis felt longer to read once than these two volumes did to read twice. 

 

Most of the problems are Dan adhering too and trying to tie up other authors and the series problems and characters, not the other way around.

 

We'll see how book 3 is. But seems likely this massive 70+ book series will end with Prospero Burns being the best book.

 

The negativity from a lot on this forum all but guarantees no new fan would ever want to discuss stuff here. It's not just cause it's negative, its the type negativity.

 

If you really want some fun, go back through this thread and look at people's comments vs when they admit actually reading/finishing the book. Pretty telling.

 

The little clique in this sub has become a real problem, full of passive aggressiveness (the moonreaper comment is just a straight up personal attack btw, nothing book related) and snark. 

 

Glad you shared your opinion, we'll see if Book 3 closes it out like we hope!

[phandaal]

8 hours ago, Lord_Caerolion said:

We get it, you’re the lone bastion of culture bringing the concept of high literature to us unappreciative proles. 

 

I do not have an opinion on the book itself, because I have not read it. Been following this thread to see what people think before picking it up and honestly, the discussion here has been really disappointing.

 

The Moonreaper thing is especially pathetic. It is a "dunk" on someone using an in-joke that only the small group of people who frequent these forums would actually get, which means it was done for literally no other purpose than to have other "regulars" here come and laugh the "outsider."

 

@tgcleric and @caladancid are 100% correct in their critiques of the discussion here. This seems more like a group of catty old women in a book club than a forum of ostensibly grown (mostly) men.

 

Edited November 22, 2023 by phandaal

[Scribe]

6 hours ago, DukeLeto69 said:

A question (not only for you)...based on tEatD vol 1&2 so far, do you think there is a strong/good novel within the pages/wordcount if it was to be cut back considerably? We know there are plots/storylines people do not like, but are the main beats in there? Could a Readers Digest single volume deliver a (very) satisfactory book?

 

Yes, I think a really good, even great book exists in there.

[System Sound]

22 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

Yes, I think a really good, even great book exists in there.

Unfortunately it's so "spaghetti-coded" into these 3 bloated tomes, only a proper rewrite could salvage it.

[Scribe]

1 hour ago, phandaal said:

This seems more like a group of catty old women in a book club than a forum of ostensibly grown (mostly) men.

 

Sir I must protest!

 

While many if not everyone actually see the problems, I'm quite sure that it's mostly me pointing them out.

 

I've also been quite consistent in thinking Perpetuals didn't need to be added, and shouldn't be the central PoV.

[EverythingIsGreat]

11 hours ago, Scribe said:

Spoiler

Malcador creates the first Astartes?

 

 

Spoiler

Well there's more. From Horus Heresy Book 9: Crusade (Forge World 2020) page 83

 

 

The "obscure text" mentioned in the clip may or may not become less obsure in the future.

 

 

5 hours ago, System Sound said:

Spoiler

And what was the point of the Dark King? If it's just brushed away like nothing?

 

 

Spoiler

 

But the clue may be in the dedication by Abnett: "For Ian Watson"

One iteration of the equation is

Emperor=Dark King+Star Child+SomeOtherVoodoo (includes shamanic/human ingredients)

 

Also, check out the "Acknowledgents" section, for author help and guidance. Not just BL, but FW and GW (the big names) are mentioned. Why? Not that this is unusual. But it is a further indication that any one novel is part of a much more expansive setting. Not all aspects of the setting/lore need be in sync at all times. Or to agree with each other.

 

Edited November 22, 2023 by EverythingIsGreat
dementia

[DukeLeto69]

35 minutes ago, EverythingIsGreat said:

 

  Hide contents

Well there's more. From Horus Heresy Book 9: Massacre (Forge World 2020) page 83

 

 

The "obscure text" mentioned in the clip may or may not become less obsure in the future.

 

 

 

  Hide contents

 

But the clue may be in the dedication by Abnett: "For Ian Watson"

One iteration of the equation is

Emperor=Dark King+Star Child+SomeOtherVoodoo (includes shamanic/human ingredients)

 

Also, check out the "Acknowledgents" section, for author help and guidance. Not just BL, but FW and GW (the big names) are mentioned. Why? Not that this is unusual. But it is a further indication that any one novel is part of a much more expansive setting. Not all aspects of the setting/lore need be in sync at all times. Or to agree with each other.

 

Nope it is all Abnett’s fault ;-)

[Scribe]

1 hour ago, System Sound said:

Unfortunately it's so "spaghetti-coded" into these 3 bloated tomes, only a proper rewrite could salvage it.

 

As far as V2 goes, this may help the effort. 2 lines into the 'chapter' you know if its worth reading or cutting out. Or you can read the 3rd line and finish the chapter.

[SkimaskMohawk]

@DukeLeto69

3 hours ago, DukeLeto69 said:

It is well documented that PB was published late and out of sync with the series due to Abnett having health issues. Originally PB and TTS were to drop together (or close). At the time one of the main criticisms was that the Abnett book was called Prospero Burns when it doesn’t in that book (you see the battle in TTS). That is a marketing dept decision.

 

For sure it's a marketing decision with the name; bringing up a thousand sons was another point of Prospero Burns actually being part of a series, and to show that Goodreads scores don't really mean much when we're talking about "being the best in the series". 

 

3 hours ago, DukeLeto69 said:

Criticising Abnett for writing a book that subsequent authors then ignored or had to undo is precisely the criticism bring levelled at Abnett now! It seems rather hypocritical (not having a dig at you just trying to discuss). Surely if an earlier book in the series establishes characterisations, plot points, lore/colour about factions etc, then whether you agree or not, that provides the blueprint for subsequent additions to the series?

 

I'm going to try my best to keep it from being an all out ramble but...you know. 

 

There's nuance and stuff think about. A good, or at least, inoffensive characterization, plot point, or foreshadowed idea should absolutely be used as a blueprint.

 

We saw this with Horus rising with Horus' fears and responsibilities, and Erebus' manipulation and set up for davin; all of this was respected. Did McNeil do a worse job with the human characters? Ya. Did he bungle the dream sequence and make Horus look dumb? Ya. Did he get criticized? Super ya. 

 

But poor characterization and plot points tend to get massaged by the rest of the series to make things make sense. We saw this when french got criticism for his angry perturabo and then McNeil and Haley rounded it out his character to make it fit. Or Wright's efforts with Mortarion. 

 

The whole executioner schtick fell squarely in the massaged category. People didn't like it and it got undermined by multiple authors as a result to bring it in line. Abnett ignoring many other authors characterization on Typhus for a throwaway POV doesn't fix a poor representation of the character; it creates one. Same thing with Amit and Rann and Sol talgron. Same thing with killing off Falkus Kibre (and ADB took the heat when he repeated this with kargos) when we know he's kicking around later.

 

So ya, when one author tosses a lot of concepts out that people don't want to pick up and has a concept that's overruled by the rest of the authors to better fit the consistency of the series, it's different from the same author re-writing characters for no reason.

 

And all of this is in the context someone else declaring Prospero Burns as the best book in the series, vs. a general list of frustrations with a high-quality authors latest work. 

 

So ya, it's definitely a ramble and I don't think i really clearly explained anything properly. 

 

 

[Scribe]

7 minutes ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

The whole executioner schtick fell squarely in the massaged category. People didn't like it and it got undermined by multiple authors as a result to bring it in line.

 

The course correction on this actually defined the majority of the SW arc I feel, as they came to grips with the fact they are not in fact the Emperors Gift to Astartesian Glory.

 

I'd say that the whole 'Emperor's Executioners' and the following corrections from near every other author, probably generated more flame wars here and Portent/Warseer than anything else in the entire series. :D

[DarkChaplain]

2 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

Yes, I think a really good, even great book exists in there.

 

I agree. I'm halfway through volume 2, had to take a break from it and get some Star Wars: The High Republic out of the way, along with some audible preorders that popped (why oh why is November so crowded?!), and it's proving a necessary breather.

 

There's plenty in there to like. Cool ideas, cool concepts, well-written character moments - and those are what I'm here for, not the bolter action and gigantic setpieces or crucified titans. The rule of cool is far less interesting to me than the moments where characters have "heart to hearts" or are forced to re-evaluate their views on the setting and its protagonists.

 

The Malcador bits, and his Chosen (who I wish so very much had been explored more between The Sigillite and the Siege! Khalid Hassan was criminally underused in particular, but now we have a bunch of them who have basically zero development prior to TEATD) reacting to his "death", are largely brilliant. But then you have chapters that just keep repeating themes and even paragraphs ad nauseum (even if effective and definitely evocative, the Rogal Dorn sections, for instance, feel bloated as a result of the repetition, and Fo's outsmarting of Amon runs in circles for a while too; don't even need to touch on the clocks or the end and the death), scenes that never needed to be here (Rann & Zephon, for instance), scenes that regress on previous character development or scenes that treat characters as if it was their first outing in the series when they've been around for longer than Oll.

 

The "easter eggs", to put it charitably, have also crossed from "haha, nice one" to "I get it already, Abaddon the despoiler, how cute" at some point. There is foreshadowing and nods to a surviving characters' eventual fate, and then there's signposting this stuff for the audience with all the subtlety of Vulkan's hammer.

 

There are also unnecessary bits that could easily be cut, which actively do a disservice to characters from other authors, like Sor Talgron, who in the past had been one of my favorite traitors with lots of potential and even a forgotten macguffin from way back when Anthony Reynolds wrote him. In here, he gets shanked without ever offering a real look into his head. His perspective is irrelevant, he's just another trophy kill for another character whose relevance in this book so far only seems to be that he got a model when Saturnine was properly announced. He's here to make Fafnir Rann look cool and had a known name attached to him, not because he had any bearing on the story. We are then treated to a short epilogue paragraph after he is dispatched:

 

Quote

Talgron’s butchered corpse is carried off the field in the confusion by his brethren, and brought to Portis Bar. Later, in the terrible aftermath, he will be made to live again, against his abject wishes, for a third time, interred in the sarcophagus of a Dreadnought shell to endure the living death he had always rejected.

 

Like, why is this here? It feels detached, not just because it's a separated paragraph from the action piece beforehand, or the top-down perspective, but because we never engaged with Sor Talgron in this book, not mentally. You could've replaced him with any mook and it'd have had the same impact on the story, it's just ticking a box that didn't need ticking - it was already established in 40k works that he survived, got entombed in a dreadnought, and that he hated the idea of being made to survive that way was clear in The Purge by Anthony Reynolds already. We knew he was even more fanatical after his near-death experience in The Purge.

 

His inclusion here adds nothing to the plot of TEATD. It doesn't make it a better book, it just makes it a longer book. And that's something that can be said about many of the featured characters and scenes in TEATD 1&2.

 

I'm not even criticising Amit being here, or Azkaellon, or in a way even Zephon, even though he steps on Azkaellon's toes (who has been sidelined/forgotten for the longest time as is), or Raldoron. Raldoron, Amit and Azkaellon are basically the trifecta of the Legion-era Blood Angels - it's been established before in the Andy Smillie novels that all three react differently to Sanguinius' death, and all three take different consequences away from it. There's great potential here to explore these three angles of the Blood Angels situation and grief.

 

But there's the issue: Amit acts out of character. I've spoken about the "Flesh Tearer" being shocked by his own sudden anger issues before.

Raldoron is barely in these two volumes. He gets namedropped a few times, and the rest of the time we get to see him through Ikasati, an original TEATD Abnett character. We don't see the Vengeful Spirit through Raldoron, but Ikasati, who even got a namedrop in a chapter title, something that's rare enough to happen here. He's more prominent in the narrative than the character we should actually care about and think is top tier at this juncture.

 

Azkaellon appears in volume 1 to stand in and comment on Zephon's behavior to Rann. His role in this could be almost completely swapped with Zephon and nothing would really change for the characters involved. Beyond that, he is just namedropped alongside other heroes, like Thane and Archamus. And volume 2 drops the namedrops in favor of Azkaellon again being a foil for Rann, and a stand-in for Zephon who seemingly doesn't want to talk about his own issues. At least he brings more to the table than Raldoron does, but damn it's a far cry from what it needed to be, if it had to be here.

 

The names are here, but the soul hardly is.

 

There's even the curious case of Zagreus Kane, Fabricator General in exile, who is listed in both volumes' Dramatis Personae, without ever actually being named in the book so far, neither as Zagreus Kane, nor Zagreus, nor Kane. He's listed, but has no role to play. This is most likely an oversight with the listing, but it sprung out to me.

Another character who has been built up through multiple Siege novels is Katsuhiro, who the first half put a lot of emphasis on as a human PoV to it all. He is listed in both DPs, and is namedropped exactly once in each volume, with no relevance. He isn't actually here, he isn't doing anything of relevance, he's a checkbox.

 

Some folks know that I have my issues with how Argonis was introduced in the series and that he ended up overshadowing established characters like Aximand too easily, but here? In The End and the Death? He's almost an irrelevance aside from his reaction to the Dark King stuff when Abaddon finds him, or the brief info he sends Abaddon about the shields being down. Argonis has the doubtful honor of being in the story while not even being recognized as himself by his lord, being called Maloghurst instead, and what agency he tries having earns him a slap from Horus, removing him from the story for a good while after.

 

Abnett has used myriad characters throughout these two volumes already, and most of them are exceedingly underused or substituted. For many of them it'd have been better not showing them in scenes, sticking with namedrops at best (because they're doing stuff off-story), than giving us a glimpse just to have them included.

That's what significantly contributes to the feel of bloat in the novel, and when coupled with the snail's pace at which key events appear to happen (because time is broken, the clocks stopped ticking, yadda yadda), drags the book down.

 

Had Abnett been more selective, stripping at least 200 pages from each part so far, it'd have still been a very chunky book, but a better one. One that actually puts the focus on the parts that matter, that benefit the unfolding catastrophe, rather than dilluting it by reiterating the basics over and over again, or including stuff just for the sake of inclusion, rather than that it has anything to say of its own about these things.

 

There are strokes of genius in The End and the Death. It's a shame that there's a large quantity of forgettable, contradictory, inconsistent or worse, boring spots all throughout that detract from them. And that was just so, so unnecessary and should have been headed off by editing staff. Some of these things and characters would've been far better served with a short story in a multi-author Siege anthology than being here, and it boggles my mind that they haven't just done an anthology for "cleanup" before the final novel.

 

Looking at the audiobook runtimes, The End and the Death in full will rival Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace or Alexandre Dumas' The Count of Monte Cristo in listening time. A lot of stuff happens in those books too, and they have greatly abridged editions. Just for perspective on how long this final novel actually is going to be.

Edited November 22, 2023 by DarkChaplain