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

[DukeLeto69]

10 hours ago, Scribe said:

 

I think this reflects a few things.

 

1. The fundamental difference between 30K Marines, and 40K Marines.

2. That the 'emotion' human component is absolutely critical to what makes Marines relatable.

3. That the very much stunted, damaged, 'little boy in a killing machine body' is, in a series about trauma, betrayal, lies, truth, passions, appreciation? I mean thats it at its root.

 

How many books discussed the Father/Son relationships? That is a human lens applied to a mutilated murder machine.

 

This isnt 40K, it was the HH. Emotion, and 'humanized' Astartes, have been with us in this series FAR longer than otherwise.

 

 

I dont know what to tell you, because 'emotion' and not wanting to pull the trigger, is the pivot upon which this book rotates. The Primarch's are not psycho-conditioned. The Primarchs grew up, influenced by their worlds, just as human children grow up. The Primarchs can be quoted discussing their emotions, their 'human' side. Heck, Perturbo? His whole section has exactly 1 point. "I am a conflicted being, at odds with myself, I feel used, unappreciated, uncared for, and while I wish I was a cold being without emotion, I feel, and so I smash."

 

Emotion, is the whole point. Just as its the whole point of Chaos. Just as the Emperor giving it up, was meaningful.

 

You guys want Duty first and last? Either its Valdor, or Sigismund, and well Abnett ruined Valdor, and Sigismund is essentially a broken man, existing for one purpose. Killing.

So I just saw brother @SpecialIssue post this (an extract)...

 

”The more severe brainwashing of space marines, only happened in the 2nd founding and the codex reforms by Guilliman...”

 

If this is in the lore then I have gaps in my lore knowledge (or I am just getting more forgetful as I get old). However, that means your point @Scribe is correct on the Astartes and I am wrong.

[Scribe]

8 hours ago, DukeLeto69 said:

So I just saw brother @SpecialIssue post this (an extract)...

 

”The more severe brainwashing of space marines, only happened in the 2nd founding and the codex reforms by Guilliman...”

 

If this is in the lore then I have gaps in my lore knowledge (or I am just getting more forgetful as I get old). However, that means your point @Scribe is correct on the Astartes and I am wrong.

 

It is the case, the process of 'uplifting' the child to a Marine was not yet refined, and was handled more as a cultural thing by the end of the Heresy, we had examples of Marines just getting churned out with even less control.

[DukeLeto69]

3 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

It is the case, the process of 'uplifting' the child to a Marine was not yet refined, and was handled more as a cultural thing by the end of the Heresy, we had examples of Marines just getting churned out with even less control.

In which case that adds more (nice) context to Heretic Astartes calling later Space Marines “thin bloods” (which I think ADB coined in the Black Legion books?) 

[Scribe]

10 minutes ago, DukeLeto69 said:

In which case that adds more (nice) context to Heretic Astartes calling later Space Marines “thin bloods” (which I think ADB coined in the Black Legion books?) 

 

The Night Lords series also mentions this, when working on the "first generation" Astartes.

[Dornfist]

I got my volume III hardcover today!!! A legendary day!! (My pre-order didn't fail this time lmao). I will devour this within the coming days and report back my thoughts, as well as catch up with all the thoughts people have shared thus far on the spoilers lol.

Edited January 31 by Dornfist

[DukeLeto69]

My order of Std HB Vol III has been despatched. Whoop whoop!

[Tymell]

I'm late as usual, but I finished up Volume II today (ready to press on into III), and my thoughts are:

 

BLOAT FOR THE BLOAT GOD!

FILLER FOR THE FILLER NOVEL!

 

Okay, this (and the above snark) is probably going to come across harsher than it should, but I can't resist this very succinct summary of my feelings about most of the book:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb4a_CLHtBs

 

So, yeah, wasn't a fan of this. It always feels kind of odd when a product suffers from something so entirely predictable. Not that the contents were predictable (they kind of are, but we've always known how this was going to end, that's not my criticism), but when you hear about some new project or decision and you immediately think of some way it sounds like a bad decision. And it's so obvious that part of you is sure it won't be a problem. Because it's so obvious. They must've handled it already, right? It's like when someone in a story is so obviously being set up for something, you feel sure that won't actually happen, precisely because it seems so apparent.

 

The obvious reaction when the final book of the Siege was split into two, then THREE novels, was "Huh, why? Surely there isn't enough story to warrant that? That sounds like it'll just feel really bloated and unnecessary."

 

And…yeah. It's really bloated and unnecessary. For much of this book's time, it's a painful, gruelling slog through page after page after page of nothing happening. The Siege is continuing, time and space are going crazy, the Warp's taking over, human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria, we get it. Vulkan's still in the throne room. Malcador's still on the throne. Dorn's still stuck in the desert. Valdor's still cutting through daemons. Sindermann's still in the library. Keeler's still leading people in a pilgrimage. Loyalists and traitors are still fighting. Fo is still making his own bid to steal the "Most Pointless Waste of Time in the Siege" trophy from Keeler and Sindermann.

 

This is the overwhelming impression for most of the book: padding, filler and bloat. Cutting back to scenes that don't go anywhere or serve much of a purpose beyond setting the scene, which we've already had plenty of. And it's not even as if the scene-setting is outright bad, it's decent prose, it's just…unnecessary.

 

I've seen a counter to this a few times along the lines of, "Well of course there's a lot of it, the HH series has so many plotlines to tie up!" And while it's true that the series as a whole has a ton of plot threads, most of them aren't really covered here. Which is fine, I didn't expect them to be, but it doesn't work as an excuse for the three book length when there aren't actually that many threads going on here, and many of those that are taking place don't need the page count they get.

 

One of the common questions you see for people new to the series is, "What can be safely skipped?", and it's always a question I struggle with. I'm a completionist when it comes to this, I want it all, and for me it feels like the entire point of the HH series is to expand on things and flesh them out. So I get the idea of just focusing on the more important bits, but I never feel comfortable advising people to skip things, at least not based on how "necessary" they are to the plot.

 

I'll defend The Damnation of Pythos to this day, but The End and the Death Vol. II might be the first full HH novel where I'd advise people to skip it (at least most of it). That's not something I should be feeling about the conclusion of the entire series!

 

The reason I keep saying "most" is because I do think there are some really good bits buried in here, mostly within the last quarter or so.

Spoiler

Erebus attacking the Companions is really damn good, just for how dark and monstrous a moment it feels.

 

Ahriman interacting in the library was an unexpected treat.

 

I really liked the twist of the Emperor as the Dark King and Oll's confrontation with it; yes, the whole thing was a bit of a contrivance and Oll talking Him down could've been done better, but at least something engaging was actually happening.

 

I loved the Horus vs. Sanguinius fight, especially given how much foreshadowing there has been for it (far too much IMO). It felt like it struck the right balance in describing what was happening while keeping the flow going. I felt gripped even knowing how it would end up. When it comes to a close, it's suitably sudden and brutal.

 

These highlights save the book from a truly abysmal score, but for me it's still the weakest of the Siege novels (setting aside the novellas). I was willing to give this the benefit of the doubt regarding the book split, but now I can confidently say this absolutely did NOT need to be 3 volumes. I'm still not convinced it needed to be two, but we'll see what the third is like.

 

5/10 (and was heading for more like a 3/10 until the last third/quarter)

Edited January 31 by Tymell

[TheArtilleryman]

It’s the Lord of the Rings effect. Let me explain.

 

When Peter Jackson’s TLOTR trilogy was so insanely successful, other franchises jumped on the bandwagon.
 

The Harry Potter series had always been one film per book, but they split the last book into two to maximise their revenue after seeing how TLOTR dominated the cinemas at the same time of year for three years running.

 

Same thing with The Hunger Games and how Mockinjay got split into two. You don’t want your franchise to end because it is so lucrative, so you drag it out by splitting the last one and making your already invested audience fork out twice for what they could have paid once for because they HAVE to see the end.

 

Peter Jackson even caught his own bug, and later split The Hobbit, which really should have been one movie, into three to try and repeat the success of TLOTR. The result was a trilogy with far too much added junk.

 

I don’t have the same issue with the HH series being dragged out as it is already a monster saga with so many threads that need tying up. But this is definitely what BL have done here - 100% it’s TLOTR effect.

Edited January 31 by TheArtilleryman

[DarkChaplain]

I'd argue that The Hobbit had every right to be split into two movies. Three required a lot of filler, and by that movie it was blatantly obvious that management wanted to push certain actors and angles for marketing reasons.

 

The book never felt like it'd have fit into a single movie. The amount of story beats and mini-adventures within the larger narrative, all of which contribute something to Bilbo's journey, would've meant a breakneck pace to fit it into a single movie, or extensive cuts that'd have diminished the thing.

 

Problem was: The suits wanted the movies to be something the book was not. The movie project in itself went through multiple identity crises - heck, for a while there, we were going to get a Del Toro adaptation, Peter Jackson only came in late to helm the whole thing, more pushed into it than anything. Even within the trilogy, shifts in focus and tone are obvious. If you watch the Extended Cut of the first movie, you'll find something very different from the third. The first movie was still trying a lot harder to be in tune with the original work, whereas the third largely gave up on being faithful.

 

Then again, I think the movies added a bunch of good stuff by approaching the appendices; the siege of Dol Guldur and the White Council going up against the Necromancer? Good stuff in principle. I'm not sure the execution worked well enough, but it's a logical inclusion to tie things a bit more together; in the novel, Gandalf is pretty tight-lipped about why he had to leave, and here we got proper justification sourced from outside the work. It's the added characters, shoddy romance and Legolas-:cuss: that destroyed the movies more than anything else.

 

Corporate really is the worst in cases like these. Gotta make decisions based around focus groups rather than the intended target audience.

 

As for Harry Potter 7 being split, I don't actually mind that. Book 7 is chonky. A lot of stuff happens, and I feel there is a good break point in there. The books got progressively longer, covering more ground and with less stuff to neatly cut. There's other reasons I can't stand the adaptations past movie 2, though.

 

Anyhow, I don't think those things are actually down to The Lord of the Rings trilogy adaptation in the first place. It was hardly the first trilogy to succeed in cinema, and the filming process of the movies happened pretty compactly, unlike the series adaptations mentioned.

 

 

Now, to wrap it back around to the End and the Death, which indeed strung the reader along for quite a while, I think it's accurate to say that here, too, corporate ruined a decent thing with dumb executive decisions. However, going by the afterword, it's clear enough that Abnett got carte blanche from pretty much the beginning and ran with it to the extreme. It's clear that corporate at GW/BL didn't actually meddle much at all, and only seems to have decided on the final production side of the book, rather than making creative mandates like having Legolas hop on a bunch of bats.

 

The afterword in general highlights a bunch of glaring issues with TEATD as a whole. Particularly the structural arguments Dan makes, about the split format disguising the structure, doesn't hold up. Making that statement presumes that there is a proper throughline that could be disguised, but as we've seen, Volume 3 does away with a lot of things that were the norm for volumes 1 and 2. Volume 3 harshly reduces the scope of the action, boiling it down to the essential plotlines while still somehow managing to be much longer than books with many more moving pieces and worldbuilding from the ground up. Even the chapter structure is different between V1&2 and V3. While you can tell that chapters of particular plotlines continue on without issue or recap, the pacing of volume 3 is a very different beast from the other two. It's almost indicative of the author wanting to get to the end after fussing about with largely irrelevant, or overly cute, window dressing; to bring it back to Tolkien, it's like Abnett started describing the plants native to this region of the world, and very late remembered he actually had a core story left to tell. And once he realized he needed to get that done, he went ham on that, while actively avoiding distractions - but without going back to hem in previous distractions from drowning out the setup.

 

He talks about The End and the Death effectively being the equivalent of four novels. Frankly, two of these would've been better off novellas and an anthology, rather than dilluting what could've otherwise been an engaging, tightly plotted thriller of a finale. You can't tell me that, for instance, Basilio Fo, Xanthus & co couldn't have been relegated to a novella not unlike Sons of the Selenar or Fury of Magnus, without harming the overall TEATD narrative, for instance.

[Scribe]

The Fo Dilemma was utterly useless, but look forward to it in the next Abnett book in 40K.

[DukeLeto69]

2 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

It’s the Lord of the Rings effect. Let me explain.

 

When Peter Jackson’s TLOTR trilogy was so insanely successful, other franchises jumped on the bandwagon.
 

The Harry Potter series had always been one film per book, but they split the last book into two to maximise their revenue after seeing how TLOTR dominated the cinemas at the same time of year for three years running.

 

Same thing with The Hunger Games and how Mockinjay got split into two. You don’t want your franchise to end because it is so lucrative, so you drag it out by splitting the last one and making your already invested audience fork out twice for what they could have paid once for because they HAVE to see the end.

 

Peter Jackson even caught his own bug, and later split The Hobbit, which really should have been one movie, into three to try and repeat the success of TLOTR. The result was a trilogy with far too much added junk.

 

I don’t have the same issue with the HH series being dragged out as it is already a monster saga with so many threads that need tying up. But this is definitely what BL have done here - 100% it’s TLOTR effect.

Errr sorry Frater but I disagree re LOTR. It is a trilogy of books and a trilogy of films. I also think a duology of The Hobbit would have worked just fine.

 

The rest, yeah!

[TheArtilleryman]

31 minutes ago, DukeLeto69 said:

Errr sorry Frater but I disagree re LOTR. It is a trilogy of books and a trilogy of films. I also think a duology of The Hobbit would have worked just fine.

 

The rest, yeah!

Oh you’re right, TLOTR was always a trilogy. Or even a six book series tbh. But the commercial success of TLOTR coming out three years on the trot has led, IMO, to franchises dragging themselves out longer than they would have had Jackson not released those movies.

[Astartes Consul]

Finished the audiobook over the weekend, as I've yet to pick up the physical copy. I'm not sure I can add much to what has already been said, other than overall I loved it and thought it - plus about the final third of Part II - form a very successful & satisfying ending to both the Horus Heresy and Siege of Terra series.

 

A few bits in particular I appreciated, and which I don't think need a Spoiler tag:

 

- Was great to see Abaddon get some page time and a decent bit of narrative again. I feel like he was inexplicably dropped from the story post-Saturnine. After he was left near to death and crying with grief and frustration, to have the next few books mostly ignore him was a huge missed opportunity IMO. His arc within this final volume in particular remedies a lot of that.

 

- I feel like the Dark Angel storyline never really got resolved fully throughout the SoT series. Not sure why.

 

- DA writes Horus perfectly. As always.

 

- The last part of the book - the final hour or so on the audiobook - was beautifully handled IMO. I would have been gutted if the story had ended either with a) 'Horus dead, Big E in the chair, done' or b) tried to ramp itself up into another bit, action-heavy final section describing the Traitor rout or the actually arrival of the Loyalist relief fleet. This was much better.

 

And one thing that does need a Spoiler tag:

 

Spoiler

Erebus you son of a *****. 

 

AFAIK he isn't a fully established presence in the current 40k canon, so I was hoping to get at least some satisfaction from his death.

 

[Etruscan]

I just finished the audiobook of End and the death Vol.III. Honestly feel kind of sad to have reached the end of it all, the HH books have been my ever present companion during modelling sessions.

 

Anyway, onto the final book. Some immensely enjoyable parts in it, perhaps a little too concentrated on the climactic Horus vs The Emperor battle but that was to be expected.

Spoiler

I didn't see the Erebus scene coming in at the end and damn, that hurt. As if he couldn't do more to make him my most hated character throughout the entire saga. 

 

Some elements /characters I would have liked a little more closure on. :

Spoiler

-We never really find out what happens during the battle between Death and Dark Angels at the Hollow Mountain. It all seemed set up for an epic Sigismund vs Typhon battle and then...nothing. No conclusion?

 

-What happened to Barthusa Narek?

 

-Jaghatai Khan

 

-Praetor Captain Honfler - never heard anymore of him since vol 2 after his foray with Odi Sartak. Though there is a brief cameo with Sartak at the end of vol 3.

 

-Shiban Khan, still at the Lions Gate Spaceport I guess but no mention in vol 3.

 

-Some sort of epilogue with the Aeldari response, seeing as they were the introduction to vol 2?

 

-Wishlisting here but I would have liked some insight into the other Primarchs not mentioned at all during the End and the Death.

 

-I thought that there might be a little more on the arrival of the Ultramarines etc but apparently they only took part in the void battle?

 

 

Edited January 31 by Etruscan

[DukeLeto69]

10 hours ago, TheArtilleryman said:

Oh you’re right, TLOTR was always a trilogy. Or even a six book series tbh. But the commercial success of TLOTR coming out three years on the trot has led, IMO, to franchises dragging themselves out longer than they would have had Jackson not released those movies.

I think you hypothesis was right but used the wrong starting point. It was not LotR because that was rightly a trilogy.

 

It was the decision to split the final Harry Potter book into two films (justified or not). They then did the same to Hunger Games. 

 

Not even read tEatD vol3 yet (arrives today) but based on vol1&2 I would personally have preferred one big cracking amazing book (that is certainly contained within) and the rest of “the bloat” (side stories/side plots) pulled out into a few novellas or anthologies to round off plot points etc.

Edited February 1 by DukeLeto69

[TheArtilleryman]

5 hours ago, DukeLeto69 said:

I think you hypothesis was right but used the wrong starting point. It was not LotR because that was rightly a trilogy.

 

It was the decision to split the final Harry Potter book into two films (justified or not). They then did the same to Hunger Games. 

 

Not even read tEatD vol3 yet (arrives today) but based on vol1&2 I would personally have preferred one big cracking amazing book (that is certainly contained within) and the rest of “the bloat” (side stories/side plots) pulled out into a few novellas or anthologies to round off plot points etc.

Yeah that’s what I’m saying. I know TLOTR was always a trilogy. My point is though that the timing of the cinematic releases was such that I don’t think the other movies would have been split if it wasn’t for the success of Peter Jackson’s movies. Had The Deathly Hallows and Mockingjay been released earlier, I think they would both have had one movie only.

 

Sorry for the off-topic anyway - my point was it’s the same business decision taken by BL in relation to TEATD.

[Ubiquitous1984]

15 hours ago, Etruscan said:

I just finished the audiobook of End and the death Vol.III. Honestly feel kind of sad to have reached the end of it all, the HH books have been my ever present companion during modelling sessions.

 

Anyway, onto the final book. Some immensely enjoyable parts in it, perhaps a little too concentrated on the climactic Horus vs The Emperor battle but that was to be expected.

  Hide contents

 

 

I didn't see the Erebus scene coming in at the end and damn, that hurt. As if he couldn't do more to make him my most hated character throughout the entire saga. 

 

 

Some elements /characters I would have liked a little more closure on. :

  Hide contents

-We never really find out what happens during the battle between Death and Dark Angels at the Hollow Mountain. It all seemed set up for an epic Sigismund vs Typhon battle and then...nothing. No conclusion?

 

-What happened to Barthusa Narek?

 

-Jaghatai Khan

 

-Praetor Captain Honfler - never heard anymore of him since vol 2 after his foray with Odi Sartak. Though there is a brief cameo with Sartak at the end of vol 3.

 

-Shiban Khan, still at the Lions Gate Spaceport I guess but no mention in vol 3.

 

-Some sort of epilogue with the Aeldari response, seeing as they were the introduction to vol 2?

 

-Wishlisting here but I would have liked some insight into the other Primarchs not mentioned at all during the End and the Death.

 

-I thought that there might be a little more on the arrival of the Ultramarines etc but apparently they only took part in the void battle?

 

 

 

Spoiler

It still feels like we are missing an anthology.  There are plenty of unresolved plotlines from this book alone, let alone the rest of the Siege.  

 

[Taliesin]

And as I foresaw a few weeks ago, various Amazon sites that listed the hardcover for pre-order, now find themselves without stock.

[Subtleknife]

Just started listening to it on audible. So far so good.

 

Can someone tell me though...

 

Does it explained what happened to those alpha legion operatives who Katsuhiro is in the same platoon as (in the first book in the series). 

 

I keep expecting them to show up and never hear from them. Have I missed them in previous books or something?

[Etruscan]

25 minutes ago, Subtleknife said:

Just started listening to it on audible. So far so good.

 

Can someone tell me though...

 

Does it explained what happened to those alpha legion operatives who Katsuhiro is in the same platoon as (in the first book in the series). 

 

I keep expecting them to show up and never hear from them. Have I missed them in previous books or something?

 

Spoiler

They don't make a reappearance, along with plenty of other loose ends scattered among the books during the Siege of Terra.

 

[Etruscan]

8 hours ago, Ubiquitous1984 said:

 

  Hide contents

It still feels like we are missing an anthology.  There are plenty of unresolved plotlines from this book alone, let alone the rest of the Siege.  

 

 I couldn't agree more. As much as I love a lot of the epic stuff, in some respects it's the little stories which provide some nuance and grounding to the entire series. That's why I would have liked to hear what happened to

Spoiler

Barthusa Narek; employed by an Eldar and determined to kill his own Primarch

 

In many cases it is also easier to relate to another human, rather than a super human. I can't help but think of "Olly" Piers, his character was hilariously brilliant and sort of sums up the abject horror of the 30k universe from the perspective of a mere human.

 

I am intrigued as to whether there will be some sort of epilogue to the Siege of Terra or whether they cruise straight into the Scouring...that is, assuming they have plans to do so at all...

[Sabadin]

6 hours ago, Etruscan said:

I am intrigued as to whether there will be some sort of epilogue to the Siege of Terra or whether they cruise straight into the Scouring...that is, assuming they have plans to do so at all...

I can see the WarCom post now;

 

"And for pre-order this week we have the exciting release of The Golden Throne - Volume 6:Part 4"

[Nagashsnee]

8 hours ago, Etruscan said:

I am intrigued as to whether there will be some sort of epilogue to the Siege of Terra or whether they cruise straight into the Scouring...that is, assuming they have plans to do so at all...

 

I would like to think that book 1 of the scouring is the traitors falling back to orbit and the general rout/exodus from sol with the loyalists coming in system/out of hiding.  Chaos (non warp this time) and panic reign for both sides as no one is 100% what is going on, what the plans is, or what precisely to do. 

 

That for me would be the logical book 1. So of course these events will be told only in flashbacks in 8 different books. 

[Etruscan]

6 hours ago, Sabadin said:

I can see the WarCom post now;

 

"And for pre-order this week we have the exciting release of The Golden Throne - Volume 6:Part 4"

 “Also don’t forget there will be a queueing system in place to make sure everyone can get their hands on the special edition hardcover.”

[Matcap86]

6 hours ago, Nagashsnee said:

 

I would like to think that book 1 of the scouring is the traitors falling back to orbit and the general rout/exodus from sol with the loyalists coming in system/out of hiding.  Chaos (non warp this time) and panic reign for both sides as no one is 100% what is going on, what the plans is, or what precisely to do. 

 

That for me would be the logical book 1. So of course these events will be told only in flashbacks in 8 different books. 

 

Honestly, I'd love a book like that. While I liked the EatD books, I would have loved also a perspective on the traitors side. We got several bits and bobs of where loyalists died and how some loyalists were doing. But nothing really on why the sudden mass panic and retreat on the traitor side.