The Critical Drinker weighs in on Female Custodes

[Orange Knight]

 

Quite funny, somewhat edgy. Some of the lore he mentions is either incorrect or misunderstood, but it's also very much abridged for the purpose of the video. Not that it matters so much now as "everything is canon" according to GW (more on this later).

 

I do agree with some of the sentiments - It remains to be seen if other predictions come true.

 

I think there is an interesting fine line that we may have to discuss at some point in the future. 40k is one of the most consistent settings of it's scope, especially impressive when considering just how vast and detailed it is. Games Workshop and Black Library have generally been excellent custodians of the IP they have created. 

 

The subject matter in question isn't actually as big of deal as the act of the retcon itself. How many retcons can the setting endure before the consistency that has made people so invested starts to become eroded?

 

I personally don't agree with sentiments like "everything is canon" because that view is centrered around putting the individual ahead of the greater community. 

Another thing I don't care for is the dismissive gaslighting coming from GW. "There have always been female Custodes" is the kind of overt revisionism the party in the novel "1984" would pull.

Now, I'm aware that this is a hot button issue, but I think there is a middle ground that can and should be discussed in a civil way.

 

-Some people support the change, others don't.

 

-Some people support the change because they like it, others support it for external political or cynical reasons.

 

-Some people oppose the change because they don't like it, other's because they don’t like retcons in general.

 

I was personally ambivalent on the issue, leaning towards positivity overall. One thing that is turning me the other way is the dismissive attitude coming from the Warhammer community towards their own fans. As I have mentioned above, there can be more than one reason why someone might not like this change, and it isn't always because they are against female representation. 

Edited April 19 by TrawlingCleaner
Video removed

[Guest]

Fan of him and his books and got to meet him last year.

 

I do feel the Toad thing is revisionist, but I find it hard to be angry about it. 

[Scribe]

This thread wont live. This topic is not going to enrich this forum, or the protected corner of the hobby which we had here.

 

If ever there was a time for the zeal of the mods to shine, its on all this stuff, and its now.

[Orange Knight]

Just now, Scribe said:

This thread wont live. This topic is not going to enrich this forum, or the protected corner of the hobby which we had here.

 

If ever there was a time for the zeal of the mods to shine, its on all this stuff, and its now.

 

But it can and absolutely should be discussed.

 

Here is something we can all agree on: The Introduction of Primaris was badly handled.

Whether you like them or not, in a setting that is so well thought out and detailed, their introduction was sloppy and rushed.

 

This change is 10x more sloppy.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Orange Knight said:

 

But it can and absolutely should be discussed.

 

Here is something we can all agree on: The Introduction of Primaris was badly handled.

Whether you like them or not, in a setting that is so well thought out and detailed, their introduction was sloppy and rushed.

 

This change is 10x more sloppy.

I do think Scribe is right, It's unfortunately verboten.

[phandaal]

6 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

Now, I'm aware that this is a hot button issue, but I think there is a middle ground that can and should be discussed in a civil way.

 

Agreed, but some people will not do so. Unfortunately because of that, the best we can do is a sort of détente rather than finding the common ground and moving on.

 

Whether it happens before or after certain posters come in for their victory lap struggle session, this thread will certainly be locked.

[Scribe]

Just now, Orange Knight said:

But it can and absolutely should be discussed.

 

From a simple lore perspective? Easy.

 

Its just yet another garbage change, in the lore which has been progressively worse (with minor well done additions like Votann) with every edition since 4th. So much of any kind of 'recent' lore change has been absolutely terrible, and yes Primaris are top of that list.

 

If you want to get into the reasons for the change, outside of naked capitalism, this thread wont live. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.

 

So yeah, pretty much any new 40K lore, and especially the stuff that is a clear *wink wink* totally not a retcon, is trash. Has been for probably over a decade at this point.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Scribe said:

 

So much of any kind of 'recent' lore change has been absolutely terrible, and yes Primaris are top of that list.

 

 

I can only think of one thing that will top that... I love Primaris but damn that lore to hell and the damage it did to the community.

[Orange Knight]

One thing that makes this forum exceptional is the fact that we generally don't take things personally. 

 

We happily discuss external but related factors to the hobby such as Games Workshop financials, the Warhammer community or the people that work/worked there.

 

This is no different.

 

Also, it's a legitimate and significant retcon to the established setting that, whether agreed with or not, makes the introduction of Primaris look like a stroke of Shakespearean brilliance.

 

[Scribe]

Just now, Orange Knight said:

This is no different.

 

Yes it is, and you are willfully blind if you dont see how.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Orange Knight said:

One thing that makes this forum exceptional is the fact that we generally don't take things personally. 

 

We happily discuss external but related factors to the hobby such as Games Workshop financials, the Warhammer community or the people that work/worked there.

 

This is no different.

 

Also, it's a legitimate and significant retcon to the established setting that, whether agreed with or not, makes the introduction of Primaris look like a stroke of Shakespearean brilliance.

 

 

I really wish I could agree there.

[Marshal Reinhard]

There's an accepted viewpoint. Agreeing with the accepted viewpoint is not political. Not agreeing with the accepted viewpoint means its political and therefor strictly against the rules.

[Orange Knight]

No, I'm chosing to believe that we can have an adult conversation on this forum, and if people actually try it doesn't have to fall apart into insults and gloating.

 

And frankly I don't like the idea of shutting down or censoring a discussion BEFORE any drama has even occurred. There is no fate but what we make for ourselves and all that.

[Rain]

1 minute ago, Orange Knight said:

One thing that makes this forum exceptional is the fact that we generally don't take things personally. 

 

We happily discuss external but related factors to the hobby such as Games Workshop financials, the Warhammer community or the people that work/worked there.

 

This is no different.

 

Also, it's a legitimate and significant retcon to the established setting that, whether agreed with or not, makes the introduction of Primaris look like a stroke of Shakespearean brilliance.

 

I dislike any retcons or “story progression” for obvious out-of-universe reasons, and rolled my eyes at female Custodes, but this not worse than Primaris. At least the Custodes units don’t change. Primaris changed all units to uglier versions of essentially the same units, forcing entire collections into obsolescence.

 

Primaris destroyed the connection between modern marines and the Legions, as they all wear the same nu-armor and not a mix of Marks dating back to legacy armor handed down since the Heresy. Primaris introduced some of the worst vehicle designs of any fictional IP that I have ever seen. Anyway, this thread is probably going to get Cyclonic torpedoed.

[Scribe]

1 minute ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

There's an accepted viewpoint. Agreeing with the accepted viewpoint is not political. Not agreeing with the accepted viewpoint means its political and therefor strictly against the rules.

 

Correct, and you can see this across any number of fandom's. Now, we can pretend this isnt the case, and watch threads get locked, or we can openly accept that this is the case, and it just isnt discussed.

 

If the mods do their thing, then it simply wont be discussed at all, because it inherently has become political, and the title of the dudes video makes it obvious.

 

Its just one more front, one more battle, in the culture war that nobody gets to escape it seems, unless you simply disconnect from online discourse, and news.

 

Well, I dropped news years ago. I have started selling off all my hobby stuff, and watching this site go down with every other forum/game I follow would be sad, but I was already one foot out the door anyway, because GW's lore has sucked, and their books have sucked, for quite some time.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Scribe said:

 

Its just one more front, one more battle, in the culture war that nobody gets to escape it seems, unless you simply disconnect from online discourse, and news.

 

Well, I dropped news years ago. I have started selling off all my hobby stuff, and watching this site go down with every other forum/game I follow would be sad, but I was already one foot out the door anyway, because GW's lore has sucked, and their books have sucked, for quite some time.

This rings true for me on so many levels...  

[Orange Knight]

1 minute ago, Trysanna said:

Is it tho? It's one of hundreds, if not thousands, of changes that have worked this exact way. A new codex comes out, we learn some new info that maybe contradicts previously established lore or it doesn't, and it's just folded into the setting. Knights used to only be men, and then in a newer codex we're told that they can be women too. Again, the Necron backstory was completely changed from one codex to the next. And multiple people from/working for GW have stated that there is no official cannon, it's all just part of the setting and if contradictions exist then that's just how it is. This isn't like most settings or IP's where there is one official version of it, like even the idea of a retcon doesn't really work for 40k because the information we're given might be unreliable or a myth or an outright lie. That's part of the charm of the setting.

 

Also, y'know, we've had three separate threads on this topic and they've all been a time and half. Maybe we can let this go before I personally have to fight all of you to the death MK style? Please?

 

The entire Necron identity was indeed changed, but it was a new faction that had very little identity and no established history to begin with. They went from metal Tyranids to Space Tomb Kings.

 

Some people still lament the change!

 

I'm not sure the Myth argument holds true when observing the setting externally. The history of 40k is now very detailed. What characters within the setting itself are oblivious to, and know only as misremembered Myth, we as readers know in perfect detail. The Horus Heresy is one such example.

 

The problem really only became apparent to myself when Games Workshop started behaving like the party from 1984, whilst simultaneously saying that everything is canon, which is a contradiction in of itself.

 

[lansalt]

4 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

And frankly I don't like the idea of shutting down or censoring a discussion BEFORE any drama has even occurred.

We already tried and drama occurred. Given that the same people is involved I hardly see how it's going to be different next time. Even if I also have plenty of things to say, I think it's better to keep the peace here when there's no positive outcome possible.
 

[TrawlingCleaner]

=][= We don't allow for sharing of videos with profanity:

Quote

No swearing/profanity

• Anything that can be said via swearing/profanity can be expressed in other terms, often far more articulately. Many words/terms are automatically filtered by the board software, replacing them with acceptable substitutes. Note that the "no swearing/profanity" rule includes all forms and mediums - written, oral (i.e., videos with audible profanity), visual (e.g., graphics with legible profanity) - and similarly includes abbreviations and substitutions (i.e., using alternate characters) as well as obscene gestures.
• If you feel that swearing/profanity is the only way to accurately express yourself, a number of emoticons are available, especially "cuss" emoticon .

 

The video is also inherently politically focused. Both of these are pretty clear in the rules =][=