The setting at present

[novalight]

Like many of you, I've struggled to reconcile the changes to the setting and universe I've been invested in since I was a wee lad. This coupled with changes to the game itself have left with lulls and ups and downs of interest over time but I'm finally hitting a stride and interest I had lost since pre-8th. 

Part of that was engaging with the smaller conflicts, the side notes and the often glossed over aspects of the modern campaign books, novels and codexes. Spears of the Emperor was another turning point, and really highlighted that Imperium Nihilus, nominally cut off from the more 'intact' imperium reflects a state of 'precipice of ruin' that feels more similar to the older lore. 

In that, it's changed how I have engaged with the physical hobby. I've chosen a lesser loved, seemingly vanilla plus chapter (hawk lords) with ties to the overarching plot but little actual influence, carved out a corner of Imperium Nihilus and started engaging in that with friends to create our own stories disconnected from the wider narrative. In that, it does not feel all that different to yesteryear. I actually like exploring the 'changing of the guard' that primaris has brought about and I've found 10th to be malleable enough to allow that on the tabletop with some 'creative license'. My current captain is a former vanguard veteran sergeant, and his surviving squadmates now serve as a modern 'sanguinary guard' unit of 3. I run firstborn as their veteran counterparts (vanvets = firstborn assault marines, sternguard = tacticals) which gives me a tangible difference with the core of primaris 'reinforcements'. To many, this kind of proxying would be a faux pas, but it's reinvigorated me to take a 'macro lens' approach to my physical hobbying. 

I suppose I'm running a tangent at this point, but I feel that the setting, warhammer 40k and the hobby as a whole is what you choose to make of it. Some may find the modern rendition too soulless, I find that soul for me was with how I choose to engage with the setting. Neither is wrong, neither is right. 

[RWJP]

 

When they first introduced “Era Indomitus” there was a chance to retire a lot of the older characters as they jumped the timeline forward a hundred years or so.  I don’t know if it was a case of GW reacting to fan reaction or them just losing their nerve, but they quickly retconned it back to a “mere” 10-20 years.  This meant that it was possible for all the usual suspects to remain in play, alongside the newly introduced Primaris ones, creating the surplus of characters we now have.

As I understand it, the answer to why this happened is neither of the reasons suggested above.

GW realised that by setting the events of Dark Imperium 100+ years later at the very end of the Indomitus Crusade, they had written themselves into a corner. They had limited their ability to tell stories during the crusade because effectively everyone knew how it ended, and probably more important for them, made it harder for themselves to introduce new minis into the lore without creating further inconsistencies.

For example, if they wanted to tell a story set roughly halfway through the Crusade where Bladeguard Veterans are being deployed, how does that fit with the idea that at the very end of the Indomitus Crusade, Primaris were still considered new and not veterans, and only the original "basic" Primaris units were a thing according to the events of the Dark Imperium trilogy? Same thing happens when you consider all the new stuff GW has introduced to the Primaris range since then. 

So by retconning the events of Dark Imperium to be about 12 years after great rift instead of 100+, the actual result is stop further issues and inconsistencies.

But all of this and a lot of other discussion about the lore/fluff of 40k in this thread comes down to one thing in my eyes: GW has pivoted to the idea of a progressing story line, but they don't actually have a plan for what that progression will be, and many of the lore writers are still in the mindset of the pre 8th edition "stagnant" setting.

Much like how the Star Wars sequels ended up being a jumbled mess because there was no plan, and various directors ended up just doing whatever they wanted, the 40k lore is almost in the same place. GW doesn't have a plan for what the overarching narrative should be.

[Deschenus Maximus]

 

Maybe a stupid question but if you "checked out of the lore around 8th edition"  what do you base your feeling that "Everything feels very samey and bland, and stakes-less" on?

From trying to get into it and listening to/reading recaps.

 

 

 

Edited October 1 by Deschenus Maximus

[The Praetorian of Inwit]

@Lord_Valorion Sad but very, very true. Honestly greed is why i expect Sanguinius to come back at some point. 

[Robbienw]

Bring back Andy Chamers, he will sort this out!

[The Praetorian of Inwit]

Bring back Rogal Dorn. That would improve the setting a million, million percent.