Possible Saturnine box?

[Antarius]

Yeah, I mean, I know it's been mentioned. I've just somehow never noticed it, which is sort of weird, because I used to read everything in those books.

[LSM]

The earliest use of 'Saturnine' may be 2012's The Horus Heresy Book One -Betrayal, where in the 'Terminator Armour [Great Crusade Era]' text (pg 237) it says:

 

"...Several different Terminator armour patterns were developed roughly concurrently by different Forge Worlds during the later decades of the Great Crusade, including the Indomitus, Tartaros and Saturnine patterns, most of which were functionally identical."

 

Cataphractii TDA had a separate entry, noting that it was more heavily protected and slower than the other three patterns. Rules wise, Legion Terminator Squads had 'generic' TDA, and could exchange it with Cataphractii TDA for free. 

[TheVoidDragon]

13 hours ago, Bryan Blaire said:

I can think of only one other model of a Terminator armor (also an early model) that doesn’t have a specific pattern name, what is listed as “early design #2” on Lexicanum. Early design #3 bears all the hallmarks of what became Indomitus, so I would not be convinced that it actually would be called anything other than prototype Indomitus, but hey, GW could surprise us - maybe that’s what Gav was remembering as Nocturne.

 

 

 

It wasn't those other ones Gav was saying might be Nocturne, it was in response to one of the pieces of art that the community commonly claimed was "Saturnine".

 

Quote

So in the entire grand scheme, yes, it seems like GW had only a few options - make an armor style similar to the pre-existing “early design #1” and call it Saturnine, make an armor style based on the (IMO) even uglier “early design #2” and call it Saturnine, or make up a completely new style of armor and call it Saturnine.

 

Or they could have made a miniature similar to the classic designs and called it something entirely different than "Saturnine". It's not as if there's some sort an exhaustive list they have to choose names from and that was literally all they could go for.

 

Quote

 

So in all likelihood, the community and GW may have picked the same style to call Saturnine at around the same time and there wasn’t anything other than simple logic that moved us down the road to where we are today.

 

So no, I don’t think it’s a leap at all and have outlined a perfectly plausible alternate to your “constant repeated misinformation” claim of naming influence, which frankly seems more ludicrous given that GW both listens and also doesn’t give a rat’s rear end what the community wants or says, as evidenced by numerous decisions they have made it the last couple of years. GW really does what it wants independent of the clamor from the community.

 

So what you think happened is basically this, then:

• The name "Saturnine" first appeared in the rulebook " Horus Heresy - Betrayal" released in 2012, which consisted of a simple mention of examples of names for armour patterns alongside Indomidus and Tartarus,  No description of the suit was given.
• GW then at some point decides that that single off-hand mention name must be the original Terminator miniatures, as if they plan out lore to the extent where they'd feel a need to connect two arbitrary things even when they were not doing anything with them. They keep that information to themselves.
• The community also coincidentally happens to see that name and looks at that specific miniature, and also decides that must be "Saturnine", despite that not once having been canonically mentioned. Over the years it's then repeated so much that that style "Saturnine" that most claiming that don't realize that not once been described to us as Saturnine officially.
• The armour is next officially mentioned by GW 7 years after it first was, in a Warhammer community article specifically talking about Terminator armour variants. They include art and links for all the other patterns. They mention saturnine, and even though at this point they apparently must have behind the scenes consider those classic styles "Saturnine", still make absolutely no hint towards that being the case.
• The armour is officially mentioned again in version 2 of the Horus Heresy rulebook from 2022. It's featured on a timeline of armour patterns, right at the end making it one of the latest suits. Again no hint or mention is given to what they consider Saturnine to actually be.
• And now eventually, they decided to make miniatures featuring that classic aesthetic - but it totally had nothing to do with the community having eagerly posted miniatures and discussions of that being "Saturnine" for all those years. GW just coincidentally also call it "Saturnine" because that's what they've considered it to be for the past 10+ years since it was first mentioned even though they just didn't say so, meaning even though the community had claimed for years that that style is canonically "saturnine" (even though it had never been said) it is just a completely irrelevant coincidence that had absolutely no bearing on now getting a miniature with that specific name that they also happened to give it.
• It also just happens to make all those community claims of it being canonically "Saturnine" totally correct after all because even though it had not once been said to us, they were actually just repeating super secret information that no one knew but GW!  Claiming something as if it were a canon fact even when we had not once been told that wasn't actually "misinformation" because they were in actuality just repeating hidden lore knowledge yet to be told to us until years later (that has also not even been revealed to us as having been the case anyway)! Doesnt matter what the lore/canon does tell us....it's what they we have absolutely no indication/affirmation of that matters most!

That level of jumping through hoops is what you consider just as "perfectly plausible" as simply the idea that an off-hand name mentioned in a book that the community latched onto as "Saturnine" and talked about as such for years, prompted GW to finally make those "Saturnine" Terminators everyone kept going on about for years? 

 

 

Quote

And provide proof to back your assertions

 

 

You started this whole thing off by trying to make out that not having proof something isn't the case is an indication that it actually is the case, remember.

This argument has gone on enough I think though. Again, they're cool miniatures and it's nice to have something based on that classic design. I just would have preferred that they had been called something other than "Saturnine". You clearly like it being called that while I'm not too fond of it, but neither is wrong.

Edited 30 minutes ago by TheVoidDragon

[siegfriedfr]

13 hours ago, Bryan Blaire said:

So no, I don’t think it’s a leap at all and have outlined a perfectly plausible alternate to your “constant repeated misinformation” claim of naming influence, which frankly seems more ludicrous given that GW both listens and also doesn’t give a rat’s rear end what the community wants or says, as evidenced by numerous decisions they have made it the last couple of years. GW really does what it wants independent of the clamor from the community.

 

(And by all means, edit away - it’s already in clear text what you originally said and agreed with alongside the date/time stamp, but if you don’t think it’s a clear reflection of your views, then you should say what you mean, and provide proof to back your assertions.)

 

The only "proof" that exists is the accumulation of sources.

You can see this in this part of the article on the lexicanum which has documented the use of "saturnine" in the warhammer publications, as well as the only known artworks of eggheads terminators :

 

https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Terminator_Armour#Development

https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Terminator_Armour#Salamanders_prototype_Terminators

https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Terminator_Armour#Saturnine_Pattern

 

Saturnine was never linked to the eggheads terminators by GW, only by some parts of the 40k online community.

 

GW has eventually seen it fit to finally make the link between egghead and saturnine, so the case is closed, but it does feel like they didn't care to actually check their own lore, and just googled it, making fanlore canon. Not the first time they made that mistake, as exemplified by the little drama surrounding the Old World map (please google that yourself for "proof").

[TheVoidDragon]

13 minutes ago, siegfriedfr said:

Not the first time they made that mistake, as exemplified by the little drama surrounding the Old World map (please google that yourself for "proof").

 

 

Had forgot about that, was wondering if there were any examples of when something like that happened!

Edited 7 minutes ago by TheVoidDragon

[Bryan Blaire]

I’ve already indicated that I did think that creating a new Terminator armor style was a missed opportunity here with the “Saturnine” armor.

 

And yes, I consider the concurrent evolution of the naming, independent of any factual evidence to the contrary, to be as plausible as your “story you tell yourself making it true from your point of view” that GW only named it that because the community said so.

 

And you are incorrect in stating that a lack of proof was requested as evidence. Here is what I said:

Quote

 

”

Do you have actual proof of that which shows that GW never intended the original Terminator suits to be named “Saturnine” pattern or is that your inference because they haven’t said it outright until now?

 

If there is lore somewhere that shows that, then yes, you have a point - you probably should quote it as support of your claims. If you don’t, then your argument that it’s “incorrect lore” is off the mark and you are likely spreading misinformation yourself.”

 

 

 

So as we can see, I asked for positive proof showing that GW had not intended to name this pattern as Saturnine - this could have been something as simple as Gav saying “that armor is the officially called Nocturne” - we can see that he himself said that wasn’t official though, which means he never spoke to what it officially was called internally (if anything). This entire time I’ve been asking you to post proof of your assertions that it was only named “Saturnine” because the community kept repeating it, and you have failed to do so as yet - I have not said that a lack of evidence is somehow evidence, that has been your misinterpretation it seems.