Permanent death of heroes and villains in Warhammer 40K lore. We need it.

[Alby the Slayer]

I was watching the latest video of @Chapter Master Valrak about the possibility of Commissar Yarrick to return in the next Armaggedon war/story and I was again thinking about the necessity , for me, to see some heroes or villains to die a permanent death in the lore.

 

Aren't you tired to see epic battles when no one with a recognizable name die?

Stories like that has no meanings, no stakes. Every one returns with some kind of gimmicks and it's pretty lame.

I don't see the problem to let die important characters.

 

If you are in this hobby for decades you know the names and you have read stories and did battles with them for a lifetime.

If you are new to the hobby the famous names are not something you got attached to because you didn't have the time to.

If you play the game you can always ask your opponent to use that character mini as your general/captain whatever to live battles in his name, or play the game as some "historic" battle.

 

Like this we can build a proper story made of heroes and villains who fought and die, not immortal hollow names with no stakes and no depth. And we can have new heroes rising from the bottom, to know them and see them as new champions, much like Lysander and all of his story in the Imperial Fists Chapter.

Also new amazing miniatures.

 

Also also we have so many names in the lore, for Emperor's sakes.

I don't mean to kill Marneus Calgar(also why not) but can you please kill in some amazing conflict one of the other twenty gazilion UM character, just to make an example?

 

Probably it's not what the people wants since GW is not doing this and it's smashing it but I'm curious to know what you think.

So I made this pool :

https://take.supersurvey.com/poll5569308xd73de2e2-164

Let me know what you think Fraters and Sorors, newbies and veterans.

 

PS: if the pool is not allowed, please mods let me know, thank you.

Edited 16 hours ago by Alby the Slayer

[LameBeard]

Don’t click on suspicious links, kids!

 

Absolutely agree some real death is needed and absolutely no reason GW can’t sell and we can’t play games with “dead” characters’ models.  We had a Solar Macharius model, for example.

 

They made it a story not a setting, so it’s a problem they created. I guess they are doing a bit, it’s why we have the next generation like Ursula Creed and maybe we’ll see more of that?

[gideon stargreave]

In the past, heroes like Tycho and Solar Macharius and Saint Praxedes were in codexes but already dead. I’d prefer a return to this 

[Evil Eye]

Characters actually dying would be absolutely fine. The problem is GW trying to lock the game into "the present" of 40K and retiring any characters who do die from the rules and model range. As mentioned above, prior to this we had plenty of characters who were dead by the then-present on their introduction; more a thing in WHFB admittedly but it still existed in 40K. Nowadays GW seems to have taken a leaf out of 1980s Hasbro's book and decided that death is only to be used to get rid of a character they don't sell anymore.

 

Admittedly this would be far less of an issue if 40K hadn't become so absurdly focused on named characters in the first place but there we go.

[ThaneOfTas]

10 hours ago, Evil Eye said:

The problem is GW trying to lock the game into "the present" of 40K and retiring any characters who do die from the rules and model range.

Fully agreed.

 

> Have a progressing story with new units and armies being introduced.

 

Or

 

> Have characters die but their models and rules stick around to encourage playing historically set games.

 

Look I recognise that not everyone has this problem. But I hate seeing things like Captain Typho leading primaris marines, as it just doesn't make sense, but if you start killing off characters then this will be the obvious end result.