The closing of the Necromancy thread and its consequences...

[The Scorpion]

... have been a slight but persistent and noticeable annoyance for the Bolter & Chainsword community.

 

We should have a place to discuss old stories and rediscover hidden gems. Either that or be allowed to revive old topics via necromancy, because as things currently stand there is not much place to discuss anything but the most recent (or upcoming) releases.

 

Those are my two cents, but this thread is meant to beyond that.

 

This is a thread to agree, disagree, and hopefully come up with a decision concerning this topic.

[darkhorse0607]

I don't think it's that much of an issue honestly. When the other thread was closed, the mod said that if you want to discuss a book, regardless of the release date you can just make a new topic, so no one is actively preventing the discussion around older novels. Creating individual threads would honestly be more helpful for folks looking for reviews or discussion anyway given how big the old thread got. 

 

That all being said, if this is more about forum traffic than anything (it do be dead here), I just think that is more about the current state of BL than anything. If/when releases come, discussion normally picks up again until GW forgets to release anything. 

[wecanhaveallthree]

The Necromancy thread was a book club thread. It wasn't just 'hey remember this book? here is my review of this book', it did exactly what a book club does: span off all sorts of discussions about themes, links between other books, historically interesting trivia and just general thoughts and feelings. It was, in the immortal words of F. Gump, like a box of chocolates - you never knew what you were going to get. 

 

Creating individual threads is all well and good, but I find myself much more interested in that random, free-flowing discussion which moved along at a decent clip (if today or this week's reviews didn't interest you, there would be something else tomorrow or next week, or you might not personally be reading 40K right now, but it might trigger your interest in doing so, whereupon you would contribute primary grist for the discussion mill). A 'book club' thread feeds the community, the community feeds the thread, and it drives engagement with the forum as a whole because you turn up for Book Club but see something else you want to talk about/contribute to as well. It also - for a marvel - didn't degenerate into crudposting or waffle. 90% of comments there engaged in the subject matter, and the other 10% were totally inoffensive and provided the necessary social lubricant to keep things bopping along. 

 

I do agree that the discussion about BL feels a little flat right now, but that's rather the point of having these 'book club' threads: keeping people in the loop for when things do pick up. In my desperation, I've personally turned to Battletech, so help me. 

[The Scorpion]

52 minutes ago, darkhorse0607 said:

Creating individual threads would honestly be more helpful for folks looking for reviews or discussion anyway given how big the old thread got. 

 

This makes a lot of sense, but how do we prevent the creation of redundant threads everytime someone finishes a near-forgotten book?

[darkhorse0607]

42 minutes ago, wecanhaveallthree said:

I do agree that the discussion about BL feels a little flat right now, but that's rather the point of having these 'book club' threads: keeping people in the loop for when things do pick up. In my desperation, I've personally turned to Battletech, so help me. 

 

I finally got started in The Expanse series, so Black Library not publishing anything has forced me to be productive and cross some things off my "one day" list.

 

I want to be clear, even with what I said, I do miss the Necromancy thread, I get the want/need for something like that. That being said, having gone back and re-read the reasoning behind the mods decision, I also get why it was closed. Having discussions that branch out from the main book is well and fine, but some people just don't know when to stop. Or manage to derail any discussion about a given author with the same complaints. You could argue the solution wouldve been to either give those folks a time out, or ban them and let the thread continue, but I am not a mod.

 

Additionally, I think one thing that would help traffic here is the mod team moving the threads about Black Library topics from the main News forum to, you know, the Black Library section. As is, the main discussion isn't even here, it is in a branch that will bury it and move on while the same group here persists. 

 

47 minutes ago, The Scorpion said:

 

This makes a lot of sense, but how do we prevent the creation of redundant threads everytime someone finishes a near-forgotten book?

 

Valid question. Again it would be up to the mods (dunno how many are active in here anyway but still). Until they say anything it could just be opening new threads as you go, someone can link in a comment to the older post.

 

That being said, given how few and far between book reviews/threads have been outside of the big ones (Ashes of the Imperium for example), I cant imagine there would be that many threads that arent duplicate of posts from years ago anyway. 

[Ubiquitous1984]

There is nothing more sorry than a message board full of posts with only one or two replies.  
 

The necromancy post was ideal because people could dip in and out of it at their leisure.  
 

I generally don’t click on any post for a book I haven’t yet read, but I’d happily check out the necromancy post and skim over the books that were on my to-read list.  
 

 

[Roomsky]

It was pretty great. I bet whoever made it was very smart and handsome.

[theSpirea]

The necromancy thread was excellent and I loved it. Let's be honest, BL books aren't, with exceptions, something that you'd need a dedicated thread about. The stories are generic and often don't bring anything new or worthwhile discussing for tens of pages in a thread. You often end up with a thread where one or two people reply. I'm guilty of it too, but for example, I recently finished Chem Dog and while it wasn't bad, I have nothing to say about it outside of 'it was okay'. I'm not going to create a thread about it, but I might add that not-very-valuable post in a big existing thread.

The only thing that gets traction here is ADB/Abnett, and mainly under HH where lore is discussed rather than the books themselves. I vote to bring back the necro thread. After all, it was created by very smart, not sure if handsome, person.

[Nagashsnee]

The decision to close the single most active topic here. In the hopes that taking away what made it active (constant engagement due to sheer number of users driving engagement and activity) and spreading the rest like a thin layer of butter would replicate the results was certainly A CHOICE. Only they dint even do that, it was expected we would all spread it for them.   

I was half way thru re reading the siege (well audiobook) and would do a short review of each book, i finished the siege never did another review.  As if opening a dedicated thread so i can talk about how Fury of Magnus was doomed to disapoint every one and please no one is a good idea. Only for it to be the next one, a week latter, and the next one...

 

Necromancy thread was the PERFECT ground for lively discussion of the existing backcatologue leaving the main page to be about the current releases. It worked perfectly and was active and lively, so of course it got taken care of.  I would love to see the metrics on activity for the before and after on the BL sunforum. 

[Nagashsnee]

On 6/14/2026 at 2:53 AM, darkhorse0607 said:

I don't think it's that much of an issue honestly. When the other thread was closed, the mod said that if you want to discuss a book, regardless of the release date you can just make a new topic, so no one is actively preventing the discussion around older novels. Creating individual threads would honestly be more helpful for folks looking for reviews or discussion anyway given how big the old thread got. 

 

That all being said, if this is more about forum traffic than anything (it do be dead here), I just think that is more about the current state of BL than anything. If/when releases come, discussion normally picks up again until GW forgets to release anything. 

 

If only there was a corrulation between removing the hub of engament and activity and a decrease in trafffic. 

 

Having 100 seperate threads DOES NOT CREATE ENGAMENT. The magic of the necromancy hub was that in being active it drew people in, people would have opinions on what was posted and almost always bring in other BL works/authors, this would create more talk on said items, someone would pass by and be like 'hey THEY DID write a votstroyan focussed book back in the day' cue new review and the circle becomes self sustaining. 

 

It is also easier, faster and more likely for someone to REPLY to another poster. Then go create a totally new thread. 

 

Saying that people could awlays wonder off and try and start totally new discussions misses the point in that you are KILLING the existing flow and discussion. 

[Felix Antipodes]

I wasn’t all that upset when the Necromancy thread was locked up, especially since the mods were talking about a restructure of the entire BL forum.  This is still yet to occur - it will be a big job from the description given, so no shade intended.

I can understand why some frater miss the thread.  It was a great way for new readers to get info on an older story, or older readers to either reminisce about a past read or be reminded that it was still on the shelf unread.  Frater @wecanhaveallthree gives a good defence of it above.

The trouble was it often wandered off topic (not always a bad thing) or descended into the usual I hate everything by [name your fav hack] so why are you saying you like his output guff.  Everyone has a right to an opinion.  They don’t have a right to ambush anyone who has a different view on an author they dislike.

One change that could be made is to re-organise threads by author output.  That way it would act as a signpost - if you don’t like “John Smith” don’t bother entering this thread.  Not that I think that would work - it would be like a red flag to some, who couldn’t help themselves .

Of course, the main reason we are missing a look back thread is because so little is getting released at this time 

[grailkeeper]

One of the reasons it was closed was that it was hard to search, but I don't recall anyone ever making that complaint. 

[DarkChaplain]

7 hours ago, Felix Antipodes said:

I wasn’t all that upset when the Necromancy thread was locked up, especially since the mods were talking about a restructure of the entire BL forum.  This is still yet to occur - it will be a big job from the description given, so no shade intended.

 

I admit to rolling my eyes back when that "restructuring" justification was made, because.. that wasn't the first time that idea was floated, and never acted upon. To be honest, it wasn't even a good idea in the first place, so I was glad that it never happened. 

 

Funnily enough, back then the reason for it was.... saving space. Too many threads, needing to cull the unnecessary threads/posts and trimming down the forum. Which was nuts, considering the regular weight of text data on any server (if you want to have a laugh, look up what the entirety of the english wikipedia weighs - you probably have an USB Stick lying around somewhere that'd fit all its articles). So when the justification this time was the concentration of posts and the prompting to make more individual threads, that was extra funny to me.

 

And yeah, that "nobody made that complaint" point rings true to me as well. We've had a few of these instances over the years where moderation went a bit overboard (often from global mods, not subforum mods), resulting in changes being forced that left no winners in the community, or worse, actually turned people off from posting entirely. I had a few conversations with folks who left as a result of strange events like these, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who has a PM or two in their inbox about such things. Heck, I recall when we had active posters picked as mods for this subforum, who then rarely to never posted again within a few weeks, even though their contributions had always been appreciated. I certainly liked their posts. It's a pity they either washed or burned out over it.

 

....all of this is to say: Give me back my Crying and Angry Emoji Reactions, you cowardly gretchin :'D

 

Edit: I also have it on good authority that the creator of the Necromancy thread was indeed rather smart and attractive.

Edited June 16 by DarkChaplain

[Nagashsnee]

On 6/16/2026 at 2:24 PM, Felix Antipodes said:

 

The trouble was it often wandered off topic (not always a bad thing) or descended into the usual I hate everything by [name your fav hack] so why are you saying you like his output guff.  Everyone has a right to an opinion.  They don’t have a right to ambush anyone who has a different view on an author they dislike.

One change that could be made is to re-organise threads by author output.  That way it would act as a signpost - if you don’t like “John Smith” don’t bother entering this thread.  Not that I think that would work - it would be like a red flag to some, who couldn’t help themselves .

 

 

This just sounds like toxic positivity. Forget the fact that the way BL works avoiding authors becomes impossible. I may not like, lets think of a TOTALLY random example.....Nick Kyme as a author, but if i wanted to read dawn of fire or HH, or some others series i am going to have to read Nick Kyme (may the Gods forgive BL for making me).  Saying oh you dont like Kyme so just stay away and  avoid talking about his books, de facto means skipping the conversation on entire series of books. 

 

Likewise some factions are kinda stuck with certain authors, telling a Salamander fan to avoid Kyme threads is telling him his opinion on Salamanders books is not wanted.  All of the above drives conversations away. Drives engament away.

 

Now at times people go too far, that is true FOR ANY TOPIC, its also why MODERATORS exists, to you know, moderate issues warnings and if people persist in bad behavious bans. 

 

I have also noticed a % of people on here who just do not want negative views of any part of BL books, everything has to be happy, happy chats, happy topics, happy views.  Sometimes BOOKS ARE BAD, in the kind of way that isnt tied to opinion. Editorial drops the ball, the plot is full of holes, the lore is ripped to shreds, etc etc. And people should be FREE to say their piece on it.  Disagreements are part of discussions. People have every right to full 5 pages of talk with NEGATIVE remarks as they have to gush over how great it is for the same 5 pages. Sometimes a 10 page thread will have both. 

 

Part of what made the Necromancy thread special was people gushing over some random book from 10 years ago only for someone else do go 'really? that piece of :cuss:?' and then having a back and forth on it.  Heck this place needs MORE active conversation on oposite views not bloody safe space threads. 

[grailkeeper]

4 hours ago, Nagashsnee said:

 

This just sounds like toxic positivity. Forget the fact that the way BL works avoiding authors becomes impossible. I may not like, lets think of a TOTALLY random example.....Nick Kyme as a author, but if i wanted to read dawn of fire or HH, or some others series i am going to have to read Nick Kyme (may the Gods forgive BL for making me).  Saying oh you dont like Kyme so just stay away and  avoid talking about his books, de facto means skipping the conversation on entire series of books. 

 

Likewise some factions are kinda stuck with certain authors, telling a Salamander fan to avoid Kyme threads is telling him his opinion on Salamanders books is not wanted.  All of the above drives conversations away. Drives engament away.

 

Now at times people go too far, that is true FOR ANY TOPIC, its also why MODERATORS exists, to you know, moderate issues warnings and if people persist in bad behavious bans. 

 

I have also noticed a % of people on here who just do not want negative views of any part of BL books, everything has to be happy, happy chats, happy topics, happy views.  Sometimes BOOKS ARE BAD, in the kind of way that isnt tied to opinion. Editorial drops the ball, the plot is full of holes, the lore is ripped to shreds, etc etc. And people should be FREE to say their piece on it.  Disagreements are part of discussions. People have every right to full 5 pages of talk with NEGATIVE remarks as they have to gush over how great it is for the same 5 pages. Sometimes a 10 page thread will have both. 

 

Part of what made the Necromancy thread special was people gushing over some random book from 10 years ago only for someone else do go 'really? that piece of :cuss:?' and then having a back and forth on it.  Heck this place needs MORE active conversation on oposite views not bloody safe space threads. 

 

 

May Nick Kyme write your favourite chapter- the gravest curse a BL fan can place on another. 

[gaurdian31]

1 hour ago, grailkeeper said:

 

 

May Nick Kyme write your favourite chapter- the gravest curse a BL fan can place on another. 

Could be C.S. Goto

[grailkeeper]

46 minutes ago, gaurdian31 said:

Could be C.S. Goto

Never heard anyone actually discuss Gotos books beyond memeing.

[darkhorse0607]

7 hours ago, Nagashsnee said:

 

This just sounds like toxic positivity. Forget the fact that the way BL works avoiding authors becomes impossible. I may not like, lets think of a TOTALLY random example.....Nick Kyme as a author, but if i wanted to read dawn of fire or HH, or some others series i am going to have to read Nick Kyme (may the Gods forgive BL for making me).  Saying oh you dont like Kyme so just stay away and  avoid talking about his books, de facto means skipping the conversation on entire series of books. 

 

 

But that isn't why the Necromancy thread got closed down. Anyone who was in that thread when it was closed knows that. It wasn't a good faith discussion about the author or the book, it was people (people who didn't even frequent this sub-forum) being triggered because he used "they" as a pronoun or whatever the specific character was. A similar thing would often happen whenever ADB was brought up about his tropes.

 

To pretend it was closed because of actual discussion of the novel and not "but my free speech" because the mods flat-out told them to stop is just disingenuous 

 

As for why they didn't mute/ban those folks, clear out the thread and continue, I have already said my piece on that.

[Felix Antipodes]

Maybe I should have been clearer (and less attempting at irony) when I wrote the above.  I was not advocating for such a system but attempting to show superficial changes wouldn’t solve the problems that closed down the thread.

I’m no Pollyanna, only wanting positivity in the reviews.  I’ve written plenty of negative pieces myself over the years, including stories from Kyme.  What I was pointing out was the posts where they attack the writer for daring to write, not for writing badly.

[gaurdian31]

17 hours ago, grailkeeper said:

Never heard anyone actually discuss Gotos books beyond memeing.

I have read a fair few of them and man I would rather read Kyme any day.

[The Scorpion]

The thread about reviving necromancy is becoming as active as the old necromancy thread

 

Mayhaps we should use this thread as the new necromancy

[Nagashsnee]

On 6/18/2026 at 1:39 AM, darkhorse0607 said:

 

But that isn't why the Necromancy thread got closed down. Anyone who was in that thread when it was closed knows that. It wasn't a good faith discussion about the author or the book, it was people (people who didn't even frequent this sub-forum) being triggered because he used "they" as a pronoun or whatever the specific character was. A similar thing would often happen whenever ADB was brought up about his tropes.

 

To pretend it was closed because of actual discussion of the novel and not "but my free speech" because the mods flat-out told them to stop is just disingenuous 

 

As for why they didn't mute/ban those folks, clear out the thread and continue, I have already said my piece on that.

See i remember this for the Mike Brooks eldar book thread, that went off the rails hard. But i dont remember it going so bad in Necromancy, might just have missed it. 

 

 

15 hours ago, gaurdian31 said:

I have read a fair few of them and man I would rather read Kyme any day.

Damn, Gotto is so long ago and i was so young. A Gotto read followed by a Kyme read followed by a actual comparrison sounds kinda interesting. 

 

12 hours ago, The Scorpion said:

The thread about reviving necromancy is becoming as active as the old necromancy thread

 

Mayhaps we should use this thread as the new necromancy

Honestly at this point someone is just going to open a 'reanimated discussions' thread and see if they can get away with it.

[DarkChaplain]

Just call it Reanimation Protocols or sth heretekal.

 

Problem being that the modpost ruled out a replacement thread before going into all the nonsense about indexing and splitting and what have you. I guess since that never happened, the ruling is kinda void, huh :')

[Krelious]

23 hours ago, The Scorpion said:

The thread about reviving necromancy is becoming as active as the old necromancy thread

 

Mayhaps we should use this thread as the new necromancy

So I almost finished reading Dune and its just amazing how much Warhammer40k "borrows" from that series. I find the author's ideas about AI, transhumanism, and spirituality to largely be on point but I'd have to I think state the obvious that I think Warhammer 40k became more of a cultural marvel because it decided to ensapsulate its message within a Judeo-Christian and Roman framework which I think resonates with westerners more than Islamic ideas and naming conventions.  But I guess its also trying to be Lawrence of Arabia in space. 

 

Now at the same time ive also been reading Hand of Abbadon and holy :cuss: is this book kinda like I take it to doctor's offices to kill time and its just words coming off a page. Its not necessarily bad its just a lot of the characters like Ferren Arious I couldnt give two :cuss:s about. I feel like im just reading this book because I want to get to The Silent King which seems like it could be good. 

 

Also when all the 12 limited editions of the Horus Heresy novels come out im gonna run out of shelf space as some of these books I already have multiple copies of, lucky that False Gods all I have is a paper back but when say First Heretic comes out ill have 4 copies of that book and I wont know where to put the Hardback and the new Leather hardback in as I guess they will both be in my ADB special edition section or I'll have to put all 12 books in their own row. 

 

Now this might be a Cliché statement as I did Re-read the new Horus Rising edition and I have to say it was better than I remembered it likely because when I first read it I was likely depressed and kind of in this phase of forcing myself to do things. I mean really especially when you read the early Horus Heresy novels everything feels like a gut punch because Horus and the Luna Wolves are so noble and you know exactly whats going to happen to them.

[LemartesTheLost]

On 6/13/2026 at 8:40 PM, darkhorse0607 said:

Additionally, I think one thing that would help traffic here is the mod team moving the threads about Black Library topics from the main News forum to, you know, the Black Library section. As is, the main discussion isn't even here, it is in a branch that will bury it and move on while the same group here persists. 

 

I don't think that this paragraph has gotten enough attention throughout this discussion. I was very much a fan of the necromancy thread and would like to see it return, but darkhorse has really hit the nail on the head here. If we actually brought back necromancy AND funneled BL discussion to this corner of the forum, this could be a really hoppin' place!