Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Nominally, it is unless contradicted by other established fluff (i.e. another book which can happen, so the newer book I guess would be the most established and current fluff we have).
They have that ability to establish fluff because Games Workshop owns them and by extension gives them the blessing to make their works canon and cannon fodder for disgruntled BL readers.
Authors have artistic license (justified whichever way). Most importantly, writers for the actual GW studio (e.g. the Codexes) are free to ignore Black Library or Forge World. Their stuff isn't binding in the way "GW-studio" publications are.
"With Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. [...] Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong." -- Gav Thorpe
"It all stems from the assumption that there's a binding contract between author and reader to adhere to some nonexistent subjective construct or 'true' representation of the setting. There is no such contract, and no such objective truth." -- Andy Hoare
"There is no canon. There's a variety of sources, many of which conflict, but every single one is a lens through which we can see the 40K setting." -- Aaron Dembski-Bowden
And just because BL is "owned" by GW as a company, doesn't mean they have to adhere to the same "canon". Just look at the many Marvel comics alternative timelines/universes, etc..
Black Library has often been described as "alternative take(s)" on the Warhammer 40K (and Fantasy) Universe.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/13 18:03:53
BrotherOfBone wrote:Is everything BL publish canon fluff, and if so, why?
Read anything by C.S.Goto and you know not everything BL publishes can be canon.
But then again, better not read it and just believe us
BrotherOfBone wrote:Unreliable Narrator?
The expanation that everything in a BL book is narrated by an in-universe narrator, doesn't mean it is really true. He might not know everything or he might just have lied or boasted.
BrotherOfBone wrote:Is everything BL publish canon fluff, and if so, why?
Read anything by C.S.Goto and you know not everything BL publishes can be canon. But then again, better not read it and just believe us
BrotherOfBone wrote:Unreliable Narrator?
The expanation that everything in a BL book is narrated by an in-universe narrator, doesn't mean it is really true. He might not know everything or he might just have lied or boasted.
This is actually what my argument was about. My friend said that everything BL publishes is canon, and I said 'but in some BL books there are backflipping Terminators and Devestators with multilasers', he retorted with 'so that's canon then isn't it'
Well then Zweischneid gave you enough original quotes that your friend is clearly wrong.
BTW is your friend playing Necrons, Tyranids or Eldar by chance? Then you could have a little revenge
"There is no canon. There's a variety of sources, many of which conflict, but every single one is a lens through which we can see the 40K setting." -- Aaron Dembski-Bowden
Nope, because Sahaal resurfaces a decade or two after the series is set. I was careful about that. Really, with a Legion having done so much in ten thousand years, it’s unlikely Sahaal’s return would mean that much, and he’d (at best) be just one warlord among a Legion that didn’t like him very much. As much as some fans love him, they’re not looking at it from an in-universe perspective. All canonical Night Lords lore states that Sahaal’s viewpoint is incorrect. That means, well, that it’s incorrect. The subversive “But we were really betrayed” theme works great in BL’s annals a few years ago (and sells books like crazy, as fans love conspiracy theories, and villains who are wronged heroes out for revenge), but now we’re detailing all of those ancient eras more clearly, and according to the lore. This is part of the reason why, in the Night Lords series, he’s not as popular as some fans might have imagined, and why I avoided detailing too much about him. His story is done. He’s not as great as he said he was. He’s just as tarnished as Talos, Xarl, and all the other characters in the series. - Aaron Dembski-Bowden
Essentially, the "no-canon" clause is an excuse GW made to avoid having to put any effort into maintaining consistency within their Universe. Basically the fluff equivalent of Forging a Narrative (tm).
GW, how come bolters make Guardsmen explode in this book, but they get stopped by flak armor in this other book? "Because there is no canon!"
GW, how come my Tyranids get mercilessly slaughtered by Eldau players every game and I'm powerless to stop them? "Because forging a narrative! (tm)"
This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2014/04/15 21:15:39
I'm not even hung up on what is/is not canon... My issue is solely this; why don't my bolt pistols or bolters wreak havok like they seem to do in the books lol? I mean christ, bolt pistols take down all types of baddies and in game I'm better off throwing a brick.
"While it is true that there is a very small sub-species of geek who are adept at assembling small figures and painting them with breath taking detail; the rest of us are basically the paste eating retards who failed art class. Because of this, what we build never even faintly resembles the picture on the box when we're done." - Coyote Sharptongue
Actually, I think you'll find bricks are S: User AP -
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Zarynterk wrote: I'm not even hung up on what is/is not canon... My issue is solely this; why don't my bolt pistols or bolters wreak havok like they seem to do in the books lol? I mean christ, bolt pistols take down all types of baddies and in game I'm better off throwing a brick.
Because propaganda often falls apart in the face of reality.
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
Zarynterk wrote: I'm not even hung up on what is/is not canon... My issue is solely this; why don't my bolt pistols or bolters wreak havok like they seem to do in the books lol? I mean christ, bolt pistols take down all types of baddies and in game I'm better off throwing a brick.
Because propaganda often falls apart in the face of reality.
Now that gave me a chuckle.
"While it is true that there is a very small sub-species of geek who are adept at assembling small figures and painting them with breath taking detail; the rest of us are basically the paste eating retards who failed art class. Because of this, what we build never even faintly resembles the picture on the box when we're done." - Coyote Sharptongue
If you haven't done so already, get a copy of the Infantryman's Uplifting Primer, and compare the in-universe text provided there to what we, the informed reader, know about the setting.
The sections on Orks and Tau are particularly amusing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/15 21:42:19
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised.
Psienesis wrote: If you haven't done so already, get a copy of the Infantryman's Uplifting Primer, and compare the in-universe text provided there to what we, the informed reader, know about the setting.
The sections on Orks and Tau are particularly amusing.
"Genestealers are slow and sluggish and have blunt claws."
You can hear the Blood Angels laughing an entire galaxy away.
Midnightdeathblade wrote: Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
Essentially, the "no-canon" clause is an excuse GW made to avoid having to put any effort into maintaining consistency within their Universe. Basically the fluff equivalent of Forging a Narrative (tm).
Is it? Or is that your interpretation of it.
From your argument, I sense a certain bias on your side in thinking that a consistent canon is something "good", and creative variety unconstrained by such a corset is something "bad". Or at least, that the latter would be preferable to the former.
That is not the case.
As evidenced by the Abnett Interview, the GW-Studio wanted (!) to enforce and maintain a consistent canon. It only stopped doing so after being given good reasons not to, not least by the BL authors.
Kroothawk wrote: Well then Zweischneid gave you enough original quotes that your friend is clearly wrong. BTW is your friend playing Necrons, Tyranids or Eldar by chance? Then you could have a little revenge
He used to play Necrons, and does play Tyranids currently, what sort of revenge do you have in mind?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/04/16 10:58:16
Nope, because Sahaal resurfaces a decade or two after the series is set. I was careful about that. Really, with a Legion having done so much in ten thousand years, it’s unlikely Sahaal’s return would mean that much, and he’d (at best) be just one warlord among a Legion that didn’t like him very much. As much as some fans love him, they’re not looking at it from an in-universe perspective. All canonical Night Lords lore states that Sahaal’s viewpoint is incorrect. That means, well, that it’s incorrect. The subversive “But we were really betrayed” theme works great in BL’s annals a few years ago (and sells books like crazy, as fans love conspiracy theories, and villains who are wronged heroes out for revenge), but now we’re detailing all of those ancient eras more clearly, and according to the lore. This is part of the reason why, in the Night Lords series, he’s not as popular as some fans might have imagined, and why I avoided detailing too much about him. His story is done. He’s not as great as he said he was. He’s just as tarnished as Talos, Xarl, and all the other characters in the series. - Aaron Dembski-Bowden
That's just him talking about the portrayal of the Night Lords, though, not the nature of 40K canon. When he spoke about 40K canon specifically, he said that it was all up for interpretation.
BlaxicanX wrote: Essentially, the "no-canon" clause is an excuse GW made to avoid having to put any effort into maintaining consistency within their Universe. Basically the fluff equivalent of Forging a Narrative (tm).
Alternatively, perhaps it was a genuine creative choice? It's often said that 40K is a setting rather than a story, and not having a strict policy on canon works with that. It gives creators and fans much more freedom to interpret and utilise things than would otherwise be the case.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/04/16 13:25:55
Order of the Righteous Armour - 542 points so far.
6000 pts - 
4000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 
1000 pts
Order of the Righteous Armour - 542 points so far.