I've recently figured out that it is impossible for me to play the bad guys in Warhammer and Warhammer 40k. So when I started off I chose to play fantasy with the Chaos Daemons. That was short lived. I just couldn't get a good grasp on the "fluff", it didn't appeal to me. I've, since then changed to the Imperial Guard who I absolutely love. IT was a rough start but I eventually figured out how to run a good solid mechanized list. Now I get to my problem... I want to start up a new army, but want to steer away from Space Marines if I can, because they seem overplayed, though when I look the other armies that look good are "evil". Is this a curse or a gift? Can someone please help me out on this one. Thanks.

Cue people telling you there's no such thing as "good guys" and completely ignoring the nature of morality.
Check out the Dark Angels codex. They're what marines used be like before SW and BT. Interesting, powerful in their way, but no T6 heroes or Long Fang silliness.

I dont think Nids are evil. There is no great leadership telling people to hate, or steal, or kick puppies. Nids (who I just have no want to play) are no more evil than a bee, or a crab or a shark. It only knows that it needs to eat and make more in order to live. I am sure if Nids were able to speak, and able to reason past the natural need to do what they do, then I would think different.
Tau are not evil, for the greater good and all. Imperal Dogma just stats they are evil and wrong for being blue or something
The only "badguys" I would think of are Dark Eldar, and Necrons, cause even Chaos, while they do bad things, at times, I am sure people turned to Chaos for good reasons.

That's the beauty of the game. There really are no bad guys. Just differing shades of grey.

"Good" armies are as follows:

Tau
Eldar

Yup that's pretty much it for non-marine armies.

Now you could use space wolves and just spam wolf riders, fast attack wolves, guys riding wolves in elite and HQ slots, and furthermore with one guy you can take wolves as troops.

Then again, you can run whole biker armies with the normal codex for marines.

Sisters of battle are also marines in a sense, but then not really.

The only other thing you could do is run Grey Knights as an inquisition/assassin army.

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:That's the beauty of the game. There really are no bad guys. Just differing shades of grey.

This is as opposed to real life in which objective boolean morality prevails, of course.

Joey wrote:Cue people telling you there's no such thing as "good guys" and completely ignoring the nature of morality.

There are no such thing as "good guys"...in 40k.

Lol, no seriously, there are some good guys, but they are few and far between. Even then, they've got a little bit of dirt on them. If you want clear cut good guys, you're pretty S.O.L. I think if you want that kind of three-color heroism sort of vibe, then fantasy might be more your speed. That being said, Salamanders, Grey Knights, Ultramarines, Imperial Fists, (and about a dozen other Space Marine offshoots) can be classified as "good guys" in some respects. Maybe Tau, Sisters of Battle, Imperial Guard, or Eldar, depending on your point of view. All of those armies have heroic people in them, they just are not, as a whole, "good guys" one hundred percent of the time.

In 40k, heroism and the moral high ground are experiences people have, not states of existence they live in.

40k has no good guys. All factions are evil, just some more evil than others. If you want the least evil faction, I would suggest Imperial Guard or Tau or maybe the Eldar. They're all non-Astartes who aren't quite evil as Chaos (arguably).

The Tau are the most benevolent and tolerant of the lot. They expand in the name of their ideal of civilization and peace, and you are free to join them. Else, well, let's say they're beginning to learn that diplomacy only gets you so far against ever-belligerant factions.

In reaction to another post, the Eldar only really care about their precious selves. They will oppose some big threats of galactic scale, mainly because they happen to be part of the endangered galaxy.

Joey wrote:

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:That's the beauty of the game. There really are no bad guys. Just differing shades of grey.

This is as opposed to real life in which objective boolean morality prevails, of course.

Why yes, have you ever discussed politics with a human being ? That's often the kind of impression you get

Or he was saying that in reference to, y'know, other works of fiction.

Play Eldar.

Id go with orcs. Their political views are simple. They have simple goals, and pretty straight forward mentality. They don't use deceit, blackmail, evil chaos psyker powers or follow the whims of some tyrannical hitler bent on genocide.

They do have a might makes right attitude, and want to bash break steal and burn whatever they can, but that's just the way they are, and they don't BS you About it. a horde of orcs shows up and the intent is clear. Not so much with other factions.

Orcs are the least evil out there because they have a simple, straightforward mentality that does not take orders or direction from evil sources.

- Imperium (sm/IG/meq/sob) -'if your diffrent then us we are going to bomb your planet untill it's a radioactive toxic wasteland, or burn, Bolter, crucify you as required.
- tau: if you don't do what we say, we will shoot you and make you do it anyway.
- necrons: GET THE EFF OFF MY LAWN!!!! **gauss fire*** GET THE CORPSE OFF MY DIRT!!
- eldar: your diffrent then us, stoopid and ignorant, so we must "do the galaxy a favor and remove you for your own good"
- dark eldar: BDSM soul vampires
- chaos: evil daemon worshippers
- tyranids: hungry hungry hippos meets aliens multiplied with a bad. Case of the munches.

How are imperial guardsman "good" guys. They worship a ruined corpse of a guy who's doctrines are worse than the leader of the 3rd Reiche. The commissars execute the platoon leaders if they fail a moral check. Heck, Chaos only kills its champs to summon a greater demon, not just for failing morale checks.

They're all evil!

DarthSpader wrote:Id go with orcs. Their political views are simple. They have simple goals, and pretty straight forward mentality. They don't use deceit, blackmail, evil chaos psyker powers or follow the whims of some tyrannical hitler bent on genocide.

They do have a might makes right attitude, and want to bash break steal and burn whatever they can, but that's just the way they are, and they don't BS you About it. a horde of orcs shows up and the intent is clear. Not so much with other factions.

Orcs are the least evil out there because they have a simple, straightforward mentality that does not take orders or direction from evil sources.

OY! You fink we's is simple and cuddly? Ask any families uv' dem Imperials wot got stomped on Army-geddon or got enslaved on Mordax if we's is good an un-genocidey. You fink we doesn't use blackmail? lemme read ya a quote from da ork codex:

"You give us a thousand shootas each time we visit and yer ain't got no more worries, see?" -quote box, an ork warboss to a planetary governor. Codex Orks. Page 53

Now I'm off ta stomp more humies!

Ok well... Perhaps. But at least Dey is straight up 'bout it.

I think its really about the fluff and your creativity. Eldar can be good and bad, depending on your army's story.

Necrons too - remember it's all relative views, just red about each army and create your own little story. Good luck

If by "good guys" you mean IoM, your only real non-MEQ option after IG is SoB, and even they have fair share of 3+ armour. Luckily for me I'm the compete opposite to you, I cant get myself to use a "good guy" army, being opposed to power army is much easier if you're a fan of Chaos/Xenos forces

Eldar and Tau are towards the brighter end of the grimdark scale as far as Xeno's go, and depending on how your IG list is built, both could offer you a different play style.

The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

Awesome. Just awesome.

I suppose though that the Imperial Guard and other non marine humanoids would be the least evil. You may say that the Imperium is terribly xenophobic and all that nonsense but when it comes down to it, the normal human soldier is probably fairly innocent- save for the indoctrination regimen they are subject to.

Also, if we still lived with dinosaurs, I'm pretty sure you would want them killed off because they are a threat to humans-much like xenos are.

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

Good by merit that they're just doing what they have to to survive.
I doubt you can subjectively call a totalitarian state which has highly repressive tendencies good, but objectively it's for survival, so it can be argued to be good in the long run.

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

The Imperium are definately not the good guys.

The cloest to the 'good guys' in W40K would be the Tau, although you could argue Orks or Tyranids aren't either. The Tau do not shoot people who do not join them, i don't know why people say it's "Join us or die" as i have seen no evidance of this in fluff. They are out to conquer the galaxy like everyone else, though - but they will let you join them instead of just killing you.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

Good by merit that they're just doing what they have to to survive.
I doubt you can subjectively call a totalitarian state which has highly repressive tendencies good, but objectively it's for survival, so it can be argued to be good in the long run.

Subjectively you can since the alternative is the end of humanity...that'd suck. And objective morality doesn't exist.

Ignatius wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

Awesome. Just awesome.

I suppose though that the Imperial Guard and other non marine humanoids would be the least evil. You may say that the Imperium is terribly xenophobic and all that nonsense but when it comes down to it, the normal human soldier is probably fairly innocent- save for the indoctrination regimen they are subject to.

Also, if we still lived with dinosaurs, I'm pretty sure you would want them killed off because they are a threat to humans-much like xenos are.

Well yeah. Also bare in mind that xenophobia in 40k is literal. Irl it means being afraid of foreigners, in 40k it's a rational reaction to external threats. Life is a struggle, men do what they can to survive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mentlegen324 wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

The Imperium are definately not the good guys.

If the Imperium acted in a way that you consider "good", humanity would be wiped out in a matter of years.

Joey wrote:

Mentlegen324 wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.

The Imperium are definately not the good guys.

If the Imperium acted in a way that you consider "good", humanity would be wiped out in a matter of years.

Which means that, since humanity hasn't been wiped out, you agree with the poster that the Imperium isn't good.

Eldar and Tau are towards the brighter end of the grimdark scale as far as Xeno's go, and depending on how your IG list is built, both could offer you a different play style.

Eldar: Armageddon was caused because those orks would have killed 100 eldar in their lifetime.. They killed trillions of humans of Armageddon over two major wars

Eldar are xenophobic, and Hate Everyone, they'll agree to work with you only to kill you later. They'll sacrifice billions of innocents for their plans, they'll divert and use you and than throw you away, with only the harlequins being the "good" ones...And even than they still work and help the Dark Eldar, and want to unite the two, even without fixing the dark eldars problems.

To put it simply, an Eldars life would be above an entire Star system of your kind's life. Though a "few" don't see it this way, Biel-tan doesn't even consider your life important regardless of what you do.

Joey wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

Good by merit that they're just doing what they have to to survive.
I doubt you can subjectively call a totalitarian state which has highly repressive tendencies good, but objectively it's for survival, so it can be argued to be good in the long run.

Subjectively you can since the alternative is the end of humanity...that'd suck. And objective morality doesn't exist.

Ignatius wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

Awesome. Just awesome.

I suppose though that the Imperial Guard and other non marine humanoids would be the least evil. You may say that the Imperium is terribly xenophobic and all that nonsense but when it comes down to it, the normal human soldier is probably fairly innocent- save for the indoctrination regimen they are subject to.

Also, if we still lived with dinosaurs, I'm pretty sure you would want them killed off because they are a threat to humans-much like xenos are.

Well yeah. Also bare in mind that xenophobia in 40k is literal. Irl it means being afraid of foreigners, in 40k it's a rational reaction to external threats. Life is a struggle, men do what they can to survive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mentlegen324 wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

The Imperium are definately not the good guys.

If the Imperium acted in a way that you consider "good", humanity would be wiped out in a matter of years.

Would you view the Empire from Star Wars as the good guys? Because the Imperium is alot worse than they were.

Joey wrote:Subjectively you can since the alternative is the end of humanity...that'd suck. And objective morality doesn't exist.

This is the sort of statement I frequently hear from undergraduates in seminars; it's a problematic one since it manages unhelpfully to be both correct and incorrect at the same time.

Human beings can, as your statement demonstrates, possess a concept of objective morality, even if they cannot agree upon its details, or by what, if any, authority it is empowered or defined.

Warhammer 40,000's universe does not appear to contain any kind of omnipotent (let alone omnibenovelent) deity, which throws out many of the most common arguments for objective moral values. However Kant and Bentham both put convincing arguments of "moral universalism" based upon, respectively, the objectivity of reason, and that of quantitative evidence.

What is more relevant to Warhammer 40,000, however, is the philosophy inherent in Darwin (and indeed in Hobbes and Malthus): the simple logic of unending, unfettered competition to survive and expand in a universe of finite resources. Now many (Machiavelli and Hume, for instance) have applied that logic to arrive at perspectives we would call morally nihilistic or relativist - simply put, the conclusion that there is no objective morality, and that the laws we create are created invariably with the intention of benefiting some more than others. Others, however, particularly modern writers of a scientific or materialistic bent (Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett, for instance), contend that, since pragmatic levels of altruism and co-operation are beneficial to survival, whether as an individual, a clade or a species, that what could be called universal moral values can be determined from evolutionary utility.

By that rationale, pretty much everybody in the war-torn universe of the 41st millennium is acting, broadly-speaking, in accordance with good moral values, by attempting to conquer or annihilate all others. The only possible exceptions to this would be Chaos-worshippers, given that "success" for the Ruinous Powers would entail the annihilation of all matter, energy and physical laws, and (presumably) their followers.

By that rationale, pretty much everybody in the war-torn universe of the 41st millennium is acting, broadly-speaking, in accordance with good moral values, by attempting to conquer or annihilate all others. The only possible exceptions to this would be Chaos-worshippers, given that "success" for the Ruinous Powers would entail the annihilation of all matter, energy and physical laws, and (presumably) their followers.

Also, the Chaos Gods subsist on the emotions and fates of the mortal races. Slaanesh survives on pleasure and was created from the decadence of the Eldar race. Khorne lives on a diet of rage and bloodthirst, Nurgle on sickness and Tzeentch on the usage of psychic powers.
Without the mortals in the materium, the deities of the Warp would severely weaken, thus Chaos can never win if they look out for their own good. Success to wipe out the universe would also wipe themselves out.

English Assassin wrote:

Joey wrote:Subjectively you can since the alternative is the end of humanity...that'd suck. And objective morality doesn't exist.

This is the sort of statement I frequently hear from undergraduates in seminars; it's a problematic one since it manages unhelpfully to be both correct and incorrect at the same time.

Human beings can, as your statement demonstrates, possess a concept of objective morality, even if they cannot agree upon its details, or by what, if any, authority it is empowered or defined.

Warhammer 40,000's universe does not appear to contain any kind of omnipotent (let alone omnibenovelent) deity, which throws out many of the most common arguments for objective moral values. However Kant and Bentham both put convincing arguments of "moral universalism" based upon, respectively, the objectivity of reason, and that of quantitative evidence.

What is more relevant to Warhammer 40,000, however, is the philosophy inherent in Darwin (and indeed in Hobbes and Malthus): the simple logic of unending, unfettered competition to survive and expand in a universe of finite resources. Now many (Machiavelli and Hume, for instance) have applied that logic to arrive at perspectives we would call morally nihilistic or relativist - simply put, the conclusion that there is no objective morality, and that the laws we create are created invariably with the intention of benefiting some more than others. Others, however, particularly modern writers of a scientific or materialistic bent (Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett, for instance), contend that, since pragmatic levels of altruism and co-operation are beneficial to survival, whether as an individual, a clade or a species, that what could be called universal moral values can be determined from evolutionary utility.

By that rationale, pretty much everybody in the war-torn universe of the 41st millennium is acting, broadly-speaking, in accordance with good moral values, by attempting to conquer or annihilate all others. The only possible exceptions to this would be Chaos-worshippers, given that "success" for the Ruinous Powers would entail the annihilation of all matter, energy and physical laws, and (presumably) their followers.

Well from the rationalist/nihilistic world view that I, apparently, have; nearly all societies are "moral". In fact I would content that an unwillingness to embrace eugenics was humanity's biggest crime, fluff-wise.
I've no idea why people struggle with the "killing a million to save a billion" thing. If you sacrifice a small amount of people to save a much larger amount of people, that is a moral good.

Joey wrote:Well from the rationalist/nihilistic world view that I, apparently, have; nearly all societies are "moral". In fact I would content that an unwillingness to embrace eugenics was humanity's biggest crime, fluff-wise.
I've no idea why people struggle with the "killing a million to save a billion" thing. If you sacrifice a small amount of people to save a much larger amount of people, that is a moral good.

Oh oh. Here comes the moral relativity...

What about if I kill 999,999 people to save 1,000,000 people? What if I torture those 999,999 in the most horrible and reprehensible way possible to save those million people? What if all those 999,999 people are cute little toddlers?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Eldar and Tau are towards the brighter end of the grimdark scale as far as Xeno's go, and depending on how your IG list is built, both could offer you a different play style.

Eldar: Armageddon was caused because those orks would have killed 100 eldar in their lifetime.. They killed trillions of humans of Armageddon over two major wars

Eldar are xenophobic, and Hate Everyone, they'll agree to work with you only to kill you later. They'll sacrifice billions of innocents for their plans, they'll divert and use you and than throw you away, with only the harlequins being the "good" ones...And even than they still work and help the Dark Eldar, and want to unite the two, even without fixing the dark eldars problems.

To put it simply, an Eldars life would be above an entire Star system of your kind's life. Though a "few" don't see it this way, Biel-tan doesn't even consider your life important regardless of what you do.

Do the Eldar willingly and happily oppress and kill their own people like the IoM does? the IoM is incredibly Xenophobic, moreso that the Eldar could ever be. Eldrad Ulthran has even said that he is greatly interested in the potential future of the Tau and that he feels greatly protective towards them, can you honestly say the high lords of Terra would say anything like that regarding a Xenos race? The main priority of the great crusade was basically to wipe out everything non-human from the entire galaxy, is that really less evil than what the Eldar have ever done?

The only thing that comes any where near close to the IoM's attempted galaxy wide genocide is the birth of Slaanesh, which the vast majority of their race didnt know was going to happen. Every one of the (non Dark) Eldar that did notice what was going on then stopped, fled their homes and has spent thousands of years grieving over their loss and trying to prevent their race from becoming extinct...That's not evil.

English Assassin wrote:

Joey wrote:Subjectively you can since the alternative is the end of humanity...that'd suck. And objective morality doesn't exist.

This is the sort of statement I frequently hear from undergraduates in seminars; it's a problematic one since it manages unhelpfully to be both correct and incorrect at the same time.

Human beings can, as your statement demonstrates, possess a concept of objective morality, even if they cannot agree upon its details, or by what, if any, authority it is empowered or defined.

Warhammer 40,000's universe does not appear to contain any kind of omnipotent (let alone omnibenovelent) deity, which throws out many of the most common arguments for objective moral values. However Kant and Bentham both put convincing arguments of "moral universalism" based upon, respectively, the objectivity of reason, and that of quantitative evidence.

What is more relevant to Warhammer 40,000, however, is the philosophy inherent in Darwin (and indeed in Hobbes and Malthus): the simple logic of unending, unfettered competition to survive and expand in a universe of finite resources. Now many (Machiavelli and Hume, for instance) have applied that logic to arrive at perspectives we would call morally nihilistic or relativist - simply put, the conclusion that there is no objective morality, and that the laws we create are created invariably with the intention of benefiting some more than others. Others, however, particularly modern writers of a scientific or materialistic bent (Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett, for instance), contend that, since pragmatic levels of altruism and co-operation are beneficial to survival, whether as an individual, a clade or a species, that what could be called universal moral values can be determined from evolutionary utility.

By that rationale, pretty much everybody in the war-torn universe of the 41st millennium is acting, broadly-speaking, in accordance with good moral values, by attempting to conquer or annihilate all others. The only possible exceptions to this would be Chaos-worshippers, given that "success" for the Ruinous Powers would entail the annihilation of all matter, energy and physical laws, and (presumably) their followers.

That was a lucid, well thought, well supported argument.


I may take a picture of it to frame.

pretre wrote:

Joey wrote:Well from the rationalist/nihilistic world view that I, apparently, have; nearly all societies are "moral". In fact I would content that an unwillingness to embrace eugenics was humanity's biggest crime, fluff-wise.
I've no idea why people struggle with the "killing a million to save a billion" thing. If you sacrifice a small amount of people to save a much larger amount of people, that is a moral good.

Oh oh. Here comes the moral relativity...

What about if I kill 999,999 people to save 1,000,000 people? What if I torture those 999,999 in the most horrible and reprehensible way possible to save those million people? What if all those 999,999 people are cute little toddlers?

Well, considering how you are basically saving 1 person (1,000,000-999,999)...I would say that it's not really moral. It doesn't help that the 999,999 are innocent (assumingly).

Joey wrote:

English Assassin wrote:

Joey wrote:Subjectively you can since the alternative is the end of humanity...that'd suck. And objective morality doesn't exist.

This is the sort of statement I frequently hear from undergraduates in seminars; it's a problematic one since it manages unhelpfully to be both correct and incorrect at the same time.

Human beings can, as your statement demonstrates, possess a concept of objective morality, even if they cannot agree upon its details, or by what, if any, authority it is empowered or defined.

Warhammer 40,000's universe does not appear to contain any kind of omnipotent (let alone omnibenovelent) deity, which throws out many of the most common arguments for objective moral values. However Kant and Bentham both put convincing arguments of "moral universalism" based upon, respectively, the objectivity of reason, and that of quantitative evidence.

What is more relevant to Warhammer 40,000, however, is the philosophy inherent in Darwin (and indeed in Hobbes and Malthus): the simple logic of unending, unfettered competition to survive and expand in a universe of finite resources. Now many (Machiavelli and Hume, for instance) have applied that logic to arrive at perspectives we would call morally nihilistic or relativist - simply put, the conclusion that there is no objective morality, and that the laws we create are created invariably with the intention of benefiting some more than others. Others, however, particularly modern writers of a scientific or materialistic bent (Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett, for instance), contend that, since pragmatic levels of altruism and co-operation are beneficial to survival, whether as an individual, a clade or a species, that what could be called universal moral values can be determined from evolutionary utility.

By that rationale, pretty much everybody in the war-torn universe of the 41st millennium is acting, broadly-speaking, in accordance with good moral values, by attempting to conquer or annihilate all others. The only possible exceptions to this would be Chaos-worshippers, given that "success" for the Ruinous Powers would entail the annihilation of all matter, energy and physical laws, and (presumably) their followers.

Well from the rationalist/nihilistic world view that I, apparently, have; nearly all societies are "moral". In fact I would content that an unwillingness to embrace eugenics was humanity's biggest crime, fluff-wise.
I've no idea why people struggle with the "killing a million to save a billion" thing. If you sacrifice a small amount of people to save a much larger amount of people, that is a moral good.

Well, I'm not going to touch the business of eugenics with a bargepole, and would add that zero-sum questions are considered meaningless in philosophy. What I will say is that respect for individual life and liberty (which includes one's reproductive decisions) is a core principle of pretty much all moral philosophy, regardless of whether the thinker considers moral positions universal or not, since such a respect is essential to the formation and functioning of societies. Speaking as an historian (my actual academic discipline, I just teach first-year combined honours in arts in order to treat myself twice yearly with a big Forge World order), I would add that the principle of "the survival of the fittest" has not favoured states and societies of the sort which have discarded that respect for individual life, much less those which have developed the totalitarian ethos and institutions necessary for such a level of interference in individual lives.

Dabedman wrote:Also, the Chaos Gods subsist on the emotions and fates of the mortal races. Slaanesh survives on pleasure and was created from the decadence of the Eldar race. Khorne lives on a diet of rage and bloodthirst, Nurgle on sickness and Tzeentch on the usage of psychic powers.
Without the mortals in the materium, the deities of the Warp would severely weaken, thus Chaos can never win if they look out for their own good. Success to wipe out the universe would also wipe themselves out.

I steered deliberately clear of making moral statements on the Chaos Gods themselves, not only are they insufficiently well-understood, but the moral principles derived by (or from, depending upon your perspective) human beings are, unsurprisingly, poor instruments by which to measure immortal, reality-distorting beings coalesced over millennia from the emotions of countless billions of sapient lifeforms. (Amusingly, if you're interested, there is however a branch of theology concerned with whether (and why) the moral positions adopted by religions as divine writ apply (or not) to their gods.)

I was just saying that Chaos in it self, from how it is portrayed in the fluff, is dependent upon the status quo. I would actually venture as far as to say that the Gods themselves are basically of a neutral morality, what with their strength derived from the actions of others and just not being interested in anything else than the Great Game of Chaos Thrones. In which you win or you die.

Incidentally, "insufficiently well-understood" may perhaps be the greatest phrase ever.

Joey wrote:If the Imperium acted in a way that you consider "good", humanity would be wiped out in a matter of years.

The Imperium might be wiped out. Humanity would be fine. Way back when, in the year 29,000, humanity had colonized much of their known universe. They had to put up with, not only all the threats they normally do (save Tyranids), but also a huge variety of smaller empires the Emperor wipe out. They did this without unity or, in many cases, even space travel technology, and had been doing so for about 7 thousand years.

Pretty much everyone resisted the Imperium during their crusade, especially the civilized worlds. Most other civilized humans had formed alliances with all manner of aliens, including the Eldar and were existing peacefully. Rather than working towards peace, the Imperium killed the peace-capable aliens, then killed peace-capable humans because they wanted sole power. The Emperor wasn't trying to save humanity, he just wanted to control it. Both how he got there and what he planned to do afterwards caused more suffering than good. That's pretty much the definition of evil.

@DarkHound: The argument goes that the great crusade was necessary to bring humanity together to face a greater threat. Yes, humanity was doing okay so far, but problems were coming down the road that they needed to be united to face.

Whether that was an excuse or a reason is a different question.

The only threat was Tyranids, and the Emperor had no idea they were coming. Give the Eldar 10 thousand years to rebuild and they'd be more than prepared for them. Most Eldar craftworlds liked the humans, except the Biel-tan.

The Chaos Gods gave no gaks about our world, and would never have if the Emperor didn't piss them off by cheating them. Hell, with the Eldar's help, humans wouldn't have fallen to Chaos.

DarkHound wrote:The only threat was Tyranids, and the Emperor had no idea they were coming. Give the Eldar 10 thousand years to rebuild and they'd be more than prepared for them. Most Eldar craftworlds liked the humans, except the Biel-tan.

The Chaos Gods gave no gaks about our world, and would never have if the Emperor didn't piss them off by cheating them. Hell, with the Eldar's help, humans wouldn't have fallen to Chaos.

I think you underestimate inevitability.
Chaos was coming no matter what. They may not have been coming for Terra specifically, but they've been picking off humans for quite a long time and will continue to. Eldar might have tried to help us, but humans are pretty stubborn and numerous. Someone would have fallen and kicked things off even if there was no Horus or Emperor.
Tyranids are coming as long as the Astronomican exists.
Necrons are waking up in 10k years.
Orks are constantly a problem.

If the Long Night taught us anything, Humanity must stay together to stand against the things that go bump in the. If you think each world could hold out on its own or in the small empires against the monstrous things that occured between M30 to M40, you're insane. The Imperium may not be perfect, but it is the best we have.

DarkHound wrote:The only threat was Tyranids, and the Emperor had no idea they were coming. Give the Eldar 10 thousand years to rebuild and they'd be more than prepared for them. Most Eldar craftworlds liked the humans, except the Biel-tan.

The Chaos Gods gave no gaks about our world, and would never have if the Emperor didn't piss them off by cheating them. Hell, with the Eldar's help, humans wouldn't have fallen to Chaos.

What makes you think the Eldar would have helped? They never bothered to previously, even after it had become clear that some of the more isolated human colonies had fallen to Chaos.
Indeed, most fluff indicates they have no interest at best in what they consider to be a fairly underevolved race.
Furthermore, we have no idea what the Emperor's master plan actually was, as it's never been properly discussed.
Sure, he wanted to unite humanity, but for what purpose? It's never stated, except in the broadest and most vague of terms.

Good guys in 40k?
Imperium, Eldar and Tau are as far as "Good" guys will go.
Everybody else are bad to worse.

Brother Coa wrote:Good guys in 40k?
Imperium, Eldar and Tau are as far as "Good" guys will go.
Everybody else are bad to worse.

Except for Orks. Orks can be regarded as neutral.
And maybe Tyranids too, thinking about it.

Warhammer is told from Human perspective the most yes?
By that - every race other then Eldar and Tau ( who are less evil then most others ) are evil.

If you are looking at universal level then only Chaos and Dark Eldar are evil. Orks and Tyranids are driven by animal instinct, Necrons and Eldar are trying to survive and build their former empires, Tau are evolving and advancing while Humanity is trying to survive and to keep it's domination of the galaxy.

Brother Coa wrote:Orks and Tyranids are driven by animal instinct

And humans aren't?
In fact aren't orks actually fungi? So humans have animal instincts, orks do not.

Joey wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:Orks and Tyranids are driven by animal instinct

And humans aren't?
In fact aren't orks actually fungi? So humans have animal instincts, orks do not.

But isn't that even stronger in favour of the Orks? You wouldn't call a mushroom evil, would you?

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:Except for Orks. Orks can be regarded as neutral.
And maybe Tyranids too, thinking about it.

I don't see how anyone can read Rynn's World and call Orks Neutral. They, like the Dark Eldar, are the epitome of Chaotic Evil.

The enjoy the suffering of others. The torture and kill for the pleasure of it. Mad Doks perform "experiments" on humans partly because they enjoy hearing them scream.

Tyranids, I'll grant you, are acting on animal instinct. True Neutral, but still a terrible threat to the galaxy.

Joey wrote:
And humans aren't?
In fact aren't orks actually fungi? So humans have animal instincts, orks do not.

We have common sense that enable us to control our animal instincts ( otherwise incest would be as common as Facebook updates ). Orks and Nids cannot, that is a difference between Humans and animals.

Brother Coa wrote:

Joey wrote:
And humans aren't?
In fact aren't orks actually fungi? So humans have animal instincts, orks do not.

We have common sense that enable us to control our animal instincts ( otherwise incest would be as common as Facebook updates ). Orks and Nids cannot, that is a difference between Humans and animals.

So the only reason you don't have sex with your family is because you have to consciously restrain yourself not to? That's just wrong.

Dabedman wrote:

Joey wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:Orks and Tyranids are driven by animal instinct

And humans aren't?
In fact aren't orks actually fungi? So humans have animal instincts, orks do not.

But isn't that even stronger in favour of the Orks? You wouldn't call a mushroom evil, would you?

Of course not. I wouldn't label anything evil that was not an immediate gut reaction to something.

Joey wrote:
So the only reason you don't have sex with your family is because you have to consciously restrain yourself not to? That's just wrong.

That is called morality and I learned that in 3'rd grade of High School from Sociology. It is basically the only thing that part us and animals - the common sense, also known as moral judgment.
Something that both Orks and Tyranids lack thus making them animals in comparison to Humans.

Good: IoM, Space Marines, and Tau.

Neutral: Tyranids.

Evil: Dark Eldar, Orks, Forces of Chaos

I'm undecided on Necrons and Eldar, but willing to listen to arguements either way.

Brother Coa wrote:

Joey wrote:
So the only reason you don't have sex with your family is because you have to consciously restrain yourself not to? That's just wrong.

That is called morality and I learned that in 3'rd grade of High School from Sociology. It is basically the only thing that part us and animals - the common sense, also known as moral judgment.
Something that both Orks and Tyranids lack thus making them animals in comparison to Humans.

So the reason you don't have sex with your relatives is because you were taught not to?
Morality is just a tag we attach to the actions and feelings of ourselves and our social group in order to look down on other groups, who're just as stupid as we are.

I don't think that you can describe Eldar as good or bad really, I'd prefer to label them as pragmatic if anything. Eldar, like any other race in the 40K setting, have committed terrible atrocities - from a human perspective - but have also shown instances of exemplary morality.

For example in the "Path of the Seer" novel, Thirianna kills two small human children and their mother due to particularly dire prediction of an Aloticii Farseer. Where we see such a thing as barbaric, the Eldar saw it as necessary to halt the spread of Chaos and indeed, Thirianna does reflect on it in several instances throughout the book and questions the morality of not only the act, but also herself.

Whereas, without multiple Eldar interventions so far in the 13th Black Crusade, it is quite possible that Abaddon could have overwhelmed the Cadian system and controlled the space around the Eye of Terror in its entirety.

I'm no philosopher, but I can certainly tell the difference between Pragmatism and Evil.

Iranna.

kronk wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:Except for Orks. Orks can be regarded as neutral.
And maybe Tyranids too, thinking about it.

I don't see how anyone can read Rynn's World and call Orks Neutral. They, like the Dark Eldar, are the epitome of Chaotic Evil.

The enjoy the suffering of others. The torture and kill for the pleasure of it. Mad Doks perform "experiments" on humans partly because they enjoy hearing them scream.

Tyranids, I'll grant you, are acting on animal instinct. True Neutral, but still a terrible threat to the galaxy.

That assumes that orks have a human psychological approach to good and evil. In fact, by our standards, they'd be considered insane, not evil. They literally do not see anything wrong or unnatural about what they do. Mad Doks, I'll grant you, are Chaotic Evil, but the average ork is simply acting according to the impulse to fight and beat everything not green - and a fair few things that are green, too.

Also, Joey, for clarification, Orks are both animals and fungi. Just thought you'd be interested to know.

Joey wrote:
So the reason you don't have sex with your relatives is because you were taught not to?
Morality is just a tag we attach to the actions and feelings of ourselves and our social group in order to look down on other groups, who're just as stupid as we are.

Exactly, because that is the primary law we created for our civilization - the moral law. After that we created religious laws and only after that came the civil laws.
Morality is not just a tag, it is entire subject that is studied on universities and represent what make us human in general because each moral if different from person to person.
And moral is something that can only be developed in sentient beings like us, that is what part us from animals.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:What makes you think the Eldar would have helped? They never bothered to previously, even after it had become clear that some of the more isolated human colonies had fallen to Chaos.
Indeed, most fluff indicates they have no interest at best in what they consider to be a fairly underevolved race.
Furthermore, we have no idea what the Emperor's master plan actually was, as it's never been properly discussed.
Sure, he wanted to unite humanity, but for what purpose? It's never stated, except in the broadest and most vague of terms.

If you read the Horus Heresy series, you'll find actually love humans. They were integrated into a few coalitional societies. They see a lot of potential in us and used to go out of their way to help. Eldrad even set up a meeting with Fulgrim to convince him of Horus' imminent betrayal. However, that was ten thousand years ago, and since then humanity has done nothing but kill the Eldar. Genocide tends to put one off.

Whatever the Emperor's plan was, he failed because he refused help. He had no reason to refuse help if his intentions were for a safer man-kind; he had plenty of examples of races co-existing before he crushed them.

Eldrad acted like idiot himself. If he went to the Emperor none of that would happened. Instead, he provoked Fulgrim who was already corrupted by Chaos daemon, and as a result he slaughtered them.

Mankind is helping Eldar in other way - by keeping the Chaos Legions at bay. Not to mention story about Malantai...

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:That's the beauty of the game. There really are no bad guys. Just differing shades of grey.

That is about the best why to desricbe the fluff.
however there is the Tau that are good compared to the other races eldar I think just do what they want so they can't get classed as either good or bad.
SM and IG denpends on the chapter/regiment I mean my regiment doesn't care about who they kill so long as they are dead.
but as SoloFalcon said they are all really different shades of grey.
though the Tau would be a shade of blue to be honest

"Good" is what you want it to be in WH40K with the exception of the Daemons and DE all armies have a "good" or neutral aspect to it.

Eldar - preserve the ancient order of the galaxy

Chaos Marines - Free humanity from the regime of the Immortal Emperor and introduce an era of galactic "freedom"

Tau - Progress of all races through the greater good

Nids - eat sleep poop

Orcs - eat fight poop

Imperium - guarantee the existence of man and fight off evil gods who intend to enslave man for their "game"

Crons - Kill bugs that do nothing but eat, sleep, and poop aka your local not so friendly Orkin Man (exterminator company in the US)

Brother Coa wrote:Eldrad acted like idiot himself. If he went to the Emperor none of that would happened. Instead, he provoked Fulgrim who was already corrupted by Chaos daemon, and as a result he slaughtered them.

Mankind is helping Eldar in other way - by keeping the Chaos Legions at bay. Not to mention story about Malantai...

First, obviously there's the logistical issues. Fulgrim was the closest primarch and there wasn't time to find anyone else. Second, he would never have been able to contact the Emperor and arrange a meeting. Third, if he did, the Emperor would have killed him, because he's just that kind of guy.

I hardly see how it's Eldrad's fault Fulgrim fell to Chaos. He gets points just for trying to help humanity. If anything, it's the Emperor's fault for not warning Fulgrim about the Chaos Gods. Horus, who was told more than Fulgrim, basically only knew that daemons and Chaos gods existed. He wasn't informed who or how, despite the Emperor's working relationship with them.

Mind you, if the Eldar had been allowed to help, there wouldn't be any Chaos Legions to be protected from.

DarkHound wrote: despite the Emperor's working relationship with them.

Alleged.

DarkHound wrote:First, obviously there's the logistical issues. Fulgrim was the closest primarch and there wasn't time to find anyone else. Second, he would never have been able to contact the Emperor and arrange a meeting. Third, if he did, the Emperor would have killed him, because he's just that kind of guy.

I hardly see how it's Eldrad's fault Fulgrim fell to Chaos. He gets points just for trying to help humanity. If anything, it's the Emperor's fault for not warning Fulgrim about the Chaos Gods. Horus, who was told more than Fulgrim, basically only knew that daemons and Chaos gods existed. He wasn't informed who or how, despite the Emperor's working relationship with them.

That is entirely different debate on why Emperor kept Chaos secret, acted like he did etc...

Mind you, if the Eldar had been allowed to help, there wouldn't be any Chaos Legions to be protected from.

I to love Eldar, but they despite Mankind - they were hating us even when we were in our Golden Age, thinking nothing more of us then advanced primitives.

DarkHound wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:What makes you think the Eldar would have helped? They never bothered to previously, even after it had become clear that some of the more isolated human colonies had fallen to Chaos.
Indeed, most fluff indicates they have no interest at best in what they consider to be a fairly underevolved race.
Furthermore, we have no idea what the Emperor's master plan actually was, as it's never been properly discussed.
Sure, he wanted to unite humanity, but for what purpose? It's never stated, except in the broadest and most vague of terms.

If you read the Horus Heresy series, you'll find actually love humans. They were integrated into a few coalitional societies. They see a lot of potential in us and used to go out of their way to help. Eldrad even set up a meeting with Fulgrim to convince him of Horus' imminent betrayal. However, that was ten thousand years ago, and since then humanity has done nothing but kill the Eldar. Genocide tends to put one off.

Whatever the Emperor's plan was, he failed because he refused help. He had no reason to refuse help if his intentions were for a safer man-kind; he had plenty of examples of races co-existing before he crushed them.

I have read the Horus Heresy series, though clearly I interpreted differently. The Eldar in the Cabal, for example, out and out admitted that he hates humans, and the other Eldar don't exactly show this "love" you're talking about when they meet with Fulgrim. Respect? Probably. But love?

actually i would probally call the orcs chaotic nuetrel more then anything else.they do what suits them, when and how they want, but really dont have "evil" intentions. the war mongering and constant battle is their way of hammering out a "pecking order" if you will, and they are only doing so because its their base nature. much like a lion will stalk, kill and eat its prey. while the mass wars and destruction wrought on imperial worlds are many and thus to the imperials point of view that is evil. but what if orcs invaded a tyranid world? or eldar? the imperium could care less because ITS NOT HAPPENING TO THEM. a hurricane or earthquake that levels a town and kills thousands is not evil. its just doing its thing and its activities or results of said are interpreted as evil by those it affects. (who probally see themselves as the good guys by default, thus their opponents are "bad" or "evil")

Then again all of this "they're evil because of x" being bandied about is entirely from a sole human standpoint. I sincerely doubt the Dark Eldar think of themselves as evil. To use an analogy, from their point of view we are to them as chimps are to us. Them torturing/herding/enslaving/hunting us is no different in many ways than our own treatment of animals we consider completely beneath us.

When considered from a biological standpoint, the only evil force in the universe is the Chaos Gods, as they are essentially attempting suicide instead of expansion.

Thanks for all of the help. I think I'm going to go with either Eldar or Dark Angels. Does anyone have any ideas on how to start these new armies?

First of all, don't use the Dark Angels codex.

It is quite literally the worst codex out right now. Though admittedly they got a faq update that helped crap tons.

For Dark Angels generally you want to go Deathwing, Ravenwing, or Deathraven. This means either go all bikers, all terminators, or lots of termies with some bikes and landspeeders thrown in.

Ratbarf wrote:First of all, don't use the Dark Angels codex.

It is quite literally the worst codex out right now. Though admittedly they got a faq update that helped crap tons.

For Dark Angels generally you want to go Deathwing, Ravenwing, or Deathraven. This means either go all bikers, all terminators, or lots of termies with some bikes and landspeeders thrown in.

Bhawha? They're not THE WORST codex out there. I'd probably rate it better than GK for an all Termy army.

daedalus wrote:

Ratbarf wrote:First of all, don't use the Dark Angels codex.

It is quite literally the worst codex out right now. Though admittedly they got a faq update that helped crap tons.

For Dark Angels generally you want to go Deathwing, Ravenwing, or Deathraven. This means either go all bikers, all terminators, or lots of termies with some bikes and landspeeders thrown in.

Bhawha? They're not THE WORST codex out there. I'd probably rate it better than GK for an all Termy army.

I would too since they have access to cheap deapstrike homers, access to more ranged gear so don't need to buy add ons, etc. DA prob have the best walking termie army out of all the sm books.

Brother Coa wrote:Eldrad acted like idiot himself. If he went to the Emperor none of that would happened. Instead, he provoked Fulgrim who was already corrupted by Chaos daemon, and as a result he slaughtered them.

That's not exactly what happened. They met, Eldrad told Fulgrim about Chaos and Horus, Fulgrim became pissed because Horus was his bro, and his daemon weapon whispered evulstuff to him. Then they fought, the Eldar lost a bunch of guys and an Avatar, Fulgrim lost all of his elite bodyguard.

Ratbarf wrote:Then again all of this "they're evil because of x" being bandied about is entirely from a sole human standpoint. I sincerely doubt the Dark Eldar think of themselves as evil. To use an analogy, from their point of view we are to them as chimps are to us. Them torturing/herding/enslaving/hunting us is no different in many ways than our own treatment of animals we consider completely beneath us.

When considered from a biological standpoint, the only evil force in the universe is the Chaos Gods, as they are essentially attempting suicide instead of expansion.

Humans dont torture/herd/enslave/hunt other sentient species. The DE may think we're chimps but there's a big difference between using animals for resources and willingly torturing intelligent sentient creatures, they're pretty evil whether or no they think so themselves. Also are you implying suicide is evil?

asimo77 wrote:

Ratbarf wrote:Then again all of this "they're evil because of x" being bandied about is entirely from a sole human standpoint. I sincerely doubt the Dark Eldar think of themselves as evil. To use an analogy, from their point of view we are to them as chimps are to us. Them torturing/herding/enslaving/hunting us is no different in many ways than our own treatment of animals we consider completely beneath us.

When considered from a biological standpoint, the only evil force in the universe is the Chaos Gods, as they are essentially attempting suicide instead of expansion.

Humans dont torture/herd/enslave/hunt other sentient species. The DE may think we're chimps but there's a big difference between using animals for resources and willingly torturing intelligent sentient creatures, they're pretty evil whether or no they think so themselves. Also are you implying suicide is evil?

Good and evil are pov. There is no definitive universal definition other then you labeling a behavior you disaprove. Don't try to label non human races with human terms since thats incredibly illogical.

It's not really illogical being human doesn't have to do with it, it's about personhood. The DE are clearly intelligent beings them being human doesn't make a difference. It's more like comparing two separate cultures than two entirely alien species (which they aren't). You really shouldn't subscribe to moral relativism.

Except that eldar percieve things differently than humans due to physiological differences and have developed in an entire different atmosphere. Aside from intelligience and bipedal theyre not that similar.

CuddlySquig wrote:
"You give us a thousand shootas each time we visit and yer ain't got no more worries, see?" -quote box, an ork warboss to a planetary governor. Codex Orks. Page 53

they did change their minds and assaulted them

the greater good is more like join us with diplomacy then we install a new leader with our ideals if it doesnt work then planet goes to hell and we also have that there leaders mind control them and if the last etheral dies then you have another o shavan running around.

Orks may lie alittle but hey who doesnt?? orks well tell you and show you that they hate peace and want war.

asimo77 wrote:

Humans dont torture/herd/enslave/hunt other sentient species. The DE may think we're chimps but there's a big difference between using animals for resources and willingly torturing intelligent sentient creatures, they're pretty evil whether or no they think so themselves. Also are you implying suicide is evil?

Actually, the only things humans don't do out of that list is enslave or herd other species. They torture captured xenos for info, exterminate them whenever possible, and hunt out any popuations that survived the initial assault.

I remember seeing this trolling image using the D&D alignment

Why is Chaos' subtitle the tagline for Necrons?

Marzillius wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:Eldrad acted like idiot himself. If he went to the Emperor none of that would happened. Instead, he provoked Fulgrim who was already corrupted by Chaos daemon, and as a result he slaughtered them.

That's not exactly what happened. They met, Eldrad told Fulgrim about Chaos and Horus, Fulgrim became pissed because Horus was his bro, and his daemon weapon whispered evulstuff to him. Then they fought, the Eldar lost a bunch of guys and an Avatar, Fulgrim lost all of his elite bodyguard.

Fulgrim didn't lose all of his bodyguard. He lost a few, but most survived.

Draigo wrote:Good and evil are pov. There is no definitive universal definition other then you labeling a behavior you disaprove. Don't try to label non human races with human terms since thats incredibly illogical.

It would be nice to think people actually read my posts... What you espouse here is moral relativism; the conclusion that value judgements are inseparable from cultural norms. Though this was a fashionable perspective in the mid-twentieth century, it is far from being the only possible conclusion on the universifiability (or otherwise) of ethics. Indeed it is one which has very much fallen out of favour in the philosophical world, since it principally avoids answering moral questions at all. Philosophers, unsurprisingly, consider this a lazy cop-out.

There exists the strong (and indeed compelling) argument, beginning with Kant and Bentham, that reason and empiricism are absolute, and they ability to employ both is inherent to all sapient beings (indeed very possibly to all sentient beings, albeit in vary degrees). Contemporary authors such as Daniel Dennett and that argumentative sod Richard Dawkins have added a quantitative scientific basis to this; that (simply put) the basic elements of human morality exist because they provide evolutionary advantage by facilitating co-operation. These contentions remain hypothetical (which is unsurprising, given the challenges of testability they face) but they do represent - albeit very broadly - the present academic consensus on the subject, principally because they reconcile morally absolutist and nihilist perspectives, and allow moral relativism to be relegated to the field of cultural anthropology.

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

asimo77 wrote:

Humans dont torture/herd/enslave/hunt other sentient species. The DE may think we're chimps but there's a big difference between using animals for resources and willingly torturing intelligent sentient creatures, they're pretty evil whether or no they think so themselves. Also are you implying suicide is evil?

Actually, the only things humans don't do out of that list is enslave or herd other species. They torture captured xenos for info, exterminate them whenever possible, and hunt out any popuations that survived the initial assault.

I actually meant humans as in our world, real life, not in the 40k fiction I apologize for not being clear. The "torture/herd/enslave/hunt" langauge was a deliberate repeat of the words used by the person I quoted simply for rhetorical purposes.

asimo77 wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

asimo77 wrote:

Humans dont torture/herd/enslave/hunt other sentient species. The DE may think we're chimps but there's a big difference between using animals for resources and willingly torturing intelligent sentient creatures, they're pretty evil whether or no they think so themselves. Also are you implying suicide is evil?

Actually, the only things humans don't do out of that list is enslave or herd other species. They torture captured xenos for info, exterminate them whenever possible, and hunt out any popuations that survived the initial assault.

I actually meant humans as in our world, real life, not in the 40k fiction I apologize for not being clear. The "torture/herd/enslave/hunt" langauge was a deliberate repeat of the words used by the person I quoted simply for rhetorical purposes.

Huh, maybe you have simply been living within an entirely different timeline than me. Nearly every human society has enacted both torture and enslavement during their history. Several different cultures hunted humans, and what were peasants except human chattel?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Durza wrote:Why is Chaos' subtitle the tagline for Necrons?

Marzillius wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:Eldrad acted like idiot himself. If he went to the Emperor none of that would happened. Instead, he provoked Fulgrim who was already corrupted by Chaos daemon, and as a result he slaughtered them.

That's not exactly what happened. They met, Eldrad told Fulgrim about Chaos and Horus, Fulgrim became pissed because Horus was his bro, and his daemon weapon whispered evulstuff to him. Then they fought, the Eldar lost a bunch of guys and an Avatar, Fulgrim lost all of his elite bodyguard.

Fulgrim didn't lose all of his bodyguard. He lost a few, but most survived.

I beleive it said that all of the Phoenix guard that he brought with him to the surface died there.

DarthSpader wrote:Id go with orcs. Their political views are simple. They have simple goals, and pretty straight forward mentality. They don't use deceit, blackmail, evil chaos psyker powers or follow the whims of some tyrannical hitler bent on genocide.

They do have a might makes right attitude, and want to bash break steal and burn whatever they can, but that's just the way they are, and they don't BS you About it. a horde of orcs shows up and the intent is clear. Not so much with other factions.

Orcs are the least evil out there because they have a simple, straightforward mentality that does not take orders or direction from evil sources.

- Imperium (sm/IG/meq/sob) -'if your diffrent then us we are going to bomb your planet untill it's a radioactive toxic wasteland, or burn, Bolter, crucify you as required.
- tau: if you don't do what we say, we will shoot you and make you do it anyway.
- necrons: GET THE EFF OFF MY LAWN!!!! **gauss fire*** GET THE CORPSE OFF MY DIRT!!
- eldar: your diffrent then us, stoopid and ignorant, so we must "do the galaxy a favor and remove you for your own good"
- dark eldar: BDSM soul vampires
- chaos: evil daemon worshippers
- tyranids: hungry hungry hippos meets aliens multiplied with a bad. Case of the munches.

Long story short; GREEN IZ BEST!

"Huh, maybe you have simply been living within an entirely different timeline than me. Nearly every human society has enacted both torture and enslavement during their history. Several different cultures hunted humans, and what were peasants except human chattel?"

In the day and age will live now it would pretty hard to get away with slavery and the like towards fellow human beings. Yes people were enslaved and tortured in the past it was terrible back then and it's still terrible now. We don't practice it anymore because we've gotten to a point as a society where we recognize its evils. I guess I needed to make it clear that I meant humans in the real world today don't regularly engage in acts of slavery and torture of other sentient beings.

asimo77 wrote:In the day and age will live now it would pretty hard to get away with slavery and the like towards fellow human beings. Yes people were enslaved and tortured in the past it was terrible back then and it's still terrible now. We don't practice it anymore because we've gotten to a point as a society where we recognize its evils. I guess I needed to make it clear that I meant humans in the real world today don't regularly engage in acts of slavery and torture of other sentient beings.

We've got an entire continent where this is the daily routine: it's called Africa. Not to mention North Korea and Cuba.

So you wanna play good guys? Well i guess that appeals to what your own views are. A lot of people will say Tau are good. But that's not true at all really. I'd say your best bet is to make your own chapter of SM. Make them proctectors of civilians of the Imperium or something like that. What defines a certain race as "good" depends what side of the fence you're staning on.

DarkHound wrote:

asimo77 wrote:In the day and age will live now it would pretty hard to get away with slavery and the like towards fellow human beings. Yes people were enslaved and tortured in the past it was terrible back then and it's still terrible now. We don't practice it anymore because we've gotten to a point as a society where we recognize its evils. I guess I needed to make it clear that I meant humans in the real world today don't regularly engage in acts of slavery and torture of other sentient beings.

We've got an entire continent where this is the daily routine: it's called Africa. Not to mention North Korea and Cuba.

Yeah and it's viewed as horrible by nearly all civilized peoples right? That's the whole point, that most people consider that kind of stuff terrible because it is terrible. To tie things back to the original comments: as a whole humanity isn't fond of slavery and torture, the entirety of the Dark Eldar are, that's why they can be called evil.

asimo77 wrote:

DarkHound wrote:

asimo77 wrote:In the day and age will live now it would pretty hard to get away with slavery and the like towards fellow human beings. Yes people were enslaved and tortured in the past it was terrible back then and it's still terrible now. We don't practice it anymore because we've gotten to a point as a society where we recognize its evils. I guess I needed to make it clear that I meant humans in the real world today don't regularly engage in acts of slavery and torture of other sentient beings.

We've got an entire continent where this is the daily routine: it's called Africa. Not to mention North Korea and Cuba.

Yeah and it's viewed as horrible by nearly all civilized peoples right? That's the whole point, that most people consider that kind of stuff terrible because it is terrible. To tie things back to the original comments: as a whole humanity isn't fond of slavery and torture, the entirety of the Dark Eldar are, that's why they can be called evil.

Slavery in the West, which seems to be the only place you're drawing your conclusion from, has only been outlawed for a few hundred years. Out of thousands. The West's stance on slavery and equal human rights is pretty much an incredible anomaly in comparison to the vast majority of human history and culture.

Secondly, the Dark Eldar are only evil to you because you're they're prey. I'm pretty sure his slaves felt that George Washington was evil. (Well maybe not but it is the strange consensus that slave owners were evil.) We don't think twice about destroying an ant colony or a beaver hut. To the Dark Eldar we are no more evolved than an animal which has the ability to create, that's it.

Joey wrote:

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

Good by merit that they're just doing what they have to to survive.
I doubt you can subjectively call a totalitarian state which has highly repressive tendencies good, but objectively it's for survival, so it can be argued to be good in the long run.

Subjectively you can since the alternative is the end of humanity...that'd suck. And objective morality doesn't exist.

Ignatius wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

Awesome. Just awesome.

I suppose though that the Imperial Guard and other non marine humanoids would be the least evil. You may say that the Imperium is terribly xenophobic and all that nonsense but when it comes down to it, the normal human soldier is probably fairly innocent- save for the indoctrination regimen they are subject to.

Also, if we still lived with dinosaurs, I'm pretty sure you would want them killed off because they are a threat to humans-much like xenos are.

Well yeah. Also bare in mind that xenophobia in 40k is literal. Irl it means being afraid of foreigners, in 40k it's a rational reaction to external threats. Life is a struggle, men do what they can to survive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mentlegen324 wrote:

Joey wrote:The Imperium of Man are the good guys. People who don't see this are very closed-minded.
Also eldar, possibly. Or Tau, but they're sissies.

The Imperium are definately not the good guys.

If the Imperium acted in a way that you consider "good", humanity would be wiped out in a matter of years.

Sigh...

Time for a breakdown, children. You all need to understand that the term "Good Guys" is a perspective-based identity term, and has virtually nothing to do with the benevolence of said faction. "Good Guys" don't even have to be remotely good, they are simply the side that you as the user identify the most with. They are 'your side' of the conflict. We must remember, in Nazi Germany, there were many people who truly believed the Wehrmacht were the good guys, and the Americans were evil capitalist pigs. Heck, even in Star Wars, if you read into back story, there are quite a few fictions where you can see the war from the Imperial perspective, and see that there are people that truly believe in the Empire's cause. They see what we see as the bad guys, in fact as their good guys.

So one must recognize, 'Good Guys' is really all about who you truly believe are right. I, for one, am a xenophobic human who puts the survival and expansion of my race above most other values, so to me the IoM are the 'Good Guys'. The rest is up to you. Maybe you think that in order for the Galaxy to finally be 'good', all biological life must be wiped out. In that case, Necrons are your 'Good Guys'. You must think of it like a Super Bowl with several more teams. Some of you will be rooting for one team, some for another, and then another; those are your good guys, but they may not be mine.

-Fin


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:

Joey wrote:Well from the rationalist/nihilistic world view that I, apparently, have; nearly all societies are "moral". In fact I would content that an unwillingness to embrace eugenics was humanity's biggest crime, fluff-wise.
I've no idea why people struggle with the "killing a million to save a billion" thing. If you sacrifice a small amount of people to save a much larger amount of people, that is a moral good.

Oh oh. Here comes the moral relativity...

What about if I kill 999,999 people to save 1,000,000 people? What if I torture those 999,999 in the most horrible and reprehensible way possible to save those million people? What if all those 999,999 people are cute little toddlers?

Heh...I can only picture the smugness you typed this counter-argument with. But the answer is still yes. Speaking relatively, what you've done is still quite immoral, but to let the million perish is even more immoral. So relatively, you have done the more moral deed by sacrificing the 999,999.

I see it like this
(described in terms of Dungeons and dragons)

IOM: Lawful Neutral they don't wipe out those who obay their law

Tau: lawful Neutral

Eldar: Neutral (they really only care about how it effects them)

Dark Eldar: evil they enslave torture kill they have only one use for everyone else slaves

tyranids: neutral (they don't care they do their own thing)

Necrons; lawful neutral

orcs:chaotic Neutral no defined evil as such just a natural urge to fight that explodes when poulation reaches a certain density.

Chaos: Chaotic Evil: hates everyone else and would destroy each other if they could.

Eldar are clearly the only good guys, because they're the only ones not wanting to wipe out a sentient species.

And, yes, Orks, Tyranids, Daemons, Necrons, Tau, and Humans are all non-sentient. Eldar exist on a higher plane of consciousness and are actually self-aware. Humans have the ability to describe sentience, but they don't actually posses it.

Grakmar wrote:Eldar are clearly the only good guys, because they're the only ones not wanting to wipe out a sentient species.

And, yes, Orks, Tyranids, Daemons, Necrons, Tau, and Humans are all non-sentient. Eldar exist on a higher plane of consciousness and are actually self-aware. Humans have the ability to describe sentience, but they don't actually posses it.

i chuckled ... seriously this is why they are not good its called arrogance

Necrons are pretty much neutrall.

English Assassin wrote:

Draigo wrote:Good and evil are pov. There is no definitive universal definition other then you labeling a behavior you disaprove. Don't try to label non human races with human terms since thats incredibly illogical.

It would be nice to think people actually read my posts... What you espouse here is moral relativism; the conclusion that value judgements are inseparable from cultural norms. Though this was a fashionable perspective in the mid-twentieth century, it is far from being the only possible conclusion on the universifiability (or otherwise) of ethics. Indeed it is one which has very much fallen out of favour in the philosophical world, since it principally avoids answering moral questions at all. Philosophers, unsurprisingly, consider this a lazy cop-out.

There exists the strong (and indeed compelling) argument, beginning with Kant and Bentham, that reason and empiricism are absolute, and they ability to employ both is inherent to all sapient beings (indeed very possibly to all sentient beings, albeit in vary degrees). Contemporary authors such as Daniel Dennett and that argumentative sod Richard Dawkins have added a quantitative scientific basis to this; that (simply put) the basic elements of human morality exist because they provide evolutionary advantage by facilitating co-operation. These contentions remain hypothetical (which is unsurprising, given the challenges of testability they face) but they do represent - albeit very broadly - the present academic consensus on the subject, principally because they reconcile morally absolutist and nihilist perspectives, and allow moral relativism to be relegated to the field of cultural anthropology.

Of course philosophers wouldn't like this because it would give them a lot less to do everyday. You can label behavior whatever you want but in the end the term good and evil are methods to describe the majorities accepted and disapproved behavior. The only definative line of behavior is not good and evil so much as what is needed to survive. I also find it funny that this was not in response to your post so I think you need to read more. People adapt their behavior to survive in what the majority deems socities ways.

Ratbarf wrote:

asimo77 wrote:

DarkHound wrote:

asimo77 wrote:In the day and age will live now it would pretty hard to get away with slavery and the like towards fellow human beings. Yes people were enslaved and tortured in the past it was terrible back then and it's still terrible now. We don't practice it anymore because we've gotten to a point as a society where we recognize its evils. I guess I needed to make it clear that I meant humans in the real world today don't regularly engage in acts of slavery and torture of other sentient beings.

We've got an entire continent where this is the daily routine: it's called Africa. Not to mention North Korea and Cuba.

Yeah and it's viewed as horrible by nearly all civilized peoples right? That's the whole point, that most people consider that kind of stuff terrible because it is terrible. To tie things back to the original comments: as a whole humanity isn't fond of slavery and torture, the entirety of the Dark Eldar are, that's why they can be called evil.

Slavery in the West, which seems to be the only place you're drawing your conclusion from, has only been outlawed for a few hundred years. Out of thousands. The West's stance on slavery and equal human rights is pretty much an incredible anomaly in comparison to the vast majority of human history and culture.

Secondly, the Dark Eldar are only evil to you because you're they're prey. I'm pretty sure his slaves felt that George Washington was evil. (Well maybe not but it is the strange consensus that slave owners were evil.) We don't think twice about destroying an ant colony or a beaver hut. To the Dark Eldar we are no more evolved than an animal which has the ability to create, that's it.

Ants and beavers are not sentient, sapient species we are; there's a big difference. I also hope you're not trying to say slavery was good in the past because it was widespread but it's evil now because we finally got around to passing the legislature. DE society is built around slavery and torture the majority of them accept it and practice it. I would be totally floored if most humans considered slavery and torture ok. You seem to think that these things are still accepted in today's world they are not. That's the difference between the DE and us right now. If you asked everyone if they were down with slavery and torture I assure you most humans would say no, DE however would disagree.

@ Captain I think you're confusing "good guys" with prtotagonist


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Of course philosophers wouldn't like this because it would give them a lot less to do everyday. You can label behavior whatever you want but in the end the term good and evil are methods to describe the majorities accepted and disapproved behavior. The only definative line of behavior is not good and evil so much as what is needed to survive. I also find it funny that this was not in response to your post so I think you need to read more. People adapt their behavior to survive in what the majority deems socities ways.

We already don't do much everyday....

On a more serious note relativism has already been addressed in the topic at this point I suggest you do some reading on moral philosophy. It'll teach you the subject better than we can.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Heh...I can only picture the smugness you typed this counter-argument with. But the answer is still yes. Speaking relatively, what you've done is still quite immoral, but to let the million perish is even more immoral. So relatively, you have done the more moral deed by sacrificing the 999,999.

The whole 1,000,000 versus 999,999 example is really more about utilitarianism than anything else.

Ah more people stating absolutes in philosophy.. priceless.

Philosophy in not a subjective field though...In fact the more we can objectively define things the better, philosophy concerns itself with that idea quite a bit.

Yeah, i had the same problem, I start empathizing with the protagonists (IOM) and Have a hard time not rooting for them. I like the fluff of the other factions, but the IoM fluff is the strongest.
As far as 40k goes, there really are just shades of Gray, as everyone has been saying, but I always root for imperials (unless my Necrons are involved)

Ants and beavers are not sentient, sapient species we are; there's a big difference. I also hope you're not trying to say slavery was good in the past because it was widespread but it's evil now because we finally got around to passing the legislature. DE society is built around slavery and torture the majority of them accept it and practice it. I would be totally floored if most humans considered slavery and torture ok. You seem to think that these things are still accepted in today's world they are not. That's the difference between the DE and us right now. If you asked everyone if they were down with slavery and torture I assure you most humans would say no, DE however would disagree.

Actually yes, the only reason Slavery is now considered bad is because public opinion changed. The public's opinion on slavery changes drastically depending upon era and geography.

As for torture, again it's much the same thing. Heck some cultures have rituals that revolve around torture! Native Americans for instance. (At least in Southern Ontario and North Eastern United States.) When a warrior was captured he was tortured by his captor. His response to this was then gaged and he was assigned honour in accordance with his reaction. Many different religions and cultures practice rituals that encompass some form of torture, and many cultures have practiced human sacrifice at some point in the past. Our views on it have changed but the rightness or wrongness has not.

Final note, how do you classify sentient/sapient? If it boils down to, "Are they sell aware?" then Chimpanzees and Orangutans are both self aware and we treat both species like crap.

"Our views on it have changed but the rightness or wrongness has not."

Ok good we're on the same page then I think one of us (or perhaps both us) mixed up moral relativism as a ethical theory and moral relativsm as a simple description of human culture. I can easily accept the latter.