Hey, so cruising these forums and reading lexicanum, seems like there's a "noble" aspect to Khorne that I haven't seen much of in the fluff.
In Gaunt's Ghosts they fight against khornites often, but on the battlefield so there's not much room for nobility. Traitor General explored it a bit, though not as much as I would have liked.
So what fluff source show the more "noble" aspect of Khorne?

I do not think that Khorne has a "noble" aspect. Khorne cares about blood and violence, not how it is produced. As such, Khorne will generally like both two honourable gentlemen dueling each other with florettes as well as two feral barbarians hacking each other to bits with huge axes. He'll just like the latter two a bit more because their actions produce more blood, and more violence.

In a way, it's like people would say the Imperium has a "caring" aspect just because it takes care of some orphans in the Schola Progenium. The Imperium doesn't actually care about these orphans, the Imperium wishes to form them into loyal and capable servants to the Throne, as the Imperium's actual goal is order (as a means to ensure the mankind's survival).

The big difference in both cases is that just like the Imperium will sport individuals who actually do care, Khorne too will have a few followers who actually are noble and honourable. At least for a while, for the corrupting influence of the Chaos Gods and their daemons has a tendency to twist their followers and mold them into something more in line with the respective God's actual goals. It's all a matter of influence.

I'm sorry that I cannot answer your actual question regarding fluff examples for honourable Khornate cults, but I am sure that there are some. Another dakkanaut will likely be able to pitch in regarding this.

A pretty big aspect of Khorne is martial prowess, rather than just bloodletting IIRC, which is probably about as close to noble as it gets...

Testify wrote:Hey, so cruising these forums and reading lexicanum, seems like there's a "noble" aspect to Khorne that I haven't seen much of in the fluff.
In Gaunt's Ghosts they fight against khornites often, but on the battlefield so there's not much room for nobility. Traitor General explored it a bit, though not as much as I would have liked.
So what fluff source show the more "noble" aspect of Khorne?

The old Realm of Chaos books Slaves to Darkness and Lost and the Damned explored that all four chaos gods have a noble side and outcome to their resume.

Khorne's is Martial Prowess, it can be compared to Samurai bushido or the Predator's rules about worthy prey to take on. It's about self discipline and dedication. Khorne's champions don't skulk or throw spells, they march out and seek the biggest baddest badass the other side has and seek to take that leader or champion on. I remember some fluff where a Khorne champion is walking through a fallen city and sneers in disgust at the beastmen who are torturing and killing the townsfolks as such should be beneath them and, having passed higher onto Khorne's true path, the Champion sees the leader of the beastmen killing old villagers and, flying into an incensed rage at the unsuitable offerings the beastman was making to his Lord, killed the beastman leader in Khorne's name. Purity of Purpose.

Tzeentch's is Ambition, climbing the ladder and seeking to better your position, constantly able to change and adapt in the face of adversity. Always Evolving.

Nurgle's is Defiance, resisting change and surviving adversity in spite of it all. Able to Endure.

Slaanesh's is Self Perfection, taking on any and all experiences and using what you take to become a more perfect being. Love of Self.

If you find blood and murder to be noble, then that's it.

I think the Chaos Gods in general, while being spectrums of emotions, are those emotions taken to extremes and twisted around in ways that become harmful. Tzeentch for instance is the god of hope, and that hope is used to manipulate worlds and individuals into doing crazed thing. Slaanesh is the god of pleasure, and its followers are eventually forced into more and more savage acts to experience any kind of feeling at all.

Khorne has a sense of "honor" in that he'd prefer to kill a strong, armed opponent in 1 on 1 hand-to-hand over a baby or whatever, but that's really where it ends.

It basically comes down to the old 'Khorne cares not from where the blood flows'.

If you're a highly skilled swordsman gracefully hacking your way through the enemy, or an outright blood crazed killed murdering your way through the enemy, Khorne is happy.

The problem is GW are reluctant to explore anything outside of the berserker stereotype, likely because it's just easier to do.

There was some very old fluff (RT/2nd) which simply may not be canon at this point but a Bloodletter would yield its weapon to an unarmed opponent or Khorne would send a Bloodletter after Cultist who would offer the unworthy skulls of the weak, young, or old, to him. Khorne was always about blood and skulls but it was more about warfare and martial prowess than just slaughter.

ntin wrote:There was some very old fluff (RT/2nd) which simply may not be canon at this point but a Bloodletter would yield its weapon to an unarmed opponent or Khorne would send a Bloodletter after Cultist who would offer the unworthy skulls of the weak, young, or old, to him. Khorne was always about blood and skulls but it was more about warfare and martial prowess than just slaughter.

This is fairly obsolete. Bloodletters today are screaming maniacs that kill everything in sight. 4th Ed Daemon Codex has a passage about Bloodletters herding civilians into cages then bringing them out to be executed by beheading, one by one. Thousands died this way.

"The Blood God does not care from whom the blood flows, so long as it does."

Older fluff made Khorne more noble. Nowadays, him and his followers are just mindless berserkers.

Real shame, I absolutely love the 'honourable blood knight' archetype.

Fafnir wrote:Older fluff made Khorne more noble. Nowadays, him and his followers are just mindless berserkers.

Real shame, I absolutely love the 'honourable blood knight' archetype.

Since its all canon and none of it is canon this is the interpretation i choose to use.

Fafnir wrote:Older fluff made Khorne more noble. Nowadays, him and his followers are just mindless berserkers.

Real shame, I absolutely love the 'honourable blood knight' archetype.

It's a shame and I whole-heartedly agree with you. While blood-crazyed berserkers are fun and all, there's already enough of that in the 40k universe as is (look at the Blood Angels and their Successors, for example)
I think the 'nobility' aspect of Khorne comes from the fact that he and his followers are first and foremost, warriors beyond anything else. And with being a warrior comes a certain code of conduct that can be construed as honourable and noble, such as only fighting those worthy (i.e., not picking on the weak and infirm because they just do not put up a good fight), seeking out champions to fight, and have a general disdain of 'lesser' forms of combat, i.e., magic, skulking around all cloak and daggers-like. So while devotees of Khorne eventually devolve into blood-crazed madness, it wouldnt be a stretch to say that many of them start out on the path to Khorne from being honourable warriors themselves.

Of course, its a pity when all of that subtlety is just thrown out the window and subsequently drowned in that OTP "The Blood God does not care from whom the blood flows, so long as it doe." shtick. It used to be that Khorne DID care where his blood and skulls came from. If you were Khorne, wouldnt you be insulted if you were only given the blood and skulls of the weak, old and infirm?

I recently read the Valkia the Bloody novel - which I found both very enoyable and actually had something a little more than basic beserkers.

It is Warhammer Fantasy - but a tribe on a feral world worshipping Khorne would be very similar.........

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Warhammer/valkia-the-bloody.html

http://thefoundingfields.com/2012/06/valkia-the-bloody-shadowhawk/

Warhammer armies mentions 'honour'
ie no magic and shooting. Just hand to hand.

I suppose then we'd have to define what "honour" actually means, first.

Khorne Berserker: "What are you doing aiming that crossbow at that unarmed child? That is dishonourable! Use your friggin' axe!"

Bigger chance of seeing the blow come and defending yourself.

thenoobbomb wrote:Bigger chance of seeing the blow come and defending yourself.

Eh, an unarmed child still wouldn't be able to defend itself.

Khorne and his followers value martial power, and such strength can only be proven in combat with an equal or greater foe. Nevertheless, Khorne also values simple spilling of blood, as much as possible and regardless of whom. As such, a true Khornate will always revel more in slaying an enemy that can truly defend him- or herself ... yet at the same time also not hesitate to behead a 1 year old babe. It just won't be as fun because it isn't a challenge. Individual cultists may elect to foregoe such base acts of senseless violence, but that would be the scarce remains of their own honour, not that of their Chaos God.

(to clarify, that also means that the "honourable blood knight" archetype is still entirely possible and fluffy, even if you'd want to stick to current studio fluff)

Lynata wrote:

thenoobbomb wrote:Bigger chance of seeing the blow come and defending yourself.

Eh, an unarmed child still wouldn't be able to defend itself.

Khorne and his followers value martial power, and such strength can only be proven in combat with an equal or greater foe. Nevertheless, Khorne also values simple spilling of blood, as much as possible and regardless of whom. As such, a true Khornate will always revel more in slaying an enemy that can truly defend him- or herself ... yet at the same time also not hesitate to behead a 1 year old babe. It just won't be as fun because it isn't a challenge. Individual cultists may elect to foregoe such base acts of senseless violence, but that would be the scarce remains of their own honour, not that of their Chaos God.

(to clarify, that also means that the "honourable blood knight" archetype is still entirely possible and fluffy, even if you'd want to stick to current studio fluff)

Just killing baby's is a lot better then what Slaanesh would do
Also, they will not attack some one from the back, nor refuse challenges.

Harriticus wrote:Tzeentch for instance is the god of hope, and that hope is used to manipulate worlds and individuals into doing crazed thing.

Tzeentch is the god of change, not hope.

thisisnotpancho wrote:

Harriticus wrote:Tzeentch for instance is the god of hope, and that hope is used to manipulate worlds and individuals into doing crazed thing.

Tzeentch is the god of change, not hope.

Change and hope.

One example I can think of to support the OP is from the SW codex. In the description of Ulrik the Slayer it talks about how his martial prowess and fierceness during the First War of Armageddon earned him a "grim salute from the lord of the World Eaters himself."

So it seems that Angron, mr big chosen daemon primarch of Khorne is at least willing to acknowledge others who fight well, which is a kind of nobility.

CrashCanuck wrote:One example I can think of to support the OP is from the SW codex. In the description of Ulrik the Slayer it talks about how his martial prowess and fierceness during the First War of Armageddon earned him a "grim salute from the lord of the World Eaters himself."

So it seems that Angron, mr big chosen daemon primarch of Khorne is at least willing to acknowledge others who fight well, which is a kind of nobility.

Or it was just a Space Wolf bragging about how awesome he thinks he is.

I think we will possibly see the noble side of khorn in the new CSM codex when it is released, things like khorn berserker champions not being able to decline challenges and what not, I hope anyway, it will make the codex so much better and fluffier than a lot of other codexes seem.

Coolyo294 wrote:Or it was just a Space Wolf bragging about how awesome he thinks he is.

Killing a few Khorne Berserkers with your bare fists is pretty awesome in anyone's books...

Killing Inquisitors is one of them....

Mantle wrote:I think we will possibly see the noble side of khorn in the new CSM codex when it is released, things like khorn berserker champions not being able to decline challenges and what not, I hope anyway, it will make the codex so much better and fluffier than a lot of other codexes seem.

I'm used to Warhammer armies: WoC and that has exactly this but then for all characters

There can be a certain nobility during conflict. An acknowledgment of a shared experience, respect for someone who has to do the same job at the same level that you do. This leads to situations where people don't always take advantage of their opponents weaknesses.

I don't think Khorne has anything to do with that. I think Khorne centers on all the other aspects of warfare. The hatred, the rage, the fear and the bloodlust.

From what I recall, the underlying message has always been that ostensibly noble impulses - honour, martial pride, a just desire for vengeance - still lead to blood, death and carnage; which are just what Khorne likes best.

I think it's more that were Khorne to have a good side, it would be this, however given that it's the grim darkness of the far future, this good side is basically nonexistant, and simply theoretical.

p_gray99 wrote:I think it's more that were Khorne to have a good side, it would be this, however given that it's the grim darkness of the far future, this good side is basically nonexistant, and simply theoretical.

It does exist in WHFB.

thenoobbomb wrote:It does exist in WHFB.

In Khorne himself or in some of his followers?

That is a very, very important difference. As mentioned before, I'm fairly sure there are some "noble" Khornates in 40k as well. "Noble" just like that Champion that MeanGreenStompa mentioned, who also doesn't tell us anything at all about how his god actually feels about the subject.

Lynata wrote:

thenoobbomb wrote:It does exist in WHFB.

In Khorne himself or in some of his followers?

That is a very, very important difference. As mentioned before, I'm fairly sure there are some "noble" Khornates in 40k as well. "Noble" just like that Champion that MeanGreenStompa mentioned, who also doesn't tell us anything at all about how his god actually feels about the subject.

In Khorne (and his daemons) himself.
Khorne feeds upon honour too.

If that were true, then all the Empire's knights, the Griffon Knights of Brettonia, the.... I forget what the High Elves call their knights.... and basically every knightly order everywhere are subject to the influence of Khorne pretty much all the time. That makes no narrative sense, and honor and martial pride are not the same thing. It also contraindicates the statement "Khorne cares not from whence the blood flows".

Psienesis wrote:If that were true, then all the Empire's knights, the Griffon Knights of Brettonia, the.... I forget what the High Elves call their knights.... and basically every knightly order everywhere are subject to the influence of Khorne pretty much all the time. That makes no narrative sense, and honor and martial pride are not the same thing. It also contraindicates the statement "Khorne cares not from whence the blood flows".

Aye, but its GW.

thenoobbomb wrote:Khorne feeds upon honour too.

I don't recall ever reading this, ever ... then again, the only book I have from WHFB is the non-GW Tome of Corruption, which I purchased for a WFRP campaign (ToC had rules for Norscan characters ).

Weird that Khorne would differ so much from one setting to another.

I think there is a difference between the "noble aspects of Khorne" and those of "Khorne followers".

Khorne, 100% undiluted, likely has no noble or redeeming aspects as far as I am aware.

But 99,9% of Khorne's followers are not "fully" Khorne yet (Kharn being the possible exception). Most followers of Khorne start their worship at some point of being a warrior or soldier, bound to some tradition, code, military rule or another. And as both individual warriors and/or entire warrior/army-organisations slowly drift towards Khorne, you will find alot of "hybrid"-beliefs that mix the various elements of martial and warrior-traditions with the extremes of "blood for the blood-god".

It is the same for the other Chaos Gods too. Not ever follower will just switch from "zero" to "full-fledge, uncompromising extremist". For all the "vices" that lure them in, self-justification with some real or imagined "noble" or "greater" purpose is likely one of the last things a Chaos-follower wipes from his self-perception.

Hell, even most Berzerkers/World Eaters wont go quite as far as Kharn and slaughter their own brothers. They (mostly) cling on to remnants of loyalty and restraint in facing their brethren. Which is why only Kharn is the "truest" and "purest" servant of Khorne. He truly does not care where the blood comes from. But these last remnants of loyalty are not part of "Khorne". They are those last few parts that are not fully Khorne yet.

Lynata wrote:

thenoobbomb wrote:Khorne feeds upon honour too.

I don't recall ever reading this, ever ... then again, the only book I have from WHFB is the non-GW Tome of Corruption, which I purchased for a WFRP campaign (ToC had rules for Norscan characters ).

Weird that Khorne would differ so much from one setting to another.

Ever wondered why Khorne's biggest enemy is Slaanesh?
Slaanesh has no honour. Tzeentch neither, but SLaanesh is worse.

thenoobbomb wrote:Ever wondered why Khorne's biggest enemy is Slaanesh?
Slaanesh has no honour. Tzeentch neither, but SLaanesh is worse.

I thought it had more to do with their agenda being at odds with each other, rather than the way they go about it.

Khorne wants as much slaughter as possible - Slaanesh wants as much experience as possible. I can easily see Slaaneshi orgies ending in kills (not to mention the instances where slaves are pulverised to make for drugs), but obviously the whole process is extremely dragged out. Where Khorne would wish a bunch of slaves to be murdered and sacrificed asap, Slaanesh would want to have them abused or perhaps even turned just for giggles, the longer the better.

The aspect of seeking worthy foes as offerings to Khorne has always been in the fluff, but has fallen to the wayside in recent years. Sure Khornites will kill unarmed villagers, but that's merely because they're in the way. If given the chance a Khornite champion would turn from senseless slaughter to prove himself better than another skillful warrior. If he wins in combat, he's proven himself and Khorne is happy; if he loses, Khorne is still happy. -That- is what the famous line, "Khorne cares not from where the blood flows, as long as it does" means. It doesn't mean to seek favor by killing the weak, huddled masses. It means that Khorne is happy if you win a big fight or lose.

There's also honor in the way Khornites do battle in both WHFB and 40k. While they are vicious, unrelenting killers, they do not fight dirty. They stand up to their enemy and fight them eye to eye. They are not underhanded, they don't rely on sorcery or plotting to win. They march on and prove themselves better warriors than those in their way or die trying with nothing but their skill and strength of arms.

There's no denying that unarmed villagers won't be cut down if they're caught in the warpath. They're weak and the followers of Khorne will prove that to them. Are they a worthy offering to the Blood God? Well, that's up to the big guy himself to decide, but like I said in my first paragraph, there are better offerings and better ways to prove your might than senseless slaughter.

Haunter! wrote:The aspect of seeking worthy foes as offerings to Khorne has always been in the fluff, but has fallen to the wayside in recent years. Sure Khornites will kill unarmed villagers, but that's merely because they're in the way. If given the chance a Khornite champion would turn from senseless slaughter to prove himself better than another skillful warrior. If he wins in combat, he's proven himself and Khorne is happy; if he loses, Khorne is still happy. -That- is what the famous line, "Khorne cares not from where the blood flows, as long as it does" means. It doesn't mean to seek favor by killing the weak, huddled masses. It means that Khorne is happy if you win a big fight or lose.

There's also honor in the way Khornites do battle in both WHFB and 40k. While they are vicious, unrelenting killers, they do not fight dirty. They stand up to their enemy and fight them eye to eye. They are not underhanded, they don't rely on sorcery or plotting to win. They march on and prove themselves better warriors than those in their way or die trying with nothing but their skill and strength of arms.

There's no denying that unarmed villagers won't be cut down if they're caught in the warpath. They're weak and the followers of Khorne will prove that to them. Are they a worthy offering to the Blood God? Well, that's up to the big guy himself to decide, but like I said in my first paragraph, there are better offerings and better ways to prove your might than senseless slaughter.

Great 1st post and the best answer to the OP I've seen.

Just Dave wrote:

Haunter! wrote:The aspect of seeking worthy foes as offerings to Khorne has always been in the fluff, but has fallen to the wayside in recent years. Sure Khornites will kill unarmed villagers, but that's merely because they're in the way. If given the chance a Khornite champion would turn from senseless slaughter to prove himself better than another skillful warrior. If he wins in combat, he's proven himself and Khorne is happy; if he loses, Khorne is still happy. -That- is what the famous line, "Khorne cares not from where the blood flows, as long as it does" means. It doesn't mean to seek favor by killing the weak, huddled masses. It means that Khorne is happy if you win a big fight or lose.

There's also honor in the way Khornites do battle in both WHFB and 40k. While they are vicious, unrelenting killers, they do not fight dirty. They stand up to their enemy and fight them eye to eye. They are not underhanded, they don't rely on sorcery or plotting to win. They march on and prove themselves better warriors than those in their way or die trying with nothing but their skill and strength of arms.

There's no denying that unarmed villagers won't be cut down if they're caught in the warpath. They're weak and the followers of Khorne will prove that to them. Are they a worthy offering to the Blood God? Well, that's up to the big guy himself to decide, but like I said in my first paragraph, there are better offerings and better ways to prove your might than senseless slaughter.

Great 1st post and the best answer to the OP I've seen.

And exactly what I wanted to say, but did not know how to.

So basically it comes down do:
- some people think that innocents being killed is just a follower-induced byproduct of some versions of Khornate worship, whereas the God himself doesn't care about it
and
- some people think that noble behaviour is just a follower-induced byproduct of some versions of Khornate worship, whereas the God himself doesn't care about it

A good example for how interpretations of 40k fluff can vary, I suppose.

I think the mistake here is talking about a Chaos God as if it is just another discrete character in the setting, like Marneus Calgar or Eldrad. Khorne is a god known to mortals indirectly by mystical experiences and, in exceedingly rare examples, the presence of Khornate daemons -- who are themselves so utterly alien to the material universe much less the human conception of morality that our qualification of their motives, desires, and attitudes will be insufficient as a matter of course. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that some worshipers of Khorne would emphasize ritualized but straight-foward "honorable" combat (a la Skulltaker itself) and others would emphasize unmitigated violence in any direct form. In other words, this is not merely a matter of different readers interpreting the fluff differently in the context of the real world but of different fictional characters interpreting their own fictional world differently. From a daemon's own perspective, there may be no difference at all between these attitudes.

Haunter! wrote:There's no denying that unarmed villagers won't be cut down if they're caught in the warpath. They're weak and the followers of Khorne will prove that to them. Are they a worthy offering to the Blood God? Well, that's up to the big guy himself to decide, but like I said in my first paragraph, there are better offerings and better ways to prove your might than senseless slaughter.

Excellent point. I think of it like this:

A Khornate warrior makes planetfall on some peaceful agriworld. Twenty clicks to the west of his landing zone is a defenseless colony of thousands of agriworkers. Twenty clicks to the south is a tactical squad of Astartes. It's not really as simple as the difference between thousands of skulls to the west and ten skulls to the south.

Manchu wrote:In other words, this is not merely a matter of different readers interpreting the fluff differently in the context of the real world but of different fictional characters interpreting their own fictional world differently. From a daemon's own perspective, there may be no difference at all between these attitudes.

Exactly. The tricky thing about the question is that people were asking about Khorne himself - not just his followers.
Are there more examples of how Khorne's demons actually act? That might present a more accurate glimpse of what Khorne himself "thinks", rather than relying on the personal style of some select followers.

I think we can all agree that there are many forms his worship might take, though.

I was pretty shocked no one had brought up Skulltaker yet. Here is a daemon that, when the crowd of Bloodletters parts, is stalking around a makeshift arena, calling out the best and bravest to go mano-a-mano. He apparently earned Khorne's particular favor after taking 888 skulls. So yeah, that's lucky eight and all but it's also a pretty tiny number for a functionally immortal being. So my impression is Khorne gets more jollies from good fights than just any old violence.

Also consider this: If a berserker makes a kill, who's pleased? Well, Khorne obviously. If a Black Templar Marshal takes down an enemy champion in honorable, single combat, who's pleased? Khorne, of course. As long as there's bloodshed and conflict, He is pleased. He cares not for who claims victory, for those are the concerns of mortal men. Just as long as those that make war do so until their last breath is drawn on the battlefield, Khorne is as content as the embodiment of warfare and wrath can be.

Lynata wrote:So basically it comes down do:
- some people think that innocents being killed is just a follower-induced byproduct of some versions of Khornate worship, whereas the God himself doesn't care about it
and
- some people think that noble behaviour is just a follower-induced byproduct of some versions of Khornate worship, whereas the God himself doesn't care about it

A good example for how interpretations of 40k fluff can vary, I suppose.

It would be wrong to say that He wouldn't care about the skulls of the weak. Bloodshed is bloodshed after all. It is safe to say that killing another warrior wold gain you more favor with him, however. His church is the battlefield, his sacrament blood, his communion skulls. Who's blood and skulls offered has been seen to effect favor gained. Do you think Skulltaker gained his position from the slaughter of 888 townsfolk? Possibly, but given his background I'm more inclined to believe he killed other warriors.

As I said before, a Khornite warrior may be vicious and violent in their aims, but they are noble in their methods. They forgo the underhanded methods of sorcery and misdirection to march directly to their foes and offer them a chance to defend themselves.

Haunter! wrote:It would be wrong to say that He wouldn't care about the skulls of the weak. Bloodshed is bloodshed after all. It is safe to say that killing another warrior wold gain you more favor with him, however.

See, that I can absolutely agree on. The more challenging a fight, the better for Khorne. It just sounded as if some people here would suggest that Khorne would spare those that aren't ... well, challenging. Manchu's reference, for example, omits that the Skulltaker simply kills those who refuse anyways.
Ultimately, bloodshed is bloodshed, as you say. If Khorne's Legion would conquer a world, everyone would be slain - the men, the women, the elderly and the children. It's just that most of his daemons will go for the warriors first, resorting to kill the defenseless only when there's no-one else left.

"Under Khorne's urgings, his endless tide of soldiers are whipped into a blood frenzy, and will fall upon each other in their desire to spill blood if no other foe can be found. For it is war - constant, mindless bloodletting and destruction - that is all Khorne cares for. He cares not who is victorious and who is slain, just that they fight until they can fight no more. All that Khorne exists for, all that his entire being is bent towards, is the flow of blood from fresh wounds and the taking of skulls."
4E C:CD p10

I suppose that foregoing sorcery and misdirection can be called a form of nobility, but it does not extend to some form of compassion against the weak. To suggest otherwise is, imo, just an attempt to twist the Chaos Gods towards some "moral grey area" (possibly to excuse the CSM as misunderstood liberators, for I've seen that argument to be made for the Black Crusade RPG) when it's clear that Chaos truly is meant to be the cliché Evil with a capital E.
As mentioned before, however, the followers of the Chaos Gods are a diverse breed, and there one might indeed find various misled and more noble individuals - such as the aforementioned "blood knight" concept.

Maybe in the case of individuals like Skulltaker his 888 skulls aren't skulls but Skulls, as we've noted previously in the thread the quality of the sacrifice and the fight leading up to it can effect the quality of favor gained from khorne (taking your girlfriend to McDonalds vs a fine restraunt as a silly comparison) So the Skulltaker's taken 888 WORTHY skulls for Khorne in duels that have been good enough that it caught the god's eye and pleased him.

Even with Warrior Codes though you can find plenty of cracks to slip through towards the "Blood for the blood god" methodology. So let's take a standard warrior. You live for the challenge, leading your force in search of worthy opponents and conflicts. When you arrive somewhere you are seeking their best, giving everyone in/on the planet/city/whatever a chance to fight and die with honor BUT the civilians are fleeing! Cowardice! It's... it's revolting! Disgusting! They shall PAY for their filth! As a man who lives by a warrior code and has done time in a military branch where they do uphold a very strong sense of warrior pride and honor I can confirm emotions like that in /this/ century. Not to the extreme above of being disgusted to the point of slaughter of civilians. But being disgusted by an enemy who behaves in a cowardly manner or a fellow Marine/solider who is a coward

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Maybe in the case of individuals like Skulltaker his 888 skulls aren't skulls but Skulls, as we've noted previously in the thread the quality of the sacrifice and the fight leading up to it can effect the quality of favor gained from khorne (taking your girlfriend to McDonalds vs a fine restraunt as a silly comparison) So the Skulltaker's taken 888 WORTHY skulls for Khorne in duels that have been good enough that it caught the god's eye and pleased him.

Close!
It's really "just" 888 any skulls - but the Skulltaker has killed many more foes since then. The 888 was just when he finally gained the attention of his god.
The Codex notes that Khorne now keeps most skulls of the Skulltaker's victims ... but allows him to keep "the few that posed a real challenge."

I actualy would like it better if they brought back the old Karnath and showd all of the Emotions that the Chaos Gods portray not just the negative ones

Lynata wrote:\Manchu's reference, for example, omits that the Skulltaker simply kills those who refuse anyways.

Aye but those skulls are ne woven into his cloak of trophies. You're so hasty to paint me as dismissive that you end up being the one who's dismissive.

Manchu wrote:Aye but those skulls are ne woven into his cloak of trophies. You're so hasty to paint me as dismissive that you end up being the one who's dismissive.

I actually mentioned that as I answered KalashnikovMarine's post.
And I wouldn't have tried "painting" you as "dismissive" - but I did think that you were (perhaps unintentionally) trying to twist that character, or Khorne in general, into appearing more "noble" than they actually are.
You've got to admit, presenting a Chaos demon and pointing out how he challenges individual enemies to a duel, yet not mentioning how those that decline are killed anyways does appear a tad selective.

I think it bears pointing out that perhaps Khorne values certain aspects of "honor"... in the way that his followers march straight into battle, give no quarter, expect none, and fight a straight-up, stand-up battle with their targets.... but not the codes of honor that center around chivalry, the defense of the weak, protection of the innocent, etc etc etc.

Honor is a tricky thing, and most codes of honor that have existed in Earth's history covered a very wide range of topics, not just battlefield behavior.

Lynata wrote:You've got to admit, presenting a Chaos demon and pointing out how he challenges individual enemies to a duel, yet not mentioning how those that decline are killed anyways does appear a tad selective.

Not at all. Slaying the cowardly doesn't seem contrary to the point I was making at all ...

Lynata wrote:I suppose that foregoing sorcery and misdirection can be called a form of nobility, but it does not extend to some form of compassion against the weak.

Honor and compassion are not synonymous, neither is nobility. It's a great misconception people seem to be having in this thread. Khorne's realm has never extended toward nobility, but has extended towards honor in combat.

To suggest otherwise is, imo, just an attempt to twist the Chaos Gods towards some "moral grey area" (possibly to excuse the CSM as misunderstood liberators, for I've seen that argument to be made for the Black Crusade RPG) when it's clear that Chaos truly is meant to be the cliché Evil with a capital E.
As mentioned before, however, the followers of the Chaos Gods are a diverse breed, and there one might indeed find various misled and more noble individuals - such as the aforementioned "blood knight" concept.

That's the thing about Chaos, it isn't "good" or "bad," it simply is. Chaos is the amoral nature of the cosmos, spreading in every direction for no real reason other than to do so. It cannot be quantified by human morals.

Chaos is just raw emotions.

Haunter! wrote:Honor and compassion are not synonymous, neither is nobility. It's a great misconception people seem to be having in this thread. Khorne's realm has never extended toward nobility, but has extended towards honor in combat.

That's why I was asking people to clarify what they mean when they talk about "noble behaviour" earlier.
Maybe it was a misconception, but to me it sounded like a lot of people were going on about how "unworthy" opponents would be spared; "noble behaviour" in this case apparently referring to killing only those who actually have a chance at defending themselves.

Haunter! wrote:That's the thing about Chaos, it isn't "good" or "bad," it simply is. Chaos is the amoral nature of the cosmos, spreading in every direction for no real reason other than to do so. It cannot be quantified by human morals.

A matter of semantics. What I'm saying is that to us human beings, Chaos is obviously evil, and as such it should be natural to name it so - otherwise you may as well go on about "good" or "bad" do not exist anywhere and are just abstract constructs of the dominant society.
I also think that the truly amoral nature of the cosmos is the Warp, and the four Chaos Gods we know are but aspects of it. There are some theories that the Emperor himself might be another. And then there are (possibly) the Eldar gods and the Living Saints, as well as countless other thoughts and emotions that were given form within the Warp.

Perhaps the idea of honor through strength of arms is simply not accessible enough to modern minds to be precisely defined. I have an inkling of: the notion that combat against a worthy opponent is an honorable thing, whether good or bad in the (let's face it) Christian sense aside, and that victory against such a foe is a great source of honor. The idea that honor makes one noble may be similarly inaccessible but it seems at least familiar if one considers the feudal world -- i.e., a world in which Khornate combat was the dominant expression of social power. Reckless slaughter of the cowardly weak seems like the "dirty work" of Khorne. So when Skulltaker must slay a craven who refuses his challenge, he is ill-pleased and considers himself robbed of the chance to vanquish a mighty foe. In other words, the lack of honor of the challenged party is a theft of honor of the challenger.

Honor through strength of arms is perfectly accessible in the modern world, you just have to be in a position and culture where honor through strength of arms continues to be taught, which is significantly rarer then ancient times.

Honor itself is a very unique and personal concept even when it's got a wider cultural definition such as bushido or chivalry, those cultural definitions also vary and evolve drastically as time goes on. To compare east and west in very general terms. If you're a knight and you lose a fight and live the worst that's going to happen to you is you'll be stripped of your position, most likely you'll just be made fun of over beers. In the samurai culture if you're defeated and live you're dishonored twice. Once your losing and a second time for A. not dying well and B. not having the courage to immediately commit seppuku.

So with the vast cultural definition differences, you can imagine it gets even worse down to a personal level. Does honor come from killing the enemy? Dying well? Defending the weak? Is there a certain mode of behavior required to live honorably out of combat?

That's what we're facing now with the Khornate worshipers because ALL of the above can and does serve Khorne, and Khorne himself really doesn't give a damn about any of it "Khorne cares not from where the blood flows..." Khorne accepts honor and the like because it's another reason for warriors to fight, bleed and die and those three things please him. Not the "honor" gained from those three things.

I don't think the meaning of honor is a unique to a given person. If that was the case, then the concept would have little social value. Perhaps honor is this unique sort of thing today because it is basically irrelevant in our modern society. But in cultures where honor is relevant, people know what it means, they know when they have it or not, they know when others lose it, and they know when someone is impinging upon theirs.

Further, it seems to me that Skulltaker is pretty good example of Khorne actually caring from whence the blood flows. Yes, in the grand scope of things, blood is blood and skulls are skulls. More of each is always appreciated. But the blood of the mighty, the skulls of heroes -- those are the ones Khorne values best and rewards those who can lay them before his throne.

No, I think modern minds have sufficient access to good novels and movies to get an idea of the various interpretations of honour. Ironically, I've been on the other side of the discussion once on the STO forums, in a big thread about Klingon honour. Various authors have written a number of interesting treatises on the idea of honour through strength of arms.

At the end of the day, however, what I'm questioning is why must the Skulltaker slay that "craven who refuses his challenge"? I definitively agree that he obviously prefers a real fight, but that doesn't mean that his indiscriminate slaughter of anyone else wouldn't taint his supposedly noble behaviour. What I'm thinking is that the Skulltaker gives a grot's ass about the concept of "honour". He cares not for innocence or affiliation or promises or age, the only thing he cares for is that he is presented with a challenging fight. And if he doesn't get it, he'll still have no problem slaying defenseless babes in their beds - he'd just be bored, and after a while even more enraged that he doesn't get to kill something that can actually fight back (then possibly venting his frustration on some hapless ally ).

Again, it could be as simple as refusing a challenge dishonoring both the challenger as well as the challenged party. When Skulltaker calls you out, it's because he considers you to be mighty. If you crumble before his challenge then you have effectively insulted his judgment. This thing Skulltaker only exists for battle. It is a matter of religious import to him. Imagine going into a church, having the priest offer you communion in front of every one, and then you're like "no, I'm good." You insult the entire community, the traditions, the good will of your hosts, etc, etc, etc, in that situation. From its daemonic perspective, the battlefield is not some chessboard that Skulltaker moves its pieces across to achieve ends beyond the scope of war. War itself is the goal. Battle is a holy enactment of Khorne's very being. To turn down Skulltaker's challenge is to spit in the Blood God's eye. Honor demands blood, one way or the other.

A lot of these answers are very contradictory. Single one to one combat produces far less blood than outright massacre - how can khorne enjoy both equally?

The problem with any religon is that its text and creed are open to interpritation. There will be those blood crazed fanatics who will gut and decapitate everything in sight because in Khornes favourite tag line seems to be "Blood for the blood God" but for the warriors who understand the creed on a different level, who understand that the souls of those they kill feed their God, why would they feed him substandard fare? especially from an astartes point of view.

I only recently began reading the CSM black library books (So far ive read the iron warriors and word bearers omnibus') both book had their blood crazed nutters BUT these blood crazed lunatics were still astartes at their core, they understood the basis of warfare. Sacrificing a helpless woman to Khorne probably wont garner much kudos, on the other hand as a slave said woman can reload a seige engine, help haul a gun carriage, dig a trench. You will always get extemists from any religon, fictional or otherwise, its important to note that people rarely throw their lot in with the chaos Gods for their darker incarnations.

The Miser doesnt side with tzeencth because he wants tentacles, he wants to sate his ambition for power.

The Noble doesnt side with slannesh because he wants to be tortured repeatedly, he wants power and to be loved.

The sick dont side with Nurgle because they want to be pox ridden, they want to survive.

By the same token a warrior wants to better himself and beat his enemies on the feild of battle, not murder the contents of a small orphanage.

Testify wrote:A lot of these answers are very contradictory. Single one to one combat produces far less blood than outright massacre - how can khorne enjoy both equally?

It seems to me that he does not. Skulltaker gets a promotion for 888 skulls. Now, considering that all bloodletters are immortal and that all they do is continuously try to decapitate things, why would Skulltaker stand out unless each of those 888 skulls was an exceptional trophy?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

danp164 wrote:By the same token a warrior wants to better himself and beat his enemies on the feild of battle, not murder the contents of a small orphanage.

Very well said.

Testify wrote:A lot of these answers are very contradictory. Single one to one combat produces far less blood than outright massacre - how can khorne enjoy both equally?

I think here it gets tricky.
Is that one-to-one combat a truly epic fight between two mighty opponents, or is it just a CSM Lord hacking a PDF soldier in two with his chainsword?
vs
How many children are in that orphanage?

I'd guess that the answers to each of these questions would have to be weighed against each other to determine Khorne's interest. Simple bloodlust vs interest in a good fight. Khorne exists for both.

Manchu wrote:Again, it could be as simple as refusing a challenge dishonoring both the challenger as well as the challenged party.

And again: I understand that.
This doesn't deal with the "why" regarding what would happen if you put the Skulltaker into an unguarded hospital.

Lynata wrote:This doesn't deal with the "why" regarding what would happen if you put the Skulltaker into an unguarded hospital.

I'm not sure what you are getting at. Are you saying that a being who recklessly slaughters the weak cannot also value matching its strength against a worthy opponent?

It seems pretty simple to me: Skulltaker wouldn't slap a baby for honor's sake. Like I said, culling the weak is just the dirty work. It's a necessary thing -- because the strong who survive will be the most prized opponents, the ones who make honorable combat possible, whose skulls are most fit to be trophies.

Manchu wrote:I'm not sure what you are getting at. Are you saying that a being who recklessly slaughters the weak cannot also value matching its strength against a worthy opponent?

No, I'm saying that, in this case, a being that prefers matching its strength against a worthy opponent will still recklessly slaughter the weak whenever it gets the chance.

Manchu wrote:It seems pretty simple to me: Skulltaker wouldn't slap a baby for honor's sake. Like I said, culling the weak is just the dirty work. It's a necessary thing -- because the strong who survive will be the most prized opponents, the ones who make honorable combat possible, whose skulls are most fit to be trophies.

Skulltaker doesn't care for honour. He cares for challenges. The concept of "honour" is what some people may try to attribute to him due to his preference for strong opponents. (of course this comes back to the actual definition of "what does honour mean")
It also isn't a matter of necessity - for this, the slaughter is too indiscriminate, too unlimited. Exterminating entire planetary populations would obviously prevent potential strong opponents to be born there in the future, after all.

This does tie in with Khorne - or any other Chaos god - not really having a vested interest in ever truly "winning" the conflict, though. The Chaos gods thrive thanks to it, so it seems logical that they (at least subconsciously, if not openly) would prefer the current stalemate to last indefinitely. And there are some in the Imperium who believe this is best for the survival of mankind as well...
Makes me wonder as to whether Chaos may occasionally only put up a half hearted fight (lack of coordination and support by the Big Four towards their minions) and spare entire worlds or suddenly halt an advance, just so that they'd be able to come back later. Of course, this would be the game of the gods and not something that a lowly demon or CSM or cultist would realize.

It does come back to the question of defining honor, which is where I started this morning. I don't think it's a terribly coherent or complicated worldview but it does seem to exist: fighting strong opponents is honorable; culling the weak is a necessity. Asking a daemon to be consistent is ... misguided.

Going right back to the beginning - Slaves to Darkness says:

Khrone is the Blood God, the angry and murderous god of Chaos......
Khorne is the Power of Chaos in its aspect of mindless and absolute violence, destorying everything and everyone within its reach (sounds kinda like Azathoth to me).....
Every life taken by a follower of Khorne increases the Blood God's power. He looks with particular favour upon those who take the livs of thier friends and allies, and the more death and destruction a creature has caused, the more welcome it is as a sacrifce to Korne.
The only way to gain favour with him is by killing - enemies of firends, all the dead are equal in the eyes of Khorne...

Khorne is pure in its needs, however his followers and creations may I feel, be more complicated than their Master and in how they sate its needs

Lynata wrote:This does tie in with Khorne - or any other Chaos god - not really having a vested interest in ever truly "winning" the conflict, though. The Chaos gods thrive thanks to it, so it seems logical that they (at least subconsciously, if not openly) would prefer the current stalemate to last indefinitely. And there are some in the Imperium who believe this is best for the survival of mankind as well...
Makes me wonder as to whether Chaos may occasionally only put up a half hearted fight (lack of coordination and support by the Big Four towards their minions) and spare entire worlds or suddenly halt an advance, just so that they'd be able to come back later. Of course, this would be the game of the gods and not something that a lowly demon or CSM or cultist would realize.

I agree - usually the forces of Chaos - be they the Lord of Chaos in the Moorcock novels, the Shadows in B5 of the Warhammer Gods would normally prefer the "Great Game" to continue for infinity - but they usually are forced into a final confrontation by their opposite numbers of Law or they are too successful in their actions, plots and machinaitons. If the game ends then their revals are ended and Chaos enjoys the process more than the climax............

I would suggets that Chaos in 40K will and does frustrate the other powers and on occassion themselves so that the game can continue - even if the mortal realm was subsumed by Chaos - would that really gain them anything new.................would they care.

Those touting the slogan "Khorne cares not from where the blood flows, only that it flows" to counter the concept of martial pride/honourable killing are not considering the quote in it's entirety, it was stated first back in the old Realm of Chaos days when a Khornate renegade champion was falling in battle to an astartes foe. It was meant to represent that Khorne was pleased/powered even as his servant was falling. The Khorne warriors never cared that they were beaten by a more powerful foe because that foe too was serving their master's dictate. It was never meant to represent World Eaters massacring orphans at a picnic. It's not a quote about killing the weak, it's a quote about Khorne not caring if it is his servants or their enemies winning, only that there is warfare and offerings of mighty warrior deaths to appease his appetite.

There has been, clearly stated, reference in the background over the years about the Throne of Skulls and placing offerings of skulls at the feet of Khorne in the hereafter/realm of chaos. These offereings must be worthy foes, champions, monsters, sorcerers and such. The better the offering, the higher the skull may be placed, the closer to the god himself.

In a short story, in an old old white dwarf, when the first Grey Knights were released in terminator armour, a planetary governor's palace is attacked by cultists who summon a bloodthirster which sets about killing the PDF and palace guards which are protecting his target. The Governor springs his trap and Grey Knights teleport into the chamber to attack the bloodthirster.
The Bloodthirster shouts 'At last, worthy meat!' and sets about taking on the far more threatening opponents. He seems genuinely pleased at the increased challenge and with more worthwhile skulls to take back to his master.

I don't think anyone here was argueing that Khornates wouldn't enjoy a greater challenge. That was not the subject of the debate.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:It was never meant to represent World Eaters massacring orphans at a picnic.

Excellent reminder, MGS! Seems like this saying may have gotten carried too far.

So ... you're saying the World Eaters would not massacre orphans at a picnic?

...but but the orphan slaughter is the best part of our company picnic! And they make such good BBQ,,,,

Just for clarification - someone who massacred someone for the sheer carnal joy...khorne would not be interested in?
Chivalry and bloodlust are generally considered opposites.
And why would khorne want followers who were too weak to have everything in their favour, preferring instead to risk their lives in equal combat?

Even the dullest World Eater could put the following argument together:

- I want to claim as many skulls as possible
- the defenseless have skulls
- it is easier to claim the skulls of the defenseless
- I should always prioritize attacking the defenseless

Funny enough, that's not what they do. It's a sound argument -- but, as MSG points out, the premise is incorrect. The servants of Khorne do not necessarily want to claim any old skull for their patron's throne. And they certainly don't want to do it by just any means.

To me, this is where the concept of "honor" comes in for Khornate warriors and Khorne himself. If you have to hack through orphans to draw out a worthy opponent or get to her then so be it. But the Blood God will not favor you for punching babies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Testify wrote:Just for clarification - someone who massacred someone for the sheer carnal joy...khorne would not be interested in?

Sure, that's a good start.

Chivalry and bloodlust are generally considered opposites.

Chivalry is something way specific and not at all at issue here.

And why would khorne want followers who were too weak to have everything in their favour, preferring instead to risk their lives in equal combat?

Because the victory is more glorious when the opponents are both mighty.

.... I wish I had never brought up the orphanage

Breaking away from the Blood for the blood god Skulls for the Skull throne party line, is khorne not more a god of war and violence than a god of blood and skulls. Its like saying christians worship crucifixes, sure it features heavily in some subsets of christianity but its not the core component of the religon.

At the end of the day even the skull of the mighteist of heroes would not equal the bloodshed and glory of conquering a whole world in the name of khorne. Individual duels and battles may be won with butchery and savagery but wars are won with tactical thought and planning. Ergo there has to be a brain behind the blood god.

Yeah, it's called Tzeench. Khorne cares not whether he wins over the world or not, he simply cares about the kills.

Wars are generally fought to accomplish a goal external to war itself. The belligerents want territory, resources, prestige, etc. This is not the case with Khorne. Khorne does not advocate conquest except as a matter of martial feat. Therefore, Khorne would favor she who placed the skull of a primarch (for example) before his Brass Throne over she who offered the skulls of a hundred million invalids.

The followers of Khorne are warriors, not skull farmers. They might also be generals, sure. They might also be butchers of the innocent and helpless, sure. But those are secondary considerations.

Manchu wrote:Even the dullest World Eater could put the following argument together:
- I want to claim as many skulls as possible
- the defenseless have skulls
- it is easier to claim the skulls of the defenseless
- I should always prioritize attacking the defenseless
Funny enough, that's not what they do.

Yet again, who said that? I don't think anybody did. What people are suggesting as a counterpoint to the whole "noble aspect" bit is that Khorne's followers - and probably Khorne himself - are prioritising attacking worthy foes (as a true challenge will be much more interesting than a simple decapitation), yet still do not forget about the defenseless. You may call it the "dirty work" of Khorne, but that does not mean that Khorne and his followers would still not enjoy it.

Time for some more quotes!

"World Eaters, the Blood Soaked Berzerkers, Slayers of Skalathrax
Long before the Horus Heresy, the World Eaters were noted for their savagery, having been censured by the Emperor for their brutality and use of psycho-surgery to turn new recruits into frothing madmen. Still, the World Eaters were invaluable terror troops in the Great Crusade and fought at the forefront of many great campaigns. It was simple for Horus to pervert their bloody rituals to the worship of Chaos. Since then, they have become devoted to Khorne, the Blood God, and they have become a byword for carnage. In its bloodlust, the Legion tore itself apart, forming many smaller warbands, which to this day still seek battle, often joining other Chaos armies in their quest for skulls."
-- 6E Core Rulebook, p228

Is there really anyone who believes the World Eaters became less terror-troop'ish in their worship to Khorne? Have you read about the origin of the CSM Khorne Berzerkers, and what they do? Actually, why do you think this Legion is called World Eaters?

"Khorne is the Blood God, an angry and murderous God of Chaos whose bellows of insatiable rage echo throughout time and space. His great brass throne sits upon a mountain of skulls in the midst of a plain of splintered bones and lakes of blood, the remains of his followers slain in battle and those killed in his name. Khorne embodies mindless and absolute violence, destroying everyone and everything within reach, slaying both friend and foe alike.
The followers of Khorne are always ferocious warriors, for the Blood God abhors the trickery of magic and cowardly sorcerers. Men turn to Khorne for the power to conquer, to defeat their enemies in battle, to wreak bloody vengeance and to attain unaimaginable martial prowess. The most fanatical and dedicated to his followers, those trapped fully within his clawed grasp, know that he desires only wild slaughter. Khorne cares not from whence the blood flows, only that it does."
-- 4E C:CSM

Interestingly, here the "cares not from where the blood comes" sentence is linked specifically to wild slaughter, which sounds quite a bit less specific than honorable duels between friend and foe, or even ally and ally.
You just have to read about Khârn's background to know how this works for the World Eaters. The guy torches entire cities and "has dedicated his millennia-long existence to unleashing bloody carnage upon anyone and anything within reach."
Perhaps it even just so happens that the defenseless are usually fleeing from battle, so they happen to be the last to get slaughtered on mere coincidence? I for one do not believe a Bloodletter or World Eater CSM would halt his claw or chain-axe if some kid ran past him.

Lynata wrote:Yet again, who said that? I don't think anybody did.

Wut. Conversations with you can be very puzzling. There are at least five or six people ITT referencing the "Khorne cares not" line to mean that Khorne just wants Blud'n'Skullz, nothing more and nothing less.

Lynata wrote:You may call it the "dirty work" of Khorne, but that does not mean that Khorne and his followers would still not enjoy it.

This is where it would be appropriate to say "who said that?" because I know you are explicitly talking about my posts. And my posts say nothing about the followers of Khorne not enjoying slaughter. Rather, my posts emphasize that bullying the defenseless is not going to earn serious points with the Blood God. To get in good, you have to fight some real enemies. "Hey Khorne, I just punched a million kittens, how about making me a daemon prince?" Er, no.

Lynata wrote:Interestingly, here the "cares not from where the blood comes" sentence is linked specifically to wild slaughter, which sounds quite a bit less specific than honorable duels between friend and foe, or even ally and ally.

Well ... duh? That's kind of what we've been talking about -- getting away from the older idea of Khorne for the sake of GRIMDARKNESS. Like other aspects of 40k being amped way, way up, the kill everything always forever no matter what mantra doesn't make a lot of sense when you actually think about it. If you take that literally then it's easy to imagine how the World Eater Legion splintered but basically impossible to see how even a single World Eater warband survives.

Because it's easier to kill a whole fethload of people as a roving pack of goons with chain-axes than just a lone goon with a chain-axe.

At the end of the day even the skull of the mighteist of heroes would not equal the bloodshed and glory of conquering a whole world in the name of khorne. Individual duels and battles may be won with butchery and savagery but wars are won with tactical thought and planning. Ergo there has to be a brain behind the blood god.

No. Khorne doesn't care if you win or lose the battle for the planet. He doesn't give a toss about the planet itself. It is the act of warfare, the act of combat, violence and bloodshed, that Khorne craves. If you have two generals fighting for two otherwise-identical planets, and one wins the day through brilliant strategy, tactical planning and flawlessly-executed maneuvers that kills five million people, seizing the planet in a month and the other general begins his offensive with massive orbital bombardment, followed by the planetfall of a million screaming berserkers, supported by a legion of tanks, and eventually wins control of the planet, twenty years later, at the cost of a hundred billion lives.... guess who's going to get to Daemon Prince first? Dude number 2. No trickery, no subtlety, no devious tactics, just a straight-forward charge, crush everything in his path kind of guy.

Psienesis wrote:Because it's easier to kill a whole fethload of people as a roving pack of goons with chain-axes than just a lone goon with a chain-axe.

That's not a good enough explanation for the literalized account of Khorne. The Blood God isn't interested in the long term maximization of carnage, just wild slaughter, according to that line of thought. So if the nearest murder victim to you happens to be a World Water, it's MAIM BURN KILL all the same.

Actually it makes me wonder: how does Kharn accomplish anything other than mindless slaughter? If he's always killing his buddies and anyone he can reach, how does he get any where or even find supplies? I think he would eventually find himself trapped on a planet with no way off.

I think Khorne and his warriors would be a lot more interesting if they brought back the honor. Emphasize his warriors searching for great warriors to kill, and maybe they do spare civilians at that point, since they are not worthy combatants. And retconn that quote out of existence, it gets thrown around too much.

Noisy_Marine wrote:And retconn that quote out of existence, it gets thrown around too much.

As MGS demonstrates, it can actually be pretty cool if not taken to the uttermost extremes of ERMAHGERD GERMDERK.

That's not a good enough explanation for the literalized account of Khorne. The Blood God isn't interested in the long term maximization of carnage, just wild slaughter, according to that line of thought. So if the nearest murder victim to you happens to be a World Water, it's MAIM BURN KILL all the same.

But the World Eaters are not Khorne Incarnate, they are (mostly) mortal warriors who happen to have a love of the old ultraviolence and are in service to the Blood God. Though we can ask WWKD? when it comes to tooling about with a pack of your battle brothers and causing murder and mayhem, we have to realize that these Berzerkers are not, themselves, Khorne. They still have some shred of mortal minds left... and even Kharn, the greatest of Khorne's personal champions... is still possessed of a mostly mortal mind. He may be Khorne's favored Champion, but that does not make him a clone of Khorne or a perfect copy of "how Khorne himself would have done it."

Point is, we're not talking about a principal that is difficult to emulate. This isn't like trying to be as devious as Tzeentch. Just about anyone can completely and totally live up to the very pinnacle of Khorne is all Khorne cares about is cranking up the violence.

So it can't be just that. It has to be more than mindless slaughter, which is not to say that mindless slaughter has no place. The mystical bezerker rage achieved in the heart of the storm of battle is something like that -- but better to call it transcendent slaughter. And you don't get there by simply doing violence to anything and everything you come across. You have to cultivate it by getting to the very peak of combat prowess, which in turn requires matching yourself against the mighty.

Sorta... again, no one is saying that the World Eaters, or any other follower of Khorne, is going to pass up a challenging fight in favor of slaughtering some non-combatants, but we also cannot say what actions bring a berzerker into their transcendental slaughter state. For some it might be a 1 on 1 combat against a equally-matched foe... for the Berzerkers, I think it's more landing amidst a pack of soldiers (like Guardsmen, or the equivalent) from a jump-pack, or just leaping over the wall, and then laying about with whirring chainaxes in both fists, reveling in the spray of blood, the screams of the dying, and the pure adrenaline rush that primal combat brings, as well as the sadistic pleasure of carnage, slaughter, and the ultimate expression of your personal power.

Sorry, but I keep getting images of a Kharn ripping the wings off of butterflies and stamping on ladybugs while slobbering maniacally. It seems to me that would be enough for the lteralized "cares not" Khorne.

Eh... I mean, you could extend it to absolutely ridiculous extremes... remember the Tool song about the harvesting of the carrots?... but I think that's just getting too off the mark, really. Though I'm pretty sure that most of Khorne's followers had sociopathic tendencies before taking their first step on the path to glory.

Sounds about right to me.

Manchu wrote:This is where it would be appropriate to say "who said that?" because I know you are explicitly talking about my posts. And my posts say nothing about the followers of Khorne not enjoying slaughter.

Well, you did write that:
"The servants of Khorne do not necessarily want to claim any old skull for their patron's throne. And they certainly don't want to do it by just any means. To me, this is where the concept of "honor" comes in for Khornate warriors and Khorne himself. If you have to hack through orphans to draw out a worthy opponent or get to her then so be it. But the Blood God will not favor you for punching babies."

Whereas I am saying: Yes, they do want to claim "any old skull" for their patron's throne, and a Bloodletter is not holding back when it's standing next to a baby cradle. Slaughter is slaughter, and whilst they enjoy the challenge of a worthy enemy, they will also enjoy general murder and mayhem. Your posts about how it is the "dirty work" and how you suggest that these innocents would only be killed "if they get in the way" suggest a distinctively different image than the one I've been getting from reading the studio material.

Manchu wrote:Rather, my posts emphasize that bullying the defenseless is not going to earn serious points with the Blood God.

Hence me saying earlier that it depends on how good that single combatant you're fighting was, versus "how many orphans" were in that building. Whilst Khorne will always like a good battle between two worthy foes more than a CSM punching a Guardsman's brain through a wall ... I propose that Khorne will also like a mass-murderer who ritually sacrificed a hundred helpless victims more than a CSM who killed a Brother-Marine.

Basically: There comes a point when "more blood" outweighs "worthy blood". To get back to the idea of "earning points" with Khorne ... yeah, maybe a Marine's skull is worth 10 points* and a helpless human's skull is worth only 1 point*. But kill 11 of those and you're still ending up with more favour.
(*: modified by how strong the perpretrator is, of course)

Manchu wrote:Well ... duh? That's kind of what we've been talking about -- getting away from the older idea of Khorne for the sake of GRIMDARKNESS.

Yet apparently this is not true, if the quote posted by Mr. Morden is correct.
The "Slaves to Darkness" book is from 1988, and when this one already references Khorne as the Chaos God of "mindless and absolute violence" and how his demons "destroy everything and everyone within their reach", I just do not see the difference to the current material.

Psienesis wrote:But the World Eaters are not Khorne Incarnate, they are (mostly) mortal warriors who happen to have a love of the old ultraviolence and are in service to the Blood God. Though we can ask WWKD? when it comes to tooling about with a pack of your battle brothers and causing murder and mayhem, we have to realize that these Berzerkers are not, themselves, Khorne. They still have some shred of mortal minds left... and even Kharn, the greatest of Khorne's personal champions... is still possessed of a mostly mortal mind. He may be Khorne's favored Champion, but that does not make him a clone of Khorne or a perfect copy of "how Khorne himself would have done it."

True - a better template would be the Bloodletters, since, according to the Codex, they are a piece of Khorne himself. Thus, looking at what the Bloodletters do should give a fairly good impression about what Khorne thinks.

Seems that people are still mistaking "having honor" with "having a caring heart." I'll say again, the followers of Khorne are violent in their means, but honorable in method. Remember that Khorne sees sorcery and poison as cowardly (a.k.a. dishonorable) means to win a fight. His warriors do battle with only their martial skill and their savage might.

Are toppling orphanages a part of Khorne worship? As long as there is killing involved, yes. Are the skulls of unarmed, cowering orphans a worthy offering to the Throne? I doubt it, now go kill a rival champion.

I don't think anyone is making that mistake. I think what people are debating is whether or not Khornites would bother to slaughter an orphanage or if it is not considered "worthy prey" to the Blood God.

I, for one, think that certain sorts of Khornites would, because slaughter is slaughter is slaughter, where others, possibly from different backgrounds, possibly not as far along the path of glory, possibly due to some remnants of their mortal minds, and thus their humanity, would not, and would instead move on for worthier foes.... but in either event, I don't think Khorne cares.

This whole "noble" aspect of Khorne is a namby-pamby 2nd or 3rd edition hippy addition. The original Khorne was (and has returned to) a mass murdering psychopath.

From page 17 of Slaves to Darkness, we find:

Friends and Enemies (of Khorne) wrote:
Followers of Khorne have no friends and few long term acquaintances- all are soon to be sacrifices to Khorne. Even another follower of Khorne may at any time try to offer their lives to the Blood God!

This same page also notes that Khorne looks upon favor of those who kill, but especially those who kills friends and allies.

I should also note that 2nd edition ruined Chaos, with the introduction of the spikey marines and the downplay of mutation and H.R. Geiger/Bosch looks for the Marines.

I for one am glad that all of this "honorable" crud is gone. Yes Khorne doesn't use sorcery (as it is cheating!). The only "noble" aspect is that at least he's not gonna have his guys rape you like Slaanesh would.

I should note that again, Khorne doesn't care if it's at range or in melee. It kinda sucks that nowadays he is melee only, but range is still an important part. It's funny that Kharn the Betrayer is the best example of a Champion of Khorne, but for some reason nowadays he is different?

Psienesis wrote:I think what people are debating is whether or not Khornites would bother to slaughter an orphanage or if it is not considered "worthy prey" to the Blood God.

No, I don't think that's it - it seems pretty straight-forward that it should be expected that there are varying degrees and interpretations of how Khornate worship can look like.

As far as I can see - correct me if I'm wrong - the debate truly is what Khorne himself thinks about that. Of course, in 40k there is no single answer, but assuming we're going by GW material here ... I've posted quotes to support my interpretation, and if there are any to support the notion my understanding is wrong I'd like to see them.

p_gray99 wrote:I think it's more that were Khorne to have a good side, it would be this, however given that it's the grim darkness of the far future, this good side is basically nonexistant, and simply theoretical.

there is no good side ....... only a Lesser Evil

Lynata wrote:

Psienesis wrote:I think what people are debating is whether or not Khornites would bother to slaughter an orphanage or if it is not considered "worthy prey" to the Blood God.

No, I don't think that's it - it seems pretty straight-forward that it should be expected that there are varying degrees and interpretations of how Khornate worship can look like.

As far as I can see - correct me if I'm wrong - the debate truly is what Khorne himself thinks about that. Of course, in 40k there is no single answer, but assuming we're going by GW material here ... I've posted quotes to support my interpretation, and if there are any to support the notion my understanding is wrong I'd like to see them.

Agreed, I think every stance presented here is a valid method of Khornate worship. I think it's also perfectly clear that Khorne himself doesn't care in the slightest how that worship occurs (worship being people/things being killed), so long as it does.

You can punch through an enemy's skull from a mile or more, never having been seen by him, thanks to sniper rifles. You could scheme to have a whole swathe of enemies lose their head's to the executioner's axe by framing them for a crime. You can take out a city by poisoning their water supply. You can even kill the population of a whole planet with a cyclonic torpedo. And there's always sorcery ...

There are so many ways to deliver skulls to the Skull Throne and yet some are obviously not going to earn you any favor with the Blood God. Does anyone really believe killing weaklings will earn favor just because it involves swinging a chainsword? It seems to me that the weaklings just get caught up in the greater slaughter, which is genuinely about going out and fighting capable opponents. Khorne enjoys the slaughter but the killing of weaklings in and of itself is beside the point. Generally speaking, buildings also crumble when Khornate Warriors get down to their bloody business. Are we going to say that the devastation of structures -- any structure, whether a hive or child's dollhouese -- also pleases the Blood God under the ridiculous literalistic logic of "cares not from whence the blood flows"?

Skulltaker's own promotion makes this clear. All bloodletters are killing all the time. Babies, soldiers, the elderly, whoever. But Skulltaker stood out for skill as a duelist. Mindless carnage should not be overemphasized against martial prowess and skill, including tactical acumen. Bloodthirsters are noted generals as well as incredibly skilled combatants -- and it is next to these things, rather than over and above them, that we can talk about the rage and bloodlust of those greater daemons.

Manchu wrote:

There are so many ways to deliver skulls to the Skull Throne and yet some are obviously not going to earn you any favor with the Blood God. Does anyone really believe killing weaklings will earn favor just because it involves swinging a chainsword?

Yes, because it's more blood and an additional skull.

It seems to me that the weaklings just get caught up in the greater slaughter, which is genuinely about going out and fighting capable opponents. Khorne enjoys the slaughter but the killing of weaklings in and of itself is beside the point. Generally speaking, buildings also crumble when Khornate Warriors get down to their bloody business. Are we going to say that the devastation of structures -- any structure, whether a hive or child's dollhouese -- also pleases the Blood God under the ridiculous literalistic logic of "cares not from whence the blood flows"?

How is the killing of weaklings besides the point? Rather, it's just another way of accomplishing the goal of murder. Also a structure isn't a person and therefore isn't the same thing.

Skulltaker's own promotion makes this clear. All bloodletters are killing all the time. Babies, soldiers, the elderly, whoever. But Skulltaker stood out for skill as a duelist. Mindless carnage should not be overemphasized against martial prowess and skill, including tactical acumen. Bloodthirsters are noted generals as well as incredibly skilled combatants -- and it is next to these things, rather than over and above them, that we can talk about the rage and bloodlust of those greater daemons.

Skulltaker is a skilled duelist, but more importantly he murders those he duels. If all Khorne cared about was skill as a duelist, then he'd be Slaanesh, who relishes in art forms and all of the weak stuff. But Skulltaker's first action was to behead another bloodthirster. Just a mindless act of slaughter.

If Skulltaker was just a good duelist then Khorne would be massively disappointed. The fact that he so brutally slaughters his enemy is what Khorne puts his blessings on.

The problem is that putting too much emphasis on martial prowess and skill is that this is the path towards Slaanesh, and perfecting and honing that craft. Mindless is the word we're looking for.

Note that some of the Chosen of Khorne (RT era anyway) would commit suicide to offer another skull to Khorne if they hadn't killed anyone in a while!

Vladsimpaler wrote:Skulltaker is a skilled duelist, but more importantly he murders those he duels.

No, he defeats them in duels to the death. He murders those who refuse to duel.

Vladsimpaler wrote:But Skulltaker's first action was to behead another bloodthirster. Just a mindless act of slaughter.

Which didn't get him promoted ...

Vladsimpaler wrote:If Skulltaker was just a good duelist then Khorne would be massively disappointed. The fact that he so brutally slaughters his enemy is what Khorne puts his blessings on.

Nope -- it has to be both.

Manchu wrote:

Vladsimpaler wrote:Skulltaker is a skilled duelist, but more importantly he murders those he duels.

No, he defeats them in duels to the death. He murders those who refuse to duel.

Vladsimpaler wrote:But Skulltaker's first action was to behead another bloodthirster. Just a mindless act of slaughter.

Which didn't get him promoted ...

Vladsimpaler wrote:If Skulltaker was just a good duelist then Khorne would be massively disappointed. The fact that he so brutally slaughters his enemy is what Khorne puts his blessings on.

Nope -- it has to be both.

Right...so one Bloodletter has an interesting way of killing people and this somehow is all that Khorne likes? Kharn the Betrayer is a favorite of Khorne but he hacks and slashes his way through friend and foe alike.

I've never seen any Khornate character like Skulltaker, which is why he is a special character, since what he does is pretty different. It's not the norm. This is of course also ignoring the mentions in the background of him hacking and slashing his way to his opponent.

Khorne cares not from where the blood flows.

As long as its flowing.

Orphans, guardsmen, Eldar, space marines... Whatever. Khorne DOES NOT CARE!

Khorne cares not for honor!

Homer-cles cares not for beans!

Thought on guns, does Khorne NEED you to stab people up for it to be proper worship? Surely the aforementioned sniper's bullet, or a "moar dakka" barrage from a heavy bolter into a tight packed squad would be just as pleasing.

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Thought on guns, does Khorne NEED you to stab people up for it to be proper worship? Surely the aforementioned sniper's bullet, or a "moar dakka" barrage from a heavy bolter into a tight packed squad would be just as pleasing.

I think Khorne would prefer a sniper to shoot someone in a vital area that would cause them to bleed to death.

He would disapprove of a headshot because that would destroy the skull.

Okay, accepting that, I don't think there's anything stopping me from going blood for the blood god from a couple miles off with a sniper rifle, or artillery for that matter.

Carnage and warfare. These are Khorne's interests. Snipers are an aspect of warfare, though they are probably not as highly favored as the ones who get stuck in down in the sharp end where it devolves into hand-to-hand combat.

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Thought on guns, does Khorne NEED you to stab people up for it to be proper worship? Surely the aforementioned sniper's bullet, or a "moar dakka" barrage from a heavy bolter into a tight packed squad would be just as pleasing.

Nope, not at all!
For some reason it keeps getting repeated, but again, Khorne doesn't care where or how the blood flows (aka the method), as long as it flows! In Rogue Trader, World Eaters Devastators (yes, Devastators!) were known as the Teeth of Khorne and are one the Imperium's most deadly foes...

Also note that at this time, Khorne would also gift his followers weapons from WH40k even if they were in the Fantasy universe. This meant that you could have a unit of Chaos Warriors with bolters, or a champion with a lascannon. Chaos Warriors were BS6 at this time, so they were uber deadly if they ever got ranged weaponry.

Testify wrote:Just for clarification - someone who massacred someone for the sheer carnal joy...khorne would not be interested in?
Chivalry and bloodlust are generally considered opposites.
And why would khorne want followers who were too weak to have everything in their favour, preferring instead to risk their lives in equal combat?

Killing for joy is Slaanesh.
And well, if you win in equal combat, thats wavy more glory and honour.

Since we've been quoting Slaves to Darkness, here's what it says in its entry on Khorne:

Khorne is the Blood God, the angry and murderous god of Chaos, one of the great four Powers. His great brass throne sits upon a mountainous pile of bones - the remains of his followers who have died in battle, and of the many they have killed in his name. The growing bone pile reflects the success of his worshippers, feeding his glory but never quenching his thirst for blood and death.

Khorne is the Power of Chaos in its aspect of mindless and absolute violence, destroying everything and everyone within its reach, slaying both friend and foe alike. He is the Huntsman of Souls who drives the great armies of Chaos before him. His horn sounds in the depths of the Chaos Wastes, urging his followers every onwards in search of fresh prey. The gore-maddened followers of Khorne harry beyond the edges of the Known World, delighting in slaughter by the tainted light of a blood-stained moon. Khorne watches the wild destruction wrought in his name, and his bellows of rage and delight can be heard echoing across the void between worlds....

...Every life taken by a follower of Khorne increases the Blood God's power. He looks with particular favour upon those who take the lives of their friends and allies, and the more death and destruction a creature has caused, the more welcome it is as a sacrifice to Khorne. Any follower who lets a day pass without contributing to the bloody-handed slaughter by which Khorne is worshipped will incur the god's great disfavour....

... He is worshipped only in the act of killing, and his followers often fight as individuals, ignoring bonds of allegiance and common faith when it suits them to do so.

The Code of Khorne is simple: blood and more blood. The use of spells or similar powers to cause death and destruction is abhorrent to him, and he is unlikely to deal with any creature who has ever used magic.

The only way to gain favour with him is by killing - enemies or friends, all the dead are equal in the eyes of Khorne. The only way to incur his displeasure is by not killing.

-- Realm of Chaos: Slaves to Darkness, pg 17.

Hmmm so it sounds like Khorne would much prefer you slaughtering an opposing army then murdering everyone in that orphanage. Interesting.

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Hmmm so it sounds like Khorne would much prefer you slaughtering an opposing army then murdering everyone in that orphanage. Interesting.

Assuming that army includes more skulls than that orphanage, of course.

He looks with particular favour upon those who take the lives of their friends and allies, and the more death and destruction a creature has caused, the more welcome it is as a sacrifice to Khorne.

Seems to imply that Khorne does have certain quality scales so leading your platoon of Khornate cultists in a surprise attack on your IG unit or PDF unit and killing them would be more appealing to Khorne even if that only netted him 50 or 60 skulls as opposed to burning down a nearby orphanage of innocents for a net gain of 100 skulls. Particularly if your IG unit has been blooded on multiple worlds. Each man you kill has probably killed hundreds himself and once counted himself as a friend/ally so you're getting a double "Khorne approved" sacrifice bonus.

Hmmm that's an interesting thought, so the more death/destruction something does, the more appealing it's skull, blood and soul are as a sacrifice to Khorne, so if you slaughter Khornate demons, themselves avatars of death many millenia old, would those potentially be a more appealing sacrifice to the blood god?

How is killing 50 or 60 soldiers "more death" than burning down an orphanage with 100 kids inside?

As I said above, I too support the idea that skulls may have different "points values" attached depending on how hard it was to get them - but your statement about how Khorne would always favour an army as opposed to an orphanage just seemed to blow that way out of proportion, especially keeping the rest of the quote in mind ("every life taken", "mindless and absolute violence", "all dead are equal", "blood and more blood").

Vladsimpaler wrote:

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Thought on guns, does Khorne NEED you to stab people up for it to be proper worship? Surely the aforementioned sniper's bullet, or a "moar dakka" barrage from a heavy bolter into a tight packed squad would be just as pleasing.

Nope, not at all!
For some reason it keeps getting repeated, but again, Khorne doesn't care where or how the blood flows (aka the method), as long as it flows! In Rogue Trader, World Eaters Devastators (yes, Devastators!) were known as the Teeth of Khorne and are one the Imperium's most deadly foes...

Also note that at this time, Khorne would also gift his followers weapons from WH40k even if they were in the Fantasy universe. This meant that you could have a unit of Chaos Warriors with bolters, or a champion with a lascannon. Chaos Warriors were BS6 at this time, so they were uber deadly if they ever got ranged weaponry.

Whilst I agree entirely, and would be delighted to see the "Teeth of Khorne" return to modern-day fluff, it's worth pointing out that not everything in Slaves to Darkness was particularly well thought-out; I'm glad, for instance, that the Librarians of the Emperor's Children are no longer said to spend their time composing witty epigrams about those they have slaughtered.

Lynata wrote:How is killing 50 or 60 soldiers "more death" than burning down an orphanage with 100 kids inside?

As I said above, I too support the idea that skulls may have different "points values" attached depending on how hard it was to get them - but your statement about how Khorne would always favour an army as opposed to an orphanage just seemed to blow that way out of proportion, especially keeping the rest of the quote in mind ("every life taken", "mindless and absolute violence", "all dead are equal", "blood and more blood").

I'm visualizing it like this:

1 skull = 1 point, Allies and Friends is a +.5 modifier and if that soul is the soul of one who's killed is another +.5 modifier for a total possible score of 2 points per soul unless you kill something that has literally been killing for millenia... ironically Kharne the Betrayer would probably be the greatest possible sacrifice to Khorne. So 50 Guardsmen souls can have the same points value as burning down an orphanage because they're boring civilians. Still fun and an amusing diversion for Khorne but quality counts over quantity on some level.

Manchu wrote:Wars are generally fought to accomplish a goal external to war itself. The belligerents want territory, resources, prestige, etc. This is not the case with Khorne. Khorne does not advocate conquest except as a matter of martial feat. Therefore, Khorne would favor she who placed the skull of a primarch (for example) before his Brass Throne over she who offered the skulls of a hundred million invalids.

The followers of Khorne are warriors, not skull farmers. They might also be generals, sure. They might also be butchers of the innocent and helpless, sure. But those are secondary considerations.

If this means they wish to attack a population where all will fight rather than one where some of the civilians will simply cower and say "not the face!" does this mean that Khornates would attack an ork world or nid ship rather than humans?

p_gray99 wrote:

Manchu wrote:Wars are generally fought to accomplish a goal external to war itself. The belligerents want territory, resources, prestige, etc. This is not the case with Khorne. Khorne does not advocate conquest except as a matter of martial feat. Therefore, Khorne would favor she who placed the skull of a primarch (for example) before his Brass Throne over she who offered the skulls of a hundred million invalids.

The followers of Khorne are warriors, not skull farmers. They might also be generals, sure. They might also be butchers of the innocent and helpless, sure. But those are secondary considerations.

If this means they wish to attack a population where all will fight rather than one where some of the civilians will simply cower and say "not the face!" does this mean that Khornates would attack an ork world or nid ship rather than humans?

No becouse the Legions are still fighting the Long War. To caouse a blow to the Imperium Is valued higher than the fight.

BloodAngels Brother wrote:

p_gray99 wrote:

Manchu wrote:Wars are generally fought to accomplish a goal external to war itself. The belligerents want territory, resources, prestige, etc. This is not the case with Khorne. Khorne does not advocate conquest except as a matter of martial feat. Therefore, Khorne would favor she who placed the skull of a primarch (for example) before his Brass Throne over she who offered the skulls of a hundred million invalids.

The followers of Khorne are warriors, not skull farmers. They might also be generals, sure. They might also be butchers of the innocent and helpless, sure. But those are secondary considerations.

If this means they wish to attack a population where all will fight rather than one where some of the civilians will simply cower and say "not the face!" does this mean that Khornates would attack an ork world or nid ship rather than humans?

No becouse the Legions are still fighting the Long War. To caouse a blow to the Imperium Is valued higher than the fight.

On the other hand, whilst the Legions are most certainly Chaos' most prominent representatives to the galaxy (or at least the fandom), they do not stand for all Khornates. Khorne's daemons, for example, give a gak about the Imperium. Unless someone in the Imperium killed them some time ago. That apparently makes them angry.

And I don't buy that "Primarch = 100.000.000 invalids" comparison for a second. Source pls.
Interestingly, Khorne does fight over territory, just that the territory he cares for lies in the Warp. It grows and shrinks in accordance to Khorne's influence over the mortal world and the power of his cultists and daemons - which might explain why "blood is blood".

Given Khorne's penchant for skulls, does that mean he especially delights in the slaughter of multi-headed mutants?
Like the Brahmin in Fallout...only people.

Honestly what is this obsession with skulls? They don't look cool, they're not particularly creepy. The blood I can understand but skulls are just awkwardly shaped rocks.

Also, what if you kill someone BY bashing their skull in? On the one hand, you've appeased khorne. On the other, you've ruined his precious skull.

Maybe khorne has abandonment issues, and the skulls represent his mothers' ovaries. Maybe I shouldn't have drunk so much cough medicine and should get some sleep.

Wouldn't something with two skulls simply have skulls worth half as much?

Skulls are just remants of chopped of heads, and a half-destroyed skull is fine too.
But cutting of with your hellblade or chainaxe is cooler.

Think it would depend on if it can live with only one head or not, or is actually capable of sentient thought, which cuts out like 95% of the brahmin right there (not the ones that go, "Moo, I say, moo.").

If cutting off one head kills it, then it probably counts half a point per. If not, then it's probably a point each... assuming it's intelligent.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

Testify wrote:Hey, so cruising these forums and reading lexicanum, seems like there's a "noble" aspect to Khorne that I haven't seen much of in the fluff.
In Gaunt's Ghosts they fight against khornites often, but on the battlefield so there's not much room for nobility. Traitor General explored it a bit, though not as much as I would have liked.
So what fluff source show the more "noble" aspect of Khorne?

The old Realm of Chaos books Slaves to Darkness and Lost and the Damned explored that all four chaos gods have a noble side and outcome to their resume.

Khorne's is Martial Prowess, it can be compared to Samurai bushido or the Predator's rules about worthy prey to take on. It's about self discipline and dedication. Khorne's champions don't skulk or throw spells, they march out and seek the biggest baddest badass the other side has and seek to take that leader or champion on. I remember some fluff where a Khorne champion is walking through a fallen city and sneers in disgust at the beastmen who are torturing and killing the townsfolks as such should be beneath them and, having passed higher onto Khorne's true path, the Champion sees the leader of the beastmen killing old villagers and, flying into an incensed rage at the unsuitable offerings the beastman was making to his Lord, killed the beastman leader in Khorne's name. Purity of Purpose.

Tzeentch's is Ambition, climbing the ladder and seeking to better your position, constantly able to change and adapt in the face of adversity. Always Evolving.

Nurgle's is Defiance, resisting change and surviving adversity in spite of it all. Able to Endure.

Slaanesh's is Self Perfection, taking on any and all experiences and using what you take to become a more perfect being. Love of Self.

Pretty much how the original Legions were called to by Chaos gods - Defiance - Death Guard, Perfection - Emperor's Children etc.

Everyone's missing the most obvious and most noble aspect of Khorne - his mutual respect for warriors, whether his or not. Khorne respects martial prowess and. above all, victory.

So much so that during the Fall of the Eldar, when She Who Thirsts killed the majority of the Eldar gods, only Khaine the Bloody-Handed and the Laughing God remained.

The latter escaped into the Webway, but as Slaanesh was about to destroy the murder-god, Khorne interceeded against his brother, saying that 'he is a god of battle and war, as I am. You will not kill him', forcing Slaanesh to stop at shattering him into thousands of shards (which became the Avatars).

Khorne might respect warriors. He definitely doesn't care about victory.