83194
Post by: EmpNortonII
So, as it turns out, picking Horus to be Warmaster wasn't the brightest of ideas, what with that whole Horus Heresy thing.
If you were the Emperor, which Primarch would you pick to lead the Great Crusade in your absence?
78600
Post by: raiden
Such a difficult decision, as horus, at the time was the perfect candidate.
my top 3?
Sanguinius
Guilliman
Dorn.
As much as I love the lion, he is a warrior, not a warmaster.
Sanguinius has the heart and charisma to do it. IMO, the best candidate, except that his tactical mind is behind BOTH dorn and guilliman. The most charismatic warmaster.
Guilliman would work well because of the way he runs his planets already, the problem being he moves slowly. He takes 2-3, then builds up administration, infrastructure, reward systems. I love how he makes it all work, reward to work, not birth status. But he was not the most charismatic. THe most practical warmaster.
Dorn... Well dorn was the best tactical mind out of all of them. (if, prone to insanity at times). His problem was he had 0 charisma compared to the others, he also was of a much more defensive mind set than offensive one.
In the end, horus was the best choice, but if I had to pick from this list........
I personally would pick Guilliman.
38926
Post by: Exergy
 EmpNortonII wrote:So, as it turns out, picking Horus to be Warmaster wasn't the brightest of ideas, what with that whole Horus Heresy thing.
If you were the Emperor, which Primarch would you pick to lead the Great Crusade in your absence?
Horus was the obvious choice:
He was the first one the emperor found.
He and the emperor fought the great crusade alone together for some 50 years before another primarch was found.
Horus was by far the most experienced
Horus was the strongest
Horus was the smartest
Horus had the most command of his brother primachs
Horus was perfect, or as close as possible among any of the other primarchs.
To not pick Horus is to not have a warmaster and the emperor would have had to remain in command of the crusade for all time(but he had other things to do)
To not pick Horus might have led to a more serious rebellion, who knows, but when you dont pick the guy who is obvious and qualified for the job, you often have problems
78600
Post by: raiden
 Exergy wrote: EmpNortonII wrote:So, as it turns out, picking Horus to be Warmaster wasn't the brightest of ideas, what with that whole Horus Heresy thing.
If you were the Emperor, which Primarch would you pick to lead the Great Crusade in your absence?
Horus was the obvious choice:
He was the first one the emperor found.
He and the emperor fought the great crusade alone together for some 50 years before another primarch was found.
Horus was by far the most experienced
Horus was the strongest
Horus was the smartest
Horus had the most command of his brother primachs
Horus was perfect, or as close as possible among any of the other primarchs.
Strongest- Debatable, sanguinius was the better swordsman, and, at admission from others, one of the strongest martial warriors among the brothers,
Smartest- Also debatable, Magnus the red, even Guilliman could contend with Horus
the others are fairly true, what made Horus the obvious choice, outside his relentless attacking nature and the drive to free as many worlds he could as soon as he could was that he combined the others strengths, in so doing, he was not "better" at these things indiviually, but through mastering of all of them, was the best candidate for warmaster
-He was almost as charismatic as Sanguinuis, and almost as good a swordsmam
-He was almost as tactical and calculating as Dorn
-He was almost as smart as Magnus
-He had the almost most ferocious charges and emotion gut feelings as Russ.
the list goes on. Its because he had the "almost best" of everything he was selected. Because he was basically a mesh of all the others.
83510
Post by: YFNPsycho
 raiden wrote: Exergy wrote: EmpNortonII wrote:So, as it turns out, picking Horus to be Warmaster wasn't the brightest of ideas, what with that whole Horus Heresy thing.
If you were the Emperor, which Primarch would you pick to lead the Great Crusade in your absence?
Horus was the obvious choice:
He was the first one the emperor found.
He and the emperor fought the great crusade alone together for some 50 years before another primarch was found.
Horus was by far the most experienced
Horus was the strongest
Horus was the smartest
Horus had the most command of his brother primachs
Horus was perfect, or as close as possible among any of the other primarchs.
Strongest- Debatable, sanguinius was the better swordsman, and, at admission from others, one of the strongest martial warriors among the brothers,
Smartest- Also debatable, Magnus the red, even Guilliman could contend with Horus
the others are fairly true, what made Horus the obvious choice, outside his relentless attacking nature and the drive to free as many worlds he could as soon as he could was that he combined the others strengths, in so doing, he was not "better" at these things indiviually, but through mastering of all of them, was the best candidate for warmaster
-He was almost as charismatic as Sanguinuis, and almost as good a swordsmam
-He was almost as tactical and calculating as Dorn
-He was almost as smart as Magnus
-He had the almost most ferocious charges and emotion gut feelings as Russ.
the list goes on. Its because he had the "almost best" of everything he was selected. Because he was basically a mesh of all the others.
And this is why Horus was the best choice for Warmaster.
He knew the strengths and weaknesses of his brother primarchs better than anyone else, because he was comfortable with all of their skills.
642
Post by: Silverthorne
Sanguinus would have been better. I don't see how the emperor could have known that though. I think his greatest strength is he has unassailable integrity but he is still extremely likeable and charismatic. That combination is probably rarer than the wings he was rocking.
85436
Post by: RileyJessup
raiden wrote:Such a difficult decision, as horus, at the time was the perfect candidate.
my top 3?
Sanguinius
Guilliman
Dorn.
As much as I love the lion, he is a warrior, not a warmaster.
Sanguinius has the heart and charisma to do it. IMO, the best candidate, except that his tactical mind is behind BOTH dorn and guilliman. The most charismatic warmaster.
Guilliman would work well because of the way he runs his planets already, the problem being he moves slowly. He takes 2-3, then builds up administration, infrastructure, reward systems. I love how he makes it all work, reward to work, not birth status. But he was not the most charismatic. THe most practical warmaster.
Dorn... Well dorn was the best tactical mind out of all of them. (if, prone to insanity at times). His problem was he had 0 charisma compared to the others, he also was of a much more defensive mind set than offensive one.
In the end, horus was the best choice, but if I had to pick from this list........
I personally would pick Guilliman.
This isn't true gulliman had the greatest tactical mind of all the primarchs he wrote the codex Astarte's not done if you read the Horus heresy books it says in the one about calth somewhere. Dorn was just a defensive tactical genius and also the greatest fleet commander his skill was in combat in space. It says so in Horus heresy book 3! And also my autocorrect keeps trying to correct dorn to corn and its making me laugh
29904
Post by: KorPhaeron77
Guilliman, a thousand times Guilliman. Of all of the Primarchs, he is the only one who doesn't let his flaws or his ego drive him.
He is the only one with a valid Resume on how to run an Empire because he already has the most successful sub Empire in the whole Imperium. Most importantly, none of his achievements were done to boast or for personal pride, most important to him was leaving behind a legacy to improve the lives of future generations.
Guilliman wasn't just a tactical genius, he was an administrative one. The great crusade was almost over, they didn't need a warlord, they needed a governor who could capitalise on what they had already conquered and make them better places to live. He was the only Primarch who had already been teaching his Legion to be more than warriors, to give them a place in the world when the fighting was done.
Sanguinius was almost perfect for the role to the outside eye but we the reader know that he has a deep paranoia about the purity of his Legion and fears how others see him. This is a big flaw than could have been exploited, not just by Chaos, but by his brother Primarchs, leading him to make decisions that wouldn't always be 100% objective.
Dorn is too rigid, too much a slave to doctrine. This is the same reason he so fiercely resisted arming the palace and later on, adopting the Codex. A leader of a galactic empire should encourage and welcome change and innovation, something I think he would have lacked.
Horus was far too proud and ambitious. He wanted to be the best and we all know where that lead.
The Lion was too distant, too secretive and aloof. The New Imperium needed a relatable leader with compassion and humility as well as practicle skill. Something with The lion lacked. Many don't trust him and that alone would have been enough to cause divisions in the Legions.
Magnus, same as Horus. Magnus was wise and should have been one of the best Primarchs, but he was totally blind to his own limitations. Although he had the best intentions, his fear of powers gave him somewhat of a superiority complex. He had too much of his own agenda to promote that he would maybe have neglected other important factors in leading the crusade.
Fulgrim, far too arrogant and self centred to have made a good Warmaster. He was blind to his entire legion being poisoned from the inside. I don't just mean the Slaanesh influence after Laer, but the rise of fools such as Eidolon to high command, clearly put a dampener on Fulgrim's management skills. He is impressed by sycophancy and self aggrandisers and thus would make a terrible Warmaster.
The Khan, too wild, not close to any of his brothers and no interest in leading, I doubt he was even in the running.
Alpharius. too new to the Crusade, too secretive and his methods were rather unorthodox and widely disliked by many other arms of the Imperial Military (I believe in the book Legion and Imperial commander laments that he wishes any Legion but the Alpha Legion had been sent to help) so it was unlikely he would have been chosen.
Mortarion, not a well liked Primarch, I don't know enough about him to have a good opinion but that alone seems reason not to hire him.
Leman Russ, already had his role in the Legions as "The Exectutioner" like the can, too wild and unorthodox to be representative of the Legions as a whole. He always suited the role of attack dog too well to be the leader.
Ferrus Manus, again, not a well loved Primarch, prone to volcanic rages and his actions at the dropsite massacre show that he lacked the control and focus to lead. His hotheadedness resulted in his death and the loss of his whole first company. A very poor choice for Warmaster.
Lorgar, on the face of it, tries to do what Guilliman does, but is too much of a zealot, always feels he needs to prove himself, leading him to make poor choices. Probably the least respected by his peers due to his shaming at Monarchia. But own admission he doesn't even consider himself a warrior, so Warmaster would have been an ill fitting title.
Vulkan, certainly had the compassion and empathy needed to govern the newly established Imperium, but doesn't seem pragmatic enough to make the big decisions. Certainly an Imperium ruled by Vulkan would have been a kinder place to live but that sort of makes him incompatible as the leader of an Empire that crushes everything in it's path.
Perturabo, too bitter, too choleric and a hard man to like. I think for similar reasons to Ferrus he would have been a poor choice.
Corax, not the worst choice but he is a leader suited to striking from the shadows and retreating back into them again so not the sort of man that would be great at leading the crusade.
Finally Angron and Kurze, you would have to be mentally ill to let either of these too lead. The fact that they are even allowed to rule their Legions is a baffling endictment of the Emperor's judgement. A brain damaged lunatic and a violent sociopath...I don't think I even really need to explain these two.
So ( I think that's all of them) whilst some like Sanguinius and Horus certainly had their merits, I think Guilliman was the only objective choice when you really tally up their positives and negatives (In my opinion of course).
47367
Post by: Fenrir Kitsune
Tom Kirby, cos he knows how to run an empire.
73959
Post by: niv-mizzet
Sanguinius. When Horus was heavily wounded and almost killed before turning, he himself admitted that Sanguinius should have been the warmaster.
He has both the charisma and honor needed to convince virtually anyone that they are on the right side with him. He also cared deeply for all the imperials, not just his sons or the rest of the Astartes. He was notably angry when the people of the Signus cluster were found to be dead, and again when the daemons' mental attacks killed many of the non-astartes crew in his fleet, including his favorite female ship captain. He could still make decisions calmly, despite the anger, though.
He also has the wisdom to know when to delegate. While Guilliman didn't have the charisma necessary to be the figurehead for such a large force, Sanguinius would have the wisdom to put him to work where his strengths lie, in administrative designs. He was closer to pre-chaos Horus than any other primarch, and would certainly include him in large strategic planning sessions. (In fact, pre-chaos Horus already knew about the Blood Angel genetic flaw, as Sanguinius told him about it personally, and Horus swore himself to secrecy.)
By his own admission, the reason he felt Horus was a better warmaster than himself, was that Sanguinius felt that people would view him as "too far above them" to relate to.
65628
Post by: welshhoppo
There is no option for Horus.
75727
Post by: sing your life
need I explain what making Horus Warmaster got the Imperium? 
57575
Post by: Metaljunx
Vulkan . Salamanders is one of my favorite
74772
Post by: the shrouded lord
The problem wasn't Horus. Horus was awesome. He would have Andes up killing a few dozen people who were trying to collect taxes from people with no legs and only one lung, but he was the best choice. The problem was lorgar. The emperor should have brain-scanned lorger and then "re-educate" him with a melta gun.
So, Horus.
Wit vulkan as m
The runner up, because vulkan was fethin' awesome.
84405
Post by: jhe90
Guilliaman,
He is most long term strategic of them, used to handling a large scale planetary area and has a big legion to support his claim to the title if required.
He made ultramar a beacon of organisation, in fact its almost decent by 40k standards.
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
Guilliman. He pretty much would have been a better warmaster in almost every way, the greatest exception being that he'd probably get quite a bit of push-back from some of the black sheep Primarchs, such as Angron and Curze.
The thing about those silly nannies is that they would have gone off the deep-end at some point regardless. Even if Horus had never fallen, it seems likely to me that the World Eaters and Night Lords would have ended up being culled eventually. Kurze and Angron were both damaged goods.
81927
Post by: Farseer Anath'lan
I personally think that the Emperor made a huge mistake creating the title of Warmaster. It goes completely against common sense.
What would have been far more effective would have been to create 'ministers'. In this case Guilliman would have been in charge of organisation, Sanguinius probably would've been head of public relations. El'Johnson in charge of Great Crusade, and then Iron Hands or Fists in charge of (separately) rebuilding and fortification, I forget who did what 'better'.
My $0.02.
38926
Post by: Exergy
it survived 10,000 years
some of these other guys and it wouldnt have lasted 50 Automatically Appended Next Post:  BlaxicanX wrote:Guilliman. He pretty much would have been a better warmaster in almost every way, the greatest exception being that he'd probably get quite a bit of push-back from some of the black sheep Primarchs, such as Angron and Curze.
What would Horus, the ambitious and trusted primarch who knew the emperor better than any of the others have done?
81025
Post by: koooaei
Maybe the best warmaster would have been a non-primarch?
83361
Post by: Verstaka
Dorn, brilliant tactician and while he had the personality of a brick he wasn't afraid to lead by example and was loyal to The Emperor and Mankind first and foremost.
73174
Post by: BrotherOfBone
Alpharius Omegron has the strategic mind to successfully lead any crusade against the enemies of the Imperium.
34258
Post by: Pilau Rice
All were flawed in their own respective way but I believe Guilliman to be the best choice aside from Horus. But who's to say that Guilliman would not fall the same way that Horus did if given the same incentive.
The Chaos Gods would have found some way to bring about the fall of the Imperium and unending war.
The Emperors amazing foresight certainly wasn't working great when he put Horus in charge of his military.
83460
Post by: ashcroft
I'd go with Sanguinius. He's one of the few other than Horus himself who had the people skills to work with all of his brothers. Guilliman would be my second choice, but I don't think he had the raw charisma to lead the Great Crusade and he would definitely have struggled to work with some of the others, whereas Sanguinius would have tried to find the best in them and meet them on that common ground.
38926
Post by: Exergy
 BrotherOfBone wrote:Alpharius Omegron has the strategic mind to successfully lead any crusade against the enemies of the Imperium.
and their are two of them, so they could always have one awake. Automatically Appended Next Post: clearly Kruze would have been the best choice because if he fell to chaos he would have been the easiest to dispatch
with the lowest charisma, if he had fallen to chaos, he wouldnt have taken that many legions with him.
39995
Post by: Maniac_nmt
 Pilau Rice wrote:All were flawed in their own respective way but I believe Guilliman to be the best choice aside from Horus. But who's to say that Guilliman would not fall the same way that Horus did if given the same incentive.
The Chaos Gods would have found some way to bring about the fall of the Imperium and unending war.
The Emperors amazing foresight certainly wasn't working great when he put Horus in charge of his military.
I think the likely outcome of Guilliman running the show wouldn't be Gulliman falling, but in people going rogue due to not liking him. He is the next most logical choice, but whereas Horus was disliked by none or few, Guilliman does have those who don't like him for the simple fact he is pragmatic.
The heresy is inevitable because the writers want the bleak setting and the betrayal. Gulliman couldn't have stopped that, it just would have taken a different turn.
I know there is the Dornian heresy, but I find it a bit boring in that it's just everyone bad is good and everyone good is bad. Far more interesting is taking some good and making them bad, and making some bad good. If Guilliman was war master, would Horus have rebelled due to jealousy?
As an interesting extrapolation, assume the heresy is pre ordained regardless of war master. Who stays loyal under Guilliman who goes rogue?
78600
Post by: raiden
who stays loyal? without true chaos intervention?
everyone but lorgar, Aplharius, and maybe Fulgrim and Petrubo.
39995
Post by: Maniac_nmt
raiden wrote:who stays loyal? without true chaos intervention?
everyone but lorgar, Aplharius, and maybe Fulgrim and Petrubo.
It doesn't have to be without Chaos intervention. Say Guilliman is war master and stays loyal and the heresy still has to happen in some fashion. Who is corrupted successfully? Which half stay and which half go?
38926
Post by: Exergy
raiden wrote:who stays loyal? without true chaos intervention?
everyone but lorgar, Aplharius, and maybe Fulgrim and Petrubo.
but make Lorgar warmaster and he just turns the entire crusade fleet into a theocracy of monks building temples. Not capable of rebelling.
78353
Post by: Wyzilla
Chaos would have always won (Horus fell thanks to being infected with Nurgle's Rot) as the gods were focused on winning, but Sanguinius would have been much harder to corrupt than Horus. Maybe even forcing Chaos to kill him and cause the Emperor to select a new Warmaster.
Also, it is impossible to Lorgar to stay loyal thanks to him having been raised on a Chaos worshiping planet, and thus he was always in the clutches of the Dark Gods.
74772
Post by: the shrouded lord
 Wyzilla wrote:Chaos would have always won (Horus fell thanks to being infected with Nurgle's Rot) as the gods were focused on winning, but Sanguinius would have been much harder to corrupt than Horus. Maybe even forcing Chaos to kill him and cause the Emperor to select a new Warmaster.
Also, it is impossible to Lorgar to stay loyal thanks to him having been raised on a Chaos worshiping planet, and thus he was always in the clutches of the Dark Gods.
It wasn't nurgle's rot:
82668
Post by: JubbJubbz
A really strange thing to think about. There's only one choice and its Horus. Horus the character is created to be the perfect warmaster candidate, the emperors successor. He has the charisma and ambition of the emperor. Sanguinus does not have this ambition. He does not share the emps vision for the galaxy. Guilliman lacks the charisma and character to make the others follow him despite his technical knowledge. Horus is the first among equals, he has to be the warmaster so that his tragic fall makes the most impact. Elsewise, the story makes no sense. Granted Horus fall in the books is spuriously motivated at best but the classic tragic story elements are all there and are nothing new
34258
Post by: Pilau Rice
 Maniac_nmt wrote:
I think the likely outcome of Guilliman running the show wouldn't be Gulliman falling, but in people going rogue due to not liking him. He is the next most logical choice, but whereas Horus was disliked by none or few, Guilliman does have those who don't like him for the simple fact he is pragmatic.
I disagree, I believe any Primarch could fall given enough persuasion or cause. Horus is obviously the best example here. Unrivaled but still bought low. Reading the Wolf of Ash and Fire makes you see how much Horus loved the Emperor and makes his fall seem unbeliebable. I still feel his fall is one of the worst aspects of the Heresy series so far, it's still not been fully explained yet if you ask me.
Maniac_nmt wrote:The heresy is inevitable because the writers want the bleak setting and the betrayal. Gulliman couldn't have stopped that, it just would have taken a different turn.
And because it has been apart of fluff since what, 2nd Edition?
Maniac_nmt wrote:I know there is the Dornian heresy, but I find it a bit boring in that it's just everyone bad is good and everyone good is bad. Far more interesting is taking some good and making them bad, and making some bad good. If Guilliman was war master, would Horus have rebelled due to jealousy?
As an interesting extrapolation, assume the heresy is pre ordained regardless of war master. Who stays loyal under Guilliman who goes rogue?
to me, It comes down to the choice that Horus made on Davin. If he would have saw the lies of Erebus and remained loyal the story would have been different. The Emperors Children, Death Guard and Thousand Sons had no choice in their fates and were already chosen by the Pantheon to be bought into the fold. World Eaters is a tricky one as Lorgar forced Angron, but I believe he would have eventually fell to Khorne. Word Bearers were gone as were the Night Lords. Iron Warriors are a tricky bet, as it's suggested that after Olympia it was Horus that said that the Emperor would forgive them for what they had done. If Horus was loyal perhaps he would have said Father can forgive you. Then the Alpha Legion, but it depends on the Cabal, if the Heresy wasn't such a threat perhaps they would not have intervened.
I strongly feel that those that were loyal during the Horus Heresy would have remained loyal if any other Primarch had been made Warmaster. I do not believe that the Heresy would have been on such a scale if the leader was not Horus, as he was the uniting force. I believe the Legions would have fell at different times, well, in one of my fan versions of the heresy at least. Horus warns Guilliman of Lorgar's actions, after Erebus failed attempt to convert him, being the obvious choice after Monarchia. Horus goes to confront Magnus and bring him to Terra. Guilliman kills Lorgar after he reveals to him the nature of Chaos. Kor Phaeron manages to flee with some Word Bearers and Guilliman gives chase, however, wanting to learn more of the nature of Chaos he takes many of Lorgar's texts with him. Guilliman spends many days of the chase in confinement studying the text until eventually the Ultramarines catch up with Kor Phaeron's fleet, but rather than kill him, he asks to be told more ... queue corruption and the Realm of Ultramar becoming a stomping ground for Daemons.
40392
Post by: thenoobbomb
Sanguinius, Guilliman or the Lion, in that order.
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
Exergy wrote:
What would Horus, the ambitious and trusted primarch who knew the emperor better than any of the others have done?
I don't understand your question.
46128
Post by: Happyjew
You guys are all wrong. There is only one who would have been a better Warmaster.
Matt Ward.
He even has "War" in his name.
84405
Post by: jhe90
The thing is minus horus, he has one of biggest legions, the respect of all and ability as senior crusade leader to tweak new equipment to his to betraitors.
He was one of main architects and managed to get 8 others to go to his a side but without him it would not have been so large as yes some would always have gone rougue at some point but he gave the rebels a strong leadership, it would have been more decided and far less likely to succeed as one or two alone could do a lot of damage but not take on the other 16 legions aalone.
80561
Post by: ThatSwellFella
Angron, for the lulz 
75208
Post by: Ceann Fine
Why do people always insist on saying that guilliman was tactically the best primarch? Every horus heresy book that shows a primarch's thoughts on his brothers has them saying that horus was the best of them and that none of them were a match for him
6838
Post by: 1hadhq
How about a triumvirat ?
Handing the whole load onto Horus didn't turn out well.
79759
Post by: The Anathema
why did there need to be a warmaster anyway?
why did the primarchs get put in groups of three to go on the crusade? the choices were poor (russ, magnus and lorgar for example). with such a huge war machine as the imperium why couldn't each prim arch have their own entire fleet?
the emperor was just the worst.
40392
Post by: thenoobbomb
Magnus and Lorgar went along pretty good. Russ, on the other hand.. 
83460
Post by: ashcroft
Horus would have provided a final authority - being recognised as the official proxy of the Emperor. Some of the legions - loyalist and future traitor alike - were openly hostile to the new administration of Terra and so would only take orders from one of their own.
Horus would also provide the big picture - allocating legions to ensure they deploy where they are required rather than letting say Angron and the World Eaters go off on a rampage that would devastate worlds that could have been brought to compliance by peaceful means.
72837
Post by: jakejackjake
 YFNPsycho wrote: raiden wrote:
And this is why Horus was the best choice for Warmaster.
He knew the strengths and weaknesses of his brother primarchs better than anyone else, because he was comfortable with all of their skills.
No that wasn't really why at all. He was picked because he was the most approachable of the Primarchs to the rest of the Primarchs. Basically no one hated or envied him. He wasn't the best at anything. He was in the middle of every single category not the top of any. There were several better warriors, stronger warriors, and smarter tacticians. He was third or fourth at best in every category that could matter, but he wasn't terrible and could get the other Primarchs to listen Automatically Appended Next Post: Ceann Fine wrote:Why do people always insist on saying that guilliman was tactically the best primarch? Every horus heresy book that shows a primarch's thoughts on his brothers has them saying that horus was the best of them and that none of them were a match for him
No EVERY single bit of the fluff even in the Horus Heresy says Guilliman was the best unless it is being said by a Luna Wolf. All other legions refer to Guilliman as the best. It is literally the one trait he is most known for. Turning theoretical into practical.
75208
Post by: Ceann Fine
Off the top of my head alone I can state that in the lightning tower dorn says that none could match horus on the field of war
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Where does it say guilliman was the best in the fluff? Stupid autocorrect
81872
Post by: Veteran of The Long War
Ceann Fine wrote:Off the top of my head alone I can state that in the lightning tower dorn says that none could match horus on the field of war
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Where does it say guilliman was the best in the fluff? Stupid autocorrect
In the Ultramarines Fluff section of the Space Marine Codex. And by a couple Ultras in Know No Fear.
38926
Post by: Exergy
JubbJubbz wrote:There's only one choice and its Horus. Horus the character is created to be the perfect warmaster candidate, the emperors successor. He has the charisma and ambition of the emperor. Sanguinus does not have this ambition. He does not share the emps vision for the galaxy. Guilliman lacks the charisma and character to make the others follow him despite his technical knowledge. Horus is the first among equals, he has to be the warmaster so that his tragic fall makes the most impact. Elsewise, the story makes no sense.
I agree it could only be horus
75208
Post by: Ceann Fine
 Veteran of The Long War wrote:Ceann Fine wrote:Off the top of my head alone I can state that in the lightning tower dorn says that none could match horus on the field of war
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Where does it say guilliman was the best in the fluff? Stupid autocorrect
In the Ultramarines Fluff section of the Space Marine Codex. And by a couple Ultras in Know No Fear.
Come on it hardly counts when it's ultramarines saying it
78600
Post by: raiden
 1hadhq wrote:How about a triumvirat ?
Handing the whole load onto Horus didn't turn out well.
This never works in war. The leaders bicker and argue about which way is.best and get nothing done. Or look at Rome when hannibal invaded, one leader wanted to starve him out through attrition. The best way as they could not beat him in open battle. The other wanted to go and crush him, and so, attempted. Then promptly lost 20- 40k men.
83680
Post by: ChazSexington
If I were the Emperor I would've picked Konrad for Warmaster fur die lulz.
The best choice, bar Horus, would've probably been Sanguinius for his man management. Several were better tacticians, strategists and warriors, but Sanguinius seems to know how to delegate.
57646
Post by: Kain
Guilliman.
The Domain of Ultramar Imperium won't build itself.
73289
Post by: PrehistoricUFO
Roboute Guilliman, or Sanguinius. I voted Robot Girlyman, though.
86351
Post by: morpheuschild
i suppose guilliman would be the obvious choice, but i'd really say that the best would be whichever is quickest to admit their own flaws, and be willing to consider the advice of others based on their own strengths.
the biased part of me says corax, though, he just strikes me as being the coolest and most interesting of the primarchs. he saw corruption and tyranny first-hand for much of his early life, and while he may not have had the best governing skills, he certainly had the integrity needed for the job.
of course, horus also started out with good intentions, and you know what they say about the road to hell...
39995
Post by: Maniac_nmt
morpheuschild wrote:i suppose guilliman would be the obvious choice, but i'd really say that the best would be whichever is quickest to admit their own flaws, and be willing to consider the advice of others based on their own strengths.
the biased part of me says corax, though, he just strikes me as being the coolest and most interesting of the primarchs. he saw corruption and tyranny first-hand for much of his early life, and while he may not have had the best governing skills, he certainly had the integrity needed for the job.
of course, horus also started out with good intentions, and you know what they say about the road to hell...
By your requirements, that is still Guilliman. He is quite willing to note his own flaws and consider advice of even base space marines that are not his inner circle.
8911
Post by: Powerguy
First off I think its important to clarify whether you think the Warmaster is just supposed to be a military leader, or whether they are the designated heir to the (immortal) Emperor. My thinking is that the Emperor intended this to be purely a military role - it was the start of the Emperor splitting civilian administration and the military war machine, but everyone in the Imperium assumed that by elevating Horus into a position of power he was also choosing an heir.
If you assume that it was a purely military role then imo there is only one other choice - Sanguinius. However I think the Emperor was well aware of the flaw in his gene seed/Legion and didn't want to risk having his leading general + legion go blood crazy on him.
Just quickly running through the other viable candidates:
The Lion - Amazing strategic mind but zero people skills and troubling background (Watchers in the Dark + the whole 'your planet is secretly a Greater Daemon' thing)
Dorn - I always find it odd that people pick him for this. He is defensively minded, has less than stellar people skills and is never really shown to be a particularly outstanding leader/tactician compared to the likes of the Lion or Guilliman. More importantly he is arguably the most unstable of all the Primarchs and would be a terrible Warmaster.
Guilliman - a master strategy, tactics and logistics and someone who saw further than just conquest. If you were picking an heir or a regent to the Imperium then he would probably be your man, but as a straight general he lacks the charisma and good relationships with all his brothers.
Russ - imo he actually would have made a pretty damn good Warmaster. With him you get guaranteed loyalty and someone who is feared and respected as a warrior and a leader across the entire Imperium. The thing about Russ is that he always stepped up and did what was asked, he united his planet and ruled that before the Emperor found him, and then stepped into the Executioneer role because that is what was asked of him. He may not have wanted to become Warmaster, but that by itself is often a sign of a good leader.
34439
Post by: Formosa
Ceann Fine wrote:Why do people always insist on saying that guilliman was tactically the best primarch? Every horus heresy book that shows a primarch's thoughts on his brothers has them saying that horus was the best of them and that none of them were a match for him
Apart from the ones that say it's the lion, guiliman states this also and the "warmaster" refuses to meet the lion head on, he and the lion both know the lion will cone out on top, now in cc...horus wins
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
Horus wasn't the best at anything but being social. That's why he was chosen. He was good at everything but not really a master at anything, yet the close ties he had to all of his brothers, even the outcasts, is what allowed him to be a leader among equals, which is what the Emperor truly needed.
80083
Post by: Retrogamer0001
1
75208
Post by: Ceann Fine
 Formosa wrote:Ceann Fine wrote:Why do people always insist on saying that guilliman was tactically the best primarch? Every horus heresy book that shows a primarch's thoughts on his brothers has them saying that horus was the best of them and that none of them were a match for him
Apart from the ones that say it's the lion, guiliman states this also and the "warmaster" refuses to meet the lion head on, he and the lion both know the lion will cone out on top, now in cc...horus wins
Funnily enough lion was my pick even before I noticed that the horus option wasn't there
73929
Post by: Animus
Guilliman, the Emperor's greatest mistake was not creating 20 Guilliman's.
Gman shaped the Ultramarines to be great:
Most worlds liberated during the great crusade
Captured worlds faster than any other Legion
Highest recruitment rate
Lowest death rate
Creates self supporting defence systems for conquered worlds
Creates industry and trade routes for the Imperium.
From these points we see that he is not only a superb war leader, but also that he not only kills the enemies of the Imperium but strengthens the Imperium as well. Guilliman also created the Codex Astartes, which has made the Space Marines preeminent warriors even ten thousand years later, and his reforms forged an Imperium with more staying power than even the Emperor's.
38926
Post by: Exergy
BlaxicanX wrote:Horus wasn't the best at anything but being social. That's why he was chosen. He was good at everything but not really a master at anything, yet the close ties he had to all of his brothers, even the outcasts, is what allowed him to be a leader among equals, which is what the Emperor truly needed.
and he had more experience and was more trusted by the emperor
50 years of constant battle in the early days before any other primarch was discovered.
15283
Post by: tgjensen
Animus wrote:Guilliman, the Emperor's greatest mistake was not creating 20 Guilliman's.
Gman shaped the Ultramarines to be great:
Most worlds liberated during the great crusade
Captured worlds faster than any other Legion
Highest recruitment rate
Lowest death rate
Creates self supporting defence systems for conquered worlds
Creates industry and trade routes for the Imperium.
From these points we see that he is not only a superb war leader, but also that he not only kills the enemies of the Imperium but strengthens the Imperium as well. Guilliman also created the Codex Astartes, which has made the Space Marines preeminent warriors even ten thousand years later, and his reforms forged an Imperium with more staying power than even the Emperor's.
I don't disagree with you. The Ultramarines' record speaks for itself; that is exactly what you want from your legions in a crusade of conquest. If the job was to lead armies in the conquest of the galaxy, then Guilliman was clearly the only right choice. But being Warmaster, as many have pointed out, isn't about commanding armies, it's about commanding Primarchs. And since fully half of them are emotionally stunted manchildren incapable of making smart decisions unless they are being tricked into them, the Warmaster must be someone charismatic and well-liked by all. For that reason, and certainly not out of any tactical or strategic considerations, Sanguinius is next in line for the job.
85988
Post by: Toastaster
Animus wrote:Guilliman, the Emperor's greatest mistake was not creating 20 Guilliman's.
Gman shaped the Ultramarines to be great:
Most worlds liberated during the great crusade
Captured worlds faster than any other Legion
Highest recruitment rate
Lowest death rate
Creates self supporting defence systems for conquered worlds
Creates industry and trade routes for the Imperium.
From these points we see that he is not only a superb war leader, but also that he not only kills the enemies of the Imperium but strengthens the Imperium as well. Guilliman also created the Codex Astartes, which has made the Space Marines preeminent warriors even ten thousand years later, and his reforms forged an Imperium with more staying power than even the Emperor's.
I thought that up until the heresy, the Sons of Horus liberated the most worlds? IIRC in the time they were functioning with their primarch(s), the Alpha Legion actually captured more worlds faster than the other Legions, and if they'd had the time that Girlyman had they would of easily surpassed his record, which is why he wasn't a fan of theirs (and I doubt the whole becoming chaotic helped either).
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
Guilliman apparently could have been Warmaster if he'd wanted, but turned it down because he's too cool for school.
So really, the Heresy is actually Guilliman's fault.
46305
Post by: Red_Starrise
Rowboat Girlyman is a bad choice. As he was willing to turn on loyal imperial warriors to enforce *his* laws & will when he wasn't even around for any of the real fighting. In addition not only has he forced rules upon other chapters he then breaks these rules by commanding his own PDFs (among other things). Thus he is little more than an opportunist who saw the death of his father as a way to grab power.
I think the scene from Family Guy where George W. Bush shows up "too late" for Vietnam & asks if he missed the fight best describes him.
76710
Post by: Vulgar
1. Guilliman - This is what having your gak together looks like.
2. Vulkan - He might require a nudge here and there, but I would rather my leadership be more kind to my people, and employ assassins and what not for the stuff Vulkan may find distasteful.
3. Omegon - Only due to recent FW fluff that makes me believe he never left Terra like the others. I get the feel he may have been raised by the emperor in secret, but I like to make gak up.
I only omit Sanguinius because of wings. Trying to get away from religon won't be helped by your super angel general. Guilliman, Vulkan and Alpharius have all displayed a lack of what are generally referred to as fatal character flaws, like pride, obsession, vanity, rage and etc.
I still take Guilliman over all by a very large margin.
24470
Post by: Orblivion
Vulgar wrote:1. Guilliman - This is what having your gak together looks like.
2. Vulkan - He might require a nudge here and there, but I would rather my leadership be more kind to my people, and employ assassins and what not for the stuff Vulkan may find distasteful.
3. Omegon - Only due to recent FW fluff that makes me believe he never left Terra like the others. I get the feel he may have been raised by the emperor in secret, but I like to make gak up.
I only omit Alpharius because of wings. Trying to get away from religon won't be helped by your super angel general. Guilliman, Vulkan and Alpharius have all displayed a lack of what are generally referred to as fatal character flaws, like pride, obsession, vanity, rage and etc.
I still take Guilliman over all by a very large margin.
Alpharius doesn't have wings, that would be Sanguinius. And Guilliman was very prideful actually. Its likely that Guilliman would have fallen in mostly the same way that Horus did, since his pride is what Erebus targeted.
40392
Post by: thenoobbomb
Also, Omegon was with Alpharius all the time.
73929
Post by: Animus
tgjensen wrote:I don't disagree with you. The Ultramarines' record speaks for itself; that is exactly what you want from your legions in a crusade of conquest. If the job was to lead armies in the conquest of the galaxy, then Guilliman was clearly the only right choice. But being Warmaster, as many have pointed out, isn't about commanding armies, it's about commanding Primarchs. And since fully half of them are emotionally stunted manchildren incapable of making smart decisions unless they are being tricked into them, the Warmaster must be someone charismatic and well-liked by all. For that reason, and certainly not out of any tactical or strategic considerations, Sanguinius is next in line for the job.
The fact that some Primarchs are manchildren doesn't make it an excuse. They could just be pulled from active duty until they learned to respect the chain of command. Can you imagine any other army just refusing orders because they were a little stroppy that day? 
 Toastaster wrote:I thought that up until the heresy, the Sons of Horus liberated the most worlds?
You could probably find some source for that. But it's the Ultramarine's claim as recently as the 7e rulebook and as early as 2e Codex Ultramarines.
Toastaster wrote:IIRC in the time they were functioning with their primarch(s), the Alpha Legion actually captured more worlds faster than the other Legions, and if they'd had the time that Girlyman had they would of easily surpassed his record, which is why he wasn't a fan of theirs (and I doubt the whole becoming chaotic helped either).
Nope, the only time I remember them being strictly opposed was in Index Astartes, and the Alpha Legion have seemingly since been replaced by the Word Bearers in terms of Ultramarine rivalry. Guilliman and Alpharius had a heated debate over tactics and ideology, which ended with Guilliman showing off his much greater honour roll and saying Alpharius could never compare, Alparius got mad and cleaved to his tactics even harder. It was actually said that the Alphas could not equal the number of worlds conquered by the older legions, implying at best they were going at the same pace as the older Legions.
78353
Post by: Wyzilla
Also, just realized.
Whoever becomes Warmaster will inevitably fall. However, unless that person has numerous allies among his brothers and has strong his charisma, the rebellion will be severely weakened and never have the strength as the one led by Horus. Make Curze warmaster for example, and very few Primarchs are likely to be swayed to his side when he falls- forcing Chaos to seek a much longer and possibly more risky plan to cripple the Imperium.
86652
Post by: CrosisDePurger
The Heresy didn't happen based on how tempting Chaos is or a bad Warmaster choice. The Emperor in fact caused the heresy by making several missteps. He placed massive power in a few people's hands and then concealed critical information from them that made them more vulnerable and also gave them cause to distrust him.
46959
Post by: Dust
Exergy wrote: EmpNortonII wrote:So, as it turns out, picking Horus to be Warmaster wasn't the brightest of ideas, what with that whole Horus Heresy thing.
If you were the Emperor, which Primarch would you pick to lead the Great Crusade in your absence?
Horus was the obvious choice:
He was the first one the emperor found.
He and the emperor fought the great crusade alone together for some 50 years before another primarch was found.
Horus was by far the most experienced
Horus was the strongest
Horus was the smartest
Horus had the most command of his brother primachs
Horus was perfect, or as close as possible among any of the other primarchs.
To not pick Horus is to not have a warmaster and the emperor would have had to remain in command of the crusade for all time(but he had other things to do)
To not pick Horus might have led to a more serious rebellion, who knows, but when you dont pick the guy who is obvious and qualified for the job, you often have problems
This
Just look at how things were playing out before the fall. Sure Dorn and Sanguinus might have been charismatic as hell, sure Angron and Russ might have been combat incarnate, sure Peterabo and Vulkan were sharp as tacks. But Horus was all of those things. The strength of Horus was that he could lead from the front, lead from the rear, and coordinate with any one. Sure in a one on one fight he might have lost to Angron or Mortarion, maybe Johnson could beat him in a sword fight, Khan and Lorgar were probably more enthusiastic and passionate than he was, Robute probably had a better grasp for crafting battle doctrine and composing cohesive forces on both a small and large scale. But Horus, more than any other primarch, had the raw experience needed to balance the talents and attributes of the other primarchs along with their associated legions to best maximize their potential. There's even mention in the fluff of Horus intentionally assigning other primarchs to work together that openly hated each other just so that they would compete to put-perform one another. That's talent... an incredible talent and skill that outweighs almost any other.
76273
Post by: Eihnlazer
I would have made Vulkan He'stan the forgefather be the warmaster.
Guy is smart, understands his enemy and himself, can lead his brothers well, and is actually open minded enough to understand that unguided zealotry is powerful and yet doomed to fail without some malleability.
So sad that he is a far better character than all the primarchs combined.
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
I would have picked Angron to be warmaster.
78353
Post by: Wyzilla
 CrosisDePurger wrote:The Heresy didn't happen based on how tempting Chaos is or a bad Warmaster choice. The Emperor in fact caused the heresy by making several missteps. He placed massive power in a few people's hands and then concealed critical information from them that made them more vulnerable and also gave them cause to distrust him.
...Except that Horus didn't fall because of shoddy information, but because Lorgar and Daemon allies had been manipulating everything so Horus would end up stabbed with a tainted weapon ( iirc the Laer Blade) that forced him to turn to Chaos or die.
24470
Post by: Orblivion
Wyzilla wrote: CrosisDePurger wrote:The Heresy didn't happen based on how tempting Chaos is or a bad Warmaster choice. The Emperor in fact caused the heresy by making several missteps. He placed massive power in a few people's hands and then concealed critical information from them that made them more vulnerable and also gave them cause to distrust him.
...Except that Horus didn't fall because of shoddy information, but because Lorgar and Daemon allies had been manipulating everything so Horus would end up stabbed with a tainted weapon ( iirc the Laer Blade) that forced him to turn to Chaos or die.
He has a valid point though. If Horus and the other primarchs had been informed of the existence of Chaos beforehand instead of being told complete lies by the Emperor, I think they would have been much more prepared to deal with the threat. Instead they were left intentionally ignorant of the threat, and that made each and every one of them vulnerable.
72881
Post by: Blackhair Duckshape
From an out of universe perspective, I'd choose Fulgrim just because I'd like to see the Eldar's reaction to a second galaxy spanning empire falling to Slaanesh.
As a serious answer, I'd pick Roberto Gillyweed for the reasons listed by every fething other person in this thread.
76710
Post by: Vulgar
 Orblivion wrote:Vulgar wrote:1. Guilliman - This is what having your gak together looks like.
2. Vulkan - He might require a nudge here and there, but I would rather my leadership be more kind to my people, and employ assassins and what not for the stuff Vulkan may find distasteful.
3. Omegon - Only due to recent FW fluff that makes me believe he never left Terra like the others. I get the feel he may have been raised by the emperor in secret, but I like to make gak up.
I only omit Alpharius because of wings. Trying to get away from religon won't be helped by your super angel general. Guilliman, Vulkan and Alpharius have all displayed a lack of what are generally referred to as fatal character flaws, like pride, obsession, vanity, rage and etc.
I still take Guilliman over all by a very large margin.
Alpharius doesn't have wings, that would be Sanguinius. And Guilliman was very prideful actually. Its likely that Guilliman would have fallen in mostly the same way that Horus did, since his pride is what Erebus targeted.
Thanks for the winged demigod correction, hey, they rhyme at least.
That being said; I should have used the phrase "excessive pride". Is Guilliman prideful, yes. He has a reason to be.
What I interpret, is that he can escape to rational thought. The avenging son pulled from Nuceria once stuff went south, meanwhile other primarchs may have fought to the death.
86868
Post by: EddieJA
Even though Guilliman is my favorite Primarch, I voted for Dorn. Some of the stuff Dorn says really speaks to me. This guy loved the Imperium. What it was and what it could have become. Both his sadness at tearing down the beauty of the Imperial Palace to replace it with kill boxes and ramparts, and his subsequent dogged defense of it during the Siege of Terra.
Dorn was a believer. There is nothing more dangerous than someone who believes in the mission you put before them. Dorn could have faced the exact same trials as Horus and not for a second thought about tearing down the Imperium.
38926
Post by: Exergy
Remember that as Horus was found first, he was taught everything he knew directly from Big E.
Subsequent Primarchs were taught by Horus
83680
Post by: ChazSexington
Maniac_nmt wrote:morpheuschild wrote:i suppose guilliman would be the obvious choice, but i'd really say that the best would be whichever is quickest to admit their own flaws, and be willing to consider the advice of others based on their own strengths.
the biased part of me says corax, though, he just strikes me as being the coolest and most interesting of the primarchs. he saw corruption and tyranny first-hand for much of his early life, and while he may not have had the best governing skills, he certainly had the integrity needed for the job.
of course, horus also started out with good intentions, and you know what they say about the road to hell...
By your requirements, that is still Guilliman. He is quite willing to note his own flaws and consider advice of even base space marines that are not his inner circle.
Guilliman didn't take Alpharius' advice on board.
73929
Post by: Animus
Guilliman was the one who gave Alpharius advice.
24470
Post by: Orblivion
Exergy wrote:Remember that as Horus was found first, he was taught everything he knew directly from Big E.
Subsequent Primarchs were taught by Horus
Where is this stated? I know Horus was found first and this was certainly the case with Alpharius, who was actually discovered by Horus and not the Emperor, but what makes you believe they were all taught by Horus? In all the lore I've seen the primarchs take command of their legion pretty much immediately after being reunited with the Emperor. Most of them had already been through some form of warfare on their own planets, and each legion's tactics reflects the combat prowess of their primarch. The fact that they all use different tactics should be an indication that they were not all taught by Horus.
86652
Post by: CrosisDePurger
Wyzilla wrote: CrosisDePurger wrote:The Heresy didn't happen based on how tempting Chaos is or a bad Warmaster choice. The Emperor in fact caused the heresy by making several missteps. He placed massive power in a few people's hands and then concealed critical information from them that made them more vulnerable and also gave them cause to distrust him.
...Except that Horus didn't fall because of shoddy information, but because Lorgar and Daemon allies had been manipulating everything so Horus would end up stabbed with a tainted weapon ( iirc the Laer Blade) that forced him to turn to Chaos or die.
The weapon didn't make him turn, he didn't turn just from fear of death. If he hadn't already had the seeds of doubt in the Emperor and had known who he was dealing with in the warp he'd have refused and died true to the Emperor. The Emperor gave the enemy the tools they needed to subvert Horus.
78353
Post by: Wyzilla
CrosisDePurger wrote: Wyzilla wrote: CrosisDePurger wrote:The Heresy didn't happen based on how tempting Chaos is or a bad Warmaster choice. The Emperor in fact caused the heresy by making several missteps. He placed massive power in a few people's hands and then concealed critical information from them that made them more vulnerable and also gave them cause to distrust him.
...Except that Horus didn't fall because of shoddy information, but because Lorgar and Daemon allies had been manipulating everything so Horus would end up stabbed with a tainted weapon ( iirc the Laer Blade) that forced him to turn to Chaos or die.
The weapon didn't make him turn, he didn't turn just from fear of death. If he hadn't already had the seeds of doubt in the Emperor and had known who he was dealing with in the warp he'd have refused and died true to the Emperor. The Emperor gave the enemy the tools they needed to subvert Horus.
It's not fear of death. It's Chaos mindfucking you into service. It's just a matter of how long you can resist before you completely breakdown and cave in.
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
Can I get a source on the Alpha Legion having one of the fastest growing compliance records?
My understanding has always been that the Alpha Legion had one of the most effective methods for acquiring compliance, but it was also one of the most inefficient. While other legions could conquer a planet in a month with 1000 casualties, the Alpha Legion would conquer a planet in six months with a dozen (Astartes) casualties.
78353
Post by: Wyzilla
BlaxicanX wrote:Can I get a source on the Alpha Legion having one of the fastest growing compliance records?
My understanding has always been that the Alpha Legion had one of the most effective methods for acquiring compliance, but it was also one of the most inefficient. While other legions could conquer a planet in a month with 1000 casualties, the Alpha Legion would conquer a planet in six months with a dozen (Astartes) casualties.
Fastest compliance would probably belong to the Night Lords after they became infamous.
38926
Post by: Exergy
Wyzilla wrote: BlaxicanX wrote:Can I get a source on the Alpha Legion having one of the fastest growing compliance records?
My understanding has always been that the Alpha Legion had one of the most effective methods for acquiring compliance, but it was also one of the most inefficient. While other legions could conquer a planet in a month with 1000 casualties, the Alpha Legion would conquer a planet in six months with a dozen (Astartes) casualties.
Fastest compliance would probably belong to the Night Lords after they became infamous.
yeah, when you completely rape a world the next 20 surrender without a shot.
39995
Post by: Maniac_nmt
 ChazSexington wrote: Maniac_nmt wrote:morpheuschild wrote:i suppose guilliman would be the obvious choice, but i'd really say that the best would be whichever is quickest to admit their own flaws, and be willing to consider the advice of others based on their own strengths.
the biased part of me says corax, though, he just strikes me as being the coolest and most interesting of the primarchs. he saw corruption and tyranny first-hand for much of his early life, and while he may not have had the best governing skills, he certainly had the integrity needed for the job.
of course, horus also started out with good intentions, and you know what they say about the road to hell...
By your requirements, that is still Guilliman. He is quite willing to note his own flaws and consider advice of even base space marines that are not his inner circle.
Guilliman didn't take Alpharius' advice on board.
Advice which destabilizes a world for a long and painful period? Alpharius fights a good guerilla war, but a very poor empire building war. Alpharius' methods are create insurgent cells which then breeds the grounds for future insurgency.
Legion and other bits read all cool and cloak and dagger, but are poor ways to generate long term stability. They can do that, but they can also just as easily lead to a perpetual state of conflict and rebellion.
78600
Post by: raiden
There are 2 primarchs that I believe without a doubt would not have fallen. Sanguinius and dorn.
Sangy- he he to devoted, selfless, Honorable.
Dorn-_ he is already half crazy. But its imperium crazy. Good luck chaos gods.
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
Sanguinus wouldn't have fallen, something that even Horus recognized; the Chaos Gods aren't infallible, at the end of the day their power outside of the warp is limited.
I don't think Sanguinus would have been a good warmaster, though. He was a likable primarch, but there seemed to be a lot of resentment toward him by the man-child Primarchs, and I don't think Sanguinus would have had the heart to do what Russ, Horus or Guilliman would do in morally grey situations.
78600
Post by: raiden
Their power inside the warp is limited as well. Just ask draigo.
35785
Post by: Avatar 720
One of the lost Primarchs.
Or my custom unknown 21st Primarch who is also half-Eldar and half-Ork, has his own secret SM legion, and single-handedly stopped two Tyranid Hive Fleets from reaching Terra.
He also makes a mean grilled cheese, has eleven girlfriends, fifteen boyfriends, and a pet Bloodthirster called Cuddles.
57646
Post by: Kain
 Avatar 720 wrote:One of the lost Primarchs.
Or my custom unknown 21st Primarch who is also half-Eldar and half-Ork, has his own secret SM legion, and single-handedly stopped two Tyranid Hive Fleets from reaching Terra.
He also makes a mean grilled cheese, has eleven girlfriends, fifteen boyfriends, and a pet Bloodthirster called Cuddles.
Is he kawaii Avatar-kun? Uguu.
78600
Post by: raiden
Uguu! God I love kannon.
21853
Post by: mattyrm
The polls about right, Sanguinius and Gulliman have immense integrity and would do a fine job, having that single most important facet of their personalities that even modern politicians lack, integrity.
From reading UE they are both genuinely pleasant blokes, with few flaws, humility, and great intellect, although I would go with Gulliman over Sanguinius because he was clearly a better administrator just a bit less charismatic.
Maybe have Gulliman as PM and Sanguinius as the Queen?
35785
Post by: Avatar 720
 Kain wrote: Avatar 720 wrote:One of the lost Primarchs.
Or my custom unknown 21st Primarch who is also half-Eldar and half-Ork, has his own secret SM legion, and single-handedly stopped two Tyranid Hive Fleets from reaching Terra.
He also makes a mean grilled cheese, has eleven girlfriends, fifteen boyfriends, and a pet Bloodthirster called Cuddles.
Is he kawaii Avatar-kun? Uguu.
Super kawaii.
79603
Post by: TheRedWingArmada
INVALID. DRAIGO HACKS!
Edit: Also, I change my vote from Magnus the Red to Mark "the muthaporkin Baby" Cakes! He'd like, make everyone follow the warriors code and give out free coupons for chickin nibbles and he's also beat the Dream Reamer. I believe he also has sex with dragons. Can any Primarch say they've done that?
Also, Canada Cake.
83680
Post by: ChazSexington
http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Alpharius_Omegon
This campaign brought Alpharius censure from almost all of his brother Primarchs; Guilliman in particular raged at Alpharius' conduct of the war, labelling the drawn-out operation as "a waste of the Emperor's bolt shells." Only the Warmaster Horus, always impressed by Alpharius and his work, praised the Alpha Legion's skill.
Also, check HH: Extermination. Rawbutt cared nothing for the Alpha Legion's ways.
BlaxicanX wrote:Can I get a source on the Alpha Legion having one of the fastest growing compliance records?
My understanding has always been that the Alpha Legion had one of the most effective methods for acquiring compliance, but it was also one of the most inefficient. While other legions could conquer a planet in a month with 1000 casualties, the Alpha Legion would conquer a planet in six months with a dozen (Astartes) casualties.
They appear to have done both. I know Rawbutt pissed off Alpharius by saying the Alpha Legion could never match the Ultramarines in terms of the number of worlds brought to compliance, and after that Alpharius made it his life's mission to basically prove Rawbutt wrong. However, it showed in Alpha Legion numbers; 180,000 strong, which I think made them the third (?) largest Legion.
http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Alpha_Legion
Standing also in favour of the Alpha Legion was an enviable record of success in military terms, particularly in forcing the Imperial Compliance of recalcitrant human colonies, and exposing and rooting out rebellion and treachery on recently Compliant worlds.
Some histories claim that as many as a dozen worlds were brought into Imperial Compliance with only a single shot having been fired by Exodus, who could achieve with one round what the expenditure of billions of rounds, charges and shells might never bring about.
46864
Post by: Deadshot
Why there no Horus in the poll? Horus is the only right answer because he was the perfect candidate at the time.
If the Emperor had known what was going to happen, he would have had Lorgar warned in a different way (not destroy Monarchia or whatever), or had Erebus and Kor Phaeron dissappear or had the Word Bearer's expunged. But Horus would have still been the Warmaster.
Second choice is Sanguinius. 3rd is too hsrd to decide. The other Legions are too focused and specialised to be candidates.
Lion is too proud and tactical to stray from his strategies.
Fulgrim is too proud and obsessed with personal and Legion perfection, plus, isn't a team-player.
Perturabo was focused on art and culture prior to the Crusade and too resentful during.
Khan is too focused on honour, justice and martial pride to fight tooth and nail and get his hands dirty with the nasty work.
Russ was a team player and a man who valued family and brotherhood like Horus himself, but his gruffness and unpopularity with his brothers rules him out.
Dorn was too stubborn and volatile, as shown during the Iron Cage. If Erebus had came to him as he did Horus Dorn's heart would have broken and the Dorn Heresy appears.
Kurze was too unstable.
Manus was too temperamental.
Angron...
Guilliman is a good candidate but he was better as a politician, planner, organiser. He wouldn't have fit in well with his brothers. Or the fans. Matt Ward would have the ultimate Nerdgasm though.
Mortarion focused too heavily on infantry warfare, and vehicles were uncommon, and so too inflexible.
Magnus was highly unpopular, an outcast and was needed for the Golden Throne.
Lorgar...
Vulkan was too caring and his Legion too small, and too focused on flames, forgery, etc.
Corax was too focused on shadow-warfare.
Alpharius was too unconvential, and outcast and considered uminexperienced (having only been found about 50 years before the Heresy, after Warmastery was given to Horus?)
73174
Post by: BrotherOfBone
Alpharius may have been inexperienced but he was a brilliant tactical mind, and the fact that they had an 'enviable' record of worlds brought into the Imperium in just 50 years of service is testament to how fantastic he and his legion were.
~AL fanboy.
|
|
