As you've seen in the title I am wondering which primarch was the best at planning and executing tactics and battle plans in ways that destroy the foe with maximum efficiency.

I'm thinking guilliman because that's what hes famous for, but alpharius is good at that kinda thing as well so y,know as well as fulgrims "flawless" executions etc
so just let us all know what you think and why

The lion.

And the wolf.

Both outstanding in thier own seperate ways at destroying an enemy, though i think the wolf for some strange reason!

Argron. Just go straight to the enemy. If you win, you win, if you lose, you are death so it doesn't matter.

And seeing as Argron is still alive, we can arguee that it was the best strategist.

I think it depends on what type of warfare.
Subterfuge/black ops - Alpharius
Siege - Perty
Defense - Dorn
Psyche warfare - Curze
Complete annhilation - Angron/Russ

etc etc

All primarchs had their own strengths and weaknesses, I'd say the best All around was proably Gulliman.

Alpharius had the most interesting and unorthodox tactics IMO. Otherwise Dorn, Guilliman or Horus.

Honestly Horus. There was a very good reason he was chosen Warmaster - he had a formidable military mind. The Luna Wolves were also superbly suited for what space marine should always be doing - shock and awe, aka. breakthrough tactics.

All in all, Horus was probably the best.

 Novelist47 wrote:
Honestly Horus. There was a very good reason he was chosen Warmaster - he had a formidable military mind. The Luna Wolves were also superbly suited for what space marine should always be doing - shock and awe, aka. breakthrough tactics.

All in all, Horus was probably the best.

Not sure I agree, Horus was chosen not for any of his military talents (though they where considerable) but for his people skills and having the strongest bond with the Emperor.

Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

 Novelist47 wrote:
Honestly Horus. There was a very good reason he was chosen Warmaster - he had a formidable military mind. The Luna Wolves were also superbly suited for what space marine should always be doing - shock and awe, aka. breakthrough tactics.

All in all, Horus was probably the best.

We have never seen Horus demonstrate any tactical prowess that couldn't be replicated by a toddler.

 Saber wrote:
Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

yes and no, a seige situation is hardly an ideal spot for tactics and stragety. there is some skill etc in it yes, in knowing when you hold a breach, when you pull back to anoither line, when you apper to fall back to trap your enemy etc, but for the most aprt a seige situation is sort of a long drawn out affair when you tst your fortifcations against your enmies siege prowess, (your enemy needs to know where to apply artillery and other siege craft to break your walls etc) and ultimatly there is a combined timer, where you have to balance your supplies in holding out, vs the encamped enemies supplies, and the possiabilty of reinforcement. the seige of terra was won because Dorn managed to hold off long eneugh for reinfrocements (in the form of the Ultramarines) to come, which forced Horus into a "hail mary pass" manuver that didn't work out so well. so the seige of terra certainly let the fists show their skill at seige defence, but I'm not sure it gave much insight, one way or another, into the general strategic/tatical accunum of the Imperial Fists.

 Saber wrote:
Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

Rogal Dorn is responsible for the massacre as Istvaan V. He is a fething idiot.

The Lion is considered the greatest tactician, and Ferrus Manus was considered the greatest at warfare.

... after Horus ofcourse!

Is been said the Lion would have been the warmaster...
... but he's not very charismatic, which Horus was.

123ply wrote:
Is been said the Lion would have been the warmaster...
... but he's not very charismatic, which Horus was.

the ONLY Primarch I've heard musing the Lion should be Warmaster was the Lion. I don't thin k any of his brothers actually liked the Lion

Angron certainly not. He should be the best cc fighter of all Primarchs, but it seems that he isn't.
This is the only Primarch I own.

I'd say Alpharius because based on what I've read the Alpha Legion always accomplishes their goals.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Angron certainly not. He should be the best cc fighter of all Primarchs, but it seems that he isn't.
This is the only Primarch I own.

What makes you say he isn't? Angron has a fairly impressive record for close combat, took on two of his brother primarchs, neither managed to put him down.

 SolidOakie wrote:
I'd say Alpharius because based on what I've read the Alpha Legion always accomplishes their goals.

given how complex Alpharus' schemes are, do they really? or does he build a giant "Strategic goldberg machine" that does something completely unexpected half the time followed bhy him steepling his fingers and going "... umm just as planned yes.,.."

sides, he's had stuff go sideways on him before, Preatorian of Dorn did NOT turn out the way he intended.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Angron certainly not. He should be the best cc fighter of all Primarchs, but it seems that he isn't.
This is the only Primarch I own.

What makes you say he isn't? Angron has a fairly impressive record for close combat, took on two of his brother primarchs, neither managed to put him down.

I think one could make an arguement on raw SKILL. Angron's effective in combat sure. but he's just a raging bezerker, there's no skill to what he does. and if he wasn't so physically superior he proably wouldn't have survived fighting like he does as long as he has.

My vote goes to Russ.
The other legions wrote the Wolves off as braggarts, too full of their own importance and too busy jamming their laurels up their furry backsides to be a true power but the Wolves were a power.
The Wolves were specialists who could be called on to perform a variety of tasks - more than they could actually manage.
Russ preferred to be one of the "Heroic" Primarchs, freeing systems from Xenos and Tyrant rule and the Wolves could do it but the Big E made the Wolves to make a statement.
The Executioners moniker is hinted at being the job of eliminating deviant Space Marine chapters but more recently that's been retconned, the Wolves Executioner title comes from the Emperor sending the Wolves to make a bloody mess out of anyone who refused to join the Imperium, the kind of bloody mess that spread horror stories throughout the universe allowing the Emperor to offer systems the choice between negotiating their entry into the Imperium with Guilliman and the Ultrasmurfs or negotiate it with the Space Wolves.
Unlike Angron, Russ was also reasonable enough to offer a last chance at surrender before living up to the threatened horror stories.
Three jobs the Wolves accomplished successfully.
The Wolves were also called on to drag other Primarchs back to confront the Emperor, a job they failed at twice - once through changed orders and once was just a plain old failure.
We don't know if the Emperor ever called on the Wolves to disappear a legion but we know they whacked the Sons. We know Russ also prepared properly to deal with the Sons' psychic abilities.

Concessions.

Information - Russ's information network was tampered with enough times to justify a complete overhaul.
Superstition - Russ was quick to let his blind him.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Saber wrote:
Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

yes and no, a seige situation is hardly an ideal spot for tactics and stragety. there is some skill etc in it yes, in knowing when you hold a breach, when you pull back to anoither line, when you apper to fall back to trap your enemy etc, but for the most aprt a seige situation is sort of a long drawn out affair when you tst your fortifcations against your enmies siege prowess, (your enemy needs to know where to apply artillery and other siege craft to break your walls etc) and ultimatly there is a combined timer, where you have to balance your supplies in holding out, vs the encamped enemies supplies, and the possiabilty of reinforcement. the seige of terra was won because Dorn managed to hold off long eneugh for reinfrocements (in the form of the Ultramarines) to come, which forced Horus into a "hail mary pass" manuver that didn't work out so well. so the seige of terra certainly let the fists show their skill at seige defence, but I'm not sure it gave much insight, one way or another, into the general strategic/tatical accunum of the Imperial Fists.

The Siege of Terra was fought over most of central Asia, or perhaps an even wider stretch of territory. It was a larger theater of war than World War II in Europe.

I would also disagree with your characterization of sieges as lacking in opportunities to display tactics or strategy; Belisarius' defense of Rome, Wellington's defense of Portugal, Grant's Vicksburg campaign, etc - they're all brilliant displays of strategy and tactics. Of course most sieges are bloody messes, but so are most battles. I don't think a siege is any less tactical than a battle on average.

Recall the main points of Dorn's success during the Siege of Terra: he did not stick the White Scars behind the walls but instead let them roam around outside to harass the traitor's supply lines, and eventually drew off the entire Death Guard to counter them; Dorn was highly aggressive when it came to conducting the defense, constantly counter-attacking and keeping the traitor's off balance; Dorn tried to repel Horus' troops from the spaceports, in order to keep their heavy equipment from reaching the ground; and, at the end of the Siege, the inner walls had been breached but the central fortresses of the Palace were still intact which would have probably required months more fighting to take.

Obviously this is a fictional event involving fictional people, but Dorn's decision-making seems to have heavily influenced the course of the Siege. Plus, he designed and built the fortress they were defending, so he would bear the majority of the blame or credit for the outcome of the Siege even if he wasn't there to conduct the defenses.

BrianDavion wrote:

123ply wrote:
Is been said the Lion would have been the warmaster...
... but he's not very charismatic, which Horus was.

the ONLY Primarch I've heard musing the Lion should be Warmaster was the Lion. I don't thin k any of his brothers actually liked the Lion

The Lion certainly was a dick. He was a strategic genius though.

Guilliman was a logistical genius. It's not exactly the same, for those of you championing him.

 djones520 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

123ply wrote:
Is been said the Lion would have been the warmaster...
... but he's not very charismatic, which Horus was.

the ONLY Primarch I've heard musing the Lion should be Warmaster was the Lion. I don't thin k any of his brothers actually liked the Lion

The Lion certainly was a dick. He was a strategic genius though.

Guilliman was a logistical genius. It's not exactly the same, for those of you championing him.

Given two identical armies on neutral terrain, I'd bet on the Lion over any of the other Primarchs. When you ask who the best strategist/tactician is, that is what it comes down to.

The best Tactician I'd say was the Lion. A very capable general, matched by very few in general warfare (of course, the aspects of which the other Primarchs specialised in - Dorn and Perturabo with sieges, Alpharius with asymmetrical warfare - would all be superior in their dedicated field).

The best Strategist, in terms of theory and logic, on the other hand, I'd put to Guilliman, with Perturabo coming second.

BrianDavion wrote:

123ply wrote:
Is been said the Lion would have been the warmaster...
... but he's not very charismatic, which Horus was.

the ONLY Primarch I've heard musing the Lion should be Warmaster was the Lion. I don't thin k any of his brothers actually liked the Lion

Actually Guilliman claims that he viewed many of his brothers as his equal, but he claims that The Lion and Horus were the only ones head and shoulders above the rest of the primarchs. Russ also states that he believes that The Lion and Guilliman were the 2 most talented tacticians of his brothers (somewhat ironic since Russ had more tactical victories than Guilliman). At the rate the Lion was going during the crusade, had Horus not thrown his little party, The Lion probably would have eventually passed him in tactical victories in the crusade not long after Horus became warmaster. Here's my top five list for primarch tactiticians.

1. Horus or The Lion, Horus had more victories than The Lion, but if you factor in that he probably had a 35-50 year head start (The Lion was the 10th primarch found) and that the Lion had the 2nd most tactical victories by the end of the crusade it comes out as a draw.
2. Russ, who although never really demonstrating superb tactical prowess is credited with the 3rd most military victories.
3. Guilliman, he was behind his brothers in terms of military achievement at 4th place, but he also had the most compliance's.
4. Khan, again not much is known about him other than he's a brilliant general.

TotallyNotAFallenAngel wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

123ply wrote:
Is been said the Lion would have been the warmaster...
... but he's not very charismatic, which Horus was.

the ONLY Primarch I've heard musing the Lion should be Warmaster was the Lion. I don't thin k any of his brothers actually liked the Lion

Actually Guilliman claims that he viewed many of his brothers as his equal, but he claims that The Lion and Horus were the only ones head and shoulders above the rest of the primarchs. Russ also states that he believes that The Lion and Guilliman were the 2 most talented tacticians of his brothers (somewhat ironic since Russ had more tactical victories than Guilliman). At the rate the Lion was going during the crusade, had Horus not thrown his little party, The Lion probably would have eventually passed him in tactical victories in the crusade not long after Horus became warmaster. Here's my top five list for primarch tactiticians.

1. Horus or The Lion, Horus had more victories than The Lion, but if you factor in that he probably had a 35-50 year head start (The Lion was the 10th primarch found) and that the Lion had the 2nd most tactical victories by the end of the crusade it comes out as a draw.
2. Russ, who although never really demonstrating superb tactical prowess is credited with the 3rd most military victories.
3. Guilliman, he was behind his brothers in terms of military achievement at 4th place, but he also had the most compliance's.
4. Khan, again not much is known about him other than he's a brilliant general.

except Warmaster means jack gak about tatical skill. was the Lion a skilled battlefield commander? yes, no one is denying that. he's an incrediably good battlefield commander. but thats not what the Warmaster is needed for. the Warmaster can't just run around focusing on his own victories, in addition he needs to manage the entire crusade. well it seemed most of the legions each managed their own logistics chains etc. what the warmaster needed most was to be able to manage the primarchs. and the list of Primarchs capable of doing this basicly came down to "Horus or Sanguinis"

of the ones you mentioned well, the Lion was just HORRIABLE at dealing with people, he was a bit of an arrogant prick whom had a pretty big chip on his shoulder. it's clear to me the man neither understood his brothers, nor was capable of it Russ? Russ wasn't capable of that eaither, (and frankly wouldn't have wanted the post) he was also a very direct warrior, and would have almost certainly conflicted with his brothers whom took a more.... scientific, approuch to war.
Gulliman? Gullimanis the best of the list easily, being a meticulas planner and logistican, but as I said most of the Legions seemed to have their own logistics train, and Gulliman would have gotten along well with some of his brothers, but he would have had conflict with others, Gulliman was widely respected for his skills, but it definatly wasn't the universal love for Horus or Sanguinis. I suspect several Primarchs (Angron, Lorgar, Alpharius all come to mind) would not have accepted his authority.

BrianDavion wrote:

 SolidOakie wrote:
I'd say Alpharius because based on what I've read the Alpha Legion always accomplishes their goals.

given how complex Alpharus' schemes are, do they really? or does he build a giant "Strategic goldberg machine" that does something completely unexpected half the time followed bhy him steepling his fingers and going "... umm just as planned yes.,.."

sides, he's had stuff go sideways on him before, Preatorian of Dorn did NOT turn out the way he intended.

I haven't read that one yet but look forward to it! It's high time he got some egg on this face

 john27 wrote:

I'm thinking guilliman because that's what hes famous for,

That's incorrect. Guilliman was famous for organization.

Johnson was famous for strategy.

the Lion, was also Tactically smart enough to hold back until he could pick a winning team during the Heresy =D

Now that's what I call being a coward.. I mean Brilliant Strategy

GodDamUser wrote:
the Lion, was also Tactically smart enough to hold back until he could pick a winning team during the Heresy =D

Now that's what I call being a coward.. I mean Brilliant Strategy

Oh you did not just go there! Fortunately I have to agree with you on that one, as I simply can't see them in any other light

As for who I see, I would have to go with Guilliman on top while Perturabo comes in second.

 SolidOakie wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 SolidOakie wrote:
I'd say Alpharius because based on what I've read the Alpha Legion always accomplishes their goals.

given how complex Alpharus' schemes are, do they really? or does he build a giant "Strategic goldberg machine" that does something completely unexpected half the time followed bhy him steepling his fingers and going "... umm just as planned yes.,.."

sides, he's had stuff go sideways on him before, Preatorian of Dorn did NOT turn out the way he intended.

I haven't read that one yet but look forward to it! It's high time he got some egg on this face

He got more than just an egg to the face

The lion was the "warmaster" Equivalent for the imperium secundus, and both Guilliman and Sanguinius choose him for that role because they both knew he was the best fit. The problem with the lion is, he is too prideful. The smallest slight can set him off, and make him take stupid actions. His battle with Leman Russ, dumb, trying to kill Konrad Cruze in front of Guilliman and Sanguinius, dumb, banishing luther, dumb, killing Nemiel, also dumb. The common thread to all of those dumb actions is a slight to his pride.

One wonders how he would handle an actual defeat, but we may never find out because he hasn't been beaten when leading an army. The closest we've seen to him losing is him not wiping out the entire force that's facing him, or sparing the man who raised him like a father.

I'd say Lorgar just for the reason that when he conquered world, he would meticulously set to making sure it would stay loyal to the imperium (the best fire is one you dont have to stamp out every ten seconds). His legion then changed to using blitz and blowthrough tactics after Monarchia (doing so very efficiantly) . And during the Horus Heresy, he went head to head with Guilliman, and won.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Saber wrote:
Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

Rogal Dorn is responsible for the massacre as Istvaan V. He is a fething idiot.

I thought that was Horus?

According to Horus in Vengeful Spirit Ferrus Manus was supposed to be the best, hard to believe after his charging in an Istvaan V and the Iron Hands style of combat. Opinions seem to change like water though. I think Guilliman would be up there, changing the outcome of the assault on the 500 worlds from a total defeat to an ish victory was pretty competent.

The Lion, afaik, is described in the fluff the best strategist and tactician, though none of them were slouches at warfare. Guilliman is a glorified secretary in comparison.

 Novelist47 wrote:
Honestly Horus. There was a very good reason he was chosen Warmaster - he had a formidable military mind. The Luna Wolves were also superbly suited for what space marine should always be doing - shock and awe, aka. breakthrough tactics.

All in all, Horus was probably the best.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The Lion is considered the greatest tactician, and Ferrus Manus was considered the greatest at warfare.

... after Horus ofcourse!

No, he wasn't. Horus was the only one with the social skills (bar maybe Sanguinius) to be the only accepted first among equals. That's why he was chosen by the Emperor.

BrianDavion wrote:

 SolidOakie wrote:
I'd say Alpharius because based on what I've read the Alpha Legion always accomplishes their goals.

given how complex Alpharus' schemes are, do they really? or does he build a giant "Strategic goldberg machine" that does something completely unexpected half the time followed bhy him steepling his fingers and going "... umm just as planned yes.,.."

sides, he's had stuff go sideways on him before, Preatorian of Dorn did NOT turn out the way he intended.

That's the problem with the Alpha Legion. It's superficially portrayed as insidious and powerful, but they get their asses whooped in almost every single novel bar the one where they take over an AdMech ship. I mean sure, they spend most of the time just fighting themselves, but Scars, Wolf King, Praetor of Dorn etc. all have them being in a position of superiority over some other Legion before losing during some Bond-esque bad guy speech. Their nadir was honestly them being beaten at asymmetric warfare by Dorn. Queue the slow clap.

There is nothing in the fluff to suggest Alpharius was better than any other primarch at warfare; two brains aren't always better than one it would seem.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Saber wrote:
Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

Rogal Dorn is responsible for the massacre as Istvaan V. He is a fething idiot.

I thought that was Horus?

According to Horus in Vengeful Spirit Ferrus Manus was supposed to be the best, hard to believe after his charging in an Istvaan V and the Iron Hands style of combat. Opinions seem to change like water though. I think Guilliman would be up there, changing the outcome of the assault on the 500 worlds from a total defeat to an ish victory was pretty competent.

Extermination suggests it was Alpharius' plan, actually. Sending the supposed Loyalist and Loyalist Legions there was Dorn's idea, iirc.

I could belvie istavaan V being an Alpharius plan.

 ChazSexington wrote:


Extermination suggests it was Alpharius' plan, actually. Sending the supposed Loyalist and Loyalist Legions there was Dorn's idea, iirc.

It's been hinted at yes, mentions it in the IA article as well, but it was Horus that decided something had to be done about the loyalist legions, so Horus was responsible. And it was Dorn's idea true , but I'm not sure what other options there were to Dorn to put the rebellion down and guarantee a victory short of blowing up the entire planet. It wasn't the best idea, but that's why i'm not nominating Dorn as best strategist/tactician

 Wyzilla wrote:
We have never seen Horus demonstrate any tactical prowess that couldn't be replicated by a toddler.

This is what happens when you have fluff written about tactics and strategists by people who are not themselves experienced in either.

Primarch's abilities and strengths seem to fluctuate depending on the needs of the story. If the story requires Primarch X to pull off some brilliant tactic then they will. If another story requires Primarch Y to fail stupidly, they will do that too.

In a sense this is a reflection of the fact that the Horus Heresy series is being written by a dozen different authors, each with their own take on the fluff. Add to that many of the opinions expressed in the novels are from characters and hence are wholly subjective.

Horus's deathbed confession was that Sanguinius should have been Warmaster. Gulliman viewed Dorn, Sanguinius, Leman Russ, and Ferrus Manus as the greatest of his brothers (although I cannot remember if that was before or after Horus rebelled). Guilliman supposedly supported Horus's appointment as Warmaster (as did Sanguinius). According to the old fluff, the tally of victories for the legions was:

1 Lunar Wolves
2 Dark Angels
3 Space Wolves

However, the Dark Angels had a head-start as the first legion whilst Lunar Wolves benefited from being the first legion to be reunited with their Primarch. I believe Leman Russ was also an early foundling which helps explain the Space Wolves position near the top.

The other thing to remember is that strategy is different from tactics. Strategy represents the overall approach to a battle whilst tactics are the actual means to gain an objective.



In the case of Angron, don't write him off so quickly. He had virtually no interest in strategy but that did not make him a bad tactician. His favoured tactic was to run up to the target and hit it until it died. Whilst not exactly subtle, it was remarkably successful in its own blood-thirsty way.

Wasn't there a point in one of the HH books where Russ was playing chess with someone and was discussing how he's sized up the other primarchs? Was it from Vengeful Spirit? Anyway, he said that out of all of them, Horus was the only one he wasn't sure he could beat.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:


Extermination suggests it was Alpharius' plan, actually. Sending the supposed Loyalist and Loyalist Legions there was Dorn's idea, iirc.

It's been hinted at yes, mentions it in the IA article as well, but it was Horus that decided something had to be done about the loyalist legions, so Horus was responsible. And it was Dorn's idea true , but I'm not sure what other options there were to Dorn to put the rebellion down and guarantee a victory short of blowing up the entire planet. It wasn't the best idea, but that's why i'm not nominating Dorn as best strategist/tactician

It also highlights why Dorn would've made a terrible Warmaster. He didn't know his brothers' measure.

 Quarterdime wrote:
Wasn't there a point in one of the HH books where Russ was playing chess with someone and was discussing how he's sized up the other primarchs? Was it from Vengeful Spirit? Anyway, he said that out of all of them, Horus was the only one he wasn't sure he could beat.

Well, the Khan and Mortarion also had a pissing contest on Armageddon/Ullanor (Scars, I think), where both suggested they were the best in single combat. It doesn't mean either were the best in single combat, they just happened to think they were. I can think myself tactically superior to Alexander the Great, but it doesn't mean I am superior to Big Al.

 ChazSexington wrote:


It also highlights why Dorn would've made a terrible Warmaster. He didn't know his brothers' measure.

It is Dorn's flaw, that he is too straight up and narrow. But it's a tricky one, would any other Primarch had believed it could happen though. How would you deal with the greatest of your brothers falling and taking 3 others (that you knew of) at the same time. I can see the logic behind Dorns way of thinking, it probably was the only guaranteed way to resolve the problem, stopping force by even bigger force. But how could you trust anyone? Always had a big issue with the Night Lords being involved, but needs must I guess, and after Ferrus and Fulgrim fall out where Fulgrim openly admits that Lorgar is with them as well, why include the Word Bearers, even with a contingency still above Terra.

That's 2 Legions who could have been discounted. Dorn never liked the way the Alphas fought so should have supposed something might be awry with them and he didn't get on with Perturabo So he would've been down to the 3 loyalist Legions. I think it would have been prudent to just send them. But then Horus had already been in cahoots with the other 4 so who's to say that they wouldn't have been on Istvaan anyway. But then I guess the Loyalists would have knwon something was wrong.

Lots of what if and buts.

 ChazSexington wrote:
Well, the Khan and Mortarion also had a pissing contest on Armageddon/Ullanor (Scars, I think), where both suggested they were the best in single combat. It doesn't mean either were the best in single combat, they just happened to think they were. I can think myself tactically superior to Alexander the Great, but it doesn't mean I am superior to Big Al.

Was in Scars but was on Prospero, not Ullanor

In Raven's Flight Corax has a moment about how he can't beat Angron. but then in Deliverance Lost he seems to change his mind. In Angel Exterminatus Perturabo thinks that Fulgrim is the finest Swordsman but in Scars, Sanguinius says that the Khan is. All different opinions and perspectives. I don't think that without Primarch Top Trump cards you could ever put it down who is the best at what

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:


It also highlights why Dorn would've made a terrible Warmaster. He didn't know his brothers' measure.

It is Dorn's flaw, that he is too straight up and narrow. But it's a tricky one, would any other Primarch had believed it could happen though. How would you deal with the greatest of your brothers falling and taking 3 others (that you knew of) at the same time. I can see the logic behind Dorns way of thinking, it probably was the only guaranteed way to resolve the problem, stopping force by even bigger force. But how could you trust anyone? Always had a big issue with the Night Lords being involved, but needs must I guess, and after Ferrus and Fulgrim fall out where Fulgrim openly admits that Lorgar is with them as well, why include the Word Bearers, even with a contingency still above Terra.

That's 2 Legions who could have been discounted. Dorn never liked the way the Alphas fought so should have supposed something might be awry with them and he didn't get on with Perturabo So he would've been down to the 3 loyalist Legions. I think it would have been prudent to just send them. But then Horus had already been in cahoots with the other 4 so who's to say that they wouldn't have been on Istvaan anyway. But then I guess the Loyalists would have knwon something was wrong.

Lots of what if and buts.

I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

Guilliman would probably be fretting over how Horus was ruining paperclip logistics in the IoM, Sanguinius would be emotional, Vulkan would hug a human, Corax would blame the prison system on Cthonia, and the rest would do what Dorn did.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:
Well, the Khan and Mortarion also had a pissing contest on Armageddon/Ullanor (Scars, I think), where both suggested they were the best in single combat. It doesn't mean either were the best in single combat, they just happened to think they were. I can think myself tactically superior to Alexander the Great, but it doesn't mean I am superior to Big Al.

Was in Scars but was on Prospero, not Ullanor

In Raven's Flight Corax has a moment about how he can't beat Angron. but then in Deliverance Lost he seems to change his mind. In Angel Exterminatus Perturabo thinks that Fulgrim is the finest Swordsman but in Scars, Sanguinius says that the Khan is. All different opinions and perspectives. I don't think that without Primarch Top Trump cards you could ever put it down who is the best at what

I'm referring to the discussion with Magnus and Sanguinius present (may have been others too), not the actual fight on Prospero

But aye, totally agree. It all depends on whose viewpoint we're seeing things from. As it's all made up, it's a bit like debating ninjas vs vikings.

 Karhedron wrote:
Gulliman viewed Dorn, Sanguinius, Leman Russ, and Ferrus Manus as the greatest of his brothers (although I cannot remember if that was before or after Horus rebelled).

...

In the case of Angron, don't write him off so quickly. He had virtually no interest in strategy but that did not make him a bad tactician. His favoured tactic was to run up to the target and hit it until it died. Whilst not exactly subtle, it was remarkably successful in its own blood-thirsty way.

Is that the Dauntless Few? I don't think they were supposed to be the greatest of the brothers just that they were the ones he found most dependable. I imagine they simply coordinated well in their strategies and were amenable to suggestions.

As for Angron, pit him and his Legion against equal opposing forces and he'd lose pre-Heresy. Post-Heresy the completely breakdown of discipline in Legions like the Emperors Children could narrow the gap.

ChazSexington wrote:I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

I don't see why people find it so ridiculous that the Lion would give siege weapons to a Primarch who had shown nothing but ironclad loyalty and whose speciality was in the siege warfare. It was an entirely reasonable decision.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Novelist47 wrote:
Honestly Horus. There was a very good reason he was chosen Warmaster - he had a formidable military mind. The Luna Wolves were also superbly suited for what space marine should always be doing - shock and awe, aka. breakthrough tactics.

All in all, Horus was probably the best.

We have never seen Horus demonstrate any tactical prowess that couldn't be replicated by a toddler.

That goes for every single military leader in all of 40k to be honest.

 ChazSexington wrote:

I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

This is what I thought, he seemed to be more interested in setting himself up as Warmaster rather than being careful. Selfish gain over the needs of the Imperium. The problem as well is that the Heresy series has been a mish mash of ideas and another author possibly wouldn't have gone with this. Praetorian of Dorn makes Dorn out to be very capable which I believe he is, but then you have Istvaan and the Iron Cage and you have to wonder.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

I don't see why people find it so ridiculous that the Lion would give siege weapons to a Primarch who had shown nothing but ironclad loyalty and whose speciality was in the siege warfare. It was an entirely reasonable decision.

But so had the Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion. Horus had shown nothing but Loyalty to the Imperium. I think the problem is that in a time of uncertainty you shouldn't be trusting anyone with your WMDs.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

But so had the Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion. Horus had shown nothing but Loyalty to the Imperium. I think the problem is that in a time of uncertainty you shouldn't be trusting anyone with your WMDs.

None of three had been revealed as traitors yet. As far as anybody knew the Traitors had declared themselves openly. Trusting nobody would cripple you too and potentially cast aspersions on your own loyalties.

It would be interesting to see Macharius with his forces at full strength, in comparison to the primarchs.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

This is what I thought, he seemed to be more interested in setting himself up as Warmaster rather than being careful. Selfish gain over the needs of the Imperium. The problem as well is that the Heresy series has been a mish mash of ideas and another author possibly wouldn't have gone with this. Praetorian of Dorn makes Dorn out to be very capable which I believe he is, but then you have Istvaan and the Iron Cage and you have to wonder.

In fairness re the Iron Cage, that's not a good one to look at regarding Dorn given that every source has basicly noted Dorn was basicly mad with grief at the time. Keep in mind Dorn was the one who found the emperor and Sanguinis and took them from the ship. he proably had a pretty strong case of survivor's guilt, if not outright PTSD. it's possiable a part of Dorn saw the trap and just didn't care

BrianDavion wrote:

In fairness re the Iron Cage, that's not a good one to look at regarding Dorn given that every source has basicly noted Dorn was basicly mad with grief at the time. Keep in mind Dorn was the one who found the emperor and Sanguinis and took them from the ship. he proably had a pretty strong case of survivor's guilt, if not outright PTSD. it's possiable a part of Dorn saw the trap and just didn't care

While you are correct we don't really have a decent comparison point. We haven't seen his capabilities at "normal". Though he was apparently capable of unravelling Alpharius' attack plan so he's obviously intelligent.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

In fairness re the Iron Cage, that's not a good one to look at regarding Dorn given that every source has basicly noted Dorn was basicly mad with grief at the time. Keep in mind Dorn was the one who found the emperor and Sanguinis and took them from the ship. he proably had a pretty strong case of survivor's guilt, if not outright PTSD. it's possiable a part of Dorn saw the trap and just didn't care

While you are correct we don't really have a decent comparison point. We haven't seen his capabilities at "normal". Though he was apparently capable of unravelling Alpharius' attack plan so he's obviously intelligent.

honestly I hope Dorn gets a turn with the "The Primarchs" novel series sooner rather then later. as all we've seen from him in the HH books has basicly been him being all "I'm abuilding ma fort!"

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

ChazSexington wrote:I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

I don't see why people find it so ridiculous that the Lion would give siege weapons to a Primarch who had shown nothing but ironclad loyalty and whose speciality was in the siege warfare. It was an entirely reasonable decision.

Oh, I don't think it's ridiculous. It was more along the lines that he didn't spot the trap.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

This is what I thought, he seemed to be more interested in setting himself up as Warmaster rather than being careful. Selfish gain over the needs of the Imperium. The problem as well is that the Heresy series has been a mish mash of ideas and another author possibly wouldn't have gone with this. Praetorian of Dorn makes Dorn out to be very capable which I believe he is, but then you have Istvaan and the Iron Cage and you have to wonder.

Don't forget Phall, where ironically Dorn's orders saves Perturabo and his Iron Warriors from being destroyed by the Imperial Fists under Pollux.

Don't get me wrong btw, I'm not unhappy Alpharius died; the Hydra symbology is there for a reason. The problem is how it was handled, and I would very much have preferred some ambiguity to as to his actual fate.

I think we both agree on the Lion - I've got pretty much the exact same take.

The Horus Heresy really suffers from the variety of authors and seeming lack of consistency due to this. If they'd say, given all Word Bearer and Night Lords tales to ADB, all DA to Mike Lee etc we'd have some consistency with the direction and characters.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

In fairness re the Iron Cage, that's not a good one to look at regarding Dorn given that every source has basicly noted Dorn was basicly mad with grief at the time. Keep in mind Dorn was the one who found the emperor and Sanguinis and took them from the ship. he proably had a pretty strong case of survivor's guilt, if not outright PTSD. it's possiable a part of Dorn saw the trap and just didn't care

While you are correct we don't really have a decent comparison point. We haven't seen his capabilities at "normal". Though he was apparently capable of unravelling Alpharius' attack plan so he's obviously intelligent.

Almost everyone I know that's read Praetorian hates it because it reads like terrible Imperial Fists fanfiction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Saber wrote:
Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

Rogal Dorn is responsible for the massacre as Istvaan V. He is a fething idiot.

I thought that was Horus?

According to Horus in Vengeful Spirit Ferrus Manus was supposed to be the best, hard to believe after his charging in an Istvaan V and the Iron Hands style of combat. Opinions seem to change like water though. I think Guilliman would be up there, changing the outcome of the assault on the 500 worlds from a total defeat to an ish victory was pretty competent.

That's maybe an out-of-character moment for Ferrus (given the events going on it's not too hard to understand). He's usually near the top in these sorts of list discussions, so he has consistency going for him.

Wen it comes to strategy and the Primarchs (or other 40k characters) I figured we were supposed to exercise significant amounts of suspension of disbelief and just go with things being the way the authors say they are because they say so. Kind of like how we accept that Geordi La Forge is a brilliant engineer and not some mystic quack who shouts nonsense words and then hits random buttons on a console. Or how we go along with Worf being really good at hand-to-hand, despite getting constantly knocked on his butt.

 ChazSexington wrote:

Oh, I don't think it's ridiculous. It was more along the lines that he didn't spot the trap.

Fair point. It's a very different situation with Istvaan. He could have just assumed that Horus was being arrogant or thinking he could persuade the others or the circumstances could have made him more suspicious.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Almost everyone I know that's read Praetorian hates it because it reads like terrible Imperial Fists fanfiction.

Sadly it still applies in these sorts of discussions.

That's maybe an out-of-character moment for Ferrus (given the events going on it's not too hard to understand). He's usually near the top in these sorts of list discussions, so he has consistency going for him.

I think he was supposed to have been raging at the betrayal of such a close brother but it still leads to being told and not shown that he's competent. Same with Dorn. We're told that they're really gifted and in Dorn's case calm and collected but we don't really see anything demonstrating it so it feels like it's not really the case. Especially since it's fallible in-universe sources saying it.

 Grimgold wrote:
The lion was the "warmaster" Equivalent for the imperium secundus, and both Guilliman and Sanguinius choose him for that role because they both knew he was the best fit. The problem with the lion is, he is too prideful. The smallest slight can set him off, and make him take stupid actions. His battle with Leman Russ, dumb, trying to kill Konrad Cruze in front of Guilliman and Sanguinius, dumb, banishing luther, dumb, killing Nemiel, also dumb. The common thread to all of those dumb actions is a slight to his pride.

One wonders how he would handle an actual defeat, but we may never find out because he hasn't been beaten when leading an army. The closest we've seen to him losing is him not wiping out the entire force that's facing him, or sparing the man who raised him like a father.

You realize Russ was totally responsible for that fight, right? In Russ's own words. Jonson precipitated it because he was trying to save the lives of his own Legionaries, because Russ left the battlefield, causing the fight to drag out. When Russ returned, he attacked the Lion because he felt Jonson broke his word.

There is an entire novel, "told" by Leman Russ, that covers that event now.

 djones520 wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
The lion was the "warmaster" Equivalent for the imperium secundus, and both Guilliman and Sanguinius choose him for that role because they both knew he was the best fit. The problem with the lion is, he is too prideful. The smallest slight can set him off, and make him take stupid actions. His battle with Leman Russ, dumb, trying to kill Konrad Cruze in front of Guilliman and Sanguinius, dumb, banishing luther, dumb, killing Nemiel, also dumb. The common thread to all of those dumb actions is a slight to his pride.

One wonders how he would handle an actual defeat, but we may never find out because he hasn't been beaten when leading an army. The closest we've seen to him losing is him not wiping out the entire force that's facing him, or sparing the man who raised him like a father.

You realize Russ was totally responsible for that fight, right? In Russ's own words. Jonson precipitated it because he was trying to save the lives of his own Legionaries, because Russ left the battlefield, causing the fight to drag out. When Russ returned, he attacked the Lion because he felt Jonson broke his word.

There is an entire novel, "told" by Leman Russ, that covers that event now.

'tis true.
However.
In that same book Russ was the first one to see the stupidity of his actions, the Lion never saw his own idiocy at all and even took a sword to Russ years and a whole Heresy later to "release the bad blood between them" and even perceptive of that Russ just took it.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

Oh, I don't think it's ridiculous. It was more along the lines that he didn't spot the trap.

Fair point. It's a very different situation with Istvaan. He could have just assumed that Horus was being arrogant or thinking he could persuade the others or the circumstances could have made him more suspicious.

Aye, but as Pilau suggested, he may have been blinded by the chance of being made Warmaster and wishful thinking. It fits with his ambition. However, if any of the Loyal Primarchs could've spotted it, it would've been Lion El'Johnson. If Alpharius hadn't participated in the rebellion (see how I didn't call him a Traitor?), he may have spotted it.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

But so had the Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion. Horus had shown nothing but Loyalty to the Imperium. I think the problem is that in a time of uncertainty you shouldn't be trusting anyone with your WMDs.

None of three had been revealed as traitors yet. As far as anybody knew the Traitors had declared themselves openly. Trusting nobody would cripple you too and potentially cast aspersions on your own loyalties.

Exactly. Dorn's plan might have sucked in hindsight. But what options did he have really. Sending in 3 Legions to battle 3 Legions could have ended up being a stalemate that dragged on and on at the cost of the Legions themselves. How was Dorn to know that 4 of the seven had sided with Horus.

 ChazSexington wrote:

The Horus Heresy really suffers from the variety of authors and seeming lack of consistency due to this. If they'd say, given all Word Bearer and Night Lords tales to ADB, all DA to Mike Lee etc we'd have some consistency with the direction and characters.

Agreed, or just let Chris Wraight write the whole thing

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Almost everyone I know that's read Praetorian hates it because it reads like terrible Imperial Fists fanfiction.

I enjoyed the book and thought it was written well, it does imho redeem the Alphas somewhat and handles them pretty well. It's more of a return to Legion showing them fight at their intended capacity. They lose again true, but I don't think the book should have been allowed such a free reign of what the Alphas had done. On another planet somewhere things might have been different. Imagine if they would have won and how the story might have had to have been changed.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's maybe an out-of-character moment for Ferrus (given the events going on it's not too hard to understand). He's usually near the top in these sorts of list discussions, so he has consistency going for him.

I agree, Primarchs aren't infallible and they are more human then they let on. Same situation for Dorn and the Iron Cage. But like Sone RandomEvilGuy says, is that a competent commander that lets his emotions get the better of him. From that angle perhaps the Lion is the best.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

Agreed, or just let Chris Wraight write the whole thing

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Almost everyone I know that's read Praetorian hates it because it reads like terrible Imperial Fists fanfiction.

I enjoyed the book and thought it was written well, it does imho redeem the Alphas somewhat and handles them pretty well. It's more of a return to Legion showing them fight at their intended capacity. They lose again true, but I don't think the book should have been allowed such a free reign of what the Alphas had done. On another planet somewhere things might have been different. Imagine if they would have won and how the story might have had to have been changed.

The Alpha Legion accomplished nothing bar losing their fleet, one Primarch, and blowing up a few statues. Their capacity for asymmetric/nonconventional warfare was shown to be poorer than the scrambled, ad hoc defences of the Imperial Fists. Dorn had them figured out from the get go. I guess it's on par with Legion, as far as the Alpha Legion's competency goes, where they almost lost both Primarchs to a feudal world's suicide bomb and decided to betray the Emperor after two pages of adjective-filled dialogue.

I enjoyed reading Praetor of Dorn more than Legion though, purely from a technical perspective. Legion's pacing was possibly the worst I've ever read.

I don't have a problem with the Alpha Legion losing, as long as it's done in a way consistent with how they're portrayed outside of the novels. At this point, their ability for subterfuge is below that of a clown villain hanging out in an abandoned amusement park, waiting for Scooby Doo.

Agreed - that books was really disappointing to read.

And outright killing Alpharius?

What a miserable way to ruin one of the cooler 'mysteries' of 40K.

Oh well!

I guess that's the way it goes when you get a book written by a big fan of the Fists - gotta up Dorn's cred somehow...

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
The lion was the "warmaster" Equivalent for the imperium secundus, and both Guilliman and Sanguinius choose him for that role because they both knew he was the best fit. The problem with the lion is, he is too prideful. The smallest slight can set him off, and make him take stupid actions. His battle with Leman Russ, dumb, trying to kill Konrad Cruze in front of Guilliman and Sanguinius, dumb, banishing luther, dumb, killing Nemiel, also dumb. The common thread to all of those dumb actions is a slight to his pride.

One wonders how he would handle an actual defeat, but we may never find out because he hasn't been beaten when leading an army. The closest we've seen to him losing is him not wiping out the entire force that's facing him, or sparing the man who raised him like a father.

You realize Russ was totally responsible for that fight, right? In Russ's own words. Jonson precipitated it because he was trying to save the lives of his own Legionaries, because Russ left the battlefield, causing the fight to drag out. When Russ returned, he attacked the Lion because he felt Jonson broke his word.

There is an entire novel, "told" by Leman Russ, that covers that event now.

'tis true.
However.
In that same book Russ was the first one to see the stupidity of his actions, the Lion never saw his own idiocy at all and even took a sword to Russ years and a whole Heresy later to "release the bad blood between them" and even perceptive of that Russ just took it.

Yeah, in all fairness though the lion was the adult in the room, he should have stopped the fight with Russ, instead as soon as the first blow was struck he lost his cool. When russ backed off and laughed, that should have been the end of it, but no the lion had have the last blow.

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
The lion was the "warmaster" Equivalent for the imperium secundus, and both Guilliman and Sanguinius choose him for that role because they both knew he was the best fit. The problem with the lion is, he is too prideful. The smallest slight can set him off, and make him take stupid actions. His battle with Leman Russ, dumb, trying to kill Konrad Cruze in front of Guilliman and Sanguinius, dumb, banishing luther, dumb, killing Nemiel, also dumb. The common thread to all of those dumb actions is a slight to his pride.

One wonders how he would handle an actual defeat, but we may never find out because he hasn't been beaten when leading an army. The closest we've seen to him losing is him not wiping out the entire force that's facing him, or sparing the man who raised him like a father.

You realize Russ was totally responsible for that fight, right? In Russ's own words. Jonson precipitated it because he was trying to save the lives of his own Legionaries, because Russ left the battlefield, causing the fight to drag out. When Russ returned, he attacked the Lion because he felt Jonson broke his word.

There is an entire novel, "told" by Leman Russ, that covers that event now.

'tis true.
However.
In that same book Russ was the first one to see the stupidity of his actions, the Lion never saw his own idiocy at all and even took a sword to Russ years and a whole Heresy later to "release the bad blood between them" and even perceptive of that Russ just took it.

Yeah, in all fairness though the lion was the adult in the room, he should have stopped the fight with Russ, instead as soon as the first blow was struck he lost his cool. When russ backed off and laughed, that should have been the end of it, but no the lion had have the last blow.

the novel that depicts the whole thing makes it even worse. as apparently in the aftermath of the bloody seige of terra, The Lion was still pissy about it and demanded the fight be finished. Russ apparently wasn't intreasted (it seemed so ya know PETTY in the aftermath of the Heresy) but apparently the Lion needed to give Russ a good stabbing to be sastified.

 Grimgold wrote:

Yeah, in all fairness though the lion was the adult in the room, he should have stopped the fight with Russ, instead as soon as the first blow was struck he lost his cool. When russ backed off and laughed, that should have been the end of it, but no the lion had have the last blow.

I just had to quote this out of amusement.

When it comes to his brothers Johnson has been the adult in the room a grand total of once.
Ironically Russ was being the adult in the room at the same time which means Russ has been the adult in the room twice.

When Horus was named Warmaster the Wolf and the Lion were two of the five top options and along with Girlyman and Sangy the most mature acceptance of missing out. Russ never believed himself the greatest brother and didn't care for extra responsibility. The Lion had a good long brood about it but did find the time to track down Horus and shake his hand.

BrianDavion wrote:

the novel that depicts the whole thing makes it even worse. as apparently in the aftermath of the bloody seige of terra, The Lion was still pissy about it and demanded the fight be finished. Russ apparently wasn't intreasted (it seemed so ya know PETTY in the aftermath of the Heresy) but apparently the Lion needed to give Russ a good stabbing to be sastified.

Is the Lion still angry about Dulan or angry that if Russ hadn't had stopped to assist Imperial Worlds on their way back to Terra they might have been able to help the Emperor? In WD 233 it gives a pretty good account of the relationship between Russ and the Lion. Some of it has been changed now and not written yet but the Angels and the Wolves arrive on Terra and do some mopping up but the don't realise that the Emperor has been wounded. After the Emperor is interred on the Golden Throne The Lion has a go at Russ and challenges him. Russ, too distraught, simply bares his chest and the Lion stabs him, pulling the blade at the last minute realising his folly. Then they become best buds.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

the novel that depicts the whole thing makes it even worse. as apparently in the aftermath of the bloody seige of terra, The Lion was still pissy about it and demanded the fight be finished. Russ apparently wasn't intreasted (it seemed so ya know PETTY in the aftermath of the Heresy) but apparently the Lion needed to give Russ a good stabbing to be sastified.

Is the Lion still angry about Dulan or angry that if Russ hadn't had stopped to assist Imperial Worlds on their way back to Terra they might have been able to help the Emperor? In WD 233 it gives a pretty good account of the relationship between Russ and the Lion. Some of it has been changed now and not written yet but the Angels and the Wolves arrive on Terra and do some mopping up but the don't realise that the Emperor has been wounded. After the Emperor is interred on the Golden Throne The Lion has a go at Russ and challenges him. Russ, too distraught, simply bares his chest and the Lion stabs him, pulling the blade at the last minute realising his folly. Then they become best buds.

the whole events of the duel laid heavily over them. in the novel after seeing the emperor Interred Russ flees the scene, deep into the Imperial palace before passing out (he apparent;y hadn't slept the entiore way to Terra) when he wakes up (after having a vision where he chats with the emperor) he finds the Lion standing over him it turns out that they're underneath a mural dedicated to the compliance of the world they fought their duel on. that brings it back, I mean it's clear there is more there, but the Lion also wants to "finish the duel that had begun so long ago" although from something the Lion says I almost wonder if he had been hoping Russ would kill him so he didn't have to ebar the guilt.

The lion, thats been stated a bunch of times because its kinda his shtick

Overall it's definitely Guilliman. That said Perturabo is better in siege assault, Dorn better in defense, etc. That said, all the primarchs were likely brilliant generals, but Guilliman, Dorn, Perturabo, Alpharius, and Horus stand well above the others in my opinion. Top three are probably Guilliman > Horus > Perturabo.

 ripjaw wrote:
Overall it's definitely Guilliman. That said Perturabo is better in siege assault, Dorn better in defense, etc. That said, all the primarchs were likely brilliant generals, but Guilliman, Dorn, Perturabo, Alpharius, and Horus stand well above the others in my opinion. Top three are probably Guilliman > Horus > Perturabo.

See I would disagree, girlyman was the best diplomat and leader aside from Horus. But for battlefield twchtition, that goes to lion seeing as he has always been regarded and portrayed and the best tactition.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 djones520 wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
The lion was the "warmaster" Equivalent for the imperium secundus, and both Guilliman and Sanguinius choose him for that role because they both knew he was the best fit. The problem with the lion is, he is too prideful. The smallest slight can set him off, and make him take stupid actions. His battle with Leman Russ, dumb, trying to kill Konrad Cruze in front of Guilliman and Sanguinius, dumb, banishing luther, dumb, killing Nemiel, also dumb. The common thread to all of those dumb actions is a slight to his pride.

One wonders how he would handle an actual defeat, but we may never find out because he hasn't been beaten when leading an army. The closest we've seen to him losing is him not wiping out the entire force that's facing him, or sparing the man who raised him like a father.

You realize Russ was totally responsible for that fight, right? In Russ's own words. Jonson precipitated it because he was trying to save the lives of his own Legionaries, because Russ left the battlefield, causing the fight to drag out. When Russ returned, he attacked the Lion because he felt Jonson broke his word.

There is an entire novel, "told" by Leman Russ, that covers that event now.

'tis true.
However.
In that same book Russ was the first one to see the stupidity of his actions, the Lion never saw his own idiocy at all and even took a sword to Russ years and a whole Heresy later to "release the bad blood between them" and even perceptive of that Russ just took it.

Yeah, in all fairness though the lion was the adult in the room, he should have stopped the fight with Russ, instead as soon as the first blow was struck he lost his cool. When russ backed off and laughed, that should have been the end of it, but no the lion had have the last blow.

the novel that depicts the whole thing makes it even worse. as apparently in the aftermath of the bloody seige of terra, The Lion was still pissy about it and demanded the fight be finished. Russ apparently wasn't intreasted (it seemed so ya know PETTY in the aftermath of the Heresy) but apparently the Lion needed to give Russ a good stabbing to be sastified.

"He knew he wouldn't kill me,' Russ said, grimly amused. 'He told me that afterwards. He turned the blade aside, right at the last moment. It still took a week to heal. That damned sword.'

He chuckled Mornfully. 'It needed to be done, though. It cured the bad blood between us. Drained it out. We could speak again, after that.'

...

'He could keep a secret. He saw our imperfection, and he suffered it to remain, and that was the heart of his nobility. In the end, then, he truly was better then us. The archetype of Legions, the First of all..."

Leman Russ' opinion seems to differ from yours.

Leman Russ' opinion seems to differ from yours.

not really, as I said the Lion apparently needed to give Russ a good stabbing.


BTW you'll notice his comment on "that damned sword" there seems to be some evidance stacking up that there is something special about the Lion Sword

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 ripjaw wrote:
Overall it's definitely Guilliman. That said Perturabo is better in siege assault, Dorn better in defense, etc. That said, all the primarchs were likely brilliant generals, but Guilliman, Dorn, Perturabo, Alpharius, and Horus stand well above the others in my opinion. Top three are probably Guilliman > Horus > Perturabo.

See I would disagree, girlyman was the best diplomat and leader aside from Horus. But for battlefield twchtition, that goes to lion seeing as he has always been regarded and portrayed and the best tactition.

Guilliman was described as the best logistician and organiser of the lot, not diplomat or leader. He was not good at diplomacy; even before the Heresy he'd alienated Alpharius, Lorgar, Angron, Perturabo, and the Lion, and then came up with the codex to piss of more Loyalist ones. He was close with Russ, Ferrus, Dorn, and as almost everyone, Vulkan, Sanguinius, and Horus.

Testimonies:

Lion El'Johnson - "Insult me again, brother, and theoretically I will punch you in your practical face"
Angron - "What would you know of struggle, Perfect Son? When have you fought against the mutilation of your mind? When have you had to do anything more than tally compliances and polish your armour?" [...] "The people of your world named you Great One. The people of mine called me Slave. Which one of us landed on a paradise of civilization to be raised by a foster father, Roboute? Which one of us was given armies to lead after training in the halls of the Macraggian high-riders? Which one of us inherited a strong, cultured kingdom? And which one of us had to rise up against a kingdom with nothing but a horde of starving slaves? Which one of us was a child enslaved on a world of monsters, with his brain cut up by carving knives? Listen to your blue-clad wretches yelling of courage and honour, courage and honour, courage and honour. Do you even know the meaning of those words? Courage is fighting the kingdom which enslaves you, no matter that their armies outnumber yours by ten-thousand to one. You know nothing of courage. Honour is resisting a tyrant when all others suckle and grow fat on the hypocrisy he feeds them. You know nothing of honour."

I can probably look up where Guilliman forces him and the Word Bearers to kneel to the Ultramarines in the ashes of Monarchia too, and just look up the Tesstra Compliance for Alpharius.

The Emperor forced them to kneel. Not Guilliman.

 djones520 wrote:
The Emperor forced them to kneel. Not Guilliman.

now now don't let facts get in the way of bashing Gulliman his other arguements are similarly based on... a creative interpretation of the facts

In the unanimous judgment of the Primarchs themselves. the answer is Horus.

 Manchu wrote:
In the unanimous judgment of the Primarchs themselves. the answer is Horus.

Majority juedgement, definitely not unanimous. The Lion at least disagreed as did Horus himself (who felt it should have been Sanguinius).

 ChazSexington wrote:

Guilliman was described as the best logistician and organiser of the lot, not diplomat or leader. He was not good at diplomacy; even before the Heresy he'd alienated Alpharius, Lorgar, Angron, Perturabo, and the Lion, and then came up with the codex to piss of more Loyalist ones.

It fairness the stuff with Lorgar wasn't his fault and Angron was bitter and hated almost everyone. I don't recall Guilliman alienating Perturabo though. Breaking up the Legions was ordered by the High Lords of Terra so it's unfair to blame Guilliman for that.

As fro the Tesstra Compliance, Alpharius by his own admission deliberately dragged out a compliance so he could show off, resulting in far greater casualties among the populace they were trying to assimilate into the Imperium. Guilliman might not have been diplomatic about it but Alpharius' methods were definitely wanting.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

Guilliman was described as the best logistician and organiser of the lot, not diplomat or leader. He was not good at diplomacy; even before the Heresy he'd alienated Alpharius, Lorgar, Angron, Perturabo, and the Lion, and then came up with the codex to piss of more Loyalist ones.

It fairness the stuff with Lorgar wasn't his fault and Angron was bitter and hated almost everyone. I don't recall Guilliman alienating Perturabo though. Breaking up the Legions was ordered by the High Lords of Terra so it's unfair to blame Guilliman for that.

As fro the Tesstra Compliance, Alpharius by his own admission deliberately dragged out a compliance so he could show off, resulting in far greater casualties among the populace they were trying to assimilate into the Imperium. Guilliman might not have been diplomatic about it but Alpharius' methods were definitely wanting.

Actually breaking up the legions was a decision made by each leader it's not something that can be blamed on Guilliman at all. Russ for example chose to use the order as toilet paper.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

Guilliman was described as the best logistician and organiser of the lot, not diplomat or leader. He was not good at diplomacy; even before the Heresy he'd alienated Alpharius, Lorgar, Angron, Perturabo, and the Lion, and then came up with the codex to piss of more Loyalist ones.

It fairness the stuff with Lorgar wasn't his fault and Angron was bitter and hated almost everyone. I don't recall Guilliman alienating Perturabo though. Breaking up the Legions was ordered by the High Lords of Terra so it's unfair to blame Guilliman for that.

As fro the Tesstra Compliance, Alpharius by his own admission deliberately dragged out a compliance so he could show off, resulting in far greater casualties among the populace they were trying to assimilate into the Imperium. Guilliman might not have been diplomatic about it but Alpharius' methods were definitely wanting.

Actually breaking up the legions was a decision made by each leader it's not something that can be blamed on Guilliman at all. Russ for example chose to use the order as toilet paper.

actually thats wrong. Russ also spun off a sucessor chapter, forming the wolf brothers. he rejected the codex astartes, but he did split his chapter. truthfully if you look at it, almost all the surviving primarchs, except Dorn, cut a deal with Gulliman in one form or another

BrianDavion wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

Guilliman was described as the best logistician and organiser of the lot, not diplomat or leader. He was not good at diplomacy; even before the Heresy he'd alienated Alpharius, Lorgar, Angron, Perturabo, and the Lion, and then came up with the codex to piss of more Loyalist ones.

It fairness the stuff with Lorgar wasn't his fault and Angron was bitter and hated almost everyone. I don't recall Guilliman alienating Perturabo though. Breaking up the Legions was ordered by the High Lords of Terra so it's unfair to blame Guilliman for that.

As fro the Tesstra Compliance, Alpharius by his own admission deliberately dragged out a compliance so he could show off, resulting in far greater casualties among the populace they were trying to assimilate into the Imperium. Guilliman might not have been diplomatic about it but Alpharius' methods were definitely wanting.

Actually breaking up the legions was a decision made by each leader it's not something that can be blamed on Guilliman at all. Russ for example chose to use the order as toilet paper.

actually thats wrong. Russ also spun off a sucessor chapter, forming the wolf brothers. he rejected the codex astartes, but he did split his chapter. truthfully if you look at it, almost all the surviving primarchs, except Dorn, cut a deal with Gulliman in one form or another

Russ only wanted the high numbers that successor chapters can generate, that's why he cut the Wolves in half as opposed to the ten or so successors that Guilliman made at the same time.
Russ wanted other recruitment worlds to supplement Fenris.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

Guilliman was described as the best logistician and organiser of the lot, not diplomat or leader. He was not good at diplomacy; even before the Heresy he'd alienated Alpharius, Lorgar, Angron, Perturabo, and the Lion, and then came up with the codex to piss of more Loyalist ones.

It fairness the stuff with Lorgar wasn't his fault and Angron was bitter and hated almost everyone. I don't recall Guilliman alienating Perturabo though. Breaking up the Legions was ordered by the High Lords of Terra so it's unfair to blame Guilliman for that.

As fro the Tesstra Compliance, Alpharius by his own admission deliberately dragged out a compliance so he could show off, resulting in far greater casualties among the populace they were trying to assimilate into the Imperium. Guilliman might not have been diplomatic about it but Alpharius' methods were definitely wanting.

Actually breaking up the legions was a decision made by each leader it's not something that can be blamed on Guilliman at all. Russ for example chose to use the order as toilet paper.

actually thats wrong. Russ also spun off a sucessor chapter, forming the wolf brothers. he rejected the codex astartes, but he did split his chapter. truthfully if you look at it, almost all the surviving primarchs, except Dorn, cut a deal with Gulliman in one form or another

Russ only wanted the high numbers that successor chapters can generate, that's why he cut the Wolves in half as opposed to the ten or so successors that Guilliman made at the same time.
Russ wanted other recruitment worlds to supplement Fenris.

and your source for that is? we truthfully have no clue what Russ was thinking. myu gut feeling is he made a sucessor chapter mostly as sort of a token bit of cooperation that Gulliman could then take to the other high lords.

Horus > Guilliman/the Lion (depending on day and author > the rest... pre heresy. Guilliman edged the Lion on Strategy while the Lion edged Guilliman on tactics.

Post heresy, id put it as Horus > Guilliman > the Lion. Calth was a harsh lesson for Guilliman, it sharpened him into something more, while the Lion hasnt really had a kick in the pants like Guilliman did there.

As for Warmaster, it's pretty clearly Horus > Sanguinius > Guilliman as a distant third. Guilliman, at least, could be a politician. The Lion was too anti social, too brooding and prone to keeping secrets. Even then, with Horus and Sanguinius around, Guilliman and the Lion were never really in the running.

Edit: I always love that Angron quote. Nevermind that Guilliman had managed to make a multi system Empire before the Emperor even showed up, while Angron couldnt even take his own world. Corax managed to take his slave army and take over Deliverance!

Angron, who was going to be killed by mere humans. Guilliman managed to take Macragge after the coup into a multi system emprie, Angron couldnt even lead a bunch of gladiators made for battle to take his own planet. In fact, Nuceria ended up as part of the 500 worlds! Heck, Angron couldn't even get his own Legion to follow him until he had murdered the former master of the legion.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

Guilliman was described as the best logistician and organiser of the lot, not diplomat or leader. He was not good at diplomacy; even before the Heresy he'd alienated Alpharius, Lorgar, Angron, Perturabo, and the Lion, and then came up with the codex to piss of more Loyalist ones.

It fairness the stuff with Lorgar wasn't his fault and Angron was bitter and hated almost everyone. I don't recall Guilliman alienating Perturabo though. Breaking up the Legions was ordered by the High Lords of Terra so it's unfair to blame Guilliman for that.

As fro the Tesstra Compliance, Alpharius by his own admission deliberately dragged out a compliance so he could show off, resulting in far greater casualties among the populace they were trying to assimilate into the Imperium. Guilliman might not have been diplomatic about it but Alpharius' methods were definitely wanting.

Actually breaking up the legions was a decision made by each leader it's not something that can be blamed on Guilliman at all. Russ for example chose to use the order as toilet paper.

actually thats wrong. Russ also spun off a sucessor chapter, forming the wolf brothers. he rejected the codex astartes, but he did split his chapter. truthfully if you look at it, almost all the surviving primarchs, except Dorn, cut a deal with Gulliman in one form or another

Russ only wanted the high numbers that successor chapters can generate, that's why he cut the Wolves in half as opposed to the ten or so successors that Guilliman made at the same time.
Russ wanted other recruitment worlds to supplement Fenris.

and your source for that is? we truthfully have no clue what Russ was thinking. myu gut feeling is he made a sucessor chapter mostly as sort of a token bit of cooperation that Gulliman could then take to the other high lords.

Black Templars last Codex if memory serves. The Salamanders, Imperial Fists and Space Wolves almost incited a second civil war over not wanting the Codex or the chapter breakdown.

Lion El'Johnson - "Insult me again, brother, and theoretically I will punch you in your practical face"

Is this a real quote? Is Johnson really this much of a man-child?

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Lion El'Johnson - "Insult me again, brother, and theoretically I will punch you in your practical face"

Is this a real quote? Is Johnson really this much of a man-child?

He did spend most of his formative years in a forest. It doesn't hone your social skills. And I have the impression Guilleman isn't the nicest Primarch.

In fairness I imagine most of the Primarchs would be okay with settling things with violence. It's what they were made for and it's what they (travel to) do a large proportion of the time.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:
In fairness I imagine most of the Primarchs would be okay with settling things with violence. It's what they were made for and it's what they (travel to) do a large proportion of the time.

it's also the snide remark about theoreticals and praticals, which is honestly not a bad way to approuch problem solving.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Lion El'Johnson - "Insult me again, brother, and theoretically I will punch you in your practical face"

Is this a real quote? Is Johnson really this much of a man-child?

Sanguinius is probably the only Primarch who didn't act like a man-child at some point.

pm713 wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

Lion El'Johnson - "Insult me again, brother, and theoretically I will punch you in your practical face"

Is this a real quote? Is Johnson really this much of a man-child?

He did spend most of his formative years in a forest. It doesn't hone your social skills. And I have the impression Guilleman isn't the nicest Primarch.

If by "forest" you mean catachan-esque death forest, then yes.

The Lion was a full grown man before he spoke his first words to another human being. He survived infanthood/childhood/adolescence, all those years you're developing your social skills, on a death world, killing warp beasts with nothing but his hands.

A consummate warrior. A brilliant strategist. The perfect hunter. All of the above. A oratory genius? Not so much...

Exactly. The Lion was the best straight up tactician.

I can accept that. He is essentially a borderline aspergers case in how focused he is on how he thinks things should be.

Put him in command of a cybernetica cohort, with a clearly defined battle objective, and he will do as well or better than any other primarch.

The reason he wasn't warmaster, and why making him a warmaster after Horus' treachery was a bad idea, is that he has essentially zero people skills and next to no ability to judge or allow for character.

In a game of chess -not an issue. In a civil war? He lurches from credulous to paranoid at exactly the wrong moment, reacts badly -even violently - to being questioned, when the things he's doing would be enough for him to see anyone else as a traitor (but he's loyal, so thats fine)

Ultimately, almost all the primarchs are 'the best'' in a given situation.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

But so had the Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion. Horus had shown nothing but Loyalty to the Imperium. I think the problem is that in a time of uncertainty you shouldn't be trusting anyone with your WMDs.

None of three had been revealed as traitors yet. As far as anybody knew the Traitors had declared themselves openly. Trusting nobody would cripple you too and potentially cast aspersions on your own loyalties.

Exactly. Dorn's plan might have sucked in hindsight. But what options did he have really. Sending in 3 Legions to battle 3 Legions could have ended up being a stalemate that dragged on and on at the cost of the Legions themselves. How was Dorn to know that 4 of the seven had sided with Horus.

Well, Fulgrim told Dorn about Curze's visions of the future. Dorn had every reason to expect something like this.

Roboute

Roboute was the one that saved the imperium why all the other remaining loyalists [MOD EDIT - Don't try to workaround the expletive filter - Alpharius] off

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

But so had the Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion. Horus had shown nothing but Loyalty to the Imperium. I think the problem is that in a time of uncertainty you shouldn't be trusting anyone with your WMDs.

None of three had been revealed as traitors yet. As far as anybody knew the Traitors had declared themselves openly. Trusting nobody would cripple you too and potentially cast aspersions on your own loyalties.

Exactly. Dorn's plan might have sucked in hindsight. But what options did he have really. Sending in 3 Legions to battle 3 Legions could have ended up being a stalemate that dragged on and on at the cost of the Legions themselves. How was Dorn to know that 4 of the seven had sided with Horus.

Well, Fulgrim told Dorn about Curze's visions of the future. Dorn had every reason to expect something like this.

ever had a crazy person tell you they had visions? did you then plan your stuff around what they said? no one at the time belvied Cruz was anything but flying rodent gak insane