Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
Ciaphas Cain, don't you read the reports of this extremely brave, valorous, and selfless hero of the Imperium? These reports are required recreational reading.
Guardsman, the Commissar requests that you 'just look at the flowers'.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
Space marines still value their lives. The guardsmen that charge that daemon-prince are giving their life up, as is the space marines, not being fearful just makes it easier to function. Its more noble in the case of the guardsmen, but space marines still feel pain etc. They still go through extreme hardship like Alaric on the Daemonworld, where he was nearly broken. They don't feel fear in the same way but they fear in a way that they don't want to die or feel pain. Its impossible for Space Marines to be genuinely fearless if you read the lore, they just aren't effected by the same fight or flight response.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
I'd argue Heresy era Marines can be brave.
Ollanius Pius before the Perpetual change is the undeniable bravest IMO. He saw the strongest individual he can imagine fighting and losing to Horus Lupercal and what does he do? He shoots at him with his lasgun. It's like a medieval peasant charging a titan with a spoon.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
I'd argue Heresy era Marines can be brave.
Ollanius Pius before the Perpetual change is the undeniable bravest IMO. He saw the strongest individual he can imagine fighting and losing to Horus Lupercal and what does he do? He shoots at him with his lasgun. It's like a medieval peasant charging a titan with a spoon.
Exactly like Polux teleporting onto Perturabo's flagship to kill him.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
I'd argue Heresy era Marines can be brave.
Ollanius Pius before the Perpetual change is the undeniable bravest IMO. He saw the strongest individual he can imagine fighting and losing to Horus Lupercal and what does he do? He shoots at him with his lasgun. It's like a medieval peasant charging a titan with a spoon.
Exactly like Polux teleporting onto Perturabo's flagship to kill him.
Not really. One gets to be a superhuman with incredibly well made weaponry. He has little chance of success but compared to Ollanius he's doing great.
If Ollanius Pius wasn't retconned to be a perpetual, I would agree with him probably having the biggest balls. Other than him, I would say Tuska the Daemonkilla for charging into the eye of terror just because he had so much fun fighting off daemons when they boarded his ship. The best part is even after being bested by a khornate daemon prince (after smashing through several daemon worlds) his last act before dying was reach between its legs and "make a gesture of his own" with his power klaw.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
I'd argue Heresy era Marines can be brave.
Ollanius Pius before the Perpetual change is the undeniable bravest IMO. He saw the strongest individual he can imagine fighting and losing to Horus Lupercal and what does he do? He shoots at him with his lasgun. It's like a medieval peasant charging a titan with a spoon.
Exactly like Polux teleporting onto Perturabo's flagship to kill him.
Not really. One gets to be a superhuman with incredibly well made weaponry. He has little chance of success but compared to Ollanius he's doing great.
Yes really, I said its 'like' that, obviously Pius had more balls. I already said in my OP.
Marines by default have less balls, figuratively and literally (sterile). They're superhuman and have some of the best arms and armour in the galaxy, on top of which they are mentally and psychologically conditioned to not feel the effects of fear on the battlefield - the only reason balls of any magnitude would be needed.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Re-avaluating happens when you are proven wrong and since you still hold the position that you are right, neither of us are doing any of that. They are nice buzzwords that sound good, but that's about it. The argument isn't about the 'precise parameters' of ball size, you are saying that bravery is not a concept that Astartes are familiar with, don't change the argument and stop trying to sound intelligent, its not working and you just sound ridiculous.
Okay, so you're not going to play ball in order to "save face" or whatever stupid reasoning on an annonymous internet forum. So, seeing as all you're interested in doing thus far is try to insult and belittle me because of my diction (the classic, "I can't attack the actual content of what they're saying, so I'll just attack the way they're saying it, instead"), let's start again, shall we? Okay, here we go then...
Hi TC, cool topic. I was wondering, what do you mean by "biggest balls"? Can you give me an example situation or scenario? Your description of Khan's feats is pretty cool, but like you said maybe more descriptive of insanity-driven bloodlust and raw martial prowess, rather than straight up bravery. Is bravery an important factor? Is that what you mean by "biggest balls", prehaps? Anyway, let me know, okay? Cheers.
Spoiler:
I hope my diction is now more to your liking, and there aren't too many "ridiculous buzzwords" in there distracting you, or whatever...
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Re-avaluating happens when you are proven wrong and since you still hold the position that you are right, neither of us are doing any of that. They are nice buzzwords that sound good, but that's about it. The argument isn't about the 'precise parameters' of ball size, you are saying that bravery is not a concept that Astartes are familiar with, don't change the argument and stop trying to sound intelligent, its not working and you just sound ridiculous.
Okay, so you're not going to play ball in order to "save face" or whatever stupid reasoning on an annonymous internet forum. So, seeing as all you're interested in doing thus far is try to insult and belittle me because of my diction (the classic, "I can't attack the actual content of what they're saying, so I'll just attack the way they're saying it, instead"), let's start again, shall we? Okay, here we go then...
Hi TC, cool topic. I was wondering, what do you mean by "biggest balls"? Can you give me an example situation or scenario? Your description of Khan's feats is pretty cool, but like you said maybe more descriptive of insanity-driven bloodlust and raw martial prowess, rather than straight up bravery. Is bravery an important factor? Is that what you mean by "biggest balls", prehaps? Anyway, let me know, okay? Cheers.
Spoiler:
I hope my diction is now more to your liking, and there aren't too many "ridiculous buzzwords" in there distracting you, or whatever...
You are the one that started condescending me, so yeah I'll belittle you if you are doing that. You are the one that stopped trying to 'attack the actual content' of what I said and I already called you out for that as you started with the re-re-re lol The biggest balls means just that. Bravery is a factor, you are arguing that Astartes don't have bravery. though. Your diction is only a problem if you are trying to be condescending. They weren't distracting me, they were just used pointlessly to try and win points without actually trying to prove me wrong. People use pointlessly complex language to try and discourage less intelligent people instead of actually proving your point, but that's not the case with me and I called you out for doing that, because there was no point is using those words, they weren't relevant and they didn't add anything to your argument.
I'm gonna agree that Kharn never struck me as having big balls, the guy's just insane and likely somewhat sucidal.
as for biggest balls I'm gonna present a somewhat contriversal opinion. Cawl. let's face it, even WITH a Primarch backing you what he's done is pretty ballsy.
BrianDavion wrote: I'm gonna agree that Kharn never struck me as having big balls, the guy's just insane and likely somewhat sucidal.
as for biggest balls I'm gonna present a somewhat contriversal opinion. Cawl. let's face it, even WITH a Primarch backing you what he's done is pretty ballsy.
Sevatar has some pretty big ones. Not a lot of Space Marines could talk back to their Primarch or call him on bs. Sevatar does so and gives zero feths. He gets double credit for doing it to a Primarch able to inspire genuine fear in not just Space Marines, but also in another Primarch, Rogal Dorn.
Also, there was that one time he needed to get onto the Dark Angels flagship, so he mag-locked his boots onto a fighter and had it fly straight into the Invincible Reason's hanger. Let me repeat that. He mag-locked to the top of a fighter, and had it dodge AA fire and fly right into the hanger of the enemy flagship.
EmpNortonII wrote: Sevatar has some pretty big ones. Not a lot of Space Marines could talk back to their Primarch or call him on bs. Sevatar does so and gives zero feths. He gets double credit for doing it to a Primarch able to inspire genuine fear in not just Space Marines, but also in another Primarch, Rogal Dorn.
Also, there was that one time he needed to get onto the Dark Angels flagship, so he mag-locked his boots onto a fighter and had it fly straight into the Invincible Reason's hanger. Let me repeat that. He mag-locked to the top of a fighter, and had it dodge AA fire and fly right into the hanger of the enemy flagship.
Huge stones.
Yeah I always loved the author of death to the false emperor. They should have called him savager.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You are the one that started condescending me, so yeah I'll belittle you if you are doing that. You are the one that stopped trying to 'attack the actual content' of what I said and I already called you out for that as you started with the re-re-re lol.
Nope. All I said in this topic was Yarrick probably has a big pair and that Astartes by default have smaller balls than non-Astertes. Nothing condescending towards you whatsoever. It was you that then called my post nonsense and then things went from there.
The biggest balls means just that. Bravery is a factor, you are arguing that Astartes don't have bravery. though.
Astartes by default have a significantly lower need for bravery than non-Astartes, if any at all. It's inherent in their very nature, as established in the lore of the setting. Which means, by default they are required to be less brave, or have smaller balls, than non-Astartes. It's really that simple. I honestly don't know what else or how else to say it. If you find that argument and that wording condescending... sorry, I guess.
Your diction is only a problem if you are trying to be condescending. They weren't distracting me, they were just used pointlessly to try and win points without actually trying to prove me wrong. People use pointlessly complex language to try and discourage less intelligent people instead of actually proving your point, but that's not the case with me and I called you out for doing that, because there was no point is using those words, they weren't relevant and they didn't add anything to your argument.
Well I wouldn't know anything about all that. All I see is someone attacking the form of my posts, rather than countering the argument within my (initial) posts. I really doubt you actually believe there's anything "complex" in anything I've said. I'm pretty sure you could follow it perfectly well, you just chose not to oblige and to attack the words used anyway, in lieu of my actual argument. *shrug*
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You are the one that started condescending me, so yeah I'll belittle you if you are doing that. You are the one that stopped trying to 'attack the actual content' of what I said and I already called you out for that as you started with the re-re-re lol.
Nope. All I said in this topic was Yarrick probably has a big pair and that Astartes by default have smaller balls than non-Astertes. Nothing condescending towards you whatsoever. It was you that then called my post nonsense and then things went from there.
The biggest balls means just that. Bravery is a factor, you are arguing that Astartes don't have bravery. though.
Astartes by default have a significantly lower need for bravery than non-Astartes, if any at all. It's inherent in their very nature, as established in the lore of the setting. Which means, by default they are required to be less brave, or have smaller balls, than non-Astartes. It's really that simple. I honestly don't know what else or how else to say it. If you find that argument and that wording condescending... sorry, I guess.
Your diction is only a problem if you are trying to be condescending. They weren't distracting me, they were just used pointlessly to try and win points without actually trying to prove me wrong. People use pointlessly complex language to try and discourage less intelligent people instead of actually proving your point, but that's not the case with me and I called you out for doing that, because there was no point is using those words, they weren't relevant and they didn't add anything to your argument.
Well I wouldn't know anything about all that. All I see is someone attacking the form of my posts, rather than countering the argument within my (initial) posts. I really doubt you actually believe there's anything "complex" in anything I've said. I'm pretty sure you could follow it perfectly well, you just chose not to oblige and to attack the words used anyway, in lieu of my actual argument. *shrug*
Saying that is nonsense is not intentionally insulting you, I said your argument is nonsense, I wasn't implying you were stupid or anything. You need to develop thicker skin. "You appear to not understand the context of your own topic, then. Maybe you should re-evaluate, re-establish and then re-state the exact context and precise parameters of how the size of an individuals balls are being measured" this is very condescending.
"Astartes by default have a significantly lower need for bravery than non-Astartes" yeah if you said that in the first place I'd agree with you, but you said they unequivocally are not brave, which now I think you'd concede that that was 'nonsense', I wasn't insulting you. We are all wrong at times and we all talk nonsense at times. I was attacking you because you were being condescending. I did counter your argument but then you said this "You appear to not understand the context of your own topic, then. Maybe you should re-evaluate, re-establish and then re-state the exact context and precise parameters of how the size of an individuals balls are being measured. Perhaps then we can all move forwards from the same page?" you were the one that started attacking rather than proving your point, there is nothing useful in saying this other than to attacking me saying I don't understand the context or my own topic, which is a baseless statement, there is nothing here to counter, this is just you attacking the form of my 'form' rather than countering my point. Seriously re-read the thread. It wasn't complex in the sense that it was hard to grasp, it was just merely more complex than it needed to be as you weren't actually saying anything as it wasn't relative because I never even conceded I was wrong in the first place.. I was an ass you were an ass, I say we just forget about it and water under the bridge etc.
I swear to an uncaring universe, I will slap you both. Stop it.
The owner of the biggest balls in 40k is Abbadon. He is fething about with all 4 of the setting's most powerful entities.
1 God wants to torture you for all eternity? Worst thing ever, right? NO! 4 gods want to torture you for all eternity in different ways. Boom. That takes some serious stones.
greatbigtree wrote: I swear to an uncaring universe, I will slap you both. Stop it.
The owner of the biggest balls in 40k is Abbadon. He is fething about with all 4 of the setting's most powerful entities.
1 God wants to torture you for all eternity? Worst thing ever, right? NO! 4 gods want to torture you for all eternity in different ways. Boom. That takes some serious stones.
He does fight all his challenges to his throne when he could have an underling to do it, so yeah I respect Abaddon for that.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Saying that is nonsense is not intentionally insulting you, I said your argument is nonsense, I wasn't implying you were stupid or anything. You need to develop thicker skin.
Nor was my direct reply to you that it wasn't nonsense and that it's in the lore.
"You appear to not understand the context of your own topic, then. Maybe you should re-evaluate, re-establish and then re-state the exact context and precise parameters of how the size of an individuals balls are being measured" this is very condescending.
Only because you chose to take it that way, no doubt because you took exception to the words I used and how I used them. I asked a request for clarification. If you took that as a personal attack, that's on you, not me. I'm not the one here who needs a thicker skin.
"Astartes by default have a significantly lower need for bravery than non-Astartes" yeah if you said that in the first place I'd agree with you, but you said they unequivocally are not brave, which now I think you'd concede that that was 'nonsense',
But it's not nonsense, it's directly in line with the point me and other posters were making from the beginning. Astartes do not even conceive of or experience the concepts of "fear" and "bravery" the way normal mortals do. They're indoctrinated as part of their manufacture and training to be so. They just charge in and fight the horrors of the galaxy without thinking twice about it, because they are duty-bound, because the fear they do feel is that of mission failure, of what would happen if they didn't do it. You don't need balls to do that, just legs.
I wasn't insulting you. I was attacking you because you were being condescending. I did counter your argument but then you said this "You appear to not understand the context of your own topic, then. Maybe you should re-evaluate, re-establish and then re-state the exact context and precise parameters of how the size of an individuals balls are being measured. Perhaps then we can all move forwards from the same page?" you were the one that started attacking rather than proving your point, there is nothing useful in saying this other than to attacking me saying I don't understand the context or my own topic, which is a baseless statement, there is nothing here to counter, this is just you attacking the form of my 'form' rather than countering my point. Seriously re-read the thread. It wasn't complex in the sense that it was hard to grasp, it was just merely more complex than it needed to be as you weren't actually saying anything as it wasn't relative because I never even conceded I was wrong in the first place..
Again, only because you chose to interpret it that way. If you'd read my words and took them at face-value, you may have seen them for the request for further clarification and a re-framing of your OP that is was, and not a condescention/personal attack. I genuinely considered the possibility we were on different pages and talking about different things/concepts in order for you to call out my initial posts/argument as "nonsense".
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Saying that is nonsense is not intentionally insulting you, I said your argument is nonsense, I wasn't implying you were stupid or anything. You need to develop thicker skin.
Nor was my direct reply to you that it wasn't nonsense and that it's in the lore.
"You appear to not understand the context of your own topic, then. Maybe you should re-evaluate, re-establish and then re-state the exact context and precise parameters of how the size of an individuals balls are being measured" this is very condescending.
Only because you chose to take it that way, no doubt because you took exception to the words I used and how I used them. I asked a request for clarification. If you took that as a personal attack, that's on you, not me. I'm not the one here who needs a thicker skin.
"Astartes by default have a significantly lower need for bravery than non-Astartes" yeah if you said that in the first place I'd agree with you, but you said they unequivocally are not brave, which now I think you'd concede that that was 'nonsense',
But it's not nonsense, it's directly in line with the point me and other posters were making from the beginning. Astartes do not even conceive of or experience the concepts of "fear" and "bravery" the way normal mortals do. They're indoctrinated as part of their manufacture and training to be so. They just charge in and fight the horrors of the galaxy without thinking twice about it, because they are duty-bound, because the fear they do feel is that of mission failure, of what would happen if they didn't do it. You don't need balls to do that, just legs.
I wasn't insulting you. I was attacking you because you were being condescending. I did counter your argument but then you said this "You appear to not understand the context of your own topic, then. Maybe you should re-evaluate, re-establish and then re-state the exact context and precise parameters of how the size of an individuals balls are being measured. Perhaps then we can all move forwards from the same page?" you were the one that started attacking rather than proving your point, there is nothing useful in saying this other than to attacking me saying I don't understand the context or my own topic, which is a baseless statement, there is nothing here to counter, this is just you attacking the form of my 'form' rather than countering my point. Seriously re-read the thread. It wasn't complex in the sense that it was hard to grasp, it was just merely more complex than it needed to be as you weren't actually saying anything as it wasn't relative because I never even conceded I was wrong in the first place..
Again, only because you chose to interpret it that way. If you'd read my words and took them at face-value, you may have seen them for the request for further clarification and a re-framing of your OP that is was, and not a condescention/personal attack. I genuinely considered the possibility we were on different pages and talking about different things/concepts in order for you to call out my initial posts/argument as "nonsense".
"Yet I wasn’t prepared for the reality of war. This wasn’t some urban engagement in city ruins – a
firefight between soldiers exchanging gunfire from the security of cover, where perhaps one side
boasted greater weaponry than the other. That took bravery, patience, concentration… But this was
open war, a pitched battle, demanding greater savagery, greater strength, greater courage, and calling
upon greater depths of feeling. One couldn’t enter into such a battle between clashing armies without
being certain of one’s death." Emperors gift
'An abomination?' said Eidolon. 'Tarvitz, you are brave and disciplined, and your warriors
respect you, but you do not have the imagination to see where this work can lead us. You must realise
that the Legion's supremacy is of greater importance than any mortal squeamishness,’ - Horus Rising
"'We will sing songs of your bravery upon your return, but for now, let us drink and feast to the
doom of the Laer,' said Fulgrim. The Phoenix Gate was flung open as servants and menials entered,
bringing platters of hot meat and case after case of victory wine." - Fulgrim
"Septus Thoic and Ignatius Numen stood at the end of the wide corridor. Both were warriors who
had seen the very worst the galaxy could throw at them and had spat back in its face. Fellow
survivors of Isstvan V, they had been amongst the very first Iron Hands to make planetfall, marching
alongside the best and bravest of the X Legion. Like all those who had escaped the massacre, they had
cut their warplate with the names of the fallen, but these warriors had a name acid-etched on their
shoulder guards that marked them out as special even in a brotherhood of remarkable warriors." - Angel exterminatus
"‘We have fought hard and we have fought bravely, and another world is brought from the darkness
of superstition and division into the light of the Emperor’s clarity and unity,’ he told his warriors. ‘It
is with honour to the fallen and respect to all who stand here that I can declare the Isstvan system
brought to compliance!’ - Deliverance lost
". I am sure dissenting voices were raised when you received your orders. The Dark Angels are too
brave and resolute a Legion to accept such a command quietly. As Shang Khan said, it is a weighty
duty and a hard one for Astartes to bear. We are warriors, all of us, the Emperor’s finest. We should
be roaming the galaxy, making war on our enemies. Instead, we find ourselves forced to act as guard
dogs.’ - Descent of Angels
"Anger at the unthinking violence Russ and the Custodes hadunleashed against them.
Anger at the death of so many brave warriors who deserved better.Anger at how easily
he had allowed himself to turn away from asking questions that needed to be asked.But
most of all, anger at Magnus for leaving them to face their doom alone" - Thousand Sons
"Yet I wasn’t prepared for the reality of war. This wasn’t some urban engagement in city ruins – a
firefight between soldiers exchanging gunfire from the security of cover, where perhaps one side
boasted greater weaponry than the other. That took bravery, patience, concentration… But this was
open war, a pitched battle, demanding greater savagery, greater strength, greater courage, and calling
upon greater depths of feeling. One couldn’t enter into such a battle between clashing armies without
being certain of one’s death." Emperors gift
'An abomination?' said Eidolon. 'Tarvitz, you are brave and disciplined, and your warriors
respect you, but you do not have the imagination to see where this work can lead us. You must realise
that the Legion's supremacy is of greater importance than any mortal squeamishness,’ - Horus Rising
"'We will sing songs of your bravery upon your return, but for now, let us drink and feast to the
doom of the Laer,' said Fulgrim. The Phoenix Gate was flung open as servants and menials entered,
bringing platters of hot meat and case after case of victory wine." - Fulgrim
"Septus Thoic and Ignatius Numen stood at the end of the wide corridor. Both were warriors who
had seen the very worst the galaxy could throw at them and had spat back in its face. Fellow
survivors of Isstvan V, they had been amongst the very first Iron Hands to make planetfall, marching
alongside the best and bravest of the X Legion. Like all those who had escaped the massacre, they had
cut their warplate with the names of the fallen, but these warriors had a name acid-etched on their
shoulder guards that marked them out as special even in a brotherhood of remarkable warriors." - Angel exterminatus
"‘We have fought hard and we have fought bravely, and another world is brought from the darkness
of superstition and division into the light of the Emperor’s clarity and unity,’ he told his warriors. ‘It
is with honour to the fallen and respect to all who stand here that I can declare the Isstvan system
brought to compliance!’ - Deliverance lost
". I am sure dissenting voices were raised when you received your orders. The Dark Angels are too
brave and resolute a Legion to accept such a command quietly. As Shang Khan said, it is a weighty
duty and a hard one for Astartes to bear. We are warriors, all of us, the Emperor’s finest. We should
be roaming the galaxy, making war on our enemies. Instead, we find ourselves forced to act as guard
dogs.’ - Descent of Angels
"Anger at the unthinking violence Russ and the Custodes hadunleashed against them.
Anger at the death of so many brave warriors who deserved better.Anger at how easily
he had allowed himself to turn away from asking questions that needed to be asked.But
most of all, anger at Magnus for leaving them to face their doom alone" - Thousand Sons
The lore doesn't state that they aren't brave.
whatever, I'm done.
That's because the lore is mostly written by and for mortal mankind's perspective. Of course what they do is brave. I never said otherwise. But, the point stands; regular, ordinary, mortal non-Astartes have to do all that and face what they face right beside them... without being themselves superhumans in super armour with super weapons. That requires, by default, by inherent nature, greater courage, more bravery, and bigger balls. We know, without question, that Astartes, as part of their manufacture and training, undergo mental and psychological conditioning that makes them no longer human in terms of what they think and how they feel. They no longer feel fear the same way mortals do and therefore no longer need bravery the same way mortals do. It's really that simple. Again, I don't know what else or how else to say it. It's pure, objective, factual lore.
"Yet I wasn’t prepared for the reality of war. This wasn’t some urban engagement in city ruins – a
firefight between soldiers exchanging gunfire from the security of cover, where perhaps one side
boasted greater weaponry than the other. That took bravery, patience, concentration… But this was
open war, a pitched battle, demanding greater savagery, greater strength, greater courage, and calling
upon greater depths of feeling. One couldn’t enter into such a battle between clashing armies without
being certain of one’s death." Emperors gift
'An abomination?' said Eidolon. 'Tarvitz, you are brave and disciplined, and your warriors
respect you, but you do not have the imagination to see where this work can lead us. You must realise
that the Legion's supremacy is of greater importance than any mortal squeamishness,’ - Horus Rising
"'We will sing songs of your bravery upon your return, but for now, let us drink and feast to the
doom of the Laer,' said Fulgrim. The Phoenix Gate was flung open as servants and menials entered,
bringing platters of hot meat and case after case of victory wine." - Fulgrim
"Septus Thoic and Ignatius Numen stood at the end of the wide corridor. Both were warriors who
had seen the very worst the galaxy could throw at them and had spat back in its face. Fellow
survivors of Isstvan V, they had been amongst the very first Iron Hands to make planetfall, marching
alongside the best and bravest of the X Legion. Like all those who had escaped the massacre, they had
cut their warplate with the names of the fallen, but these warriors had a name acid-etched on their
shoulder guards that marked them out as special even in a brotherhood of remarkable warriors." - Angel exterminatus
"‘We have fought hard and we have fought bravely, and another world is brought from the darkness
of superstition and division into the light of the Emperor’s clarity and unity,’ he told his warriors. ‘It
is with honour to the fallen and respect to all who stand here that I can declare the Isstvan system
brought to compliance!’ - Deliverance lost
". I am sure dissenting voices were raised when you received your orders. The Dark Angels are too
brave and resolute a Legion to accept such a command quietly. As Shang Khan said, it is a weighty
duty and a hard one for Astartes to bear. We are warriors, all of us, the Emperor’s finest. We should
be roaming the galaxy, making war on our enemies. Instead, we find ourselves forced to act as guard
dogs.’ - Descent of Angels
"Anger at the unthinking violence Russ and the Custodes hadunleashed against them.
Anger at the death of so many brave warriors who deserved better.Anger at how easily
he had allowed himself to turn away from asking questions that needed to be asked.But
most of all, anger at Magnus for leaving them to face their doom alone" - Thousand Sons
The lore doesn't state that they aren't brave.
whatever, I'm done.
That's because the lore is mostly written by and for mortal mankind's perspective. Of course that they do is brave. I never said otherwise. But, the point stands; regular, ordinary, mortal non-Astartes have to do all that and face what they face right beside them... without being themselves superhumans in super armour with super weapons. That requires, by default, by inherent nature, greater courage, more bravery, and bigger balls. We know, without question, that Astartes, as part of their manufacture and training, undergo mental and psychological conditioning that makes them no longer human in terms of what they think and how they feel. They no longer feel fear the same way mortals do and therefore no longer need bravery the same way mortals do. It's really that simple. Again, I don't know what else or how else to say it. It's pure, objective, factual lore.
You called my reasoning and then tried to call it quits, give me a break. I genuinely wanted to call it quits, I did it without insulting you, being magnanimous. I'm not sure if you just have a very bad memory or your mind just creates a narrative that suits you.
You did say otherwise, you said the unequivocally don't feel fear. ""Bravery" is a pretty null and void concept in the Space Marine's psyche. To them it is simply one's duty to stand and fight in defiance of the Emperor's enemies. They just... do it. Because that's their purpose. Non-Marines, though? They actually have to summon the courage to do the same. It's pretty simple and self-explanatory" your quote. You weren't saying that they don't need it in the same way as humans. It isn't null and void, Astartes bravery is prevalent through the lore. That you are arguing in the face of evidence and are changing your argument, means I can no longer argue with you.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You did say otherwise, you said the unequivocally don't feel fear. "Bravery" is a pretty null and void concept in the Space Marine's psyche" your quote. That you are arguing in the face of evidence and are changing your argument, means I can no longer argue with you.
You're confusing what they do in action with what they feel inside while doing it. I never said what they do in action in and of itself cannot be considered brave, especially looking at it from a mortal man's perspective (which is 95% of all lore in the setting). So again, Astartes frames of reference for things, such as the concepts of "fear" and "bravery", are so disconnected with our own they may as well be alien to them. That was the point of my quote. Context matters. Pull words from my posts and isolate them to try and give them different meaning all you want, it ain't gonna help your argument against mine. Marines don't compute charging in with 10-to-1 odds as a brave thing to do, as non-Astartes would, they simply do it without even thinking about it in those terms. While a Guardsman would have to steel themselves, gulp, take a deep breath, steady their nerves, then charge in, Astartes are already halfway down the hill - not having to do any of that.
That was one of the shortest-lived "I'm done"'s I've seen in quite a while. Welcome back, I guess?
You called my reasoning and then tried to call it quits, give me a break. I genuinely wanted to call it quits, I did it without insulting you, being magnanimous.
The fact that you A) ignored the chance to do so when I first offered it, and then B) returned to the argument again after saying you were done in less time than it took for me to edit typos in my post speaks volumes against your supposed integrity, I'm afraid.
Andykp wrote: Old school pius all the way. If not then any guardian who doesn’t run away in soiled trousers.
Real answer, anyone who says female marines should exists.
Why because the ones that say female marines shouldn't exist are called sexist and misogynistic, I think its more brave to say the shouldn't exist. I collect Sisters of Battle and think they are utterly badass and yet I've been called all the names under the sun for not wanting marines changed.
On the marine argument, “they shall know no fear”. That’s sums it up really. If they ain’t scared they aren’t showing big “balls”. Being scared and carrying on. thats balls.
Andykp wrote: On the marine argument, “they shall know no fear”. That’s sums it up really. If they ain’t scared they aren’t showing big “balls”. Being scared and carrying on. thats balls.
I meant what I said about the whole know no fear thing. Average human standing up to an ORK is braver than marine who is programmed not to be scared doing the same.
Andykp wrote: I meant what I said about the whole know no fear thing. Average human standing up to an ORK is braver than marine who is programmed not to be scared doing the same.
Yeah though the difference to me isn't that big, its just the difference on one having a fight or flight response and the other not. Humans are less functional when it comes to fear but they both have the same on the line, bravery is more to do with sacrifice to me. I mean look at commissars, also trained to not give in to fear, obviously not to the same extent though. Humans decide to sacrifice themselves before the fear kicks in. If they are fighting Astartes, they are already scared, the decision to charge one is a choice of sacrifice not fear, granted they feel the fear up until they are killed, but they did it not because they are scared, they did it in spite of being scared.
If all Space Marines are truly fearless, they all should be able to talk gak to their Primarch, right?
Sigismund, most noble of all Imperial Fists, passed the buck on commanding a fleet when he knew it would end in his death. Of course, he was an Imperial Fist, so being a little bitch is in line with his geneseed, but Marines clearly have some fears and weaknesses- even the "greatest" of them.
EmpNortonII wrote: If all Space Marines are truly fearless, they all should be able to talk gak to their Primarch, right?
Sigismund, most noble of all Imperial Fists, passed the buck on commanding a fleet when he knew it would end in his death. Of course, he was an Imperial Fist, so being a little bitch is in line with his geneseed, but Marines clearly have some fears and weaknesses- even the "greatest" of them.
Exactly, there are many accounts of Astartes saying that in their Primarchs presence they feel 'fear' or what could be considered as fear.
Incompetent, perhaps. But the only mortal in all of existence with the "notice" of all 4 of the main chaos gods?
His primary goal, is to eliminate essentially a 5th god... that murdered his *hypothetically* superior Primarch father.
He is literally at the top of all hit-lists in the Imperium, the single "most wanted" man in the galaxy, of the single most powerful government in the Galaxy.
And he's like, "Nah, I don't want to be a Daemon Prince. I want to ice that zombie's ass as a mortal. Maybe after that I'll Daemon up. Come at me, Imperium!"
I think it's harder to find anyone more the Balisarius Cawl. Gulliman had the rank, authority, and surety to order super-marines (even after the previous debacles), but Cawl was the one who actually had to do it. He didn't get to hide in suspension either - he was an 'active' member of the Mechanicum for thousands of years - risking exposure and exterminatus every year as he siphoned Imperial resources for heresy. The sheer scope is mind boggling -
"What? These hundred troopships and manfactoriums? They are making ...stuff. Totally non-heretical stuff. Stuff no one can see or use. By the way - I need a few thousand more young boys."
The best part is he had no conceivable timeline for when he could release his creations - there was no guarantee that Gulliman would ever come back.
ChargerIIC wrote: I think it's harder to find anyone more the Balisarius Cawl. Gulliman had the rank, authority, and surety to order super-marines (even after the previous debacles), but Cawl was the one who actually had to do it. He didn't get to hide in suspension either - he was an 'active' member of the Mechanicum for thousands of years - risking exposure and exterminatus every year as he siphoned Imperial resources for heresy. The sheer scope is mind boggling -
"What? These hundred troopships and manfactoriums? They are making ...stuff. Totally non-heretical stuff. Stuff no one can see or use. By the way - I need a few thousand more young boys."
The best part is he had no conceivable timeline for when he could release his creations - there was no guarantee that Gulliman would ever come back.
Cawl wasn't the first to be a rebel in the Mechanicum, lots of forge masters and mistresses broke the rules in the pursuit of new technologies like Koriel Zeth with the Akashic-reader. Cawl isn't special at all.
greatbigtree wrote: Incompetent, perhaps. But the only mortal in all of existence with the "notice" of all 4 of the main chaos gods?
His primary goal, is to eliminate essentially a 5th god... that murdered his *hypothetically* superior Primarch father.
He is literally at the top of all hit-lists in the Imperium, the single "most wanted" man in the galaxy, of the single most powerful government in the Galaxy.
And he's like, "Nah, I don't want to be a Daemon Prince. I want to ice that zombie's ass as a mortal. Maybe after that I'll Daemon up. Come at me, Imperium!"
Bravery is not the absence of fear. It is acting in spite of it.
In other words... Pious. The man was a Perpetual-in other words, he had a LONG life ahead of him. And he was old enough to know that, yeah, if anyone can kill him for good, it would be someone capable of standing up to the Emperor.
And what does this ballsy bastard do? He stands right the feth up to Horus and says "Not today."
Honorary shout-out to any guardsmen who happen to give their lives to save comrades, especially in the face of Dark Eldar (assuming they know-less brave if they don't know, though still brave).
JNAProductions wrote: Bravery is not the absence of fear. It is acting in spite of it.
In other words... Pious. The man was a Perpetual-in other words, he had a LONG life ahead of him. And he was old enough to know that, yeah, if anyone can kill him for good, it would be someone capable of standing up to the Emperor.
And what does this ballsy bastard do? He stands right the feth up to Horus and says "Not today."
Honorary shout-out to any guardsmen who happen to give their lives to save comrades, especially in the face of Dark Eldar (assuming they know-less brave if they don't know, though still brave).
JNAProductions wrote: Bravery is not the absence of fear. It is acting in spite of it.
In other words... Pious. The man was a Perpetual-in other words, he had a LONG life ahead of him. And he was old enough to know that, yeah, if anyone can kill him for good, it would be someone capable of standing up to the Emperor.
And what does this ballsy bastard do? He stands right the feth up to Horus and says "Not today."
Honorary shout-out to any guardsmen who happen to give their lives to save comrades, especially in the face of Dark Eldar (assuming they know-less brave if they don't know, though still brave).
I already mention Pious in the OP.
Yes, and he deserves to be mentioned again. Because he's THAT DAMN BALLSY.
There's a Necron Lord with one ball and it's pretty big.
I mean, not like a direct comparison (I checked against mine) but in terms of scale it's pretty big. Enough that if mine looked like that I'd go to the doctor.
I mean, not like a direct comparison (I checked against mine) but in terms of scale it's pretty big. Enough that if mine looked like that I'd go to the doctor.
Trazyn the Infinite has already stolen the biggest balls in 40k, so I guess that's game over.
ChargerIIC wrote: I think it's harder to find anyone more the Balisarius Cawl. Gulliman had the rank, authority, and surety to order super-marines (even after the previous debacles), but Cawl was the one who actually had to do it. He didn't get to hide in suspension either - he was an 'active' member of the Mechanicum for thousands of years - risking exposure and exterminatus every year as he siphoned Imperial resources for heresy. The sheer scope is mind boggling -
"What? These hundred troopships and manfactoriums? They are making ...stuff. Totally non-heretical stuff. Stuff no one can see or use. By the way - I need a few thousand more young boys."
The best part is he had no conceivable timeline for when he could release his creations - there was no guarantee that Gulliman would ever come back.
Cawl wasn't the first to be a rebel in the Mechanicum, lots of forge masters and mistresses broke the rules in the pursuit of new technologies like Koriel Zeth with the Akashic-reader. Cawl isn't special at all.
"not being the first" doesn't change things Del, what Cawl did is still pretty Ballsy... in fact I'd say given that others had commited tek heresy before hand and Cawl saw first hand what the concequences where makes him MORE ballsy not less. it's easy to be fearless when the concequences are purely academic, when when you just saw tim down the street get killed in a horrifc fashion for doing something less bad then what you're doing....
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
Space marines still value their lives. The guardsmen that charge that daemon-prince are giving their life up, as is the space marines, not being fearful just makes it easier to function. Its more noble in the case of the guardsmen, but space marines still feel pain etc. They still go through extreme hardship like Alaric on the Daemonworld, where he was nearly broken. They don't feel fear in the same way but they fear in a way that they don't want to die or feel pain. Its impossible for Space Marines to be genuinely fearless if you read the lore, they just aren't effected by the same fight or flight response.
Yes space marines still have the basic instincts of self preservation that all living organisms have but they no longer have a fight or flight response to overcome.
Overcoming the fight or flight response is what makes one brave.
Space marines are superior to normal base line humans in almost everything except courage
Curze: "I did what I had to do , there was no other way"
Sevatar: "What other ways did you try?"
Curze is by far the most shameful coward of the Primarchs
His whole life he has chosen to accept the fate that he saw because he was too cowardly to really try to make a difference.
He COULD have developed Nostromo and he COULD have made things better on his home planet so that everything did'nt fall to pieces the moment he left but he CHOSE to no even try.
And when Sanguinus offered the possibility that not everything is written in stone Curze almost had a mental shutdown.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
Space marines still value their lives. The guardsmen that charge that daemon-prince are giving their life up, as is the space marines, not being fearful just makes it easier to function. Its more noble in the case of the guardsmen, but space marines still feel pain etc. They still go through extreme hardship like Alaric on the Daemonworld, where he was nearly broken. They don't feel fear in the same way but they fear in a way that they don't want to die or feel pain. Its impossible for Space Marines to be genuinely fearless if you read the lore, they just aren't effected by the same fight or flight response.
Yes space marines still have the basic instincts of self preservation that all living organisms have but they no longer have a fight or flight response to overcome.
Overcoming the fight or flight response is what makes one brave.
Space marines are superior to normal base line humans in almost everything except courage
Curze: "I did what I had to do , there was no other way"
Sevatar: "What other ways did you try?"
Curze is by far the most shameful coward of the Primarchs
His whole life he has chosen to accept the fate that he saw because he was too cowardly to really try to make a difference.
He COULD have developed Nostromo and he COULD have made things better on his home planet so that everything did'nt fall to pieces the moment he left but he CHOSE to no even try.
And when Sanguinus offered the possibility that not everything is written in stone Curze almost had a mental shutdown.
Overcoming the fight or flight response does not make someone brave, you could overcome the fight or flight response and decide to look for cover and fire from there instead of helping your buddy out who is fighting in close combat with an astartes.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
Space marines still value their lives. The guardsmen that charge that daemon-prince are giving their life up, as is the space marines, not being fearful just makes it easier to function. Its more noble in the case of the guardsmen, but space marines still feel pain etc. They still go through extreme hardship like Alaric on the Daemonworld, where he was nearly broken. They don't feel fear in the same way but they fear in a way that they don't want to die or feel pain. Its impossible for Space Marines to be genuinely fearless if you read the lore, they just aren't effected by the same fight or flight response.
Yes space marines still have the basic instincts of self preservation that all living organisms have but they no longer have a fight or flight response to overcome.
Overcoming the fight or flight response is what makes one brave.
Space marines are superior to normal base line humans in almost everything except courage
Curze: "I did what I had to do , there was no other way"
Sevatar: "What other ways did you try?"
Curze is by far the most shameful coward of the Primarchs
His whole life he has chosen to accept the fate that he saw because he was too cowardly to really try to make a difference.
He COULD have developed Nostromo and he COULD have made things better on his home planet so that everything did'nt fall to pieces the moment he left but he CHOSE to no even try.
And when Sanguinus offered the possibility that not everything is written in stone Curze almost had a mental shutdown.
Overcoming the fight or flight response does not make someone brave, you could overcome the fight or flight response and decide to look for cover and fire from there instead of helping your buddy out who is fighting in close combat with an astartes.
You know, avoiding the immediate close combat and seeking cover is pretty much the definition of flight? Fleeing something is not simply running screaming from the battlefield.
Astartes, I'm sure experience fear but perhaps not for their personal safety. They may be afraid of letting down their Chapter or failing to complete the mission.
But, from reading a lot of true life history (Anthony Beevor etc) the biggest balls definitely belong to the normal infantryman under artillery or mortar attack. Those guys have balls so big they have to cart them around in a wheelbarrow. Now, imagine being a normal grunt in 40k? Very little armour, horrific enemies, daemons or biotitans lobbing plasma or explosive acid at you? Joe or Joanne Guardsman gets my vote.
EmpNortonII wrote:If all Space Marines are truly fearless, they all should be able to talk gak to their Primarch, right?
Sigismund, most noble of all Imperial Fists, passed the buck on commanding a fleet when he knew it would end in his death. Of course, he was an Imperial Fist, so being a little bitch is in line with his geneseed, but Marines clearly have some fears and weaknesses- even the "greatest" of them.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
Space marines still value their lives. The guardsmen that charge that daemon-prince are giving their life up, as is the space marines, not being fearful just makes it easier to function. Its more noble in the case of the guardsmen, but space marines still feel pain etc. They still go through extreme hardship like Alaric on the Daemonworld, where he was nearly broken. They don't feel fear in the same way but they fear in a way that they don't want to die or feel pain. Its impossible for Space Marines to be genuinely fearless if you read the lore, they just aren't effected by the same fight or flight response.
Yes space marines still have the basic instincts of self preservation that all living organisms have but they no longer have a fight or flight response to overcome.
Overcoming the fight or flight response is what makes one brave.
Space marines are superior to normal base line humans in almost everything except courage
Curze: "I did what I had to do , there was no other way"
Sevatar: "What other ways did you try?"
Curze is by far the most shameful coward of the Primarchs
His whole life he has chosen to accept the fate that he saw because he was too cowardly to really try to make a difference.
He COULD have developed Nostromo and he COULD have made things better on his home planet so that everything did'nt fall to pieces the moment he left but he CHOSE to no even try.
And when Sanguinus offered the possibility that not everything is written in stone Curze almost had a mental shutdown.
Overcoming the fight or flight response does not make someone brave, you could overcome the fight or flight response and decide to look for cover and fire from there instead of helping your buddy out who is fighting in close combat with an astartes.
You know, avoiding the immediate close combat and seeking cover is pretty much the definition of flight? Fleeing something is not simply running screaming from the battlefield.
Astartes, I'm sure experience fear but perhaps not for their personal safety. They may be afraid of letting down their Chapter or failing to complete the mission.
But, from reading a lot of true life history (Anthony Beevor etc) the biggest balls definitely belong to the normal infantryman under artillery or mortar attack. Those guys have balls so big they have to cart them around in a wheelbarrow. Now, imagine being a normal grunt in 40k? Very little armour, horrific enemies, daemons or biotitans lobbing plasma or explosive acid at you? Joe or Joanne Guardsman gets my vote.
Point is he could get over the fight response to shoot, but it doesn't mean he's going to help take on an Astartes.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: Kharn would be my number one. Always fights insurmountable foes by himself. Took on a saint, black Legions bezerkers, Abaddon and a bloodthirster all by himself, even getting the bloodthirster to praise him, though I would concede that he may be more insane than brave lol. But my 2nd is either the obvious guardsmen that stood in-between the Emperor and Horus or the auxilla that stabbed Alpharius in the side puncturing his torso.
No space marine can be called brave.
Courage means conquering your fears and risking yourself despite afraid.
A space marine is physically and mentally unable to feel fear thus they have no need to conquer it.
The average guardsman charging a daemon despite knowing that he will not survive for 10 seconds yet still charges is braver thenthen most space marines can ever imagine.
I don't think fear is necessary for bravery. All that is necessary is knowing the odds are against you and still choosing to fight anyways. Also in this sense there are no levels of bravery on the battle field except the level of certain death. There is one thing going against the guardsmen though - if he runs away his commissar shoots him. So if he is damned if it does, damned if he don't. A space marine can fall back and no one will judge him - he's just following the codex Astartes.
I’m gonna go with Garviel Loken, if we can use HH characters; guy stood up for what was right against his entire legion, when they were the forefront of the heresy. He was a minnow against a sea of great white sharks, and he stood firm against them. Quite the brass pair on that one.
EmpNortonII wrote:If all Space Marines are truly fearless, they all should be able to talk gak to their Primarch, right?
Sigismund, most noble of all Imperial Fists, passed the buck on commanding a fleet when he knew it would end in his death. Of course, he was an Imperial Fist, so being a little bitch is in line with his geneseed, but Marines clearly have some fears and weaknesses- even the "greatest" of them.
timetowaste85 wrote: I’m gonna go with Garviel Loken, if we can use HH characters; guy stood up for what was right against his entire legion, when they were the forefront of the heresy. He was a minnow against a sea of great white sharks, and he stood firm against them. Quite the brass pair on that one.
Didn't even think about Garvie, yeah that took titanic balls.
Cypher is my vote, the others listed are good but they hold to much position of power and can fall back on that so it supports their... 'bravery' to an extent and to me they stay inside that comfort zone. Cypher goes where he wants, does what he wants and his baggage fee's are heavy with everyone.
Viridian wrote: Cypher is my vote, the others listed are good but they hold to much position of power and can fall back on that so it supports their... 'bravery' to an extent and to me they stay inside that comfort zone. Cypher goes where he wants, does what he wants and his baggage fee's are heavy with everyone.
we don't know eneugh about cypher's motivations IMHO to comment on the size of his balls eaither way IMHO.
This wasn’t a debate up untill recently. It was (untill Gw re-write him) quite simply Ollanius Pious. Also know as Ollanious with adamantium balls, the man with the tremendous balls and the big balled mother fether. If you know his original story then no explanation is needed. If you don’t then google him or hit one of the links below.
So much Imperial/Chaos bias here. Vect's got to be a contender. Pretty much survives moment to moment through the power of his intellect and cunning in a near-infinite city where literally almost everyone wants to kill him and take his place.
Or whichever Silent King it was that declared war on the Old Ones? Immortal God-beings who have conquered the known galaxy? Yeah, let's go pick a fight with them.
See, while I don't argue that Guardsmen are brave and courageous... They have faith.
They will die for the Emperor, and be protected by him and live in whatever equates to a happy ending for Guardsmen.
Abbadon? If he feths up, he's screwed for all eternity. And he knows how bad that would be. And he did it anyway, because screw the Emperor. He KNOWS how bad the consequences of his failure will be. Not just a painful death... no. Because the worst of all possible deaths is nothing compared to what will await him, if he fails his mission.
ChargerIIC wrote: I think it's harder to find anyone more the Balisarius Cawl. Gulliman had the rank, authority, and surety to order super-marines (even after the previous debacles), but Cawl was the one who actually had to do it. He didn't get to hide in suspension either - he was an 'active' member of the Mechanicum for thousands of years - risking exposure and exterminatus every year as he siphoned Imperial resources for heresy. The sheer scope is mind boggling -
"What? These hundred troopships and manfactoriums? They are making ...stuff. Totally non-heretical stuff. Stuff no one can see or use. By the way - I need a few thousand more young boys."
The best part is he had no conceivable timeline for when he could release his creations - there was no guarantee that Gulliman would ever come back.
Cawl wasn't the first to be a rebel in the Mechanicum, lots of forge masters and mistresses broke the rules in the pursuit of new technologies like Koriel Zeth with the Akashic-reader. Cawl isn't special at all.
He isn't ballsy for being the 'first' - he did it the longest, with one of the highest amounts of direct oversight. Most tech-heritiks were either isolated enough to avoid scrutiny or were committing things on a small scale. Not Cawl. He was a freakin' part of the core leadership, responsible for (amongst other things) enforcing orthodoxy and participating in the frequent political/religious infighting. How noone managed to figure out what he was doing is pretty mind boggling.
ChargerIIC wrote: I think it's harder to find anyone more the Balisarius Cawl. Gulliman had the rank, authority, and surety to order super-marines (even after the previous debacles), but Cawl was the one who actually had to do it. He didn't get to hide in suspension either - he was an 'active' member of the Mechanicum for thousands of years - risking exposure and exterminatus every year as he siphoned Imperial resources for heresy. The sheer scope is mind boggling -
"What? These hundred troopships and manfactoriums? They are making ...stuff. Totally non-heretical stuff. Stuff no one can see or use. By the way - I need a few thousand more young boys."
The best part is he had no conceivable timeline for when he could release his creations - there was no guarantee that Gulliman would ever come back.
Cawl wasn't the first to be a rebel in the Mechanicum, lots of forge masters and mistresses broke the rules in the pursuit of new technologies like Koriel Zeth with the Akashic-reader. Cawl isn't special at all.
He isn't ballsy for being the 'first' - he did it the longest, with one of the highest amounts of direct oversight. Most tech-heritiks were either isolated enough to avoid scrutiny or were committing things on a small scale. Not Cawl. He was a freakin' part of the core leadership, responsible for (amongst other things) enforcing orthodoxy and participating in the frequent political/religious infighting. How noone managed to figure out what he was doing is pretty mind boggling.
ChargerIIC wrote: I think it's harder to find anyone more the Balisarius Cawl. Gulliman had the rank, authority, and surety to order super-marines (even after the previous debacles), but Cawl was the one who actually had to do it. He didn't get to hide in suspension either - he was an 'active' member of the Mechanicum for thousands of years - risking exposure and exterminatus every year as he siphoned Imperial resources for heresy. The sheer scope is mind boggling -
"What? These hundred troopships and manfactoriums? They are making ...stuff. Totally non-heretical stuff. Stuff no one can see or use. By the way - I need a few thousand more young boys."
The best part is he had no conceivable timeline for when he could release his creations - there was no guarantee that Gulliman would ever come back.
Cawl wasn't the first to be a rebel in the Mechanicum, lots of forge masters and mistresses broke the rules in the pursuit of new technologies like Koriel Zeth with the Akashic-reader. Cawl isn't special at all.
He isn't ballsy for being the 'first' - he did it the longest, with one of the highest amounts of direct oversight. Most tech-heritiks were either isolated enough to avoid scrutiny or were committing things on a small scale. Not Cawl. He was a freakin' part of the core leadership, responsible for (amongst other things) enforcing orthodoxy and participating in the frequent political/religious infighting. How noone managed to figure out what he was doing is pretty mind boggling.
Or just plain convenient for plot.
True. He ranks up there with Gulliman for almost Matt Ward level of plot armor - but that's 40k. Everyone is doomed to an early death and the laughter of thirsting gods except for the chosen :p . The OP did ask who was the balliest however.
Backspacehacker wrote: If not mentioned, ahriman is up there, seeing as how he, multiple times, went against his primarch constantly
No he's not, when he was exiled he became a servant of Gzrel who treated him like a dog and Ahriman let him, he gave up. Lots of Astartes went against their Primarchs, Loken, Kharn, Sigismund etc.
Backspacehacker wrote: If not mentioned, ahriman is up there, seeing as how he, multiple times, went against his primarch constantly
No he's not, when he was exiled he became a servant of Gzrel who treated him like a dog and Ahriman let him, he gave up. Lots of Astartes went against their Primarchs, Loken, Kharn, Sigismund etc.
people evolve over time, sometimes those with the biggest balls started out as the biggest doormats.
Backspacehacker wrote: If not mentioned, ahriman is up there, seeing as how he, multiple times, went against his primarch constantly
No he's not, when he was exiled he became a servant of Gzrel who treated him like a dog and Ahriman let him, he gave up. Lots of Astartes went against their Primarchs, Loken, Kharn, Sigismund etc.
people evolve over time, sometimes those with the biggest balls started out as the biggest doormats.
Nah, plus he is the last person on the list for biggest balls.
Backspacehacker wrote: If not mentioned, ahriman is up there, seeing as how he, multiple times, went against his primarch constantly
No he's not, when he was exiled he became a servant of Gzrel who treated him like a dog and Ahriman let him, he gave up. Lots of Astartes went against their Primarchs, Loken, Kharn, Sigismund etc.
people evolve over time, sometimes those with the biggest balls started out as the biggest doormats.
Nah, plus he is the last person on the list for biggest balls.
on your list, someone else it seems disagrees.opinions differ
Asdrubael Vect has bollocks of pure wraithbone so gigantic that the entirety of one of Commorragh's sub-dimensions is devoted simply to holding them comfortably in place for him.
He got killed so that he could get all of his political opponents to come to his funeral and gloat so that he could kill them all in an ambush arranged by his allies and resurrect himself as a demigod with their deaths. I don't mean 'faked his death', I mean he literally died. How ballsy do you need to be to not just risk your life, but actively decide to lose it to advance your plans?
From the most recent Dark Eldar codex, it was in response to Yvraine's shenanigans in Commorragh gaining followers for her Ynnari group and Khaine's Gate being unleashed. These events undermined his authority so he took it into his own hands to use it as an opportunity to reinstall his rule by publicly outing conspirators/up-and-comers alongside challenging Yvraine's command over death/life by coming back to life himself and declaring himself a Living Muse.
Here's one that is worth considering..... The Emperor... given what we know of his ambitions and what he's done? It was pretty ballsy. He, seemingly failed, but you gotta give him credit, that level of ambition takes balls of neutronium
BrianDavion wrote: Here's one that is worth considering..... The Emperor... given what we know of his ambitions and what he's done? It was pretty ballsy. He, seemingly failed, but you gotta give him credit, that level of ambition takes balls of neutronium
I think he's lived so long and he's so jaded that he is no longer afraid of anything, though sitting on the golden throne and still fighting chaos etc. takes incredible will power.
BrianDavion wrote: Here's one that is worth considering..... The Emperor... given what we know of his ambitions and what he's done? It was pretty ballsy. He, seemingly failed, but you gotta give him credit, that level of ambition takes balls of neutronium
I think he's lived so long and he's so jaded that he is no longer afraid of anything, though sitting on the golden throne and still fighting chaos etc. takes incredible will power.
you say those as if they are facts. but they're just your opinions. IMHO the Emperor is indeed capable of fear, in fact I'm of the opinion much of what is driving him IS fear. Fear for humanity
BrianDavion wrote: Here's one that is worth considering..... The Emperor... given what we know of his ambitions and what he's done? It was pretty ballsy. He, seemingly failed, but you gotta give him credit, that level of ambition takes balls of neutronium
I think he's lived so long and he's so jaded that he is no longer afraid of anything, though sitting on the golden throne and still fighting chaos etc. takes incredible will power.
you say those as if they are facts. but they're just your opinions. IMHO the Emperor is indeed capable of fear, in fact I'm of the opinion much of what is driving him IS fear. Fear for humanity
Do you not see where I said 'I think', hardly stating facts.
"the Emperor is indeed capable of fear, in fact I'm of the opinion much of what is driving him IS fear. Fear for humanity" that;s just your opinion, we don't know anything about the emperor, whether he feels fear like us etc. or if its more the Astartes/Primarchs/Custodes type of fear.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: You did say otherwise, you said the unequivocally don't feel fear. "Bravery" is a pretty null and void concept in the Space Marine's psyche" your quote. That you are arguing in the face of evidence and are changing your argument, means I can no longer argue with you.
You're confusing what they do in action with what they feel inside while doing it. I never said what they do in action in and of itself cannot be considered brave, especially looking at it from a mortal man's perspective (which is 95% of all lore in the setting). So again, Astartes frames of reference for things, such as the concepts of "fear" and "bravery", are so disconnected with our own they may as well be alien to them. That was the point of my quote. Context matters. Pull words from my posts and isolate them to try and give them different meaning all you want, it ain't gonna help your argument against mine. Marines don't compute charging in with 10-to-1 odds as a brave thing to do, as non-Astartes would, they simply do it without even thinking about it in those terms. While a Guardsman would have to steel themselves, gulp, take a deep breath, steady their nerves, then charge in, Astartes are already halfway down the hill - not having to do any of that.
That was one of the shortest-lived "I'm done"'s I've seen in quite a while. Welcome back, I guess?
You called my reasoning and then tried to call it quits, give me a break. I genuinely wanted to call it quits, I did it without insulting you, being magnanimous.
The fact that you A) ignored the chance to do so when I first offered it, and then B) returned to the argument again after saying you were done in less time than it took for me to edit typos in my post speaks volumes against your supposed integrity, I'm afraid.
I quoted you fully:
"Bravery" is a pretty null and void concept in the Space Marine's psyche. To them it is simply one's duty to stand and fight in defiance of the Emperor's enemies. They just... do it. Because that's their purpose. Non-Marines, though? They actually have to summon the courage to do the same. It's pretty simple and self-explanatory"" - Somehow this comment is gone, you either have help editing the page or you deleted this, that is so pathetic.
"Astartes frames of reference for things, such as the concepts of "fear" and "bravery", are so disconnected with our own they may as well be alien to them. That was the point of my quote." This wasn't the point of your quote.
You said explicitly 'null and void', why would you ever use that phrase if you are suggesting they just have a lower degree of bravery. You said the merely do it for duty and I proved you wrong, you also said the lore says they are not brave, again I should you are wrong. That you cannot admit you are wrong is pathetic, you are just embarrassing yourself. You lie and can't admit you are wrong, your integrity is at stake not mine. You've even gone back and edited your comments ppffttt, you can delete them, but you have to look yourself in the mirror, ppfffttt Jesus Christ... ANYONE reading the thread can see that lol. Somehow some of my comments are gone, but the quotes in your comments are still there, even dark apostle 666 comment telling us to stop fighting is there and somehow there are no comments before that of us arguing at all. How can you even do that, have you a mod on your side or something. People reading this lol go back and read this thread and see what this guy has done. Saying I'm done and continuing has nothing to do with integrity lol Supposed would mean I said I had integrity, which I never did lol, no wonder you used that word, projection much.
I think there is a part of being ballsy the "Space Marines can't be ballsy" crowd are missing.
When a British line trooper would march into incoming fire, he is most assuredly being courageous... but given that everyone else is doing it, it doesn't qualify as ballsy. After all everyone else is doing it. In contrast, if my boss gives me gak for being late coming back from work, and I tell him off because I'm the only person there capable of finishing a job by a deadline, that's ballsy, despite no physical courage being involved.
Space Marines can totally be ballsy. I think just about everyone would say that Aeonid Thiel showed some fething balls when he started playing with Guilliman's personal collection of weapons in... was it Know No Fear? The one where the battle of Calth was launched. It's ballsy to be in trouble, figure you don't have much to lose, and entertain yourself with your Primarch's private collection.
EmpNortonII wrote: I think there is a part of being ballsy the "Space Marines can't be ballsy" crowd are missing.
When a British line trooper would march into incoming fire, he is most assuredly being courageous... but given that everyone else is doing it, it doesn't qualify as ballsy. After all everyone else is doing it. In contrast, if my boss gives me gak for being late coming back from work, and I tell him off because I'm the only person there capable of finishing a job by a deadline, that's ballsy, despite no physical courage being involved.
Space Marines can totally be ballsy. I think just about everyone would say that Aeonid Thiel showed some fething balls when he started playing with Guilliman's personal collection of weapons in... was it Know No Fear? The one where the battle of Calth was launched. It's ballsy to be in trouble, figure you don't have much to lose, and entertain yourself with your Primarch's private collection.
EmpNortonII wrote: I think there is a part of being ballsy the "Space Marines can't be ballsy" crowd are missing.
When a British line trooper would march into incoming fire, he is most assuredly being courageous... but given that everyone else is doing it, it doesn't qualify as ballsy. After all everyone else is doing it. In contrast, if my boss gives me gak for being late coming back from work, and I tell him off because I'm the only person there capable of finishing a job by a deadline, that's ballsy, despite no physical courage being involved.
Space Marines can totally be ballsy. I think just about everyone would say that Aeonid Thiel showed some fething balls when he started playing with Guilliman's personal collection of weapons in... was it Know No Fear? The one where the battle of Calth was launched. It's ballsy to be in trouble, figure you don't have much to lose, and entertain yourself with your Primarch's private collection.
Well, assuming we're treating 'balls' as metaphorical... Cyrene Valantion. A blind and unaugmented human who was nevertheless willing to calmly stand up to a whole squad of freaking Custodes? I think that qualifies as pretty ballsy.
BrianDavion wrote: Here's one that is worth considering..... The Emperor... given what we know of his ambitions and what he's done? It was pretty ballsy. He, seemingly failed, but you gotta give him credit, that level of ambition takes balls of neutronium
I think he's lived so long and he's so jaded that he is no longer afraid of anything, though sitting on the golden throne and still fighting chaos etc. takes incredible will power.
you say those as if they are facts. but they're just your opinions. IMHO the Emperor is indeed capable of fear, in fact I'm of the opinion much of what is driving him IS fear. Fear for humanity
Do you not see where I said 'I think', hardly stating facts.
"the Emperor is indeed capable of fear, in fact I'm of the opinion much of what is driving him IS fear. Fear for humanity" that;s just your opinion, we don't know anything about the emperor, whether he feels fear like us etc. or if its more the Astartes/Primarchs/Custodes type of fear.
No, we've just seen the previous 3 pages where you dismiss anything that doesn't fit your narrow criteria that only exists in your head and you make people guess what it is.
BrianDavion wrote: Here's one that is worth considering..... The Emperor... given what we know of his ambitions and what he's done? It was pretty ballsy. He, seemingly failed, but you gotta give him credit, that level of ambition takes balls of neutronium
I think he's lived so long and he's so jaded that he is no longer afraid of anything, though sitting on the golden throne and still fighting chaos etc. takes incredible will power.
you say those as if they are facts. but they're just your opinions. IMHO the Emperor is indeed capable of fear, in fact I'm of the opinion much of what is driving him IS fear. Fear for humanity
Do you not see where I said 'I think', hardly stating facts.
"the Emperor is indeed capable of fear, in fact I'm of the opinion much of what is driving him IS fear. Fear for humanity" that;s just your opinion, we don't know anything about the emperor, whether he feels fear like us etc. or if its more the Astartes/Primarchs/Custodes type of fear.
No, we've just seen the previous 3 pages where you dismiss anything that doesn't fit your narrow criteria that only exists in your head and you make people guess what it is.
Yeah and I've also agreed with many of the choices across three pages, but you just ignored them didn't you. You're so predictable.
You seem to have conveniently glossed over the following post in your hurry to (days later, bizarrely) launch into another tirade of baseless insults against me:
BrookM wrote: This topic has been pinged a few times now and I've cleaned it up here and there.
I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT RULE #1 IS NOT OPTIONAL.
Also, please refrain from quoting entire walls of text.
Unlike you, I never edited my posts half a dozen times after the fact, and unlike you, I’m actually going to do what I say by dropping it here and now. This exchange is over.
You seem to have conveniently glossed over the following post in your hurry to (days later, bizarrely) launch into another tirade of baseless insults against me:
BrookM wrote: This topic has been pinged a few times now and I've cleaned it up here and there.
I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND PEOPLE THAT RULE #1 IS NOT OPTIONAL.
Also, please refrain from quoting entire walls of text.
Unlike you, I never edited my posts half a dozen times after the fact, and unlike you, I’m actually going to do what I say by dropping it here and now. This exchange is over.
Yeah conveniently all the comments that show you are wrong are all gone (the comments that were there before we were even arguing are gone as well), none that had long quotes, insults or text have been removed, the one where I quoted at length is still there etc. You're just incredibly sad.
On topic, I'd say that I'd also include Rogal Dorn insofar as his refusal to adopt the Codex Astartes at first almost resulted in a fresh civil war.
I dunno, I always intepreted that as Dorn just being stubbron and stamping his feet
I think the codex was probably the worst decision Guilliman ever made. It weakened the Astartes and it didn't protect them at all from becoming traitorous as the Badab war showed All that had to be done is to ban any one person from controlling all the Astartes legions, No wonder Dorn was against it.
On topic, I'd say that I'd also include Rogal Dorn insofar as his refusal to adopt the Codex Astartes at first almost resulted in a fresh civil war.
I dunno, I always intepreted that as Dorn just being stubbron and stamping his feet
I think the codex was probably the worst decision Guilliman ever made. It weakened the Astartes and it didn't protect them at all from becoming traitorous as the Badab war showed All that had to be done is to ban any one person from controlling all the Astartes legions, No wonder Dorn was against it.
And just how would he do that without breaking Marines down into smaller chunks?
On topic, I'd say that I'd also include Rogal Dorn insofar as his refusal to adopt the Codex Astartes at first almost resulted in a fresh civil war.
I dunno, I always intepreted that as Dorn just being stubbron and stamping his feet
I think the codex was probably the worst decision Guilliman ever made. It weakened the Astartes and it didn't protect them at all from becoming traitorous as the Badab war showed All that had to be done is to ban any one person from controlling all the Astartes legions, No wonder Dorn was against it.
And just how would he do that without breaking Marines down into smaller chunks?
As I said, just have no warmaster. The codex did absolutely nothing to stop the Badab war from happening and the splitting of chapters has severely weakened the Astartes capabilities.
On topic, I'd say that I'd also include Rogal Dorn insofar as his refusal to adopt the Codex Astartes at first almost resulted in a fresh civil war.
I dunno, I always intepreted that as Dorn just being stubbron and stamping his feet
I think the codex was probably the worst decision Guilliman ever made. It weakened the Astartes and it didn't protect them at all from becoming traitorous as the Badab war showed All that had to be done is to ban any one person from controlling all the Astartes legions, No wonder Dorn was against it.
And just how would he do that without breaking Marines down into smaller chunks?
As I said, just have no warmaster. The codex did absolutely nothing to stop the Badab war from happening.
The Codex wasn't suppose to stop the Badab war from happening, the codex meant that when the Badb war happened (and this was the largest conflict of it's time since the heresy) the damage was minimal. There where only 4 chapters that sided with the Astral claws, meaning about 4000 Marines. biiig differance from the heresy era Legions which had about ,100,000 Marines which would have been a FAR more devestating conflict.
So yes, the codex DID it's job. which wasn't to prevent ay space marine ever from going bad, but to limit the damage done when one DID go bad
On topic, I'd say that I'd also include Rogal Dorn insofar as his refusal to adopt the Codex Astartes at first almost resulted in a fresh civil war.
I dunno, I always intepreted that as Dorn just being stubbron and stamping his feet
I think the codex was probably the worst decision Guilliman ever made. It weakened the Astartes and it didn't protect them at all from becoming traitorous as the Badab war showed All that had to be done is to ban any one person from controlling all the Astartes legions, No wonder Dorn was against it.
And just how would he do that without breaking Marines down into smaller chunks?
As I said, just have no warmaster. The codex did absolutely nothing to stop the Badab war from happening.
The Codex wasn't suppose to stop the Badab war from happening, the codex meant that when the Badb war happened (and this was the largest conflict of it's time since the heresy) the damage was minimal. There where only 4 chapters that sided with the Astral claws, meaning about 4000 Marines. biiig differance from the heresy era Legions which had about ,100,000 Marines which would have been a FAR more devestating conflict.
So yes, the codex DID it's job. which wasn't to prevent ay space marine ever from going bad, but to limit the damage done when one DID go bad
Splitting the legions into chapters were supposed to never let the HH happen again and the codex details how to do that. The codex never did its job, chapters turn traitor all the time and the Badab war happened. It wouldn't have been worse if the legions were at full strength, because it wouldn't of happened, Huron united the Maelstrom Warders because the were all of the same system and had goals in common, that wouldn't have happened with the founding loyal legions as they are from systems that are isolated from one another and they have very different interests, goals etc. If the founding legions turned it would most likely be one legion in which the rest could sanction, plus the memory of the HH and the bond of loyalty from that would mean they would probably never turn as they haven't in 10,000 years. Now there are so many chapters that have little relation to their founding chapters and have their own differences, difficulties and goals, that's why they turn so often and why its only 2nd founders that ever turn now. Bare in mind also that the Badab war was one of the worst rebellions in Imperial history and they were only chapter strength.
yes stopping the heresy from even happening again, by styming the amount of power over marines any one man can amass. Yet again without the codex the Badb war would have been fought with a hundred thousand marines instead of four thousand seems to me the codex did it's job. Gulliman knew that you can't STOP chaos from corrupting people, so his goal with the codex (as well as the numerous other reformations he brought in such as seperating the imperial army into guard and navy) was to limit the damage. It's classic harm reduction stragety. "This ill isn't something that can be stopped so instead we're going to reduce the harm it can do as much as possiable"
BrianDavion wrote: yes stopping the heresy from even happening again, by styming the amount of power over marines any one man can amass. Yet again without the codex the Badb war would have been fought with a hundred thousand marines instead of four thousand seems to me the codex did it's job. Gulliman knew that you can't STOP chaos from corrupting people, so his goal with the codex (as well as the numerous other reformations he brought in such as seperating the imperial army into guard and navy) was to limit the damage. It's classic harm reduction stragety. "This ill isn't something that can be stopped so instead we're going to reduce the harm it can do as much as possiable"
It didn't stymy the power really, 7 chapters fought on the side of Huron, 70,000 marines which is as much as some legions. Without a warmaster there would probably never be a HH type rebellion again especially not with the founding chapters and in 10,000 years no founding chapters has ever turned. The codex did nothing but weaken the Astartes and it did nothing to stop a rebellion happening again. Its actually far easier for 2nd founding chapters to secede as many have far less ties to their original chapters etc. The Badab war was massive, Guilliman thought that size of conflict would never happen again with Astartes forces after the introduction of the codex, he was dead wrong. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
BrianDavion wrote: yes stopping the heresy from even happening again, by styming the amount of power over marines any one man can amass. Yet again without the codex the Badb war would have been fought with a hundred thousand marines instead of four thousand seems to me the codex did it's job. Gulliman knew that you can't STOP chaos from corrupting people, so his goal with the codex (as well as the numerous other reformations he brought in such as seperating the imperial army into guard and navy) was to limit the damage. It's classic harm reduction stragety. "This ill isn't something that can be stopped so instead we're going to reduce the harm it can do as much as possiable"
It didn't stymy the power really, 7 chapters fought on the side of Huron, 70,000 marines which is as much as some legions. Without a warmaster there would probably never be a HH type rebellion again especially not with the founding chapters and in 10,000 years no founding chapters has ever turned. The codex did nothing but weaken the Astartes and it did nothing to stop a rebellion happening again. Its actually far easier for 2nd founding chapters to secede as many have far less ties to their original chapters etc. The Badab war was massive, Guilliman thought that size of conflict would never happen again with Astartes forces after the introduction of the codex, he was dead wrong. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
7 chapters is 7000 marines not 70,000.
And yet again, Gulliman was RIGHT, the Badb war was the biggest space marine rebellion since the Horus Heresy, and the number of chapters in rebellion where not 7, it was 4 chapters, the Astral Claws, Executioners, Lamenters and the Mantis Warriors. The Tyrants Legion was eistamated to contain another 1000 space marines so... all total, 5000 marines. and if the LARGEST space Marine rebellion since the Heresy was ONLY 5000 Marines? I'd say the Codex has done it's job.
BrianDavion wrote: yes stopping the heresy from even happening again, by styming the amount of power over marines any one man can amass. Yet again without the codex the Badb war would have been fought with a hundred thousand marines instead of four thousand seems to me the codex did it's job. Gulliman knew that you can't STOP chaos from corrupting people, so his goal with the codex (as well as the numerous other reformations he brought in such as seperating the imperial army into guard and navy) was to limit the damage. It's classic harm reduction stragety. "This ill isn't something that can be stopped so instead we're going to reduce the harm it can do as much as possiable"
It didn't stymy the power really, 7 chapters fought on the side of Huron, 70,000 marines which is as much as some legions. Without a warmaster there would probably never be a HH type rebellion again especially not with the founding chapters and in 10,000 years no founding chapters has ever turned. The codex did nothing but weaken the Astartes and it did nothing to stop a rebellion happening again. Its actually far easier for 2nd founding chapters to secede as many have far less ties to their original chapters etc. The Badab war was massive, Guilliman thought that size of conflict would never happen again with Astartes forces after the introduction of the codex, he was dead wrong. I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
7 chapters is 7000 marines not 70,000.
And yet again, Gulliman was RIGHT, the Badb war was the biggest space marine rebellion since the Horus Heresy, and the number of chapters in rebellion where not 7, it was 4 chapters, the Astral Claws, Executioners, Lamenters and the Mantis Warriors. The Tyrants Legion was eistamated to contain another 1000 space marines so... all total, 5000 marines. and if the LARGEST space Marine rebellion since the Heresy was ONLY 5000 Marines? I'd say the Codex has done it's job.
So it is facepalm.
Guilliman was not right and if you say her was right you have to evidence rather than just saying he was right. regardless of the numbers, Guilliman's codex failed to stop the Badab war from happening, which was its point, its point was to stop legions banding together, the chapters banded together nonetheless and he still just weakened the Astartes. Plus only second founding chapters have turned. He failed miserably. The precident is set as well, we know he failed so there is nothing from stopping a quarter, half of all chapters joining together and turning against the Imperium. All the codex accomplished was weakening the Astartes. I mean how can you say he was right, the Badab war was just a lower scale version of the HH, he didn't stop anything.
I mean how can you say he was right, the Badab war was just a lower scale version of the HH, he didn't stop anything.
Because it was smaller scale. MUCH smaller scale. Gulliamn knew that preventing Marines falling to chaos was proably futile, so he didn't try to prevent it. rather he took steps to ensure the damage would be minimal when it happened. Basic Harm reduction. If you can't stop something bad from happening, take steps to mitigate the damage. THAT is what the codex was intended as. Not some "magical chaos vaccine"
(Also, why is ADB the only BL author who can write properly badass female characters? )
On the subject of Guilliman and the Codex, I got the impression (can't remember from where) that breaking up the legions into chapters wasn't because Guilliman thought it was a good idea, but because that was the compromise he reached with the other High Lords to allow the Astartes to continue to exist at all. Because the other High Lords flat out wanted every single marine executed to prevent another Horus Heresy. And that's why Dorn refused to accept it, because unlike ultimate-pragmatist Guilliman, he never saw any value in compromise. From Dorn's PoV, it reduced the Astartes' military effectiveness for no real purpose, just for stupid PR reasons, so why do it?
(Also, why is ADB the only BL author who can write properly badass female characters? )
On the subject of Guilliman and the Codex, I got the impression (can't remember from where) that breaking up the legions into chapters wasn't because Guilliman thought it was a good idea, but because that was the compromise he reached with the other High Lords to allow the Astartes to continue to exist at all. Because the other High Lords flat out wanted every single marine executed to prevent another Horus Heresy. And that's why Dorn refused to accept it, because unlike ultimate-pragmatist Guilliman, he never saw any value in compromise. From Dorn's PoV, it reduced the Astartes' military effectiveness for no real purpose, just for stupid PR reasons, so why do it?
ou may have gotten that from me as I've been peddling that theory for awhile now. One of the ever present themes of the early HH books are that humanity doesn't realize just how fething vicious the Astartes are when they make war. it's one of the first thingsjust about every rememberancer character notes. So come the siege of terra the people of Terra see first hand how fething BRUTAL the space marines are, and are JUSTLY scared shitless. I'm sure there where a considerable number of calls to just disband the legions.
I mean how can you say he was right, the Badab war was just a lower scale version of the HH, he didn't stop anything.
Because it was smaller scale. MUCH smaller scale. Gulliamn knew that preventing Marines falling to chaos was proably futile, so he didn't try to prevent it. rather he took steps to ensure the damage would be minimal when it happened. Basic Harm reduction. If you can't stop something bad from happening, take steps to mitigate the damage. THAT is what the codex was intended as. Not some "magical chaos vaccine"
The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again.
I’d say numerous characters from Gaunts Ghosts have an excess of balls... Mkoll stands out, as does Giant himself for constantly speaking plainly even to the faces of Lord Generals who do not want to hear it lol
Commissar Yarrick has massive stones. The number of times he rode into the face of death purely to inspire his troops and perform the Emperor's will is ridiculous.
I mean how can you say he was right, the Badab war was just a lower scale version of the HH, he didn't stop anything.
Because it was smaller scale. MUCH smaller scale. Gulliamn knew that preventing Marines falling to chaos was proably futile, so he didn't try to prevent it. rather he took steps to ensure the damage would be minimal when it happened. Basic Harm reduction. If you can't stop something bad from happening, take steps to mitigate the damage. THAT is what the codex was intended as. Not some "magical chaos vaccine"
The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again.
So it worked? The HH saw 9 whole Legions rebel, plus a whole host of Imperial Army and Navy assets. Often this was as a result of how closely those elements worked together. It was fairly common when a Primarch and their Legion rebelled that a large proportion of the attached Imperial forces did so too. The Codex was about breaking up both the Legions and their influence over other military units. The Badab War is pretty insignificant when compared to the HH. Around 5000 Marines and one Battlefleet turned traitor. There has never been another event even close to the scale of the HH since the Codex was created.
What's interesting is whether the return of the loyalist Primarchs has the possibility to change things. One of the other factors in the Heresy was the raw charisma of the Primarchs and the fact many of the forces that fought under them revered and near-worshipped them. With the Emperor a distant, near-mythical figure it would have been much easier to follow the Primarch who had led you to victory after victory over some nebulous concept of the good of mankind. Imagine a situation where The Lion returns and decides to secede from the Imperium. I'm pretty sure he could persuade most, if not all, of the Unforgiven to follow him given enough time to set things up. Not saying he would, just an interesting thing to think about.
I mean how can you say he was right, the Badab war was just a lower scale version of the HH, he didn't stop anything.
Because it was smaller scale. MUCH smaller scale. Gulliamn knew that preventing Marines falling to chaos was proably futile, so he didn't try to prevent it. rather he took steps to ensure the damage would be minimal when it happened. Basic Harm reduction. If you can't stop something bad from happening, take steps to mitigate the damage. THAT is what the codex was intended as. Not some "magical chaos vaccine"
The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again.
So it worked? The HH saw 9 whole Legions rebel, plus a whole host of Imperial Army and Navy assets. Often this was as a result of how closely those elements worked together. It was fairly common when a Primarch and their Legion rebelled that a large proportion of the attached Imperial forces did so too. The Codex was about breaking up both the Legions and their influence over other military units. The Badab War is pretty insignificant when compared to the HH. Around 5000 Marines and one Battlefleet turned traitor. There has never been another event even close to the scale of the HH since the Codex was created.
What's interesting is whether the return of the loyalist Primarchs has the possibility to change things. One of the other factors in the Heresy was the raw charisma of the Primarchs and the fact many of the forces that fought under them revered and near-worshipped them. With the Emperor a distant, near-mythical figure it would have been much easier to follow the Primarch who had led you to victory after victory over some nebulous concept of the good of mankind. Imagine a situation where The Lion returns and decides to secede from the Imperium. I'm pretty sure he could persuade most, if not all, of the Unforgiven to follow him given enough time to set things up. Not saying he would, just an interesting thing to think about.
Obviously not if the Badab war happened. Whats to stop 20 chapters, 100 or half the chapters joining together like they did in the Badab war and rebelling. The loyalist legions were loyal and have been for 10,000 years, Guilliman didn't need to split them up, especially with the HH being the best tool to teach about the seriousness of Chaos and rebelling. All that came out of the break up was limiting the Astartes and creating the possibility for rebellions and traitors, the only rebellions and chapters turning traitor etc. have been 2nd founding. The Badab war was smaller but it was still a significant rebellion.
I mean how can you say he was right, the Badab war was just a lower scale version of the HH, he didn't stop anything.
Because it was smaller scale. MUCH smaller scale. Gulliamn knew that preventing Marines falling to chaos was proably futile, so he didn't try to prevent it. rather he took steps to ensure the damage would be minimal when it happened. Basic Harm reduction. If you can't stop something bad from happening, take steps to mitigate the damage. THAT is what the codex was intended as. Not some "magical chaos vaccine"
The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again.
So it worked? The HH saw 9 whole Legions rebel, plus a whole host of Imperial Army and Navy assets. Often this was as a result of how closely those elements worked together. It was fairly common when a Primarch and their Legion rebelled that a large proportion of the attached Imperial forces did so too. The Codex was about breaking up both the Legions and their influence over other military units. The Badab War is pretty insignificant when compared to the HH. Around 5000 Marines and one Battlefleet turned traitor. There has never been another event even close to the scale of the HH since the Codex was created.
What's interesting is whether the return of the loyalist Primarchs has the possibility to change things. One of the other factors in the Heresy was the raw charisma of the Primarchs and the fact many of the forces that fought under them revered and near-worshipped them. With the Emperor a distant, near-mythical figure it would have been much easier to follow the Primarch who had led you to victory after victory over some nebulous concept of the good of mankind. Imagine a situation where The Lion returns and decides to secede from the Imperium. I'm pretty sure he could persuade most, if not all, of the Unforgiven to follow him given enough time to set things up. Not saying he would, just an interesting thing to think about.
Obviously not if the Badab war happened. Whats to stop 20 chapters, 100 or half the chapters joining together like they did in the Badab war and rebelling. The loyalist legions were loyal and have been for 10,000 years, Guilliman didn't need to split them up, especially with the HH being the best tool to teach about the seriousness of Chaos and rebelling. All that came out of the break up was limiting the Astartes and creating the possibility for rebellions and traitors, the only rebellions and chapters turning traitor etc. have been 2nd founding. The Badab war was smaller but it was still a significant rebellion.
for a guy who likes to quote giant blocks of text Del you sure make a lot of elementry mistakes. No the loyalist legions where NOT loyal for 10,000 years, they where loyal for just over 200 years. And yes the 1st founding Legions have been loyal, but the 2nd plus founders are all made of the same cloth. What would have happened in Huron had been commander of the Ultramarines Legion?
I mean how can you say he was right, the Badab war was just a lower scale version of the HH, he didn't stop anything.
Because it was smaller scale. MUCH smaller scale. Gulliamn knew that preventing Marines falling to chaos was proably futile, so he didn't try to prevent it. rather he took steps to ensure the damage would be minimal when it happened. Basic Harm reduction. If you can't stop something bad from happening, take steps to mitigate the damage. THAT is what the codex was intended as. Not some "magical chaos vaccine"
The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again.
So it worked? The HH saw 9 whole Legions rebel, plus a whole host of Imperial Army and Navy assets. Often this was as a result of how closely those elements worked together. It was fairly common when a Primarch and their Legion rebelled that a large proportion of the attached Imperial forces did so too. The Codex was about breaking up both the Legions and their influence over other military units. The Badab War is pretty insignificant when compared to the HH. Around 5000 Marines and one Battlefleet turned traitor. There has never been another event even close to the scale of the HH since the Codex was created.
What's interesting is whether the return of the loyalist Primarchs has the possibility to change things. One of the other factors in the Heresy was the raw charisma of the Primarchs and the fact many of the forces that fought under them revered and near-worshipped them. With the Emperor a distant, near-mythical figure it would have been much easier to follow the Primarch who had led you to victory after victory over some nebulous concept of the good of mankind. Imagine a situation where The Lion returns and decides to secede from the Imperium. I'm pretty sure he could persuade most, if not all, of the Unforgiven to follow him given enough time to set things up. Not saying he would, just an interesting thing to think about.
Obviously not if the Badab war happened. Whats to stop 20 chapters, 100 or half the chapters joining together like they did in the Badab war and rebelling. The loyalist legions were loyal and have been for 10,000 years, Guilliman didn't need to split them up, especially with the HH being the best tool to teach about the seriousness of Chaos and rebelling. All that came out of the break up was limiting the Astartes and creating the possibility for rebellions and traitors, the only rebellions and chapters turning traitor etc. have been 2nd founding. The Badab war was smaller but it was still a significant rebellion.
for a guy who likes to quote giant blocks of text Del you sure make a lot of elementry mistakes. No the loyalist legions where NOT loyal for 10,000 years, they where loyal for just over 200 years. And yes the 1st founding Legions have been loyal, but the 2nd plus founders are all made of the same cloth. What would have happened in Huron had been commander of the Ultramarines Legion?
'Elementary mistakes' that's rich coming from you. I know more about your Ultramarines than you do and you go in rages if someone says something against your smurfs. You didn't even know Guilliman intended for the codex to be a be it and end all of warfare and was to be followed to the T and it would win any outcome, don't suddenly get cocky because I didn't know the exact numbers of the Badab war, its easy to google and prove someone wrong when they are obscure details. Plus you argue about books you've never even read (before you deny that remember unlike you I use quotes) The loyalists are still loyalists so yeah its 10,000 years DERP... The 2nd founding chapters have the same gene-seed, some have loyalty to their 1st founding legion and some have little relations with them and as such are the only ones that are constantly turning rouge/traitor.
pm713 wrote: Much as I love text walls of fighting do you want to cut it out a little?
How can you have second foundings constantly turn traitor anyway? It makes no sense.
Because they are the only ones that have turned traitor.
Funny I can only think of one confirmed Space Marine Chapter that went traitor from the second founding, The Fists Exemplar. The root of their fall was beliving they where never wrong, this meant they refused to question their actions and thus they moved slower and slower into heresy
pm713 wrote: Much as I love text walls of fighting do you want to cut it out a little?
How can you have second foundings constantly turn traitor anyway? It makes no sense.
Because they are the only ones that have turned traitor.
Funny I can only think of one confirmed Space Marine Chapter that went traitor from the second founding, The Fists Exemplar. The root of their fall was beliving they where never wrong, this meant they refused to question their actions and thus they moved slower and slower into heresy
What about all the chapters who fought in the Badab war... Plus the Astral blades, avenging sons, annihilators, Berzerkers of Kharadon and on and on and on. before you start I mean collectively, I don't mean specifically the 2nd and you know it, so don't try and score points from semantics, I mean all the foundings after the 1st.
Obviously not if the Badab war happened. Whats to stop 20 chapters, 100 or half the chapters joining together like they did in the Badab war and rebelling. The loyalist legions were loyal and have been for 10,000 years, Guilliman didn't need to split them up, especially with the HH being the best tool to teach about the seriousness of Chaos and rebelling. All that came out of the break up was limiting the Astartes and creating the possibility for rebellions and traitors, the only rebellions and chapters turning traitor etc. have been 2nd founding. The Badab war was smaller but it was still a significant rebellion.
OK, I'll make this very simple. The argument others are making is this:
1. The Codex Astartes was created, in part, to split up the Legions into smaller elements so one person would never wield the power the Primarchs did during the Crusade. As well as this, steps were taken to prevent them controlling large fleets and personally commanding Army regiments.
2. Since the creation of the Codex there has never been an uprising anywhere near the scale of the HH. Any uprisings there have been, of which the Badab war is one of the largest, have been comparatively tiny.
3. Therefore the Codex Astartes succeeded in one of its goals of reducing the power of the Space Marines.
That's the point others are making that you don't seem to be grasping. The Codex was not designed to completely stop anyone turning traitor. Some Chapters have gone rogue, yet none have had a significant impact on the Imperium as a whole.
Anyway, back to discussing the sioze of character's balls. I still vote Vect.
Obviously not if the Badab war happened. Whats to stop 20 chapters, 100 or half the chapters joining together like they did in the Badab war and rebelling. The loyalist legions were loyal and have been for 10,000 years, Guilliman didn't need to split them up, especially with the HH being the best tool to teach about the seriousness of Chaos and rebelling. All that came out of the break up was limiting the Astartes and creating the possibility for rebellions and traitors, the only rebellions and chapters turning traitor etc. have been 2nd founding. The Badab war was smaller but it was still a significant rebellion.
OK, I'll make this very simple. The argument others are making is this:
1. The Codex Astartes was created, in part, to split up the Legions into smaller elements so one person would never wield the power the Primarchs did during the Crusade. As well as this, steps were taken to prevent them controlling large fleets and personally commanding Army regiments.
2. Since the creation of the Codex there has never been an uprising anywhere near the scale of the HH. Any uprisings there have been, of which the Badab war is one of the largest, have been comparatively tiny.
3. Therefore the Codex Astartes succeeded in one of its goals of reducing the power of the Space Marines.
That's the point others are making that you don't seem to be grasping. The Codex was not designed to completely stop anyone turning traitor. Some Chapters have gone rogue, yet none have had a significant impact on the Imperium as a whole.
Anyway, back to discussing the sioze of character's balls. I still vote Vect.
Eh yeah I know... Its not like we are having a complicated debate.
The codex WAS designed to to stop the HH happening again. The Badab war still happened and what you seem not to understand is that its set a precident, what is there to stop 10, 20, half chapters from going rogue like in the Badab war (the codex hasn't worked and did what it was intended for). Refute my points rather than just repeating what other people have said. The codex and the splitting up of the legions was to stop the HH happening again, well it happened again in Badab, just at a lower scale, so it failed. I grasp what they are all saying and I have countered, all you are doing is pointlessly parroting what they've said, therefore you don't grasp the argument lol Congrats on being able to departmentalize with bullet points though, makes you seem like a genius lol.
Had the Codex not been implemented, the risk of someone like Huron coming into power and taking more than just a handful of Chapters with him would have been vastly increased.
As it stands, Huron's rebellion was the largest one of it's kind since the Horus Heresy - bar one (which was caused by the Ecclesiarchy having too much power, not a Space Marine). If that's the worst that happened, Guilliman did well.
Del, you're right in that the Badab War was essentially the HH happening again at a smaller scale: which is why the Codex worked. Yes, Guilliman admits that he made mistakes with the Codex, but none of those mistakes were with him splitting the Legions. He regrets splitting Ultramar, but that's different - a civil matter, not an organisational one. However, I think you're mixing things up.
The Codex was designed to stop another Horus Heresy. The Codex wasn't designed to completely stop treachery, however.
I think even Guilliman wasn't brazen enough to believe that he could stop corruption. Instead, his goal was to minimise the impact of any corruption and treachery from an influential leader* - which the Badab War proved succeeded (because, as said, if Huron had claimed control of a Legion sized force? Bad things).
Think of it this way, banning chemical, nuclear and biological weapons in war doesn't stop war. It stops war being fought with those weapons, and limits how war can be "legally" waged, which is it's intent. The Codex is similar. It prevents a leader causing a legion-sized force to rebel, but it doesn't stop them rebelling, which is the objective of that section of the Codex. It's not a failure, and the Badab War proves it. You're trying to measure the success of the Codex by something it doesn't aim to do.
*which is interesting, actually. Despite Cawl repeating this point to Guilliman that the traitor legions themselves weren't flawed, but their training and influence (from their Primarchs) were the problems, and that using loyal Chapters drawn from traitor genestock wouldn't be an issue, Guilliman vehemently vetoes it.
Had the Codex not been implemented, the risk of someone like Huron coming into power and taking more than just a handful of Chapters with him would have been vastly increased.
As it stands, Huron's rebellion was the largest one of it's kind since the Horus Heresy - bar one (which was caused by the Ecclesiarchy having too much power, not a Space Marine). If that's the worst that happened, Guilliman did well.
Del, you're right in that the Badab War was essentially the HH happening again at a smaller scale: which is why the Codex worked. Yes, Guilliman admits that he made mistakes with the Codex, but none of those mistakes were with him splitting the Legions. He regrets splitting Ultramar, but that's different - a civil matter, not an organisational one. However, I think you're mixing things up.
The Codex was designed to stop another Horus Heresy. The Codex wasn't designed to completely stop treachery, however.
I think even Guilliman wasn't brazen enough to believe that he could stop corruption. Instead, his goal was to minimise the impact of any corruption and treachery from an influential leader* - which the Badab War proved succeeded (because, as said, if Huron had claimed control of a Legion sized force? Bad things).
Think of it this way, banning chemical, nuclear and biological weapons in war doesn't stop war. It stops war being fought with those weapons, and limits how war can be "legally" waged, which is it's intent. The Codex is similar. It prevents a leader causing a legion-sized force to rebel, but it doesn't stop them rebelling, which is the objective of that section of the Codex. It's not a failure, and the Badab War proves it.
You're trying to measure the success of the Codex by something it doesn't aim to do.
*which is interesting, actually. Despite Cawl repeating this point to Guilliman that the traitor legions themselves weren't flawed, but their training and influence (from their Primarchs) were the problems, and that using loyal Chapters drawn from traitor genestock wouldn't be an issue, Guilliman vehemently vetoes it.
"Had the Codex not been implemented, the risk of someone like Huron coming into power and taking more than just a handful of Chapters with him would have been vastly increased." no it wouldn't, all that Guilliman would have to do is ban warmasters.
"As it stands, Huron's rebellion was the largest one of it's kind since the Horus Heresy - bar one (which was caused by the Ecclesiarchy having too much power, not a Space Marine). If that's the worst that happened, Guilliman did well." that's just a false positive, just because the rebellion wasn't as bad as the HH has no bearing on the codex working, that it happened at all proves the contrary. I mean you's are arguing that the codex stops future HH, the Badab war was a future HH, all that is different was the size.
I mean this is ridiculous, the burden of proof is on you, to say the codex worked in preventing another HH you'd have to prove that there were no rebellions with different chapters all joining in the rebellion, you can't as that did happen. Your biases towards Guillimen are making you illogical. All you can say is yeah but it wasn't as bad as the HH. Yeah the codex ensured that it was a smaller conflict (even though is was one of the worst civil wars), but there is nothing in the codex that would stop it from being far greater, nothing to stop half of all chapters joining in a rebellion.
I never said it was to stop all treachery, its was designed to stop another HH happening, I swear people just write what they like to think.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: "Had the Codex not been implemented, the risk of someone like Huron coming into power and taking more than just a handful of Chapters with him would have been vastly increased." no it wouldn't, all that Guilliman would have to do is ban warmasters.
No, Horus alone wasn't the problem. The Primarchs were. The fact that single figures, who were in charge of vast armies, battlegroups and forces, could fall and take so much with them. By compartmentalizing the strength that a single person could wield, Guilliman removed the main cause of the Heresy - that being the Primarchs.
"As it stands, Huron's rebellion was the largest one of it's kind since the Horus Heresy - bar one (which was caused by the Ecclesiarchy having too much power, not a Space Marine). If that's the worst that happened, Guilliman did well." that's just a false positive, just because the rebellion wasn't as bad as the HH has no bearing on the codex working, that it happened at all proves the contrary. I mean you's are arguing that the codex stops future HH, the Badab war was a future HH, all that is different was the size.
But here, size does matter. Otherwise, you could compare a single squad turning traitor to be a "mini Horus Heresy". What's the limit? One squad? A company? A Chapter? The force Huron had is only compared to the Legions because:
1. It was the largest rebellion (which took 10,000 years to occur) led by a Space Marine, making it the closest rival to Horus' (closest because all the others were so small)
2. Huron was able to make a far larger force from renegade forces AFTER he lost the War, which some people believe he possessed before he fled, which is untrue.
An example: compare a small hill to Mount Everest. That hill is the closest thing to the height of Everest, compared to the flat ground, but it doesn't mean it's anywhere near the same scale as Everest. That's how I'm seeing the Badab War in comparison to the HH. Sure, it was the closest one, but it wasn't anywhere near it.
Again, the fact that some Chapters fell isn't a fault of the Codex. The Codex wasn't built for that. It was built to stop another Horus Heresy. Has another Horus Heresy occurred?
No.
I rest my case.
I mean this is ridiculous, the burden of proof is on you, to say the codex worked in preventing another HH you'd have to prove that there were no rebellions with different chapters all joining in the rebellion, you can't as that did happen.
No Horus Heresy V2 occurred in over 10,000 years. Seeing as you can't prove that, if the Codex hadn't been introduced, there STILL wouldn't, I think that the current evidence is sufficient.
The fact that only one incident occurred, and most of the Chapters involved actually surrendered when Huron's third party influence wore off, that's evidence to me the Codex did it's job.
Again, you can speculate that, in an alternate timeline, that another HH might happen again, or that the HH would never happen again Codex or no, but that's speculation. As far as the facts go, the Badab War was the closest thing to another Horus Heresy, and it didn't even come close. It's barely worthy of being associated with it.
Your biases towards Guillimen are making you illogical.
IOW I'll call you biased because you're defending a certain point with reasoning and logical answers.
All you can say is yeah but it wasn't as bad as the HH. Yeah the codex ensured that it was a smaller conflict, but there is nothing in the codex that would stop it from being far greater, nothing to stop half of all chapters joining in a rebellion.
I rest my case.
The bolded is exactly what I'm saying the Codex aimed to do. You just admitted that the Codex did what it was aimed to do.
(Also, saying "the codex wouldn't have stopped it getting bigger" - I mean, in 10,000 years, it only reached the size of what Huron could manage. As you say, it ensured that it was a smaller conflict". So then, how long do you think it would have taken for someone to actually achieve something anywhere near what Horus did? Another 10,000 years? 20,000?)
I never said it was to stop all treachery, its was designed to stop another HH happening, I swear people just write what they like to think.
Exactly. And another Horus Heresy never happened. Sure, there were a few rebellions. A few Chapters turned traitor. But nothing like the Horus Heresy. Therefore, it was a success.
You say "the Badab War was a mini-Horus Heresy", but that's exactly the thing: it wasn't the Horus Heresy. It wasn't even close. Guilliman achieved what he meant.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: "Had the Codex not been implemented, the risk of someone like Huron coming into power and taking more than just a handful of Chapters with him would have been vastly increased." no it wouldn't, all that Guilliman would have to do is ban warmasters.
No, Horus alone wasn't the problem. The Primarchs were. The fact that single figures, who were in charge of vast armies, battlegroups and forces, could fall and take so much with them. By compartmentalizing the strength that a single person could wield, Guilliman removed the main cause of the Heresy - that being the Primarchs.
"As it stands, Huron's rebellion was the largest one of it's kind since the Horus Heresy - bar one (which was caused by the Ecclesiarchy having too much power, not a Space Marine). If that's the worst that happened, Guilliman did well." that's just a false positive, just because the rebellion wasn't as bad as the HH has no bearing on the codex working, that it happened at all proves the contrary. I mean you's are arguing that the codex stops future HH, the Badab war was a future HH, all that is different was the size.
But here, size does matter. Otherwise, you could compare a single squad turning traitor to be a "mini Horus Heresy". What's the limit? One squad? A company? A Chapter? The force Huron had is only compared to the Legions because:
1. It was the largest rebellion (which took 10,000 years to occur) led by a Space Marine, making it the closest rival to Horus' (closest because all the others were so small)
2. Huron was able to make a far larger force from renegade forces AFTER he lost the War, which some people believe he possessed before he fled, which is untrue.
An example: compare a small hill to Mount Everest. That hill is the closest thing to the height of Everest, compared to the flat ground, but it doesn't mean it's anywhere near the same scale as Everest. That's how I'm seeing the Badab War in comparison to the HH. Sure, it was the closest one, but it wasn't anywhere near it.
Again, the fact that some Chapters fell isn't a fault of the Codex. The Codex wasn't built for that. It was built to stop another Horus Heresy. Has another Horus Heresy occurred?
No.
I rest my case.
I mean this is ridiculous, the burden of proof is on you, to say the codex worked in preventing another HH you'd have to prove that there were no rebellions with different chapters all joining in the rebellion, you can't as that did happen.
No Horus Heresy V2 occurred in over 10,000 years. Seeing as you can't prove that, if the Codex hadn't been introduced, there STILL wouldn't, I think that the current evidence is sufficient.
The fact that only one incident occurred, and most of the Chapters involved actually surrendered when Huron's third party influence wore off, that's evidence to me the Codex did it's job.
Again, you can speculate that, in an alternate timeline, that another HH might happen again, or that the HH would never happen again Codex or no, but that's speculation. As far as the facts go, the Badab War was the closest thing to another Horus Heresy, and it didn't even come close. It's barely worthy of being associated with it.
Your biases towards Guillimen are making you illogical.
IOW I'll call you biased because you're defending a certain point with reasoning and logical answers.
All you can say is yeah but it wasn't as bad as the HH. Yeah the codex ensured that it was a smaller conflict, but there is nothing in the codex that would stop it from being far greater, nothing to stop half of all chapters joining in a rebellion.
I rest my case.
The bolded is exactly what I'm saying the Codex aimed to do. You just admitted that the Codex did what it was aimed to do.
(Also, saying "the codex wouldn't have stopped it getting bigger" - I mean, in 10,000 years, it only reached the size of what Huron could manage. As you say, it ensured that it was a smaller conflict". So then, how long do you think it would have taken for someone to actually achieve something anywhere near what Horus did? Another 10,000 years? 20,000?)
I never said it was to stop all treachery, its was designed to stop another HH happening, I swear people just write what they like to think.
Exactly. And another Horus Heresy never happened. Sure, there were a few rebellions. A few Chapters turned traitor. But nothing like the Horus Heresy. Therefore, it was a success.
You say "the Badab War was a mini-Horus Heresy", but that's exactly the thing: it wasn't the Horus Heresy. It wasn't even close. Guilliman achieved what he meant.
But here, size does matter. Otherwise, you could compare a single squad turning traitor to be a "mini Horus Heresy". What's the limit? One squad? A company? A Chapter? The force Huron had is only compared to the Legions because:
1. It was the largest rebellion (which took 10,000 years to occur) led by a Space Marine, making it the closest rival to Horus' (closest because all the others were so small)
2. Huron was able to make a far larger force from renegade forces AFTER he lost the War, which some people believe he possessed before he fled, which is untrue.
You haven't proved anything with that ^ that's irrelevant
You miss understand, I never said Horus was the problem, my point is that if he banned warmasters then there was no need to cut down the legions.
As for the size all it requires are chapters joining together to rebel. The size comparison is irrelevant unless you can prove that more than 4 chapters couldn't join and rebel or half the chapters, you can't prove that and seeing that 4 turned, far more could easily have joined or more in another rebellion.
"Again, the fact that some Chapters fell isn't a fault of the Codex. The Codex wasn't built for that. It was built to stop another Horus Heresy. Has another Horus Heresy occurred?
No." This is just a strawman, I never said anything like that. It does't fail if chapters turn, it fails when chapters join together and rebel.
"The fact that only one incident occurred, and most of the Chapters involved actually surrendered when Huron's third party influence wore off, that's evidence to me the Codex did it's job." Again another false positive. Even one incident wasn't supposed to happen. Plus the founding legions wouldn't have rebelled as they haven't in the 10,000 years after the HH, so all Guilliman did was weaken the Astartes without being able to stop rebellions.
If you agree that it reduced the size of the rebellion in the case of Badab war, but failed in stoping it from happening and that it could have been far bigger then you'd be right.
"Also, saying "the codex wouldn't have stopped it getting bigger" - I mean, in 10,000 years, it only reached the size of what Huron could manage. As you say, it ensured that it was a smaller conflict". So then, how long do you think it would have taken for someone to actually achieve something anywhere near what Horus did? Another 10,000 years? 20,000?)" - another false positive and anecdotal.
"You say "the Badab War was a mini-Horus Heresy", but that's exactly the thing: it wasn't the Horus Heresy. It wasn't even close. Guilliman achieved what he meant" - it was another HH, just on a lower scale, a rebellion is a rebellion.
Your biased because I know you are, I've had arguments with you on the Ultramarines before, you are extremely biased. I mean the Badab war happened, the codex couldn't stop it from happening and all you can counter with is 'it wasn't the same size as the HH. The splitting up of legions was to 'stop' the HH happening again, not to make a future HH smaller (which you can't prove anyways, there is only one example and you have no proof to suggest a rebellion on the scale of the HH could not happen, which is the only way you could prove it worked). With the evidence we have at most you can only say the codex helped, you cannot say it worked as intended and you have to say it failed in what it intended.
Respect for Hawke. Dude mowed down a squad of Iron Warriors with an assault cannon, survived a grenade going off inside his bunker, then went on to almost singlehandedly turn the tide of the siege of hydra cordatus by blowing up half the traitor warhost with a feth-huge ICBM. And he ended up being the only Imperial survivor of the siege. For a worthless fethup that was one mistake away from getting sent to the Commissar's firing line, I'd say he did pretty well.
Dude, the whole point of the codex was so that if one guy went rogue, he took a chapter of up to 1k marines and a strike cruiser or two. Maybe if 5, or 10 went rogue they took 5k or 10k marines with them. Now if said guys controlled legions rather than chapters then 1 guy = 100k marines, 5 guys, 500k marines, you have a new civil war on your hands because a handful of Legion commanders went rogue.
The trade off on this was you are more likely to lose a handful of marines more often. After all, 1000 chapters masters, there may be a few bad eggs. If there were still 9 legions, then there may not have been anyone going rogue wholesale. The risk was that if 1 or more of the said 9 did go rogue, then they had the power to tear the Imperium apart at the seams. That is what the codex was meant to stop, not any old chapter turning to chaos, and maybe taking a couple of his buddy chapter masters with him.
Then why do you clearly not understand what people are arguing?
Delvarus Centurion wrote: The codex WAS designed to to stop the HH happening again. The Badab war still happened and what you seem not to understand is that its set a precident, what is there to stop 10, 20, half chapters from going rogue like in the Badab war (the codex hasn't worked and did what it was intended for). Refute my points rather than just repeating what other people have said.
The Codex prevents it. Limiting the power of individuals so instead of it taking one figurehead (like a Primarch) to corrupt huge battlegroups of hundreds of thousands, you'd now need multiple individuals all turning rogue at the same time is what the Codex was designed to do. It's all about numbers, that's the important point. If a HH-era Legion was roughly 100,000 marines, it would take 1000 Chapter Masters turning rogue to be the equivalent of even 1 Legion doing the same in the HH, and that's not taking into account the fact the HH Legions also commanded huge armies of regular humans too. The thing that stops half the Chapters going rogue is the massively unlikely probability of half the Chapter Masters deciding en masse to rebel. It's purely down to numbers. Having 9 super-charismatic awe-inspiring leaders go rogue and take most of their troops with them is simply orders of magnitude more likely than having 500 do the same all at the same time.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: The codex and the splitting up of the legions was to stop the HH happening again, well it happened again in Badab, just at a lower scale, so it failed. I grasp what they are all saying...
No. You don't. You claim to, but as with just about every debate involving you, it's clear to everyone else that you actually don't understand what is being argued. You even show that in the quote above, right before you say you grasp what we're saying. I'll say it again, so it's as obvious as I can make it. I'll even make it a bullet point to highlight my genius.
1. The size of the rebellion is the whole point. HH >>>>>>>>>>>> Badab War.
The story of Ranulf’s death is told at great length in his saga. The Space Wolves were retreating over a narrow mountain pass following a rare defeat at the hands of the Orks. When the Orks caught up with the end of the Space Wolves’ column, Ranulf and a handful of Wolf Guard put up a gallant stand against the entire Ork army in a narrow gap in the pass. While the few warriors held back thousands of Orks, the remaining Space Wolves made it back to safety. Although they greatly outnumbered the defenders, the Orks were unable to bring more than a handful of troops into combat at any one time due to the narrowness and shape of the defile. Before many hours were passed there was a pile of Ork bodies as high as a wall. But even the giant Space Wolves warrior could not hold forever. One by one his Wolf Guard fell, until only Ranulf was left. Though the Orks overcame him in the end, even those creatures could not bring themselves to desecrate his body. When the Space Wolves recovered the pass they found Ranulf and his dead companions seated in a hastily constructed shrine surrounded by an immense pile of Ork wargear. To the Space Wolves Ranulf was a great Champion – but to his enemies he became nothing less than a God.
Beyond the admittedly hilarious tangent that the 'Badab War Topic' has taken, I feel the sheer badassery of Lugft Huron is being lost.
The guy's a legend. The sheer brass neck of him. He was trying to build the Astral Claws into a Legion, he had his own Guard regiments and he was charismatic enough to bring the Mantis Warriors, Lamenters and Executioners along for the ride. It took the entire weight of the High Lords and the dubious 'extreme prejudice' tactics of the Carcharodons to bring him to heel.
Lucky, he and his allies were limited to circa 1000 marines each, eh?
Delvarus Centurion wrote:But here, size does matter. Otherwise, you could compare a single squad turning traitor to be a "mini Horus Heresy". What's the limit? One squad? A company? A Chapter? The force Huron had is only compared to the Legions because:
1. It was the largest rebellion (which took 10,000 years to occur) led by a Space Marine, making it the closest rival to Horus' (closest because all the others were so small)
2. Huron was able to make a far larger force from renegade forces AFTER he lost the War, which some people believe he possessed before he fled, which is untrue.
You haven't proved anything with that ^ that's irrelevant
Explain. How haven't I made that point clear?
The point is that, with the Codex in place, the closest thing to the scale of Horus Heresy was about four/five Chapters defecting, and the majority of those Chapters rejoining the Imperium, because they weren't directly under Huron's control.
It's very clearly not irrelevant. You might not like the facts, but they're there.
You miss understand, I never said Horus was the problem, my point is that if he banned warmasters then there was no need to cut down the legions.
I'm not saying Horus specifically was the problem either, nor Warmasters in general. The problem was in people LIKE Horus having positions of power wherein they controlled vast forces: such as just one space Marine Legion. Even if the position of Warmaster was removed, the threat of an entire Legion falling is still a possibility. That's what the problem is, and it's what the Codex solved.
As for the size all it requires are chapters joining together to rebel. The size comparison is irrelevant unless you can prove that more than 4 chapters couldn't join and rebel or half the chapters, you can't prove that and seeing that 4 turned, far more could easily have joined or more in another rebellion.
I can't prove that no more than four Chapters couldn't join. And yes, by having more separate forces, there was always the risk that more Chapter Masters could still take their Chapters with them. However, just ONE Legion Commander falling would take over ten times the amount of people with him, their equipment, and their combined auxiliaries and territory.
That was the risk Guilliman took. He could split the Legions, and risk more people falling, but taking fewer resources when they did, or he could risk putting more forces under fewer people's control, and risk losing the lot (eggs in one basket). In hindsight, we can see that the worst event was four Chapters rebelling (and only one of those four actually turning traitor for good). That is a far better case scenario than Huron taking the equivalent ten Chapters with him.
Yes, you can say all you like that "but you can't prove it COULDN'T have happened". No, I can't. But I can prove that it didn't. I can also tell you the same: you can't prove that "far more would easily have joined or more in another rebellion". You're relying on "what ifs" here, and that's nice for speculation, but that's all it is. I have facts.
"Again, the fact that some Chapters fell isn't a fault of the Codex. The Codex wasn't built for that. It was built to stop another Horus Heresy. Has another Horus Heresy occurred?
No." This is just a strawman, I never said anything like that. It does't fail if chapters turn, it fails when chapters join together and rebel.
And what was the biggest example of Chapters joining together and rebelling? Four Chapters. Not even close to a Legion sized force.
You can say all you like that "but it COULD have happened". Did it? No. I rest my case.
And no, you did actually say that. "The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again." The HH never happened again. Therefore, according to your own words, it worked.
"The fact that only one incident occurred, and most of the Chapters involved actually surrendered when Huron's third party influence wore off, that's evidence to me the Codex did it's job." Again another false positive. Even one incident wasn't supposed to happen.
Untrue, according to your own words. You said "The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again." Not to stop individual Chapters.
Guilliman couldn't stop Chapters banding together. Instead, he sought to destroy the natural ties of alliegance that the Legions created.
If Chapters banded together (which relied on multiple Chapter Masters simultaneously deciding to turn traitor, contacting eachother and running the risk of one of the Chapter Masters being loyal and ratting them out for heresy), then they would need to mobilise their forces together, on a Chapter-wide scale, which would certainly bring about the attention of the Inquisition and other Chapters. Far more steps and risks involved than a Legion Commander falling, and having the equivalent army at their beck and call without needing to liaise with anyone else.
The Codex couldn't stop Chapters banding together. It could stop the pre-created bands of Chapters in the form of Legions, however. It wasn't foolproof, but it succeeded nevertheless.
Plus the founding legions wouldn't have rebelled as they haven't in the 10,000 years after the HH, so all Guilliman did was weaken the Astartes without being able to stop rebellions.
Wouldn't they? You got any proof for that?
Sorry, I forgot, when you make suppositions, they're facts, aren't they?
If you agree that it reduced the size of the rebellion in the case of Badab war, but failed in stoping it from happening and that it could have been far bigger then you'd be right.
Yes. Could. But as far as the facts go, the Badab War was the largest rebellion of it's kind, and it was nowhere near the size of if one Legion fell.
So, I'll bite back with your attitude to things: "Having no Codex meant that one person COULD have taken a whole Legion with them at once!"
"Also, saying "the codex wouldn't have stopped it getting bigger" - I mean, in 10,000 years, it only reached the size of what Huron could manage. As you say, it ensured that it was a smaller conflict". So then, how long do you think it would have taken for someone to actually achieve something anywhere near what Horus did? Another 10,000 years? 20,000?)" - another false positive and anecdotal.
Implying that anything you're saying isn't just baseless supposition?
It's anecdotal, but it's still fact. Nothing larger than the Badab War occurred. Could something larger have happened? Yeah. Did something larger happen? No.
The problem with could is that nothing is off limits. "Horus COULD have been right all along, and would have overthrown Chaos after beating the Emperor!!" "Angron COULD have been the best Primarch if the Nails hadn't been in his skull!!" "Having a xeno-friendly policy COULD have saved humanity!!"
All coulds. But they have absolutely no validity to them beyond supposition.
"You say "the Badab War was a mini-Horus Heresy", but that's exactly the thing: it wasn't the Horus Heresy. It wasn't even close. Guilliman achieved what he meant" - it was another HH, just on a lower scale, a rebellion is a rebellion.
So is one squad rebelling "another HH"?
Sorry, this point is flat out wrong. I won't argue this point, because the idea that "a rebellion is a rebellion" shows you clearly don't understand what was important about the Horus Heresy.
The Horus Heresy was important because it took the decision of ONE (1) person to make over 10,000 people fall. With the Chapters split, it takes the decision of one person for every 1,000 people. To have the same effect, you need ten people, simultaneously, to make that same decision.
1 person versus 10. Even with a 50:50 chance, more there is a higher risk that the one person will fall.
Your biased because I know you are, I've had arguments with you on the Ultramarines before, you are extremely biased.
If my points are logical, supported with facts, and not based in blatant supposition and "what ifs" and "coulds", my views in other threads mean nothing. Bias is only bias when it ignores the actual facts and data to skew them in a certain favour.
In that respect, you're being far more biased than I am. But I'm not basing that on other threads which have nothing to do with this one: I'm basing it off what I can see in this thread.
You want to prove you're not? Give me some arguments that don't rely on "could", "what if" and other hypotheticals.
I mean the Badab war happened, the codex couldn't stop it from happening and all you can counter with is 'it wasn't the same size as the HH.
That counter is all the proof I need. It wasn't anywhere near the size of the HH, and therefore a success.
Think of a suppressor for a gun. The goal of that is to reduce the noise of a gun firing. It doesn't cancel all the noise. Yet to you, you would say that a suppressor fails in it's job because some noise is made.
The splitting up of legions was to 'stop' the HH happening again, not to make a future HH smaller (which you can't prove anyways, there is only one example and you have no proof to suggest a rebellion on the scale of the HH could not happen, which is the only way you could prove it worked).
You're making a fatal assumption here. You're implying that any rebellion = a Horus Heresy. This is not true.
The Horus Heresy was a rebellion. Not all rebellions are HHs.
The Codex wasn't there to stop rebellions. It was there to stop Horus Heresies - the massive rebellions caused by single people falling and taking their entire Legions with them.
I can't prove that a rebellion on the scale of the Horus Heresy couldn't have happened. However, I can prove that one did not happen for 10,000 years. Consider nuclear deterrents: I can't say with 100% certainty that a nuclear weapon will deter nuclear attacks on a country. But I can point to the fact that no-one has fired nuclear weapons at my country, and call that a success.
Do you think nuclear deterrents are failures?
At the same time, you can't prove that a Horus Heresy-sized event would have occurred at some point. So again, a supposition.
With the evidence we have at most you can only say the codex helped, you cannot say it worked as intended and you have to say it failed in what it intended.
I can only say it fails if a Horus Heresy scale event had occurred. Seeing as one hadn't, I can say that it is succeeding for now, and, up to the current point in the timeline, has worked as intended.
You can say that "there's a risk of another large scale rebellion" all you want, and you're right. However, the Codex has, up to the current point in the timeline, prevented such a large scale rebellion. That means, up until the current timeline, the Codex is succeeding and working as intended. And whatever baseless "what if" scenario is irrelevant up until the point that it happens. If it happens.
Coolyo294 wrote:Respect for Hawke. Dude mowed down a squad of Iron Warriors with an assault cannon, survived a grenade going off inside his bunker, then went on to almost singlehandedly turn the tide of the siege of hydra cordatus by blowing up half the traitor warhost with a feth-huge ICBM. And he ended up being the only Imperial survivor of the siege. For a worthless fethup that was one mistake away from getting sent to the Commissar's firing line, I'd say he did pretty well.
Can't believe I almost forgot about Hawke, I need to read Storm of Iron again.
Banville wrote:Beyond the admittedly hilarious tangent that the 'Badab War Topic' has taken, I feel the sheer badassery of Lugft Huron is being lost.
The guy's a legend. The sheer brass neck of him. He was trying to build the Astral Claws into a Legion, he had his own Guard regiments and he was charismatic enough to bring the Mantis Warriors, Lamenters and Executioners along for the ride. It took the entire weight of the High Lords and the dubious 'extreme prejudice' tactics of the Carcharodons to bring him to heel.
Lucky, he and his allies were limited to circa 1000 marines each, eh?
Huron was an absolute badass - that can't be forgotten!
pm713 wrote: Much as I love text walls of fighting do you want to cut it out a little?
How can you have second foundings constantly turn traitor anyway? It makes no sense.
Because they are the only ones that have turned traitor.
Can you name a founding that didn't have marines turn traitor? It happens a lot and is the whole reason behind the 'renegade marines' mechanic - to represent traitor marines that haven't descended into chaos worship yet.
Then why do you clearly not understand what people are arguing?
Delvarus Centurion wrote: The codex WAS designed to to stop the HH happening again. The Badab war still happened and what you seem not to understand is that its set a precident, what is there to stop 10, 20, half chapters from going rogue like in the Badab war (the codex hasn't worked and did what it was intended for). Refute my points rather than just repeating what other people have said.
The Codex prevents it. Limiting the power of individuals so instead of it taking one figurehead (like a Primarch) to corrupt huge battlegroups of hundreds of thousands, you'd now need multiple individuals all turning rogue at the same time is what the Codex was designed to do. It's all about numbers, that's the important point. If a HH-era Legion was roughly 100,000 marines, it would take 1000 Chapter Masters turning rogue to be the equivalent of even 1 Legion doing the same in the HH, and that's not taking into account the fact the HH Legions also commanded huge armies of regular humans too. The thing that stops half the Chapters going rogue is the massively unlikely probability of half the Chapter Masters deciding en masse to rebel. It's purely down to numbers. Having 9 super-charismatic awe-inspiring leaders go rogue and take most of their troops with them is simply orders of magnitude more likely than having 500 do the same all at the same time.
Delvarus Centurion wrote: The codex and the splitting up of the legions was to stop the HH happening again, well it happened again in Badab, just at a lower scale, so it failed. I grasp what they are all saying...
No. You don't. You claim to, but as with just about every debate involving you, it's clear to everyone else that you actually don't understand what is being argued. You even show that in the quote above, right before you say you grasp what we're saying. I'll say it again, so it's as obvious as I can make it. I'll even make it a bullet point to highlight my genius.
1. The size of the rebellion is the whole point. HH >>>>>>>>>>>> Badab War.
I clearly do as I have stated exactly what people have said... Again its not hard to grasp, you might think it something hard to grasp, but it isn't. You just don't understand what I have said. Plus just because more people agree with you doesn't mean you are right, if you knew that you wouldn't always follow the consensus and have your own opinions and arguments. Plus AGAIN we are arguing based on opinion, you always seem to fail to understand that.
Delvarus Centurion wrote:But here, size does matter. Otherwise, you could compare a single squad turning traitor to be a "mini Horus Heresy". What's the limit? One squad? A company? A Chapter? The force Huron had is only compared to the Legions because:
1. It was the largest rebellion (which took 10,000 years to occur) led by a Space Marine, making it the closest rival to Horus' (closest because all the others were so small)
2. Huron was able to make a far larger force from renegade forces AFTER he lost the War, which some people believe he possessed before he fled, which is untrue.
You haven't proved anything with that ^ that's irrelevant
Explain. How haven't I made that point clear?
The point is that, with the Codex in place, the closest thing to the scale of Horus Heresy was about four/five Chapters defecting, and the majority of those Chapters rejoining the Imperium, because they weren't directly under Huron's control.
It's very clearly not irrelevant. You might not like the facts, but they're there.
You miss understand, I never said Horus was the problem, my point is that if he banned warmasters then there was no need to cut down the legions.
I'm not saying Horus specifically was the problem either, nor Warmasters in general. The problem was in people LIKE Horus having positions of power wherein they controlled vast forces: such as just one space Marine Legion. Even if the position of Warmaster was removed, the threat of an entire Legion falling is still a possibility. That's what the problem is, and it's what the Codex solved.
As for the size all it requires are chapters joining together to rebel. The size comparison is irrelevant unless you can prove that more than 4 chapters couldn't join and rebel or half the chapters, you can't prove that and seeing that 4 turned, far more could easily have joined or more in another rebellion.
I can't prove that no more than four Chapters couldn't join. And yes, by having more separate forces, there was always the risk that more Chapter Masters could still take their Chapters with them. However, just ONE Legion Commander falling would take over ten times the amount of people with him, their equipment, and their combined auxiliaries and territory.
That was the risk Guilliman took. He could split the Legions, and risk more people falling, but taking fewer resources when they did, or he could risk putting more forces under fewer people's control, and risk losing the lot (eggs in one basket). In hindsight, we can see that the worst event was four Chapters rebelling (and only one of those four actually turning traitor for good). That is a far better case scenario than Huron taking the equivalent ten Chapters with him.
Yes, you can say all you like that "but you can't prove it COULDN'T have happened". No, I can't. But I can prove that it didn't. I can also tell you the same: you can't prove that "far more would easily have joined or more in another rebellion". You're relying on "what ifs" here, and that's nice for speculation, but that's all it is. I have facts.
"Again, the fact that some Chapters fell isn't a fault of the Codex. The Codex wasn't built for that. It was built to stop another Horus Heresy. Has another Horus Heresy occurred?
No." This is just a strawman, I never said anything like that. It does't fail if chapters turn, it fails when chapters join together and rebel.
And what was the biggest example of Chapters joining together and rebelling? Four Chapters. Not even close to a Legion sized force.
You can say all you like that "but it COULD have happened". Did it? No. I rest my case.
And no, you did actually say that. "The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again." The HH never happened again. Therefore, according to your own words, it worked.
"The fact that only one incident occurred, and most of the Chapters involved actually surrendered when Huron's third party influence wore off, that's evidence to me the Codex did it's job." Again another false positive. Even one incident wasn't supposed to happen.
Untrue, according to your own words. You said "The reason for cutting the legions into chapters was only to prevent the HH from happening again." Not to stop individual Chapters.
Guilliman couldn't stop Chapters banding together. Instead, he sought to destroy the natural ties of alliegance that the Legions created.
If Chapters banded together (which relied on multiple Chapter Masters simultaneously deciding to turn traitor, contacting eachother and running the risk of one of the Chapter Masters being loyal and ratting them out for heresy), then they would need to mobilise their forces together, on a Chapter-wide scale, which would certainly bring about the attention of the Inquisition and other Chapters. Far more steps and risks involved than a Legion Commander falling, and having the equivalent army at their beck and call without needing to liaise with anyone else.
The Codex couldn't stop Chapters banding together. It could stop the pre-created bands of Chapters in the form of Legions, however. It wasn't foolproof, but it succeeded nevertheless.
Plus the founding legions wouldn't have rebelled as they haven't in the 10,000 years after the HH, so all Guilliman did was weaken the Astartes without being able to stop rebellions.
Wouldn't they? You got any proof for that?
Sorry, I forgot, when you make suppositions, they're facts, aren't they?
If you agree that it reduced the size of the rebellion in the case of Badab war, but failed in stoping it from happening and that it could have been far bigger then you'd be right.
Yes. Could. But as far as the facts go, the Badab War was the largest rebellion of it's kind, and it was nowhere near the size of if one Legion fell.
So, I'll bite back with your attitude to things: "Having no Codex meant that one person COULD have taken a whole Legion with them at once!"
"Also, saying "the codex wouldn't have stopped it getting bigger" - I mean, in 10,000 years, it only reached the size of what Huron could manage. As you say, it ensured that it was a smaller conflict". So then, how long do you think it would have taken for someone to actually achieve something anywhere near what Horus did? Another 10,000 years? 20,000?)" - another false positive and anecdotal.
Implying that anything you're saying isn't just baseless supposition?
It's anecdotal, but it's still fact. Nothing larger than the Badab War occurred. Could something larger have happened? Yeah. Did something larger happen? No.
The problem with could is that nothing is off limits. "Horus COULD have been right all along, and would have overthrown Chaos after beating the Emperor!!" "Angron COULD have been the best Primarch if the Nails hadn't been in his skull!!" "Having a xeno-friendly policy COULD have saved humanity!!"
All coulds. But they have absolutely no validity to them beyond supposition.
"You say "the Badab War was a mini-Horus Heresy", but that's exactly the thing: it wasn't the Horus Heresy. It wasn't even close. Guilliman achieved what he meant" - it was another HH, just on a lower scale, a rebellion is a rebellion.
So is one squad rebelling "another HH"?
Sorry, this point is flat out wrong. I won't argue this point, because the idea that "a rebellion is a rebellion" shows you clearly don't understand what was important about the Horus Heresy.
The Horus Heresy was important because it took the decision of ONE (1) person to make over 10,000 people fall. With the Chapters split, it takes the decision of one person for every 1,000 people. To have the same effect, you need ten people, simultaneously, to make that same decision.
1 person versus 10. Even with a 50:50 chance, more there is a higher risk that the one person will fall.
Your biased because I know you are, I've had arguments with you on the Ultramarines before, you are extremely biased.
If my points are logical, supported with facts, and not based in blatant supposition and "what ifs" and "coulds", my views in other threads mean nothing. Bias is only bias when it ignores the actual facts and data to skew them in a certain favour.
In that respect, you're being far more biased than I am. But I'm not basing that on other threads which have nothing to do with this one: I'm basing it off what I can see in this thread.
You want to prove you're not? Give me some arguments that don't rely on "could", "what if" and other hypotheticals.
I mean the Badab war happened, the codex couldn't stop it from happening and all you can counter with is 'it wasn't the same size as the HH.
That counter is all the proof I need. It wasn't anywhere near the size of the HH, and therefore a success.
Think of a suppressor for a gun. The goal of that is to reduce the noise of a gun firing. It doesn't cancel all the noise. Yet to you, you would say that a suppressor fails in it's job because some noise is made.
The splitting up of legions was to 'stop' the HH happening again, not to make a future HH smaller (which you can't prove anyways, there is only one example and you have no proof to suggest a rebellion on the scale of the HH could not happen, which is the only way you could prove it worked).
You're making a fatal assumption here. You're implying that any rebellion = a Horus Heresy. This is not true.
The Horus Heresy was a rebellion. Not all rebellions are HHs.
The Codex wasn't there to stop rebellions. It was there to stop Horus Heresies - the massive rebellions caused by single people falling and taking their entire Legions with them.
I can't prove that a rebellion on the scale of the Horus Heresy couldn't have happened. However, I can prove that one did not happen for 10,000 years. Consider nuclear deterrents: I can't say with 100% certainty that a nuclear weapon will deter nuclear attacks on a country. But I can point to the fact that no-one has fired nuclear weapons at my country, and call that a success.
Do you think nuclear deterrents are failures?
At the same time, you can't prove that a Horus Heresy-sized event would have occurred at some point. So again, a supposition.
With the evidence we have at most you can only say the codex helped, you cannot say it worked as intended and you have to say it failed in what it intended.
I can only say it fails if a Horus Heresy scale event had occurred. Seeing as one hadn't, I can say that it is succeeding for now, and, up to the current point in the timeline, has worked as intended.
You can say that "there's a risk of another large scale rebellion" all you want, and you're right. However, the Codex has, up to the current point in the timeline, prevented such a large scale rebellion. That means, up until the current timeline, the Codex is succeeding and working as intended. And whatever baseless "what if" scenario is irrelevant up until the point that it happens. If it happens.
Coolyo294 wrote:Respect for Hawke. Dude mowed down a squad of Iron Warriors with an assault cannon, survived a grenade going off inside his bunker, then went on to almost singlehandedly turn the tide of the siege of hydra cordatus by blowing up half the traitor warhost with a feth-huge ICBM. And he ended up being the only Imperial survivor of the siege. For a worthless fethup that was one mistake away from getting sent to the Commissar's firing line, I'd say he did pretty well.
Can't believe I almost forgot about Hawke, I need to read Storm of Iron again.
Banville wrote:Beyond the admittedly hilarious tangent that the 'Badab War Topic' has taken, I feel the sheer badassery of Lugft Huron is being lost.
The guy's a legend. The sheer brass neck of him. He was trying to build the Astral Claws into a Legion, he had his own Guard regiments and he was charismatic enough to bring the Mantis Warriors, Lamenters and Executioners along for the ride. It took the entire weight of the High Lords and the dubious 'extreme prejudice' tactics of the Carcharodons to bring him to heel.
Lucky, he and his allies were limited to circa 1000 marines each, eh?
Huron was an absolute badass - that can't be forgotten!
There are far too many points here to reply to, I can't be bothered replying to all that.
Yeah but if it is so simple to grasp then it only says something about the person saying 'you don't understand' lol. Its like me saying 'you think that the size of the rebellion matters; clearly you don't understand.'
There are some people who has a lot of ambitions and daringe nough to atemt them in 40K. I think the two biggest are the Emperor who not only wanted to conquere the galaxy, but actually defeat chaos. He is stil in it to winn it. Also, Eldrar who not only wants to defeat chaos, but actually save his race. He is snorting the golden path and then some. (The golden path an exprecion from Dune where you have perfect precognition and try to thread the needle of faith on a long term scale.)
Delvarus Centurion wrote:There are far too many points here to reply to, I can't be bothered replying to all that.
You can at least remove the giant wall of text for the sake of everyone else.
I think the fact that I outright say in my comment (if you bothered to read it) that you don't actually make any relevant comments that aren't just supposition is quite ironic here.
Delvarus Centurion wrote:There are far too many points here to reply to, I can't be bothered replying to all that.
You can at least remove the giant wall of text for the sake of everyone else.
I think the fact that I outright say in my comment (if you bothered to read it) that you don't actually make any relevant comments that aren't just supposition is quite ironic here.
Still, pleasure discussing this with you.
You can't definitively prove that it succeeded or failed lol Though the Badab war is proof that goes directly against Guillimans reason of splitting up the legions, so not so much supposition. Conjecture is the word you want. You can repeat your points over and over again, it isn't going to prove them.
Ratius wrote: Always liked this story from 2nd ed Wolf codex
The story of Ranulf’s death is told at great length in his saga. The Space Wolves were retreating over a narrow mountain pass following a rare defeat at the hands of the Orks. When the Orks caught up with the end of the Space Wolves’ column, Ranulf and a handful of Wolf Guard put up a gallant stand against the entire Ork army in a narrow gap in the pass. While the few warriors held back thousands of Orks, the remaining Space Wolves made it back to safety. Although they greatly outnumbered the defenders, the Orks were unable to bring more than a handful of troops into combat at any one time due to the narrowness and shape of the defile. Before many hours were passed there was a pile of Ork bodies as high as a wall. But even the giant Space Wolves warrior could not hold forever. One by one his Wolf Guard fell, until only Ranulf was left. Though the Orks overcame him in the end, even those creatures could not bring themselves to desecrate his body. When the Space Wolves recovered the pass they found Ranulf and his dead companions seated in a hastily constructed shrine surrounded by an immense pile of Ork wargear. To the Space Wolves Ranulf was a great Champion – but to his enemies he became nothing less than a God.
Reminds me of Thalastian Jorus from the Blood Angels:
“During the long years of the Seventh Black Crusade, the full might of the Blood Angels Chapter falls upon a vast Black Legion warband on the world of Mackan. Although the conflict ultimately ends in the near-extinction of the Blood Angels at the hands of Abaddon the Despoiler and his primary lieutenants – the sorcerer-lord Iskandar Khayon and the swordmaster Telemachon Lyras – the Blood Angels Reclusiarch Thalastian Jorus becomes one of the few Imperial heroes to ever land a blow against the Warmaster of Chaos.
With his Chapter devastated, the Chaplain endures weeks of hardship in the wilderness and the constant trials of keeping his crazed warriors undetected on Mackan. When the time is right, Jorus leads his Death Company in a lightning raid behind enemy lines, butchering the unprepared sworn warriors of the Despoiler’s honour guard, and allowing the Reclusiarch to lock blades with Abaddon himself. It is said the Warmaster still bears the scars of that battle, even three millennia later.
Whatever the truth of the matter, it is known that the Despoiler honoured Jorus once the war was over – perhaps in mockery, or perhaps with nothing but sincerity. After Mackan, thousands of Blood Angels corpses were desecrated, their gene-seed ruined beyond recovery. Of all the Chapter, only a handful of bodies were left undefiled: Reclusiarch Jorus and his Death Company, clad in their battered and broken black ceramite, seated in makeshift thrones made from the armour of those Black Legion warriors they had killed on that fateful night.”
If in 10000 years the only real rebellion regarding space marines was 4000 space marines the codex did its job in preventing a rebellion on the scale of the horus heresy.
godking wrote: If in 10000 years the only real rebellion regarding space marines was 4000 space marines the codex did its job in preventing a rebellion on the scale of the horus heresy.
It was designed to never let it happen again. So if it didn't do what it was designed for then its obviously a failure. If Guilliman said this is to reduce the size of a rebellion then you could have an actual argument but its still conjecture, a massive one can come round the corner, if 4 chapters went rogue there is nothing stopping those numbers rising. Plus Guillaman said it failed, why do you think he created the Codex Imperialis The codex failed on the basis of governance and Guillaman admitted it.
Yeah a nice statement in and of itself, but you'd have to actually prove I didn't understand it lol Me and the sgt know exactly what we are talking about. Only the people with nothing to say have talked about not understanding the argument.
Yeah a nice statement in and of itself, but you'd have to actually prove I didn't understand it lol Me and the sgt know exactly what we are talking about. Only the people with nothing to say have talked about not understanding the argument.
no Del you don't understand what you're arguing about. You're absolutely incapable of grasping the nuance on display here and reducing everything to a frankly REDICULAS black and white eaither or arguement. One that someone who clearly thinks he's so smart should not be doing. you seem to be equating the Heresy to ANY rebellion. yeah no thats not the heresy dude. The Horus Heresy was not a rebellion. The Horus Heresy was a wide spread rebellion, lead by the Legions Astartes, the most dreadful weapons in the Imperial Arsenal (you've read eneugh HH books to understand what I mean by that, everytime someone witnessed the Astartes making war for the first time it terrified them) that was fought across the entire Imperium of man, NOTHING was left untouched, and losses in material and information (let alone lives) where IMMENSE. THAT is what Gulliman was trying to stop. And guess what, he did the Badab war was a very localized conflict, confined to a single region of space. a handfull of sectors at most.
You keep saying no one can prove the Codex suceeded or failed (ohh look you're moving the goal posts, because you where claiming until recently that it was a failure) but we can conclude looking at the facts that it made a differance. and certainly didn't FAIL to do what it was intended.
Yeah a nice statement in and of itself, but you'd have to actually prove I didn't understand it lol Me and the sgt know exactly what we are talking about. Only the people with nothing to say have talked about not understanding the argument.
no Del you don't understand what you're arguing about. You're absolutely incapable of grasping the nuance on display here and reducing everything to a frankly REDICULAS black and white eaither or arguement. One that someone who clearly thinks he's so smart should not be doing. you seem to be equating the Heresy to ANY rebellion. yeah no thats not the heresy dude. The Horus Heresy was not a rebellion. The Horus Heresy was a wide spread rebellion, lead by the Legions Astartes, the most dreadful weapons in the Imperial Arsenal (you've read eneugh HH books to understand what I mean by that, everytime someone witnessed the Astartes making war for the first time it terrified them) that was fought across the entire Imperium of man, NOTHING was left untouched, and losses in material and information (let alone lives) where IMMENSE. THAT is what Gulliman was trying to stop. And guess what, he did the Badab war was a very localized conflict, confined to a single region of space. a handfull of sectors at most.
You keep saying no one can prove the Codex suceeded or failed (ohh look you're moving the goal posts, because you where claiming until recently that it was a failure) but we can conclude looking at the facts that it made a differance. and certainly didn't FAIL to do what it was intended.
Nuance lol you say that in every comment in every thread. 'I'm right because variables, or philosophy LOL Learn a new word. This isn't black or white, I literally said there is no right or wrong answer, I'm just arguing from my point of view.
"you seem to be equating the Heresy to ANY rebellion. yeah no thats not the heresy dude. " not true the same factors are involved in both rebellions, the instigation and collusion of Astartes, secession from the Imperium, the only real differences of factors is size and scale etc.
"The Horus Heresy was a wide spread rebellion, lead by the Legions Astartes, the most dreadful weapons in the Imperial Arsenal (you've read eneugh HH books to understand what I mean by that, everytime someone witnessed the Astartes making war for the first time it terrified them) that was fought across the entire Imperium of man, NOTHING was left untouched, and losses in material and information (let alone lives) where IMMENSE." So what. They are different, every war and rebellion is DERP...
You keep saying no one can prove the Codex suceeded or failed (ohh look you're moving the goal posts, because you where claiming until recently that it was a failure) but we can conclude looking at the facts that it made a differance. and certainly didn't FAIL to do what it was intended. - yeah its not black and white then lol you don't even know what you are talking about, all your points have already been made lol. Its not moving the goal posts, it literally can't be proved one way or the other, there are too many third party variables. I only mentioned that it can't be proved because sgt said all I was using were suppositions (he meant conjecture).
Again you haven't proved I don't understand, all you've done is repeat whats when said and said 'you don't understand'. You have only proved YOU don't understand.. Give me a break lol
BrianDavion wrote: Becuase you DON'T understand, you can quote massive blocks of text all you like but you've proven incapable of understanding those.
Lol sure. The difference in size of the HH and Badab, who could not understand that. You have to do better than that. What you are ignoring is that Guilliman broke up the legions so that a HH event would never happen again, he did not break them up to lessen the effects of a HH, Guilliman already admitted your precious codex failed, he failed in its first intent and in its second. I suggest you use qoutes as you get a lot of the lore wrong, even your own legion and you like to argue about books you've never even read. I quote long text because before I did, people would say I'm taking it out of context, you can't win.
I'm not quoting properly because I'm not helping Delvarus make horrid anti-user text walls.
The point Delvarus made about post 1st founding Chapters somehow constantly going Traitor remains completely wrong despite the statement "No full chapters went traitor in the first founding, which is the point..." because not only have a fair few individual Marines turned but you have things like a whole bunch of Blood Angels turning and nearly destroying the Chapter and rogue Salamanders trying to destroy their own homeworld
It's okay to be wrong, it's not okay to be in denial about it.
pm713 wrote: I'm not quoting properly because I'm not helping Delvarus make horrid anti-user text walls.
The point Delvarus made about post 1st founding Chapters somehow constantly going Traitor remains completely wrong despite the statement "No full chapters went traitor in the first founding, which is the point..." because not only have a fair few individual Marines turned but you have things like a whole bunch of Blood Angels turning and nearly destroying the Chapter and rogue Salamanders trying to destroy their own homeworld
It's okay to be wrong, it's not okay to be in denial about it.
Why would individual members/or squads going traitor be relevant to anything in this discussion... I mean this is the kind of debating tactics with most people here, there is an inconsistency, lets point it out even though that has nothing to do with the argument... I stated it is the collusion of chapters which makes Badab like the HH and the only CHAPTERS that have gone rogue are 2nd founding and on-wards and you people say I don't understand, its quite comical. Its why I ignore most comments like that, there is no point debating with people that make points like that.
godking wrote: If in 10000 years the only real rebellion regarding space marines was 4000 space marines the codex did its job in preventing a rebellion on the scale of the horus heresy.
It was designed to never let it happen again. So if it didn't do what it was designed for then its obviously a failure. If Guilliman said this is to reduce the size of a rebellion then you could have an actual argument but its still conjecture, a massive one can come round the corner, if 4 chapters went rogue there is nothing stopping those numbers rising. Plus Guillaman said it failed, why do you think he created the Codex Imperialis The codex failed on the basis of governance and Guillaman admitted it.
The fact that the Legions where broken up in chapters specifically prevents more then a handful at best chapters uniting in rebellion against the imperium.
Compared to the Horus Herery the Badab war was a brush war.
There is no plausible scenario where 20 chapters each with their own chapter master and their own customs and viewpoints are going to unite under one leader and rebel against the Imperium.
4 chapters uniting was already pushing it.
In 10000 years 4 chapters united against the Imperium and it was still just a brush war compared to the Horus Heresy next to that we have the occasional chapter going rogue.
That is a pretty good record.
You cannot stamp out corruption but you can mitigate it.
Less then 1 % out of a million + space marines rebelling means that the codex for the most part does what is was intended for.
godking wrote: If in 10000 years the only real rebellion regarding space marines was 4000 space marines the codex did its job in preventing a rebellion on the scale of the horus heresy.
It was designed to never let it happen again. So if it didn't do what it was designed for then its obviously a failure. If Guilliman said this is to reduce the size of a rebellion then you could have an actual argument but its still conjecture, a massive one can come round the corner, if 4 chapters went rogue there is nothing stopping those numbers rising. Plus Guillaman said it failed, why do you think he created the Codex Imperialis The codex failed on the basis of governance and Guillaman admitted it.
The fact that the Legions where broken up in chapters specifically prevents more then a handful at best chapters uniting in rebellion against the imperium.
Compared to the Horus Herery the Badab war was a brush war.
There is no plausible scenario where 20 chapters each with their own chapter master and their own customs and viewpoints are going to unite under one leader and rebel against the Imperium.
4 chapters uniting was already pushing it.
In 10000 years 4 chapters united against the Imperium and it was still just a brush war compared to the Horus Heresy next to that we have the occasional chapter going rogue.
That is a pretty good record.
You cannot stamp out corruption but you can mitigate it.
Less then 1 % out of a million + space marines rebelling means that the codex for the most part does what is was intended for.
The difference in size has no relevance, unless you say the codex 'just helped as it didn't stop, which was its purpose. People just keep ignoring that fact.
"There is no plausible scenario where 20 chapters each with their own chapter master and their own customs and viewpoints are going to unite under one leader and rebel against the Imperium." complete opinion, no factual basis at all.
"4 chapters uniting was already pushing it." Again opinion no basis in fact.
A good record, yeah when it was intended to be a perfect record.
No one said it was designed to stamp out curruption
The codex never intended for only less than 1% out of a million rebelling.
"Never again could the Imperium tolerate the possibility of Space Marine armies falling under the influence of an enemy. The original Space Marine Legions were broken up into smaller chapters" Its never been said to reduced the size of a future rebellion.
yet again the codex wasn't designed to stop any rebellions at all. it was to stop them from turning into incrediably destructive imperium wide conflicts.
The Horus Heresy was WW2, the Badab war was... I dunno the Iran-Iraq war? bloody sure, but small potatos compared to the larger war. the goal of the codex was clearly to prevent a large scale civil war engulfing the entire Imperium. to "ensure a war the likes of the Heresy never happens again" and it NEVER HAS.
claiming the differance in size is irrelevant is absolutely bonkers because thats the ENTIRE POINT, to ensure that instead of large imperium wide conflicts, the IoM sees, as best, small scale localized revolts that are easily put down
BrianDavion wrote: yet again the codex wasn't designed to stop any rebellions at all. it was to stop them from turning into incrediably destructive imperium wide conflicts.
The Horus Heresy was WW2, the Badab war was... I dunno the Iran-Iraq war? bloody sure, but small potatos compared to the larger war. the goal of the codex was clearly to prevent a large scale civil war engulfing the entire Imperium. to "ensure a war the likes of the Heresy never happens again" and it NEVER HAS.
claiming the differance in size is irrelevant is absolutely bonkers because thats the ENTIRE POINT, to ensure that instead of large imperium wide conflicts, the IoM sees, as best, small scale localized revolts that are easily put down
The splitting up of the legions, which is in the codex was designed to stop rebellions. "incrediably destructive imperium wide conflicts." that is just your OPINION. Now who's moving the goal post lol Again size is irrelevant, you have seen evidence and still you are arguing. Did you see anywhere where it says size is relevant... Its relevant to YOU. Using caps is fun, not for you though, you're so angry, its like when you got so angry that I told you what the codex was first intended for, you went ballistic.
pm713 wrote: I'm not quoting properly because I'm not helping Delvarus make horrid anti-user text walls.
The point Delvarus made about post 1st founding Chapters somehow constantly going Traitor remains completely wrong despite the statement "No full chapters went traitor in the first founding, which is the point..." because not only have a fair few individual Marines turned but you have things like a whole bunch of Blood Angels turning and nearly destroying the Chapter and rogue Salamanders trying to destroy their own homeworld
It's okay to be wrong, it's not okay to be in denial about it.
Why would individual members/or squads going traitor be relevant to anything in this discussion... I mean this is the kind of debating tactics with most people here, there is an inconsistency, lets point it out even though that has nothing to do with the argument... I stated it is the collusion of chapters which makes Badab like the HH and the only CHAPTERS that have gone rogue are 2nd founding and on-wards and you people say I don't understand, its quite comical. Its why I ignore most comments like that, there is no point debating with people that make points like that.
You claimed that only second foundings went traitor. I proved that was wrong. Now you're bringing your weird personal issues to avoid admitting it. This is typical.
If I wanted to be silly I'd be pedantic and say that it's ridiculous that of all the foundings only the second one had traitors and bring up things like the Cursed Founding.
pm713 wrote: I'm not quoting properly because I'm not helping Delvarus make horrid anti-user text walls.
The point Delvarus made about post 1st founding Chapters somehow constantly going Traitor remains completely wrong despite the statement "No full chapters went traitor in the first founding, which is the point..." because not only have a fair few individual Marines turned but you have things like a whole bunch of Blood Angels turning and nearly destroying the Chapter and rogue Salamanders trying to destroy their own homeworld
It's okay to be wrong, it's not okay to be in denial about it.
Why would individual members/or squads going traitor be relevant to anything in this discussion... I mean this is the kind of debating tactics with most people here, there is an inconsistency, lets point it out even though that has nothing to do with the argument... I stated it is the collusion of chapters which makes Badab like the HH and the only CHAPTERS that have gone rogue are 2nd founding and on-wards and you people say I don't understand, its quite comical. Its why I ignore most comments like that, there is no point debating with people that make points like that.
You claimed that only second foundings went traitor. I proved that was wrong. Now you're bringing your weird personal issues to avoid admitting it. This is typical.
If I wanted to be silly I'd be pedantic and say that it's ridiculous that of all the foundings only the second one had traitors and bring up things like the Cursed Founding.
No I did not, I grouped the 2nd founders onward, anyone can see that because 2nd founders onwards are the only full chapters to turn traitor and I was saying that no first founding chapters have turned. If that is the only way you can prove me wrong its pathetic and you know it. To say I wasn't grouping them or not realise that I was means that you have very poor reading comprehension and can't think past a phrase and have to take any phrase on face value, to anyone else it would be obvious. Plus all the chapters are grouped into '2nd founding chapters' all the time as they all share the same type, being one of the chapters created from the original. You are being silly and pedantic. Plus you've had arguments with me before where I have no problem admitting I am wrong especially admitting I am wrong when it does nothing to actually contradict my original argument. You are just being petty. I mean why would only 2nd founding chapters and not the ones after be relevant to anything... I mean seriously.
BrianDavion wrote: Second founding actually means something, perhaps you should have used the term "later foundings"
and even then you're wrong, a full HALF of the first founding went rogue.
Yeah next time dealing with you I'll spell everything out for you.
"and even then you're wrong, a full HALF of the first founding went rogue." That is so pathetic and stupid. I mean this is what I'm dealing with...
Sticks and stones may break my bones but they won't win a fething argument.
I've already won, and that nonsense ^ asinine comment has nothing to do with the argument
"Becuase you DON'T understand, you can quote massive blocks of text all you like but you've proven incapable of understanding those. " Yeah like you're civil. If you want to be civil then act civil and don't complain about the lack there of.
Until you find me a quote saying 'The split up of legions was for a HH rebellion of likewise size and scope.' then you are the one thats behind. You've shown no evidence on your part. Sgt was actually using quotes and that, I just get nonsense from you. But I know you find it difficult and off putting using quotes, since you can't stop moaning about them. I actually have evidence on my side.
Guys, I don't think you should bother. Either Delvarus has serious reading comprehension issues or is just wilfully ignoring evidence at this point. I argued him with the exact same points in another thread and he resorted ad hominems and shifting goal posts to avoid the fact that he contradicted himself and that he wasn't admitting that he was wrong.
Grimskul wrote: Guys, I don't think you should bother. Either Delvarus has serious reading comprehension issues or is just wilfully ignoring evidence at this point. I argued him with the exact same points in another thread and he resorted ad hominems and shifting goal posts to avoid the fact that he contradicted himself and that he wasn't admitting that he was wrong.
I already proved you were lying. I did admit I was wrong, and show me a quote of me "moving the goalpost."
""So it is facepalm.
Guilliman was not right and if you say her was right you have to evidence rather than just saying he was right. regardless of the numbers, Guilliman's codex failed to stop the Badab war from happening, which was its point, its point was to stop legions banding together, the chapters banded together nonetheless and he still just weakened the Astartes. Plus only second founding chapters have turned. He failed miserably. The precident is set as well, we know he failed so there is nothing from stopping a quarter, half of all chapters joining together and turning against the Imperium. All the codex accomplished was weakening the Astartes. I mean how can you say he was right, the Badab war was just a lower scale version of the HH, he didn't stop anything." !
Yeah thats me proving I said I was wrong, and then I continued to argue against other things you said that I didn't. You're a liar. Show me moving the goal posts. See you lot have such poor memories you don't even know what you said before. So you say things like he moves the goalposts etc and can't quote anywhere that I have done that. Just saying things doesn't make it so. I'm very intelligent, I remember all these things and can quote them showing you you's are just lying and making things up.
Until you find me a quote saying 'The split up of legions was for a HH rebellion of likewise size and scope.' then you are the one thats behind. You've shown no evidence on your part. Sgt was actually using quotes and that, I just get nonsense from you. But I know you find it difficult and off putting using quotes.
Alright let me provide a quote for you...
With the threat of extinction held at bay, Gulliman turned to ensuring that such a catastrophe would never happen again.... the most lasting and continous decree was that the existing space marine legions be broken up and reorginzied into smaller brotherhoods known as chapters,, fragmenting their strength so that the rot of heresy could never again spread so swiftly"
Codex Adeptus Astartes: Space Marines 8th edition page 8
Just about every space Marine Codex has a varient of this that states the entire point of the Codex was not to prevent any and all rebellions but to ensure that never again would put all that power in the hands so so few.
I'm sorry I wasn't aware I had to quote massive text blocks from a codex.
Until you find me a quote saying 'The split up of legions was for a HH rebellion of likewise size and scope.' then you are the one thats behind. You've shown no evidence on your part. Sgt was actually using quotes and that, I just get nonsense from you. But I know you find it difficult and off putting using quotes.
Alright let me provide a quote for you...
With the threat of extinction held at bay, Gulliman turned to ensuring that such a catastrophe would never happen again.... the most lasting and continous decree was that the existing space marine legions be broken up and reorginzied into smaller brotherhoods known as chapters,, fragmenting their strength so that the rot of heresy could never again spread so swiftly"
Codex Adeptus Astartes: Space Marines 8th edition page 8
Just about every space Marine Codex has a varient of this that states the entire point of the Codex was not to prevent any and all rebellions but to ensure that never again would put all that power in the hands so so few.
I'm sorry I wasn't aware I had to quote massive text blocks from a codex.
Yeah and where does it mentions size or scope. Don't just get excited because you were able to actually find a quote, actually find one that proves your point. " ensure that never again would put all that power in the hands so so few. " yeah that actually proves my point. Like Badab LOL Quote the whole part though.
BrianDavion wrote: I'm not going to quote the whole post Del, I gave you the god =damned page and referance, go read it for yourself.
Lol sure.
Some of us actually have lives that consist of doing more then typing out pages of unnesscary quotes from books in our parents basement while cackling about how "this will show them! this will show them all"
BrianDavion wrote: I'm not going to quote the whole post Del, I gave you the god =damned page and referance, go read it for yourself.
Lol sure.
Some of us actually have lives that consist of doing more then typing out pages of unnesscary quotes from books in our parents basement while cackling about how "this will show them! this will show them all"
You've been replying to my comments straight away for hours, you don't have a life lol Unnecessary, sure.
)
