My one change would be to breakup the Imperium of Man into separate factions. Particularly via the Space Marine Chapters, Ad Mech, and Terra. Essentially I’d like that after the Horus Heresy the various Primarchs create their own mini-Imperiums while Terra separates to worship the Corpse god. Yes they might ally with each other, but each behaves as a separate independent political power.
Why would I want this? Because in a couple of Narrative Campaigns I’ve seen there are a lot more Imperium players than any other faction. Orks just have Orks, but Imperium has Space Marine Chapters, Imperial Guard, Adeptus Custodes, Ad Mech, SoB, etc... a friend of mine had his Narrative campaign collapse because the Imperium players took too much of a head start. Honestly probably his own fault for having the factions in the first place. Need some rivalries happening or something.
"break up the Imperium of Man into separate factions"? You don't need to change any of the background. You just need to get people to stop and realize that the Imperium of Man is in the situation that it's in because it IS NOT a single unified faction. Neither is anyone else.
"Faction based" narrative campaigns are contrary to the background material, and usually the result of lazy thinking.
Disclaimer: If you're going to do a faction based campaign, about the only way you can reflect the way the setting works is encourage factional infighting, to the point where the faction with the most players is going to spend the most time fighting against themselves (scoring points for the players at the expense of the "side").
Seriously, the background is littered with stuff like "During such-and-such great conflict, the Space Wolves and the Dark Angels encountered each other, there was a disagreement, and that disagreement became an excuse to settle old grudges by attacking. Naturally, both sides claim the other side started it."
I would change it so that Necrons are primarily a digital species that can inject their consciousness into any suficiently advanced technology.
Necron warriors are actually the "Men of Iron" robots created by humans in the Dark Age of Technology, and Necrons taking them over caused the ban on AI in the Imperium. The weirder stuff like Tomb Spyders and so on are the "Original" necron chasis. Monoliths are the storage facilities for the necron personalities.
I just find it weird that Necron Warriors look so much like human skeletons, so I think it makes more sense if they are actually created by humans and only repurposed by the necrons for their own nefarious use.
Make it so it is a setting once more, and not a terrible GoT-esq storyline that revolves around a couple of dozen individuals and apparently no-one else.
The galaxy is vast, inconceivably so, yet here we have Girlyman bumping into the same faces over and over again.
Primaris Marines being introduced gradually rather than just shoving 50,000 new Space Marines into your face out of nowhere. This really cheapens the plot and makes the Space Marines look stupid rather than powerful beings.
Increase the head count in Space Marine Chapters to 10,000.
Because 1,000,000 Marines has been, and always will be, a drop in the ocean.
Sure, keep the Lore that even a single squad can turn a Warzone on its head. That bit is fine with me.
But given attrition, travel time and the sheer number of active zones in any given war? 1,000,000 is just far, far too few.
I disagree but don't want to derail.
Spoiler:
One of the themes of the game is that no 'player' army is conceptually big enough to make dramatic change in the galaxy (but is enough to make dramatic local change). This compartmentalises the various forces under supreme commanders who effectively control their armies through pacts and oaths rather than direct leadership.
You guard regiment may be 100,000 men or 1000 men, but it's not getting off that rock without the navy, and it is subordinate to the generals and warmasters.
Your marine army may have its own fleet and be composed of super soldiers but it is limited to 1000 of them at the most. You'll need co-operation with a crusade of mortals if you want to do more than sack cities and backwater worlds, or hit and run.
Abaddon might have a massive crusade but his allied warlords are all Starscream- he can only trust? the guys he can reach with his daemon sword.
This has changed somewhat with the introduction of playable chaos primarchs who presumably command loyalty from the majority of their legion. I personally think they should have remained in the background with the Custodes.
If I was to change one thing it would to have Cawl die and his facilities/collegues burned to the ground. Without him, none of the admech can keep the primaris project(or the equipment) going and primaris equipment becomes relic stuff that cant be reproduced. Primaris marines get folded into rank and file and handed regular boltguns, advanced bolters/plasma weapons are preserved for veteran marines. Primaris vehicles become a 1 per army relic choice.
Primaris biological component is reduced to a strategem that halves the wounds an army takes for a battleround. Without guidance from Cawl the process is deemed too risky and normal geneseed implantation resumes.
Not Online!!! wrote: A stronger focus on PDF/ Mortal traitors over CSM/ daemons.
ATM chaos is seemingly just CSM with daemons and some legion auxilia, kinda.
But i admit i am biased
I think it might happen to a degree, the orders of battle for vigilus and faith and fury specificly named traitor guard forces, and we're seeing traitor guard minis in BSF... we might see traitor guard apper.
that said I can only imagine they'd be pretty much to chaos what guard are to the IoM narrativly. mostly there as a "hopelessly out matched force" to be saved by Marines
I'd make it so that almost every single major event doesn't sound like Garth Marenghi trying to be Ayn Rand.
"And yay the elves did achieve fully automated luxury space communism and yay did they lose themselves to pleasure and yay then verily a hellbeast did eat them".
Give more background on various species/factions out there. Not saying they have to have models/kits but show who else is fighting rather than more orks, chaos and eldar.....
Ratius wrote: Give more background on various species/factions out there. Not saying they have to have models/kits but show who else is fighting rather than more orks, chaos and eldar.....
I agree, except I would replace the absolutely gratuitous amounts of imperial material and focus it on ALL xenos. Telling people their neglected xenos factions are being further ignored to focus on other xenos while imperial players get their uninterrupted deluge of material is pretty rough
Fire all the writers who think they're working in a fantasy setting. "Gods" is the manner in which humans refer to forces beyond their understanding, the "Chaos Gods" do not have discrete personalities, don't talk to people directly, don't have egos, desires, can't be tricked or defeated, they're elemental forces beyond the understanding of sentient beings. I shouldn't be reading "but Khorne wanted (thingamajig) and reached out and fiddled with the underlying nature of reality".
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Pretty sure those paid to write the background are the ones on the right of things there though?
The Big Four have always had distinct personalities, going back to Realms of Chaos?
If you go back to the question it says "if you could change one thing...". They write personalities into the Chaos Gods, I disagree. They're 'right' in the sense that that's canon because they get to write it that way but we're not here arguing about what's canon, we're here talking about what we personally would change if we had the power to.
Add stuff like Chaos Eldar, or even just add some new chaos-worshiping xenos. I don't like the fact that Chaos, supposedly this galaxy-spanning corrupting force that can only be defeated when every being that feels true emotion dies, only seems to have human or astartes followers.
I'm pretty sure there are representatives of all the races with Chaos. The human component is just stupid huge because they practically split in half during the Heresy, so 99 out of every hundred Chaos folks you see are gonna be human.
AnomanderRake wrote: Fire all the writers who think they're working in a fantasy setting. ".
THEY ARE WORKING IN A FANTASY SETTING.
I mean seriously, yuou have guys in plate armor fighting each other with swords and casting "psykic spells" 40k is basicly fantasy cleverly disguised as sci-fi
Fire all the writers who think they're working in a fantasy setting. "Gods" is the manner in which humans refer to forces beyond their understanding, the "Chaos Gods" do not have discrete personalities, don't talk to people directly, don't have egos, desires, can't be tricked or defeated, they're elemental forces beyond the understanding of sentient beings. I shouldn't be reading "but Khorne wanted (thingamajig) and reached out and fiddled with the underlying nature of reality".
40K is a fantasy setting. It isn't Sci-fi. Never has been, hopefully never will be.
The definition of Sci-fi is that the setting needs to be based in reality, even if technology hasn't reached a place where that could be possible. 40k is in no way possible, it's not rooted in reality at all. You know, hence the daemons, gods and sorcery etc...
Thats the beauty of the setting, its Fantasy in space, just like Star Wars. It should be gods, magic, swords and sorcery +space.
I would personally like to destroy the Tau and Primaris. They are both terrible for the lore and the game, they are too high tech. They don't belong in the setting.
Also, I would like Dark Eldar to be a psychic race like the craftworld eldar.
Make the T’au Empire bigger. As of now it has minimal control of its expansion spheres and with the introduction of the Imperium, Tyranids, etc. trying to go full force on them makes them seem unlikely to survive. I am by no means a T’au player, but wish for them to have a more prominent background.
AnomanderRake wrote: Fire all the writers who think they're working in a fantasy setting. ".
THEY ARE WORKING IN A FANTASY SETTING.
I mean seriously, yuou have guys in plate armor fighting each other with swords and casting "psykic spells" 40k is basicly fantasy cleverly disguised as sci-fi
Let me rephrase.
Fire everyone who thinks they're writing a Warcraft-D&D bland high fantasy setting instead of a Lovecraft-Dune-Night's Dawn existential horror pseudo-fantasy setting and tries to diminish the horror elements by, for instance, sending Kaldor Draigo to run about in the Warp beating up the Chaos Gods.
I think part of what makes the Tau unique IS their small size (combined with their short time on the galactic arena). They really haven't had to deal with the near constant and overwhelming threats the other Factions have, and it has allowed for their quick growth and that hint of naivete that makes them Tau and not just another jaded empire.
flandarz wrote: I think part of what makes the Tau unique IS their small size (combined with their short time on the galactic arena). They really haven't had to deal with the near constant and overwhelming threats the other Factions have, and it has allowed for their quick growth and that hint of naivete that makes them Tau and not just another jaded empire.
Agreed. The fact that the Tau are the baby empire is one of my favourite things about them.
If I could change one thing it'd be the bizzare "We won't mention them" approuch with the 2 lost primarchs. GW should have just detailed who they where and what happened to them, the dancing around them in the HH books is sometimes outright silly
There are numerous sci-fi settings with psychic abilities, extradimemsional beings, and incoporeal entities of godlike power.
Heck, you can find all those in Star Trek.
I've never really seen Star Trek so I can't comment on that.
It depends entirely on the source of said power. The source of power in 40K stems from raw emotion made manifest into beings known as daemons in the warp. Thats Fantasy.
If you had a setting where you could add a computer chip into your brain to allow you to control atoms and shift them in a desired manor to manifest "psychic powers" that could be considered Sci-fi because its rooted in reality.
There's a subtle difference.
Don't believe me, just ask Issac Asimov. He said it, not me.
Pure AI Tau battlesuits mixed in with the normal pilots
OR
Pure AI necron soldiers mixed in with the normal necrons
OR
Pure AI Chaos Space Marine faction complete with warpsmiths and sorcerers (maybe they're men of iron) and Titans
OR
Tyranids consume entire planets, gas giants, and stars. 100% of all matter and energy in the galaxy is turned into tyranid flesh, not just 0.0001% of it.
There are numerous sci-fi settings with psychic abilities, extradimemsional beings, and incoporeal entities of godlike power.
Heck, you can find all those in Star Trek.
I've never really seen Star Trek so I can't comment on that.
It depends entirely on the source of said power. The source of power in 40K stems from raw emotion made manifest into beings known as daemons in the warp. Thats Fantasy.
If you had a setting where you could add a computer chip into your brain to allow you to control atoms and shift them in a desired manor to manifest "psychic powers" that could be considered Sci-fi because its rooted in reality.
There's a subtle difference.
Don't believe me, just ask Issac Asimov. He said it, not me.
Issac Asimov penned a novel where one character could tune the emotions of other characters, ensuring loyalty. Iirc, no chip required, just an innate ability of said character, The Mule. I forget the name of the book, but it was the second in the Foundation series, considered a classic sci-fi collection.
It's been nearly 30 years since I read it though, the details are a bit hazy.
There are numerous sci-fi settings with psychic abilities, extradimemsional beings, and incoporeal entities of godlike power.
Heck, you can find all those in Star Trek.
I've never really seen Star Trek so I can't comment on that.
It depends entirely on the source of said power. The source of power in 40K stems from raw emotion made manifest into beings known as daemons in the warp. Thats Fantasy.
If you had a setting where you could add a computer chip into your brain to allow you to control atoms and shift them in a desired manor to manifest "psychic powers" that could be considered Sci-fi because its rooted in reality.
There's a subtle difference.
Don't believe me, just ask Issac Asimov. He said it, not me.
Issac Asimov penned a novel where one character could tune the emotions of other characters, ensuring loyalty. Iirc, no chip required, just an innate ability of said character, The Mule. I forget the name of the book, but it was the second in the Foundation series, considered a classic sci-fi collection.
It's been nearly 30 years since I read it though, the details are a bit hazy.
Foundation and Empire is the book.
indeed. it's often accepted that "Psionics" is just a fancy word of "magic.. but in sci-fi!"
Pure AI Chaos Space Marine faction complete with warpsmiths and sorcerers (maybe they're men of iron) and Titans
Wat?
I believe you've horribly got the opposite end of the Thousand Son's stick there. WTF are you on about?
Dark Mechanicum took men of iron stuff with them during horus heresy right? They even had a emperor class men of iron titan possessed by a daemon. So i want DarkMech to actually have a men of iron faction which will probably be robot chaos space marines factoion, and I want them to also have warpsmiths and sorcerers too.
Issac Asimov penned a novel where one character could tune the emotions of other characters, ensuring loyalty. Iirc, no chip required, just an innate ability of said character, The Mule. I forget the name of the book, but it was the second in the Foundation series, considered a classic sci-fi collection.
It's been nearly 30 years since I read it though, the details are a bit hazy.
Foundation and Empire is the book.
Ok, then whats the difference between Sci-fi and Fantasy then? Why have a distinction if there is none?
If you look up the definition you'll see that what I had written in my previous post is what the definition is. And that is based on what Asimov had said regarding the difference between Sci-fi and Fantasy.
Lasers and space ships don't make it sci-fi any more than swords and horses make it fantasy. All stories assume a certain level of technology. It's the rules of the universe in which they inhabit that define genre. Is it rooted in the rules of our world or one of the super natural?
How big was the castigator titan? He might've been warlord.
Do you mean this thing, from one of the Grey Knights novels? No idea.
Yeah. It's the original titan. All titan designs are worse versions of it. So i figured it should be the strongest titan so emperor class.
that's not a man of Iron, or hasn't explitcably said to be one. frankly what would be the point of "AI" in chaos? it's easier to just toss a demon in something then program an AI
Issac Asimov penned a novel where one character could tune the emotions of other characters, ensuring loyalty. Iirc, no chip required, just an innate ability of said character, The Mule. I forget the name of the book, but it was the second in the Foundation series, considered a classic sci-fi collection.
It's been nearly 30 years since I read it though, the details are a bit hazy.
Foundation and Empire is the book.
Ok, then whats the difference between Sci-fi and Fantasy then? Why have a distinction if there is none?
If you look up the definition you'll see that what I had written in my previous post is what the definition is. And that is based on what Asimov had said regarding the difference between Sci-fi and Fantasy.
Lasers and space ships don't make it sci-fi any more than swords and horses make it fantasy. All stories assume a certain level of technology. It's the rules of the universe in which they inhabit that define genre. Is it rooted in the rules of our world or one of the super natural?
Being as though there is no exact definition of Sci fi, only definitions of different types of Sci fi (hard and soft) you're going to have difficulty proving either that it is or isn't.
From wiki-science fiction
Science fiction elements can include, among others:
Temporal settings in the future, or in alternative histories.[278]
Spatial settings or scenes in outer space, on other worlds, in subterranean earth, or in parallel universes.[27]
Aspects of biology in fiction such as aliens, mutants, and enhanced humans.[279]
Speculative or predicted technology such as brain-computer interface, bio-engineering, superintelligent computers, robots, and ray guns and other advanced weapons.[279]
Undiscovered scientific possibilities such as teleportation, time travel, and faster-than-light travel or communication.[282]
New and different political and social systems and situations, including Utopian, dystopian, post-apocalyptic, or post-scarcity.
Future history and evolution of humans on Earth or on other planets.[284]
Paranormal abilities such as mind control, telepathy, and telekinesis.[285]
From wiki-fantasy
Most fantasy uses magic or other supernatural elements as a main plot element, theme, or setting. Magic and magical creatures are common in many of these worlds.
So, one could argue that 40k is a hybrid of Sci fi and fantasy.
I once heard the term "science fantasy" used. they where using it to describe star wars but IMHO that label could be applied nicely to 40k as well.
thing is, genres aren't very clear cut, just for example, what if I told you about a setting that was set in a dystopian near future where corperations controled everything, the internet was even more prevalaent then it is today, and cybernatic and genetic enhacnement of the body was common place? well you'd say that's clearly science fiction, the cyberpunk subgenre to be specific...
but what If I told you said setting also had elves, Orks, magic and dragons?
this BTW isn't a hypothetical eaither it's called Shadowrun
The funny thing about those themes is that they themselves don't have definitions in this context.
Star wars has 'biology' in the form of aliens. But that's no different to a dragon in fantasy.
The distinction seems to be almost entirely one of in-game comprehension. Characters in fantasy rarely analyse or examine the biology of fantastical creatures. Science fiction often tries to explain them - 'carbon fibre bones, bifurcated digestion with two part liquid for fire' etc
But often, science fiction style stories don't either. All these themes are just window dressing, aesthetic styles to the story. The detail of biology or blasters or hyperdrives is not part of the story.
They might as well be dragons, crossbows and steamships in their relative narrative importance.
I tend to divide the stories more by their faith vs fact style of approaching the universe in which they inhabit.
'harder' SciFi tends to examine the universe far more, tries to explain thngs rather than have the reader take them at face value.
Fantasy style stories just ignore this and treat it as a setting aesthetic. The nature of a dragons biology has no impact on the story and so ignore it.
granted you can have soft-fi that pretends to explain this stuff, but just... ugh. Star trek's like that. they love to toss technobabble around but most of it is a meaningless string of buzz words
How big was the castigator titan? He might've been warlord.
Do you mean this thing, from one of the Grey Knights novels? No idea.
Yeah. It's the original titan. All titan designs are worse versions of it. So i figured it should be the strongest titan so emperor class.
that's not a man of Iron, or hasn't explitcably said to be one. frankly what would be the point of "AI" in chaos? it's easier to just toss a demon in something then program an AI
Demons tend to do bad things to their own side. An AI doesn't try and eat your soul.
BertBert wrote: I'd want to revert Necrons back to what they were before they became comic book villains.
I actually prefer necrons the way they are now, they otherwised sounded plain to me.
If I could change a single thing it'd be the tyranids' ability to evolve, making it maybe slower, or at least a bt different in some fashion because in then the battles gainst tyranids are frustrating: it looks like they'd even evolve to counter your everyday lasgun and don't... Well dunno if people get my idea.
I got another one, either
1. Make c'tans don't resemble people. Serious immersion breaking for me. They don't look like necrontyr. They look like freaking humans or maybe eldar.
or
2. add a female c'tan. If you're gonna make no sense and make a formless star vampire in necrodermis look like humans, then at least add a female one.
BrianDavion wrote: that's not a man of Iron, or hasn't explitcably said to be one. frankly what would be the point of "AI" in chaos? it's easier to just toss a demon in something then program an AI
On closer inspection.
1. You are right. Nowhere does it say it was a man of iron. Either I jumped to conclusions or i misread something.
2. The Castigator is confirmed to be bigger than the Emperor Class Titan as it is the bigger than all the imperium titans.
3. The Castigator is either Pure AI or a crazy Daemon Engine.
What's the point of AI in chaos?
1. What's the point of anything? Answer: FUN. Chaos got empty shell power armor chaos space marines. What's the point of that? They also brainwashed a Tyranid Hive Ship. What's the point of that too?
2. Dark mechanicum ran off with it. So why do they not use it? Cawl uses it with his clone cawl.
I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
And there you go, that is what I’d change. If eldar and dark eldar are such small fry then they really add anything other than intrigue to the setting, they aren’t enough of a presence to really affect the narrative of the galaxy, or if they do that it feels a bit unconvincing. I’d much prefer it if Orks and eldar had a dominion like the tau did, even if the eldar was split up across the craft worlds. But the great rift story line should be the start of chaos establishing a permanent foothold in the galaxy and taking control of imperial planets and chaos armies getting the same attention as imperial armies from the GW
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
And there you go, that is what I’d change. If eldar and dark eldar are such small fry then they really add anything other than intrigue to the setting, they aren’t enough of a presence to really affect the narrative of the galaxy, or if they do that it feels a bit unconvincing. I’d much prefer it if Orks and eldar had a dominion like the tau did, even if the eldar was split up across the craft worlds. But the great rift story line should be the start of chaos establishing a permanent foothold in the galaxy and taking control of imperial planets and chaos armies getting the same attention as imperial armies from the GW
They aren't really small fry though. DE have an almost literally unassailable fortress from which they can go where they want to do pretty much whatever they want and Craftworlders don't need territory to alter things, that's not how they work. Craftworlders shape the narrative by saving or killing important people at key moments e.g. Guilliman. If you remove the Eldar (well Ynnari) from that then there's no Guilliman, Caw or Primaris and the story would be radically different. Neither race need or really want a held dominion to affect things.
BrianDavion wrote: granted you can have soft-fi that pretends to explain this stuff, but just... ugh. Star trek's like that. they love to toss technobabble around but most of it is a meaningless string of buzz words
To be fair Trek (at least more traditional Trek) is still built around a pretty solid framework. They definitely fudge a lot for plot purposes, but the basics of Warp Drive, Phasers, and even their teleportation tech is all sorta reasonably explained and consistent. In particular I like the way they treat interstellar distances. They treat Space As Big for the most part.
At the end of the day I think it's telling that most book stores put sci-fi and fantasy in the same section, then they let us nerds sort it out.
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
And there you go, that is what I’d change. If eldar and dark eldar are such small fry then they really add anything other than intrigue to the setting, they aren’t enough of a presence to really affect the narrative of the galaxy, or if they do that it feels a bit unconvincing. I’d much prefer it if Orks and eldar had a dominion like the tau did, even if the eldar was split up across the craft worlds. But the great rift story line should be the start of chaos establishing a permanent foothold in the galaxy and taking control of imperial planets and chaos armies getting the same attention as imperial armies from the GW
Chaos's new foothold in the galaxy since the Great Rift opened should definitely be better represented. The Night Lords should retake Tsagualsa, for instance.
I don't think that the Ecclesiarchy should have accepted Guilliman's return. A massive Imperial schism would have been a great excuse for battles between "loyalists". It would also have given something for those not keen on the whole Primaris/Roboute plot advancement to play with lore-wise. An Imperial schism would have plunged the galaxy into truely dark times, instead of this weird "hope" thing that is going on now.
+++Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.+++
Trickstick wrote: I don't think that the Ecclesiarchy should have accepted Guilliman's return. A massive Imperial schism would have been a great excuse for battles between "loyalists". It would also have given something for those not keen on the whole Primaris/Roboute plot advancement to play with lore-wise. An Imperial schism would have plunged the galaxy into truely dark times, instead of this weird "hope" thing that is going on now.
+++Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.+++
Personally I would have altered where the Rift split the galaxy and used that as a split for the Imperium. On one side you could have Roboutes Imperium that he leads and essentially functions as is now and on the other the High Lords remain in charge, denying that Roboute is a legitimate ruler and essentially follow that with the remaining organisations. For example Space Marines largely stay neutral and focus on killing Chaos, the Ecclesiarchy goes with the Primarch and the Mechanicus goes with the High Lords.
pm713 wrote: Personally I would have altered where the Rift split the galaxy and used that as a split for the Imperium.
I literally thought that is what the whole "Dark Imperium" was going to be about when I first read the chapter heading or whatever.
Plus it would really fit with the copying-from-history thing that is all over 40k. We have Ultramar as the western roman empire, lasting long after the fall of rome (Terra). Then you could cast Rouboute as Justinian, trying to reclaim what was lost. Put in overtones of the Catholic/Orthodox schism as well and the Imperium gets a lot more interesting. You can even have Ultramar be slowly eroded by Tyranids/Tau or someting, until the eventual fall of Byzantium/Macragge.
pm713 wrote: Personally I would have altered where the Rift split the galaxy and used that as a split for the Imperium.
I literally thought that is what the whole "Dark Imperium" was going to be about when I first read the chapter heading or whatever.
Plus it would really fit with the copying-from-history thing that is all over 40k. We have Ultramar as the western roman empire, lasting long after the fall of rome (Terra). Then you could cast Rouboute as Justinian, trying to reclaim what was lost. Put in overtones of the Catholic/Orthodox schism as well and the Imperium gets a lot more interesting. You can even have Ultramar be slowly eroded by Tyranids/Tau or someting, until the eventual fall of Byzantium/Macragge.
I'm now going to pretend that the matching with history bit is something I intended and not just pure coincidence.
I would make one small but vital (IMO) change to the Necron fluff.
They should have left one planet or one system of planets untouched with living Necrontyr so that they could repopulate to make more soldiers and also in case they wanted to re-transfer back into physical bodies after the war in heaven and maybe after getting some of that sweet sweet old-one genetech. Then take the story in one of two ways: Either the Eldar or the C'tan (or C'tan who try to blame the Eldar - sole dying survivor escapes and brings a message etc...) wipe out everyone on the planet while the Necrons are away finishing the war in heaven. You can have it be the final straw that shows the C'tan are evil manipulators and then the Necrons turn on them. IMO gives a logical reason why they have no backup genetic material and acts as a nice hook for their ongoing eldar hatred or for their turning on the C'tan so suddenly.
I wouldn't so much change a part of the lore, but I feel that IG units could use an upgrade, like equipment harnesses, backpacks, weapons with attachments, vehicles with bits and bobbins, I'm tired of having to kitbash all the time, because sometimes things don't fit up as well as I'd like.
That or bring the Squats back or make Robust Girlyman canonically sound like a bitch.
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
And there you go, that is what I’d change. If eldar and dark eldar are such small fry then they really add anything other than intrigue to the setting, they aren’t enough of a presence to really affect the narrative of the galaxy, or if they do that it feels a bit unconvincing. I’d much prefer it if Orks and eldar had a dominion like the tau did, even if the eldar was split up across the craft worlds. But the great rift story line should be the start of chaos establishing a permanent foothold in the galaxy and taking control of imperial planets and chaos armies getting the same attention as imperial armies from the GW
They aren't really small fry though. DE have an almost literally unassailable fortress from which they can go where they want to do pretty much whatever they want and Craftworlders don't need territory to alter things, that's not how they work. Craftworlders shape the narrative by saving or killing important people at key moments e.g. Guilliman. If you remove the Eldar (well Ynnari) from that then there's no Guilliman, Caw or Primaris and the story would be radically different. Neither race need or really want a held dominion to affect things.
Ok but even the way you describe it it feels like they exist to be part of the imperial narrative, supporting cast.
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
The thing is, most of the galaxy ISN'T imperial territory. the imperium controls 1 million worlds and at best the star system those worlds are in. There are between 100 and 400 BILLION stars in the galaxy. Even if the imperium controlled 1 million stars, that's between 0.00001% of the galaxy and 0.0000025% of the galaxy in imperial control. Just because they divided the galaxy up into segmentae and sectors, doesn't mean they actually control all space within them.
they live on any planet their spores get to and they are virtually impossible to remove.
It's not about who controls the most, it's about who the narrative is focused on. There are plenty of stories where the main characters are from the tiny faction, or a minority group against the big bad empire (actually the more standard trope). In 40k they've flipped it around and made it the largest cohesive empire as the central focus. The orks aren't united so although they are everwhere, they're actually more likely to be fighting themselves than anyone else
So there's actually nothing in 40k that needs changing. It's how GW presents 40k that needs changing. If they simply did it by the numbers, all the stories would be ork stories. GW needs to dial is overwhelming bias back from the imperium as it distorts what the galaxy really looks like.
maybe that’s my thing, there’s no one else presented on an equal footing to the empire so if you play as the empire your just taking part in the xenocidal massacre. Even if you play chaos your the underdog, and who doesn’t love the underdogs?
mrFickle wrote: maybe that’s my thing, there’s no one else presented on an equal footing to the empire so if you play as the empire your just taking part in the xenocidal massacre. Even if you play chaos your the underdog, and who doesn’t love the underdogs?
You are forgetting that the Imperium is also fighting the Imperium. They lose as much to themselves as to others. You could think of the Imperium as an underdog because it is simply impossible for it to hold together in the long term. It will continue to decline and fall apart, mostly due to internal corruption and strife.
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
The thing is, most of the galaxy ISN'T imperial territory. the imperium controls 1 million worlds and at best the star system those worlds are in. There are between 100 and 400 BILLION stars in the galaxy. Even if the imperium controlled 1 million stars, that's between 0.00001% of the galaxy and 0.0000025% of the galaxy in imperial control. Just because they divided the galaxy up into segmentae and sectors, doesn't mean they actually control all space within them.
they live on any planet their spores get to and they are virtually impossible to remove.
It's not about who controls the most, it's about who the narrative is focused on. There are plenty of stories where the main characters are from the tiny faction, or a minority group against the big bad empire (actually the more standard trope). In 40k they've flipped it around and made it the largest cohesive empire as the central focus. The orks aren't united so although they are everwhere, they're actually more likely to be fighting themselves than anyone else
So there's actually nothing in 40k that needs changing. It's how GW presents 40k that needs changing. If they simply did it by the numbers, all the stories would be ork stories. GW needs to dial is overwhelming bias back from the imperium as it distorts what the galaxy really looks like.
I've always taken the million worlds thing to be more of a nice sounding propaganda bit than a solid normal. The Imperium constantly wages war and loses and gains planets so to be strictly 1 million worlds they'd have to lose and gain at an equal rate at all times but that seems very unlikely.
There's also the huge difference between an ork being on a planet and controlling it.
The actual text says "over a million", so you have lots of room for the fluctuation of the actual number. Once you're over a million you can give or take a thousand worlds and you're still barely scratching the total.
So just to add perspective, even if the imperium controlled 100 million worlds and the star systems they exist in, the imperium would control 0.001% - 0.00025% of the galaxy's stars.
It doesn't matter hugely what the precise number is, because in order for the imperium to control meaningful percentages of the galaxy's stars, it would need to possess several billion of them.
Tldr the imperiym doesn't control as much of the galaxy as their maps suggest. The galaxy is massively huge, and there is far more evidence that Orks are the dominant civilisation by number and spread than humans.
This is also the reason why the Eldar empire could spread to the edge of the galaxy where the maiden worlds are, and DAoT humans still would rarely encroach on them as they spread across the galaxy
Hellebore wrote: So just to add perspective, even if the imperium controlled 100 million worlds and the star systems they exist in, the imperium would control 0.001% - 0.00025% of the galaxy's stars.
For real.
"The Milky Way contains between 100 and 400 billion stars and at least 100 billion planets. An exact figure would depend on counting the number of very-low-mass stars, which are difficult to detect, especially at distances of more than 300 ly (90 pc) from the Sun." - Wikipedia
I've got 3 big ones lol. In summary I would consolidate the minor factions (i.e. Space-Wolves) into larger factions that have conflicting interests within their major faction (i.e Space-Marines), kind of like the OP suggested but a different.
When you used to think about the 40k setting, it was a Impurium in slow decline and endless conflict, right now there seems to be a path to victory that really isn't grimdark.
Imperium
Spoiler:
Secessionists for Roboute Guilliman "Favors more regulation"
Ultramarines, Imperial Fists, Red Scorpions, Lamenters, etc.
Secessionists for Lion El'Jonson "Favours more independence"
Dark-Angels, Salamanders,Blood-Angels, etc.
Bring him back.
Unaligned White Scars, Black-Templar, etc.
Separatists?? Leman Russ returns and wants out
Cull the Ordos subfactions to squeeze them into one Ordos book.
Ordos gets Inquisition units and Stormtroopers with faction locked sub units.
Ordo Hereticus: Ecclesiarchy
Ordo Xenos: Deathwatch
Ordo Malleus: Grey-Knights
Renegades: Daemons, Chaos Undivided
Golden Boys, shouldn't really have been a thing, they're cool but, they really shouldn't be roaming the milky-way like this.
Maybe they police the rift in the cold-war between marine sub-factions as peacekeepers with the Sisters of Silence
Adeptus Mechanicus, probably the most contentious thing I'll write because they have a cool range (though I'm not a fan of recent additions), but I think they should be dropped and merged into an Imperial-Agents Codex with Rogue Traders and Assassins
Honestly I'd do the same to Space Wolves and Blood Angels.
Necrons
Spoiler:
Partially revert lore changes, some should still be slaves to the star-gods, maybe their stats change slightly so slaves are more docile.
Basically there's an civil-war between the slave-empires and the god-enslavers, but never confirmed or acknowledged outside of Necron lore and only alluded to in Eldar lore.
One deluded Necron Faction might try to return their bodies to flesh or grant sentience to their subjects.
All Star-Gods would be seeking to reunite their shards of self into one powerful whole.
A shard of the Void Dragon was stolen by Tech-Priest radicals, now slaves to its will.
The Deceiver has been fooling men into joining his ranks of Pariah.
Note, I wouldn't be against changes to their design, insect heads, snake tails, snouts, 4 arms, etc.
Eldar
Spoiler:
Get rid of this Death-God storyline, I don't think it's very interesting, I was kind of hoping they would use the Nightbringer as the alluded to god that would kill Slaanesh.
The Jesters really didn't need their own segregated Faction, they're cool, but meh.
I would instead have an Outcasts Faction, with the Corsair Princedoms, Laughing God, and Rangers rolled into one.
You could have the same models of the "weird name for death god eldar" but apply them as Leaders of Princedoms.
There could be a bit of fun with this range, you have the jesters, pirates and wood-elves. Dinosaur riders??
It puts the Space-Elves into a more classic contrast of the monk-society, adventurous daredevils, twisted sadists.
Eadartri wrote: I'd make all Primaris secretly Tyranid. How's that for a psychic awakening?
How about make Cawl a servant of the Void Dragon, and the whole Primaris project was a was to make the Necrons their new bodies?
I'll take that, and then they're made into Pariahs.
Fits nicely with the visions of the Necron endgame in the 3rd ed codex with the new masses of Pariahs herding humans like cattle to glut their C'tan masters with.
Eadartri wrote: I'd make all Primaris secretly Tyranid. How's that for a psychic awakening?
Nah, they're all orks and Cawl is a big mek in disguise.
Nah, Cawl is actually the remnants of the Gretchin Revolutionary Committee, hiding under a cape.
Ok yeah, he's totally that. The idea of a bunch of grots standing on each other's shoulders and bluffing their way through the mechanicus is pretty great.
I'm not up to date on necron fluff. I like alot of the suggestions for them here. It would be cool if the necrons of old transfered the souls to machines but it just ended up turning them digital and therefore their souls died. Whereas Eldar soul stones is the only way to do it properly. And Not all Necrons are former people. Some are AI that have been created. Fluff could explore dynamics between pure AI and necrontyre who used to be people. Some necron factions have more/less. Eons ago they went into a sleep protocol for some reason. ....maybe chaos gods found a way to shut them down since they like to kill all the living things that worship the chaos gods? Could have other reasons. Or just leave it mysterious reason and the necrons memory of why they shut down is gone. Maybe a galaxy wide warp storm bigger than the current one forced them to create tomb worlds and wait it out.
Expand a bit on the Men of Iron. AI that rebelled, humanity won but a few men of Iron fled.
Men of Iron could be a catch all term for any races AI. So Necrons contain rules for that kinda like genestealer cults? ....a faction with a mishh mash of AI's.
Not sure on C'tan fluff. The longest and smartest AI who go absorb energy from stars?
-------------
I would expand on the xenos fluff. Maybe modify the imperium's stance on xenos. ...like they still hate xenos and exterminate them, but its based on threat level. The current flufff reads like the Emperors crusade got every human world to comply and slaughtered every xenos except for those on the eastern fringes. Unless they are orks or hide in the webway.
--------------
Orks expand the fluff on how orks sometimes enslave other races. Orks love to fight but not wholesale slaughter a planet and hunt down every infant. So within ork territory there can be pockets of other races.
Orks love to fight so much that when the are on the verge of completely annihilating the enemy and resistance is shattered, they tend to start looking for a better fight and don't fully mop up. So there are usually survivors.
And thats part of the ork flaw, they love the biggest baddest toughest fight that they fail to fully conquer.
-------------
T'au
I think the colony fleet should have been scattered by the warp. Putting little enclaves of T'au throughtout the galaxy. The biggest chunk making it to the startide nexus areas so the current story is still happeneing. But now we got fluff reason as to why T'au can be anywhere in galaxy. One of the lost fleets/colony's.
--------------
Last but not least - expand on the chaos worshiping xenos. Tons of opportunity there.
Issac Asimov penned a novel where one character could tune the emotions of other characters, ensuring loyalty. Iirc, no chip required, just an innate ability of said character, The Mule. I forget the name of the book, but it was the second in the Foundation series, considered a classic sci-fi collection.
It's been nearly 30 years since I read it though, the details are a bit hazy.
Foundation and Empire is the book.
Ok, then whats the difference between Sci-fi and Fantasy then? Why have a distinction if there is none?
If you look up the definition you'll see that what I had written in my previous post is what the definition is. And that is based on what Asimov had said regarding the difference between Sci-fi and Fantasy.
Lasers and space ships don't make it sci-fi any more than swords and horses make it fantasy. All stories assume a certain level of technology. It's the rules of the universe in which they inhabit that define genre. Is it rooted in the rules of our world or one of the super natural?
Being as though there is no exact definition of Sci fi, only definitions of different types of Sci fi (hard and soft) you're going to have difficulty proving either that it is or isn't.
From wiki-science fiction
Science fiction elements can include, among others:
Temporal settings in the future, or in alternative histories.[278]
Spatial settings or scenes in outer space, on other worlds, in subterranean earth, or in parallel universes.[27]
Aspects of biology in fiction such as aliens, mutants, and enhanced humans.[279]
Speculative or predicted technology such as brain-computer interface, bio-engineering, superintelligent computers, robots, and ray guns and other advanced weapons.[279]
Undiscovered scientific possibilities such as teleportation, time travel, and faster-than-light travel or communication.[282]
New and different political and social systems and situations, including Utopian, dystopian, post-apocalyptic, or post-scarcity.
Future history and evolution of humans on Earth or on other planets.[284]
Paranormal abilities such as mind control, telepathy, and telekinesis.[285]
From wiki-fantasy
Most fantasy uses magic or other supernatural elements as a main plot element, theme, or setting. Magic and magical creatures are common in many of these worlds.
So, one could argue that 40k is a hybrid of Sci fi and fantasy.
I think the most commonly accepted distinction is that for it to be considered scifi it should be conceptually possible within the framework of science as we know it.
It need not be actually possible, eg FTL travel. Light has a speed, therefore the concept of something going faster exists. It's not actually possible, but conceptually it is. Or was, before SoL was proven to be the hard limit (so scifi writers went around the rules by inventing hyperspace or its myriad brothers).
Analogous reasoning can be applied to various other iffy sci-fi things like ESP etc (Asimov's the Mule was a mutant - ie his powers stemmed from a biological process rather than tapping into some font of magic power), and the lines can and do get blurred in things like Shadowrun, but on balance it's a fairly workable definition, with how closer someone sticks to the actual rules of science, the "harder" the scifi is.
Plus, of course, what is or isn't conceptually possible within science changes, so a story that was perfectly theoretically possible when it was written (say, Jules Verne stories, or HG Wells), and hence considered scifi, are no longer possible within the framework of science, but the stories are still considered to be scifi.
My distinction is if it has ray guns, then it's Sci fi, if its got bow and arrows and spears, it's fantasy (I know 40k has spears too, but the Ray guns is the arbiter.)
Also, saying conceptually possible is blurry. The existence of deities can't currently be disproven. Who's to say that if we ever went into space we wouldn't find the warp, or gates to hell on phobos?
Bran Dawri wrote: I think the most commonly accepted distinction is that for it to be considered scifi it should be conceptually possible within the framework of science as we know it.
Not to be a complete dink on this, but, please no. This is at best the line of hard scifi. I'm a fan of a lot of really early sci fi, the only thing that ever marked it as sci fi most of the time was crediting some unknown science principles and studying it to better understand it and building out from there. It's only not fantasy because it's not gods and monsters most of the time. The focus isn't fate and or magic, it's on invention and understanding.
That's been what marks scifi out from fantasy to me. Which still leaves 40k sitting in the middle somewhere, which is a huge reason of why I love the backwards lunatic of a galaxy that it is. But watching people try to gate keep sci fi to some small section of feasible science has been painful to me. Stupid bs drives infinitely more interest, fun and pushes people who grow up with it to try and investigate how to make that stupid button in star trek a reality even if it's contrary to a lot of modern understanding that it could even exist. Breaking scientific rules is how we get better scientific rules, we should encourage it.
But at the same time, it's a genre, what people look for in it is always going to be different for people. May as well argue what constitutes Metal for the wind that'll come out of all of us, which I'd also argue 40k leans heavily on and that's not even a genre of fiction... and if I'm wrong on that correct me as I think I'd be heavily into it.
I tend to see it as a sliding scale between aesthetic and narrative.
Star wars treats science as an aesthetic, like the modern steam punk movement. Put cogs on it and it's steampunk. Star wars uses science as a set dressing. It doesn't matter how hyperdrive works or the effect it has on society or that blasters fire plasma. Those components are just chrome for the story which is about people and politics.
I, robot on the other hand treats science as an important narrative device because it explores it and examines the consequences of the creation of and use of these proposed scientific advances.
At its extreme, you can take an existing story and 'reskin' it in many different themes - it's hamlet in space (therefore the focus is on hamlet and not why being in space is an interesting advancement), or it's Jane Austin but zombies, etc.
You could tell star wars as a naval story with a fast catamaran as the millenium Falcon and a new steampowred super dreadnought as the death star. Because the story beats aren't really integral to the aesthetic.
But when the science fiction itself is integral and often the point of the narrative, that's when it becomes what I consider science fiction.
While I enjoy all other styles of SciFi, I would consider most to be space operas.
I’d add a plotline where some Squats excavated a former Men of Iron facility which suddenly reactivated and commenced full scale production including hidden facilities on nearby planets. In a very short time the Squat race is revitalised and they form an unlike coalition with the Men of Iron. This results in the return of AI to the 40k universe on a large scale.
Chaos needs a big loss that cripples it. The setting is not as fun as it could be if Chaos gets to win all the time without bit losses. It makes it utterly predictable. As such I propose a book series where one or two Chaos gods are killed by the Emperor and coordinated efforts of humanity leading to a war where Chaos is for the first time on defense as their precious little eye of terror is invaded by the Holy Crusade which at least cripples Chaos leading them to rebuilding their power for entire millenia.
I personally like the way the lore has advanced, but I think it's in an inbetween phase atm. GW both want to advance the story forward and not kill off any of the big names.
For Obvious reasons, killing the Primarchs or Abbadon is probably plot armoured to much to kill. But I think the chapter masters like Calgar or The Red Corsair should be fair game.
You can't advance a story line in "the grim dark of the far future" when it has 50-100 characters who are practically invincible from a story standpoint across all the races.
They need to chose, do they continue to advance the story and kill characters and change the setting more so then it already has (something I'd like to see personally) or go back to it being a semi static setting it was before.
To answer the titles question, They need to kill named characters, even if they have models. It's the only way to have a sense of stakes in those big battles GW loves so much.
Tyzarion_Kronius wrote: Chaos needs a big loss that cripples it. The setting is not as fun as it could be if Chaos gets to win all the time without bit losses. It makes it utterly predictable. As such I propose a book series where one or two Chaos gods are killed by the Emperor and coordinated efforts of humanity leading to a war where Chaos is for the first time on defense as their precious little eye of terror is invaded by the Holy Crusade which at least cripples Chaos leading them to rebuilding their power for entire millenia.
I’d like it if Abaddon kills the Emperor, fixes the astonomicon, commissions 20 armies of super warriors totally committed to him, then purges his chaos corrupted old legions and begins a galactic crusade to reunite mankind and clear his new imperium of xenos and corruption.
With success assured, Abaddon returns to Terra to work on a webway project which will allow humanity to finally be free from the perils of the warp. During his absence his mightiest and most trusted general rises up against him and throws the galaxy into civil war.
Abaddon slays the ringleader, but is mortally wounded in the process, interred onto the Golden Throne. So begins a ten thousand year long guerilla war by the rebels and, imprisoned on his chair, Abaddon goes mad as he realise he was just a pawn in an eternal cyclical process.
Tyzarion_Kronius wrote: Chaos needs a big loss that cripples it. The setting is not as fun as it could be if Chaos gets to win all the time without bit losses. It makes it utterly predictable. As such I propose a book series where one or two Chaos gods are killed by the Emperor and coordinated efforts of humanity leading to a war where Chaos is for the first time on defense as their precious little eye of terror is invaded by the Holy Crusade which at least cripples Chaos leading them to rebuilding their power for entire millenia.
You're being sarcastic right?
Maybe he's satirizing all the people claiming the IoM needs to suffer giant losses by turning the shoe on the other foot?
that said there's a germ of an intreasting story in the idea of a IoM offensive that pushes right into the eye...
Imagine this, start a campagin by building up a great IoM general, leading a sizable Indomatus crusade force. he takes planet after planet steam rolling chaos, and begins to get cocky... to the point he orders his fleet to persue a retreating chaos army right into the eye... where he fights a campaign in the eye.. mention contact being sporadic after that, and mention vague referances implying he's knocking heads, but other then that, leave it dangling for a few years.. only to have him and his army exit the rift having been turned to chaos as a major new villian.
Tyzarion_Kronius wrote: Chaos needs a big loss that cripples it. The setting is not as fun as it could be if Chaos gets to win all the time without bit losses. It makes it utterly predictable. As such I propose a book series where one or two Chaos gods are killed by the Emperor and coordinated efforts of humanity leading to a war where Chaos is for the first time on defense as their precious little eye of terror is invaded by the Holy Crusade which at least cripples Chaos leading them to rebuilding their power for entire millenia.
You're being sarcastic right?
Maybe he's satirizing all the people claiming the IoM needs to suffer giant losses by turning the shoe on the other foot?
that said there's a germ of an intreasting story in the idea of a IoM offensive that pushes right into the eye...
Imagine this, start a campagin by building up a great IoM general, leading a sizable Indomatus crusade force. he takes planet after planet steam rolling chaos, and begins to get cocky... to the point he orders his fleet to persue a retreating chaos army right into the eye... where he fights a campaign in the eye.. mention contact being sporadic after that, and mention vague referances implying he's knocking heads, but other then that, leave it dangling for a few years.. only to have him and his army exit the rift having been turned to chaos as a major new villian.
Sounds interesting. But isn't that kinda what already happened with the renegade chapters from the Badab War?
Imagine this, start a campagin by building up a great IoM general, leading a sizable Indomatus crusade force. he takes planet after planet steam rolling chaos, and begins to get cocky... to the point he orders his fleet to persue a retreating chaos army right into the eye... where he fights a campaign in the eye.. mention contact being sporadic after that, and mention vague referances implying he's knocking heads, but other then that, leave it dangling for a few years.. only to have him and his army exit the rift having been turned to chaos as a major new villian.
Sounds interesting. But isn't that kinda what already happened with the renegade chapters from the Badab War?
I think its exactly what happens when you send troops into the eye. And what you don't want to do is invalidate peoples armies. The 2021 campaign 'into the eye' featuring the Paladins of Virtue chapter, with their unique rules and fresh background would generate a lot of mdoelling and interest.
The 2022 'out of the eye' campaign where the Dreadlords of Vice roll back into the Imperium, fresh with a bunch of gentacles and horns and evil swords would def cheese people off.
Tyzarion_Kronius wrote: Chaos needs a big loss that cripples it. The setting is not as fun as it could be if Chaos gets to win all the time without bit losses. It makes it utterly predictable. As such I propose a book series where one or two Chaos gods are killed by the Emperor and coordinated efforts of humanity leading to a war where Chaos is for the first time on defense as their precious little eye of terror is invaded by the Holy Crusade which at least cripples Chaos leading them to rebuilding their power for entire millenia.
You're being sarcastic right?
Nope. To quote where I got the idea from:
Chaos loses. I dont mean slap on the wrist loses but still wins i mean up to a chaos god DYING because of their feth up. Or chaos suffers a massive internal war as "Good" chaos gods form and start a order versus chaos war. The way chaos is written the fact that the various warbands dont destroy themselves just by existing is bs and needs a massive overhaul.
My point being in order to return stakes to 40k and fantasy chaos has to lose and lose to the point that yes that was indeed an irrecoverable loss on their part. We already have that with the imperium, technology is forever lost daily, planets destroyed, cadia gone, entire marine chapters lost in single battles. What about chaos? Nothing they never lose only win.
Or return malal to the pantheon as a sort of visible anti chaos figure, a logical evolution from chaos' self destructive behavior manifesting as chaos with in chaos as the various gods start unraveling.
Just fething something for gods sake. Chaos has won the last 15,000 years let the other players win in the lore just once.
Tyzarion_Kronius wrote: Chaos needs a big loss that cripples it. The setting is not as fun as it could be if Chaos gets to win all the time without bit losses. It makes it utterly predictable. As such I propose a book series where one or two Chaos gods are killed by the Emperor and coordinated efforts of humanity leading to a war where Chaos is for the first time on defense as their precious little eye of terror is invaded by the Holy Crusade which at least cripples Chaos leading them to rebuilding their power for entire millenia.
You're being sarcastic right?
Nope. To quote where I got the idea from:
Chaos loses. I dont mean slap on the wrist loses but still wins i mean up to a chaos god DYING because of their feth up. Or chaos suffers a massive internal war as "Good" chaos gods form and start a order versus chaos war. The way chaos is written the fact that the various warbands dont destroy themselves just by existing is bs and needs a massive overhaul.
My point being in order to return stakes to 40k and fantasy chaos has to lose and lose to the point that yes that was indeed an irrecoverable loss on their part. We already have that with the imperium, technology is forever lost daily, planets destroyed, cadia gone, entire marine chapters lost in single battles. What about chaos? Nothing they never lose only win.
Or return malal to the pantheon as a sort of visible anti chaos figure, a logical evolution from chaos' self destructive behavior manifesting as chaos with in chaos as the various gods start unraveling.
Just fething something for gods sake. Chaos has won the last 15,000 years let the other players win in the lore just once.
So "chaos has won the last 15000 years" huh? So I guess you and whoever wrote that quote are new to all this.
May I suggest reading just some of the lore and fiction from the setting? You know there's a reason that chaos's most prominent character is referred to as "Failbaddon".
Tyzarion_Kronius wrote: Chaos needs a big loss that cripples it. The setting is not as fun as it could be if Chaos gets to win all the time without bit losses. It makes it utterly predictable. As such I propose a book series where one or two Chaos gods are killed by the Emperor and coordinated efforts of humanity leading to a war where Chaos is for the first time on defense as their precious little eye of terror is invaded by the Holy Crusade which at least cripples Chaos leading them to rebuilding their power for entire millenia.
You're being sarcastic right?
Nope. To quote where I got the idea from:
Chaos loses. I dont mean slap on the wrist loses but still wins i mean up to a chaos god DYING because of their feth up. Or chaos suffers a massive internal war as "Good" chaos gods form and start a order versus chaos war. The way chaos is written the fact that the various warbands dont destroy themselves just by existing is bs and needs a massive overhaul.
My point being in order to return stakes to 40k and fantasy chaos has to lose and lose to the point that yes that was indeed an irrecoverable loss on their part. We already have that with the imperium, technology is forever lost daily, planets destroyed, cadia gone, entire marine chapters lost in single battles. What about chaos? Nothing they never lose only win.
Or return malal to the pantheon as a sort of visible anti chaos figure, a logical evolution from chaos' self destructive behavior manifesting as chaos with in chaos as the various gods start unraveling.
Just fething something for gods sake. Chaos has won the last 15,000 years let the other players win in the lore just once.
So "chaos has won the last 15000 years" huh? So I guess you and whoever wrote that quote are new to all this.
May I suggest reading just some of the lore and fiction from the setting? You know there's a reason that chaos's most prominent character is referred to as "Failbaddon".
Bad writing?
The lore has been made very clear that each Crusade has been a success. They accomplished their objectives.
Tyzarion_Kronius wrote: Chaos needs a big loss that cripples it. The setting is not as fun as it could be if Chaos gets to win all the time without bit losses. It makes it utterly predictable. As such I propose a book series where one or two Chaos gods are killed by the Emperor and coordinated efforts of humanity leading to a war where Chaos is for the first time on defense as their precious little eye of terror is invaded by the Holy Crusade which at least cripples Chaos leading them to rebuilding their power for entire millenia.
You're being sarcastic right?
Nope. To quote where I got the idea from:
Chaos loses. I dont mean slap on the wrist loses but still wins i mean up to a chaos god DYING because of their feth up. Or chaos suffers a massive internal war as "Good" chaos gods form and start a order versus chaos war. The way chaos is written the fact that the various warbands dont destroy themselves just by existing is bs and needs a massive overhaul.
My point being in order to return stakes to 40k and fantasy chaos has to lose and lose to the point that yes that was indeed an irrecoverable loss on their part. We already have that with the imperium, technology is forever lost daily, planets destroyed, cadia gone, entire marine chapters lost in single battles. What about chaos? Nothing they never lose only win.
Or return malal to the pantheon as a sort of visible anti chaos figure, a logical evolution from chaos' self destructive behavior manifesting as chaos with in chaos as the various gods start unraveling.
Just fething something for gods sake. Chaos has won the last 15,000 years let the other players win in the lore just once.
So "chaos has won the last 15000 years" huh? So I guess you and whoever wrote that quote are new to all this.
May I suggest reading just some of the lore and fiction from the setting? You know there's a reason that chaos's most prominent character is referred to as "Failbaddon".
Bad writing?
The lore has been made very clear that each Crusade has been a success. They accomplished their objectives.
Indeed. I'd still like to see something for Chaos that's not a pyrrhic victory as usual . So, unlike Tyzarion I'd say it would be nice to see the Imperium lose for once... I mean really lose. Not "unknown space marine chapter goes down against ten times the number in CSM". Abby comes, sieges a planet, wipes all Primaris reinforcements, Typhus purges the planet for generations and they move on to the next planet. A real victory for once. Even the Fall of Cadia came across as a fail. They wrote the preceding crusades as preparations for Cadia, a plan built up for 10000 years - and then nothing seemed to work, all ground forces lost against a hilariously small number of guardsmen and Abby had to sacrifice one of his Blackstone fortresses. Really not a good showing. Same with Magnus' attack on Fenris.
Tyzarion_Kronius wrote: Chaos needs a big loss that cripples it. The setting is not as fun as it could be if Chaos gets to win all the time without bit losses. It makes it utterly predictable. As such I propose a book series where one or two Chaos gods are killed by the Emperor and coordinated efforts of humanity leading to a war where Chaos is for the first time on defense as their precious little eye of terror is invaded by the Holy Crusade which at least cripples Chaos leading them to rebuilding their power for entire millenia.
You're being sarcastic right?
Nope. To quote where I got the idea from:
Chaos loses. I dont mean slap on the wrist loses but still wins i mean up to a chaos god DYING because of their feth up. Or chaos suffers a massive internal war as "Good" chaos gods form and start a order versus chaos war. The way chaos is written the fact that the various warbands dont destroy themselves just by existing is bs and needs a massive overhaul.
My point being in order to return stakes to 40k and fantasy chaos has to lose and lose to the point that yes that was indeed an irrecoverable loss on their part. We already have that with the imperium, technology is forever lost daily, planets destroyed, cadia gone, entire marine chapters lost in single battles. What about chaos? Nothing they never lose only win.
Or return malal to the pantheon as a sort of visible anti chaos figure, a logical evolution from chaos' self destructive behavior manifesting as chaos with in chaos as the various gods start unraveling.
Just fething something for gods sake. Chaos has won the last 15,000 years let the other players win in the lore just once.
So "chaos has won the last 15000 years" huh? So I guess you and whoever wrote that quote are new to all this.
May I suggest reading just some of the lore and fiction from the setting? You know there's a reason that chaos's most prominent character is referred to as "Failbaddon".
Bad writing?
The lore has been made very clear that each Crusade has been a success. They accomplished their objectives.
Indeed. I'd still like to see something for Chaos that's not a pyrrhic victory as usual . So, unlike Tyzarion I'd say it would be nice to see the Imperium lose for once... I mean really lose. Not "unknown space marine chapter goes down against ten times the number in CSM". Abby comes, sieges a planet, wipes all Primaris reinforcements, Typhus purges the planet for generations and they move on to the next planet. A real victory for once. Even the Fall of Cadia came across as a fail. They wrote the preceding crusades as preparations for Cadia, a plan built up for 10000 years - and then nothing seemed to work, all ground forces lost against a hilariously small number of guardsmen and Abby had to sacrifice one of his Blackstone fortresses. Really not a good showing. Same with Magnus' attack on Fenris.
Don't the Cadians have a new homeworld? When Angron and Fulgrim get released, have them, Kharn, Lucius (another character that badly needs a plastic model), and the entirety of both the World Eaters and the Emperor's Children come along and turn it into a daemon world. The Cadians of course live on, but with much fewer numbers, and become an elite army, something like an Imperial Guard version of the Grey Knights.
Partially revert lore changes, some should still be slaves to the star-gods, maybe their stats change slightly so slaves are more docile.
Basically there's an civil-war between the slave-empires and the god-enslavers, but never confirmed or acknowledged outside of Necron lore and only alluded to in Eldar lore.
One deluded Necron Faction might try to return their bodies to flesh or grant sentience to their subjects.
All Star-Gods would be seeking to reunite their shards of self into one powerful whole.
A shard of the Void Dragon was stolen by Tech-Priest radicals, now slaves to its will.
The Deceiver has been fooling men into joining his ranks of Pariah.
Note, I wouldn't be against changes to their design, insect heads, snake tails, snouts, 4 arms, etc.
I'm happy with those ideas.
The severed needs a lot more love, that's for certain.
. So, unlike Tyzarion I'd say it would be nice to see the Imperium lose for once... I mean really lose. Not "unknown space marine chapter goes down against ten times the number in 