I just got my copy of the 93 rulebook and in the actual rules section bit, did anyone else find those like aborted festuses attached to bolt guns creepy? I mean I've gottne used to the cyber cherubs and the ammorium cherubs, but those fetus bolters were just at the edge of what I could look at without cringing.

Honestly, that looked like stuf ol' fabius should be working on, not the imperium.

 Matt Swain wrote:
Honestly, that looked like stuf ol' fabius should be working on, not the imperium.

It's almost like the Imperium are the bad guys!

Wait...

On a serious note, that's nothing special for the Imperium. Body horror and mutilation is the order of the day.

Any reference material for those of us who only got the CA2020 rulebook please?

 Matt Swain wrote:
I just got my copy of the 93 rulebook and in the actual rules section bit, did anyone else find those like aborted festuses attached to bolt guns creepy? I mean I've gottne used to the cyber cherubs and the ammorium cherubs, but those fetus bolters were just at the edge of what I could look at without cringing.

Honestly, that looked like stuf ol' fabius should be working on, not the imperium.

Were talking about the same Imperium that abducts people from their homes to soulbind them, lobotomizes their citizens to turn into mindless single-task cyborg slaves for minor infractions, feeds living people to a corpse to keep it "alive" because they worship it, among other things?

Yeah, that thing you mentioned isn't entirely on brand for them at all.

If that creeps you out stay the hell away from the 3rd edition book! 40k has always been known for their creepy as hell art and the rulebook is where it often gets to shine.

Yes I also find some of the artwork to be quite excessive.

About time. 40k art should be a grotesque horror show of depravity humanity has been willing to sink in either in order to survive or simply because of decrepit inertia has made the society degenerate into ritualistic barbarism.

The Imperium is the absolute worst in government and culture, with a more humanitarian vision only peeking out here and there in the huge galaxy. Reflecting this in the art is one of the biggest draws of the setting, especially with the casual and needless body horror that shows how dehumanized both your average citizens and "heroes" can be before the oppressive system.

Seems par for the course to me, how is this new at all? 40k has always had disturbing imagery, body horror, and grotesque morbid imagery permeated throughout its existence. Imagery of skulls, decapitated heads, daemons, sacrifices, xenos monsters, weaponry, blood spatter, twisted body parts, cybernetic horrors, self flaggelation, etc ad nauseum are replete throughout 40k rulebooks and codex art. Hell, the 4E imagery of the High Lords of Terra has half of them looking like horrific cybermonsters.

I hope we get some rules for those abortion decorated bolters. We need more bolters IMO. Autoaborted Heavy Boltrifle would be a nice name.

 Sherrypie wrote:
About time. 40k art should be a grotesque horror show of depravity humanity has been willing to sink in either in order to survive or simply because of decrepit inertia has made the society degenerate into ritualistic barbarism.

The Imperium is the absolute worst in government and culture, with a more humanitarian vision only peeking out here and there in the huge galaxy. Reflecting this in the art is one of the biggest draws of the setting, especially with the casual and needless body horror that shows how dehumanized both your average citizens and "heroes" can be before the oppressive system.

"good" is a relative term in the grim darkness of the far future.
Nids are just hungry = good
Orks just wanna rumble = good
Chaos just wants to exist = good
Tau just wanna make everyone like them = WORST OF THE WORST & MUST BE PURGED

I am glad that they're returning to show just how horrific the galaxy is. More horror, gruesome goings on & DEATH on a massive scale, for in the 41st millennium...you will not be missed.

A few months from now we'll have posts about how GW is ruining the grim dark and kiddifying miniatures.

Lilith has pants! *gasp*

 Daedalus81 wrote:
A few months from now we'll have posts about how GW is ruining the grim dark and kiddifying miniatures.

Lilith has pants! *gasp*

but they are really nicely fitting pants

40k needs the grimdark imagery, it's a big part of what it is. You take it away and you lose a whole chunk of its unique identity.
Is aborted babies taking it a bit far? Maybe, but... no-one's pretending this is a game for children.

...oh, uhhhh... oops. I'll see myself out.

I don't know if OP is saying 40K was never like that, but (sight unseen) I'd be pleasantly surprised to see it start committing to that direction again. I don't think any of us would argue that Imperium stuff in particular has been feeling a little too clean and wholesome recently.

I would love to see some examples?

Eh. I had to go look for these pictures, as nothing came to mind. My impression of the rulebook as a whole is that its too clean- lined white fancy future printer paper with cut corners, with obviously inset pictures. A lot of the pictures are also too busy, so the details get washed out.

As for the 'fetus bolters' (pages 216, 222 & 225 for those wondering)- not really. Not that different from standard imperial cherubim, and far less creepy than actual porcelain dolls I've encountered in real life.

I think its mostly the color choice- the grey-green blends too much with the guns, makes them look artificial. Makes me think more of gargoyles or grotesques. Obviously not real, so not scary or disturbing, but makes me mildly curious about the mental state of the artist.

@ OP - More context please.

Are you saying 9E BRBR is more creepy than its predecessors ?

The rule book is absolute peanuts compared to some of the Chaos entries (the infamous Chaos Spawn pictures are fantastic body horror)

I don't think those are actual fetuses.

Yeah it's creepy, but in a good way that 40K should have more of.

Made me think of HR Giger's "Birth Machine"

 Sherrypie wrote:
About time. 40k art should be a grotesque horror show of depravity humanity has been willing to sink in either in order to survive or simply because of decrepit inertia has made the society degenerate into ritualistic barbarism.

The Imperium is the absolute worst in government and culture, with a more humanitarian vision only peeking out here and there in the huge galaxy. Reflecting this in the art is one of the biggest draws of the setting, especially with the casual and needless body horror that shows how dehumanized both your average citizens and "heroes" can be before the oppressive system.

40K was more upfront about being a thinly veiled jab at the real world and where it was headed from the beginning. Fetus bolters might be striking close to home for people following what US troops have done to Iraqis and Afghanis these past twenty years, but for some of us Vietnam and Korea were stand out examples of the real life horror show that has been and remains Western corporate militarism aka fascism in the twentieth and now twenty first centuries. When I see this art in 40K, I am returned to that initial insight that I had thirty years ago, that this is a thin veil on the world as we make it, and a window on how it may be once a religion guiding policy through faith in the Empire after a few thousand years of ritual... in that context, of course, fetus bolters a a logical eventuality.

Nope...

Well, maybe it was just me but the things that looked like late term abortions grafted to guns just kinda made me cringe.

Yeah, seen all sorts of body horror, hell I like carpenter's the thing, and i've seen earlier editions, and i've seen the chaos codex.

I don't know maybe it was just personal, but the fetusguns just seemed to be hard to look at.

Also, just gross for gross' sake. I mean I can deal with servitors, chaos horrors, cherubim, etc. But a fetus grafted to a bolter? You just screwing with us now...

And if it;s not a fetus grafted to a gun it sure looks like one.

 jeff white wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:
About time. 40k art should be a grotesque horror show of depravity humanity has been willing to sink in either in order to survive or simply because of decrepit inertia has made the society degenerate into ritualistic barbarism.

The Imperium is the absolute worst in government and culture, with a more humanitarian vision only peeking out here and there in the huge galaxy. Reflecting this in the art is one of the biggest draws of the setting, especially with the casual and needless body horror that shows how dehumanized both your average citizens and "heroes" can be before the oppressive system.

40K was more upfront about being a thinly veiled jab at the real world and where it was headed from the beginning. Fetus bolters might be striking close to home for people following what US troops have done to Iraqis and Afghanis these past twenty years, but for some of us Vietnam and Korea were stand out examples of the real life horror show that has been and remains Western corporate militarism aka fascism in the twentieth and now twenty first centuries. When I see this art in 40K, I am returned to that initial insight that I had thirty years ago, that this is a thin veil on the world as we make it, and a window on how it may be once a religion guiding policy through faith in the Empire after a few thousand years of ritual... in that context, of course, fetus bolters a a logical eventuality.

god I miss the brutality of the early books(STD, ROC, etc). Servitors & Tech-Priests are some of my favorite parts of 40k, it always made me smile when I would be flipping thru a book and see something that made me uneasy.

We need more UNCARING UNIVERSE, where you will not be missed.



well that and more comedy about Magaret Thatcher as an ork.

a_typical_hero wrote:
Any reference material for those of us who only got the CA2020 rulebook please?

^^ anyone?

a_typical_hero wrote:Any reference material for those of us who only got the CA2020 rulebook please?

Nitro Zeus wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
Any reference material for those of us who only got the CA2020 rulebook please?

^^ anyone?

References

Good old page furniture, filling up empty space with evocative weirdness. I also love the fact that those were painted with a broken hand (according to Stu in the release Twitch streams the new artist who did a bunch of those had an accident but pressed on like an absolute legend )

Inquisitor boltgun. The small bugger hugging the bolter is a weird alien lifeform that imbue the bolts with... something. Something dark and creepy, I expect. Don't want to be on the receiving end to find out!!

 Hanskrampf wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:Any reference material for those of us who only got the CA2020 rulebook please?

Nitro Zeus wrote:

a_typical_hero wrote:
Any reference material for those of us who only got the CA2020 rulebook please?

^^ anyone?

References

Spoiler:

OK, those do not look like fetuses to me. I was expecting it to be more half-formed, more obviously flesh and not sculpted rusted metal/rock. It's literally just a doll face on a gun. Akira came out in like 1980, this is a nothing thing.

I'd say the 9th rulebook is more "grimdark" than the 8th rulebook, but not to the level of the art seen in earlier editions (I have a fondness for 2nd, 3rd, and 4th editions' art).

One thing that really bugs me about the 9th edition rulebook is that there is so much "blank" space on many of the pages, especially with the large margin size and the triangle images on the corners of many pages. I know it is a stylistic approach, but I think the book could have had significantly fewer pages or larger text if they had made better use of the space for text on many of the pages.

Those are way tamer than I was expecting from the phrase "fetus bolters".

 Mr. Grey wrote:
Those are way tamer than I was expecting from the phrase "fetus bolters".

Right? Like, it's not even accurate. They're just cherub heads or doll heads.

About as shocking as "American Mcgee's Alice" lol.

If this is too "grimdark" for the OP don't let him read Red Sky Black Sun....

 Hanskrampf wrote:


References

Spoiler:

OK.

Yeah.

Those are creepy.

Granted horror and despair are the order of the day in 40k but yeah those are authentically creepy, the life/death, innocence/evil contrast is in full force.

the_scotsman wrote:
About as shocking as "American Mcgee's Alice" lol.

Hey don't diss that game it was cool!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Inquisitor boltgun. The small bugger hugging the bolter is a weird alien lifeform that imbue the bolts with... something. Something dark and creepy, I expect. Don't want to be on the receiving end to find out!!

On the plus side, you're unlikely to find out as it is impossible for the inquisitor to aim!

 jeff white wrote:

40K was more upfront about being a thinly veiled jab at the real world and where it was headed from the beginning. Fetus bolters might be striking close to home for people following what US troops have done to Iraqis and Afghanis these past twenty years, but for some of us Vietnam and Korea were stand out examples of the real life horror show that has been and remains Western corporate militarism aka fascism in the twentieth and now twenty first centuries. When I see this art in 40K, I am returned to that initial insight that I had thirty years ago, that this is a thin veil on the world as we make it, and a window on how it may be once a religion guiding policy through faith in the Empire after a few thousand years of ritual... in that context, of course, fetus bolters a a logical eventuality.

As a US veteran of Afghanistan I just wanted to jump in here and say that you're wrong. Just didn't want to let that uncalled for slander slide past without anybody standing up and pointing out how wrong you are.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
If this is too "grimdark" for the OP don't let him read Red Sky Black Sun....

I've only read like 5 or 6 BL novels, but that was one of them. There are definitely a couple things in that one I wasn't expecting. . .

Doesn't look much different the a censer in any bigger and older church. There is an old convenant in Poland where the top of it has an inlaid in silver top of skull of the female priores that founded it.

And places like italy or spain have even more older stuff like that, because they didn't have as many lootings done by non catholics.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Inquisitor boltgun. The small bugger hugging the bolter is a weird alien lifeform that imbue the bolts with... something. Something dark and creepy, I expect. Don't want to be on the receiving end to find out!!

On the plus side, you're unlikely to find out as it is impossible for the inquisitor to aim!

The creepy doll face is the aim. You can just imagine it now, in it's creepy child voice like "left a bit, right a bit, fire!"

there is a definite element of horror when you're a chaos guy who's fought through the space marine ranks, then turn to face their leader to find a creepy doll face poised over a barrel aimed at your face, and then the doll innocently says "you're 'd now, heretic!". Bang.

 dadx6 wrote:

 jeff white wrote:

40K was more upfront about being a thinly veiled jab at the real world and where it was headed from the beginning. Fetus bolters might be striking close to home for people following what US troops have done to Iraqis and Afghanis these past twenty years, but for some of us Vietnam and Korea were stand out examples of the real life horror show that has been and remains Western corporate militarism aka fascism in the twentieth and now twenty first centuries. When I see this art in 40K, I am returned to that initial insight that I had thirty years ago, that this is a thin veil on the world as we make it, and a window on how it may be once a religion guiding policy through faith in the Empire after a few thousand years of ritual... in that context, of course, fetus bolters a a logical eventuality.

As a US veteran of Afghanistan I just wanted to jump in here and say that you're wrong. Just didn't want to let that uncalled for slander slide past without anybody standing up and pointing out how wrong you are.

Because you didn't see it personally, it didn't happen, right?

As a US veteran of Afghanistan you are far FAR more prone to be biased here, and absolutely no more capable of knowing the reality. Why do you think that gives your statement any more agency at all here?

Folks, let’s please keep it on-topic. Thanks!

I just want to take a moment to appreciate the sentence "Fetus bolters are a logical eventuality."

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
If this is too "grimdark" for the OP don't let him read Red Sky Black Sun....

If you mean dead sky black sun, I red it.

 Super Ready wrote:
40k needs the grimdark imagery, it's a big part of what it is. You take it away and you lose a whole chunk of its unique identity.
Is aborted babies taking it a bit far? Maybe, but... no-one's pretending this is a game for children.

...oh, uhhhh... oops. I'll see myself out.

AHHHHH.

WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?

 Matt Swain wrote:
I just got my copy of the 93 rulebook and in the actual rules section bit, did anyone else find those like aborted festuses attached to bolt guns creepy? I mean I've gottne used to the cyber cherubs and the ammorium cherubs, but those fetus bolters were just at the edge of what I could look at without cringing.

Honestly, that looked like stuf ol' fabius should be working on, not the imperium.

If you find that creepy, i reccomend you to never, ever, set an eye upon any of these things:

Second WW , especially the eastern front.
Holocaust,
Sino-japanese war. Especially rape of nanjing.
Unit 731 and any associated fellow chemical and biological weapons formations from the IJA/IJN.
Einsatzgruppen, doubly disturbing considering the ammount of intellectuals in these formations.
Witchhunts
Italian "pacification" of lybia, including the butcherer of Fezzan,
Italian -abessynian war.
Blockade of the first WW.
Armenian genocide
Late colonial empires and their practices, especially the Dutch east indies and belgian Kongo.
Indian Famines.
Opiate wars.
Mental institutions, especially early on with human trials.
Chemical and biological warfare.


Etc, etc, etc.


We as a species have allready done way worse then strapping a weapon to a fetus.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Super Ready wrote:
40k needs the grimdark imagery, it's a big part of what it is. You take it away and you lose a whole chunk of its unique identity.
Is aborted babies taking it a bit far? Maybe, but... no-one's pretending this is a game for children.

...oh, uhhhh... oops. I'll see myself out.

AHHHHH.

WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?

The pae for one of the books called War of the Orks says:

READ IT BECAUSE
Discover what happens when orks battle orks – and how those caught in the middle fare! The latest chapter in the galaxy-spanning sci-fi adventure is here, and you don't want to miss it.

So, assuming it's canonically correct ,the children will be either slaughtered, eaten or enslaved. or blown up in the inevitable collateral damage. It's fair to say that, set in the grimdark WH40k setting, there's no place for a happy ending, right?

On the one hand, Christian imagery itself is pretty much the standard for body horror.

Saint Ebba cut off her nose and upper lip, along with all her nuns, to stop Vikings raping them. Happily, the Vikings were repelled and only burned them to death.

On the other, the body horror stuff got old decades ago, for me at least. Giger was shocking and thought-provoking, I just find his successors unpleasant now. Any game that piles it on is an auto-pass for me - KS mini boardgames seem particularly prone to making every sculpt a twisted monstrosity. I prefer the more subtle stuff - "my lust for power has driven me to make myself an inhuman monster", rather than "fire the baby cannons!"

Are Sid's creations in Toy Story a cool kitbash, a reaction against "disturbing" Japanese imports by "wholesome" Americans, or a sad case of Gandalf's warning that if you take something apart to understand it, you have merely broken it?

Did read one theory years ago, that the horrors supposedly visited upon us by aliens are a mental reaction to the horrors we inflict daily on the poor and sick and disadvantaged. A victimisation complex to absolve Western audiences of our inaction. "You're hungry and your kids are pooping themselves to death? Hey man, I was probed!". A bit of a reach as ideas go, but not without value.

hahahaha

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Matt Swain wrote:
I just got my copy of the 93 rulebook and in the actual rules section bit, did anyone else find those like aborted festuses attached to bolt guns creepy? I mean I've gottne used to the cyber cherubs and the ammorium cherubs, but those fetus bolters were just at the edge of what I could look at without cringing.

Honestly, that looked like stuf ol' fabius should be working on, not the imperium.

If you find that creepy, i reccomend you to never, ever, set an eye upon any of these things:

Second WW , especially the eastern front.
Holocaust,
Sino-japanese war. Especially rape of nanjing.
Unit 731 and any associated fellow chemical and biological weapons formations from the IJA/IJN.
Einsatzgruppen, doubly disturbing considering the ammount of intellectuals in these formations.
Witchhunts
Italian "pacification" of lybia, including the butcherer of Fezzan,
Italian -abessynian war.
Blockade of the first WW.
Armenian genocide
Late colonial empires and their practices, especially the Dutch east indies and belgian Kongo.
Indian Famines.
Opiate wars.
Mental institutions, especially early on with human trials.
Chemical and biological warfare.


Etc, etc, etc.


We as a species have allready done way worse then strapping a weapon to a fetus.

Sigh.

Yes.

I know that. I'm familiar with just about everything you listed. The thing is they are historical fact. The 40k rulebook is not. It's stuff people made up. The creators decided to make what looked like guns with fetuses on them. Just for gross points or shock value. Also even in 40k it doesn;t seem to make sense. It's just gross for shock value.

Actually, I reckon it does fit with the setting. Remember - "even in death I still serve". That baby's lifeless body isn't useful to anyone just lying there, you gotta put it to good use!

The art has always taken some inspiration from HR Giger and been creepy AF. Not really anything new in the new book. I like Giger’s work so for me it’s nice to have some grisly, disgusting art back in the rulebook. YMMV.

 Super Ready wrote:
Actually, I reckon it does fit with the setting. Remember - "even in death I still serve". That baby's lifeless body isn't useful to anyone just lying there, you gotta put it to good use!

This, life is a currency.
It's not even anymore split up in worthless (for subhumans) and worthy.
It's just a commodity that get's spent for the maintenance of a governing system in place.

 Matt Swain wrote:


I know that. I'm familiar with just about everything you listed. The thing is they are historical fact. The 40k rulebook is not. It's stuff people made up. The creators decided to make what looked like guns with fetuses on them. Just for gross points or shock value. Also even in 40k it doesn;t seem to make sense. It's just gross for shock value.

A catholic church, at least in Poland has a memorial day for fetuses, and pictures and are of them are carried around in processions, every year, even this year , which was kind of a illegal, but elections were close so the ruling party didn't dare to do anything about it.

Karol wrote:

 Matt Swain wrote:


I know that. I'm familiar with just about everything you listed. The thing is they are historical fact. The 40k rulebook is not. It's stuff people made up. The creators decided to make what looked like guns with fetuses on them. Just for gross points or shock value. Also even in 40k it doesn;t seem to make sense. It's just gross for shock value.

A catholic church, at least in Poland has a memorial day for fetuses, and pictures and are of them are carried around in processions, every year, even this year , which was kind of a illegal, but elections were close so the ruling party didn't dare to do anything about it.

Something similar used to happen in Ireland, but it tailed off a bit at least in part because people started pointing out the images were in fact of cat fetuses. Because human fetuses didn't look human enough to provoke the reaction they were angling for.

I mention this because the imagery above, while creepy, is also extremely stylised, further because of how it's coloured. It's not even clear if the faces are organic at all. They are shocking and strange, but they aren't clearly practical or biological realistic - the intention is entirely to evoke and disturb.

That's not the same as just existing for shock value. It's valuable to set the tone of this universe and immerse the reader in the nightmarishly hyperbolic and stylised visual language of 40k.

I'm of the opinion that GW urgently needs to do more of this stuff, both tonally and explicitly, to underline that the Imperium is an inherently ugly, crumbling structure that does weird and nasty things, and not because they're always necessary - just because it's always done weird and nasty things. More needs to be done to make it explicitly, undeniably clear to both players and onlookers that the Imperium is not the hero or the anti hero of this narrative eco system - there is no such thing to be found in it.

The Guilliman and Primaris driven stuff imho steered way too close to saying outright "Here are the Space Marines, they're the goodies!". That would be to the major detriment of the game lore imho, and at the risk of drifting into the forum's topical DMZs, encourage a deeply unwelcome element to continue co opting WH40K iconography. Individual characters may be fundamentally good and decent and strong, and unreliable narratives can pretend the Imperium is, but anyone outside the fourth wall shouldn't have room to think it really is. I consider it close to an ethical issue for the lore, visuals and execution of the game to respect the old school 2000AD "Everything is terrible" tone.

 Matt Swain wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 Matt Swain wrote:
I just got my copy of the 93 rulebook and in the actual rules section bit, did anyone else find those like aborted festuses attached to bolt guns creepy? I mean I've gottne used to the cyber cherubs and the ammorium cherubs, but those fetus bolters were just at the edge of what I could look at without cringing.

Honestly, that looked like stuf ol' fabius should be working on, not the imperium.

If you find that creepy, i reccomend you to never, ever, set an eye upon any of these things:

Second WW , especially the eastern front.
Holocaust,
Sino-japanese war. Especially rape of nanjing.
Unit 731 and any associated fellow chemical and biological weapons formations from the IJA/IJN.
Einsatzgruppen, doubly disturbing considering the ammount of intellectuals in these formations.
Witchhunts
Italian "pacification" of lybia, including the butcherer of Fezzan,
Italian -abessynian war.
Blockade of the first WW.
Armenian genocide
Late colonial empires and their practices, especially the Dutch east indies and belgian Kongo.
Indian Famines.
Opiate wars.
Mental institutions, especially early on with human trials.
Chemical and biological warfare.


Etc, etc, etc.


We as a species have allready done way worse then strapping a weapon to a fetus.

Sigh.

Yes.

I know that. I'm familiar with just about everything you listed. The thing is they are historical fact. The 40k rulebook is not. It's stuff people made up. The creators decided to make what looked like guns with fetuses on them. Just for gross points or shock value. Also even in 40k it doesn;t seem to make sense. It's just gross for shock value.

I mean, 40k is grimdark and turns everything up to 11. This includes the Imperium. How are fetus bolters any crazier than having literal engines of war being made around torturing people? (Penitent engines) The Imperium is supposed to be largely illogical by IRL standards, they use literal lobotomized cyborgs for the vast majority of their labour and their technological processes, body horror is Imperium to a T.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Seems par for the course to me, how is this new at all? 40k has always had disturbing imagery, body horror, and grotesque morbid imagery permeated throughout its existence. Imagery of skulls, decapitated heads, daemons, sacrifices, xenos monsters, weaponry, blood spatter, twisted body parts, cybernetic horrors, self flaggelation, etc ad nauseum are replete throughout 40k rulebooks and codex art. Hell, the 4E imagery of the High Lords of Terra has half of them looking like horrific cybermonsters.

I feel like when I was playing in 5th and 6th, the art was so fetishy for skulls it became kind of funny. Kind of like where's Waldo but instead of finding Waldo it was all about finding something that didn't have a skull somewhere on it XD

Is that just me? Not complaining about creepy imagery, it totally fits the setting, but I look back at my old books and feel like the art for a time was more laughable in how it seemed to slap skulls on every surface it could than creepy. So throwing in more actual creepiness seems like an improvement XD Mountains of skulls haven't been creepy since Terminator.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Seems par for the course to me, how is this new at all? 40k has always had disturbing imagery, body horror, and grotesque morbid imagery permeated throughout its existence. Imagery of skulls, decapitated heads, daemons, sacrifices, xenos monsters, weaponry, blood spatter, twisted body parts, cybernetic horrors, self flaggelation, etc ad nauseum are replete throughout 40k rulebooks and codex art. Hell, the 4E imagery of the High Lords of Terra has half of them looking like horrific cybermonsters.

I feel like when I was playing in 5th and 6th, the art was so fetishy for skulls it became kind of funny. Kind of like where's Waldo but instead of finding Waldo it was all about finding something that didn't have a skull somewhere on it XD

Is that just me? Not complaining about creepy imagery, it totally fits the setting, but I look back at my old books and feel like the art for a time was more laughable in how it seemed to slap skulls on every surface it could than creepy. So throwing in more actual creepiness seems like an improvement XD Mountains of skulls haven't been creepy since Terminator.

The whole skull shtick indeed is basically for any non GW inducted the first thing visible.

Like, why does the wall of martyerers, have so many bloody skulls on it...
Housing units, you bet your ass there's skulls on it.
Models, skull decorations to skulls on pikes, funnily enough khorneberzerks had less skulls on them and if mostly in the form of small "fetishes" then many other units.

Casualty 792072 10932058 wrote:

Something similar used to happen in Ireland, but it tailed off a bit at least in part because people started pointing out the images were in fact of cat fetuses. Because human fetuses didn't look human enough to provoke the reaction they were angling for.

I mention this because the imagery above, while creepy, is also extremely stylised, further because of how it's coloured. It's not even clear if the faces are organic at all. They are shocking and strange, but they aren't clearly practical or biological realistic - the intention is entirely to evoke and disturb.

Oh I don't claim it isn't stylised or that I have big know how in the nature of fetuses, but to me it doesn't seem historical or creepy. When I was 2 years younger and my mom was still forcing me to go to church, I had to dingle a censer that would fit in to w40k. 3 baby faced buttom and the cap in form of a stylised wings. And in a big convent near us, there is a censer, which is still being used durning big festivities, that has the bottom in the shape of a females face and the top is a saints top of the skull inlaid in silver. Now DG on the other hand, those models are creepy as hell. Worse they make me remember how dead horse smells.

Like, why does the wall of martyerers, have so many bloody skulls on it...

Well there are those things in churchs called ossoariums or martyr walls, whole rooms made out of monk and priests bones and skulls. There are a few in Poland, and I know they are also in spain. Maybe it was inspired by that.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Seems par for the course to me, how is this new at all? 40k has always had disturbing imagery, body horror, and grotesque morbid imagery permeated throughout its existence. Imagery of skulls, decapitated heads, daemons, sacrifices, xenos monsters, weaponry, blood spatter, twisted body parts, cybernetic horrors, self flaggelation, etc ad nauseum are replete throughout 40k rulebooks and codex art. Hell, the 4E imagery of the High Lords of Terra has half of them looking like horrific cybermonsters.

I feel like when I was playing in 5th and 6th, the art was so fetishy for skulls it became kind of funny. Kind of like where's Waldo but instead of finding Waldo it was all about finding something that didn't have a skull somewhere on it XD

Is that just me? Not complaining about creepy imagery, it totally fits the setting, but I look back at my old books and feel like the art for a time was more laughable in how it seemed to slap skulls on every surface it could than creepy. So throwing in more actual creepiness seems like an improvement XD Mountains of skulls haven't been creepy since Terminator.

The whole skull shtick indeed is basically for any non GW inducted the first thing visible.

Like, why does the wall of martyerers, have so many bloody skulls on it...
Housing units, you bet your ass there's skulls on it.
Models, skull decorations to skulls on pikes, funnily enough khorneberzerks had less skulls on them and if mostly in the form of small "fetishes" then many other units.

You answered your own question. The Imperium is one giant martyrdom cult and the skull is the face of The Emperor. Same reason out own resident martyrdom cult has crosses everywhere.

Ossuaries and similar skull-encrusted structures are indeed a big inspiration for the all-permeating religious imagery of the Imperium, canonically to both remind all citizens of their impeding martyrdom's necessity and to impress on them the holiness of the human form. Like it was in Nemesis the Warlock, another 2000AD inspiration, the citizens are expected to buy wholly into the cult of martyr and intolerance, where only the "normals" are allowed to live. To this end they must be indoctrinated to see, live and breathe the idea that any deviation from the human form is an abomination to be feared and destroyed.

This imagery is the heart of 40k, as well as the understanding of its sheer horror. Those pictures that show the brutal grind, oppression and squalor of its denizens tell a thousand stories with more humanity in them than any glorification of their "heroes" would.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Seems par for the course to me, how is this new at all? 40k has always had disturbing imagery, body horror, and grotesque morbid imagery permeated throughout its existence. Imagery of skulls, decapitated heads, daemons, sacrifices, xenos monsters, weaponry, blood spatter, twisted body parts, cybernetic horrors, self flaggelation, etc ad nauseum are replete throughout 40k rulebooks and codex art. Hell, the 4E imagery of the High Lords of Terra has half of them looking like horrific cybermonsters.

I feel like when I was playing in 5th and 6th, the art was so fetishy for skulls it became kind of funny. Kind of like where's Waldo but instead of finding Waldo it was all about finding something that didn't have a skull somewhere on it XD

Is that just me? Not complaining about creepy imagery, it totally fits the setting, but I look back at my old books and feel like the art for a time was more laughable in how it seemed to slap skulls on every surface it could than creepy. So throwing in more actual creepiness seems like an improvement XD Mountains of skulls haven't been creepy since Terminator.

There are periods in medieval cathedrals, the art, sculpture and engravings particularly, that are obsessed with depictions of death. GW's fixation with skulls and general cartoony-ness actually tones it down a little from the direction inspiration. More of a caricature of the real-world stuff people were actually fixated on.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Like, why does the wall of martyerers, have so many bloody skulls on it...

Probably because it is a wall which is decorated with the bodies of fallen soldiers (the literal martyrs here).

 Dysartes wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Like, why does the wall of martyerers, have so many bloody skulls on it...

Probably because it is a wall which is decorated with the bodies of fallen soldiers (the literal martyrs here).

There is something to be said about Moderation though.

I don't know. Some of the churches in Eastern Europe can get especially metal!

like these ones and then theres the catacombs in Paris XD

It's actually kind of wild when you think about it that the Spanish found Aztec skull racks so hardcore, cause there's some churches like this in Spain. I guess I'm not sure if they existed before contact though XD

Matt Swain wrote:The 40k rulebook is not. It's stuff people made up. The creators decided to make what looked like guns with fetuses on them. Just for gross points or shock value. Also even in 40k it doesn;t seem to make sense. It's just gross for shock value.

Yes - it's shocking and horrific.
That's the point.

It takes inspiration from the ossuaries, mausoleums, and other memento mori of the church, and turn it up to 11. It's *supposed* to be seen as stupid and irrational and downright barbaric to us, because that's what the Imperium *is*. It's drowned in symbols of death, martyrdom, eternal servitude to the state, and of the death of innocence. A cherub-like fetus attached to a gun is the most perfect encapsulation of that.

Like, it bears reinforcing that the Imperium are *not* the good guys here.

I'm not sure I've read through a 40k rulebook that wasn't creapy to some degree.

Karol wrote:

Casualty 792072 10932058 wrote:

Something similar used to happen in Ireland, but it tailed off a bit at least in part because people started pointing out the images were in fact of cat fetuses. Because human fetuses didn't look human enough to provoke the reaction they were angling for.

I mention this because the imagery above, while creepy, is also extremely stylised, further because of how it's coloured. It's not even clear if the faces are organic at all. They are shocking and strange, but they aren't clearly practical or biological realistic - the intention is entirely to evoke and disturb.

Oh I don't claim it isn't stylised or that I have big know how in the nature of fetuses, but to me it doesn't seem historical or creepy. When I was 2 years younger and my mom was still forcing me to go to church, I had to dingle a censer that would fit in to w40k. 3 baby faced buttom and the cap in form of a stylised wings. And in a big convent near us, there is a censer, which is still being used durning big festivities, that has the bottom in the shape of a females face and the top is a saints top of the skull inlaid in silver. Now DG on the other hand, those models are creepy as hell. Worse they make me remember how dead horse smells.

Like, why does the wall of martyerers, have so many bloody skulls on it...

Well there are those things in churchs called ossoariums or martyr walls, whole rooms made out of monk and priests bones and skulls. There are a few in Poland, and I know they are also in spain. Maybe it was inspired by that.

Like, Sedlech isn't unique in execution, just in preservation .

Of course GW are going to turn the creepy/horror aspect of the setting up to 11.

Without wanting to get too far into the dreaded politics/culture wars nonsense, GW recently became aware that there are... certain people out there who have come to see 40K as unironic pro-fascist propaganda. To the point that it was starting to damage GW's public image and might eventually have hurt its bottom line (remember that kids playing 40K in school clubs is a big part of GW's business model, at least in some countries).

That view was predicated on the Imperium being portrayed as not just the main protagonists in a setting with no good guys, but actually as the good guys.

GW inadvertently fuelled that wrong impression by bringing back Guilliman.

So they now need (or feel they need) to redress the balance.

Putting fetus-bolters in the new rulebook is their way of grabbing the reader firmly by the ears, shaking him until his teeth rattle, and screaming directly into his face: "The Imperium are not the good guys, you stupid numpty! They're monsters! Everybody in this setting is a monster, especially the humans! Stop idolising the Imperium and raving on the internet about how fascism is good actually! You absolute muppet!"

So expect to see more stuff showing that the Imperium is a total horror-show. Also expect Guilliman to get a serious dog-kicking moment before too long.

 Duskweaver wrote:
Of course GW are going to turn the creepy/horror aspect of the setting up to 11.

Without wanting to get too far into the dreaded politics/culture wars nonsense, GW recently became aware that there are... certain people out there who have come to see 40K as unironic pro-fascist propaganda. To the point that it was starting to damage GW's public image and might eventually have hurt its bottom line (remember that kids playing 40K in school clubs is a big part of GW's business model, at least in some countries).

That view was predicated on the Imperium being portrayed as not just the main protagonists in a setting with no good guys, but actually as the good guys.

GW inadvertently fuelled that wrong impression by bringing back Guilliman.

So they now need (or feel they need) to redress the balance.

Putting fetus-bolters in the new rulebook is their way of grabbing the reader firmly by the ears, shaking him until his teeth rattle, and screaming directly into his face: "The Imperium are not the good guys, you stupid numpty! They're monsters! Everybody in this setting is a monster, especially the humans! Stop idolising the Imperium and raving on the internet about how fascism is good actually! You absolute muppet!"

So expect to see more stuff showing that the Imperium is a total horror-show. Also expect Guilliman to get a serious dog-kicking moment before too long.

I think you're reading too much into cherubs and similar things that have always been around in 40K.

Also if by turn up the setting to 11, making it an utter skullflanderisation of unimaginable proportions to the point that it get's ridiculed then yes that is accurate

 Duskweaver wrote:
Of course GW are going to turn the creepy/horror aspect of the setting up to 11.

Without wanting to get too far into the dreaded politics/culture wars nonsense, GW recently became aware that there are... certain people out there who have come to see 40K as unironic pro-fascist propaganda. To the point that it was starting to damage GW's public image and might eventually have hurt its bottom line (remember that kids playing 40K in school clubs is a big part of GW's business model, at least in some countries).

That view was predicated on the Imperium being portrayed as not just the main protagonists in a setting with no good guys, but actually as the good guys.

GW inadvertently fuelled that wrong impression by bringing back Guilliman.

So they now need (or feel they need) to redress the balance.

Putting fetus-bolters in the new rulebook is their way of grabbing the reader firmly by the ears, shaking him until his teeth rattle, and screaming directly into his face: "The Imperium are not the good guys, you stupid numpty! They're monsters! Everybody in this setting is a monster, especially the humans! Stop idolising the Imperium and raving on the internet about how fascism is good actually! You absolute muppet!"

So expect to see more stuff showing that the Imperium is a total horror-show. Also expect Guilliman to get a serious dog-kicking moment before too long.

I don't think there were that many people who actually believed that, and if they thought the IoM is fascist they need to revise the definition of fascism.
Authoritarian =/= Fascist (though Fascist = Authoritarian). Fascist is a very specific political and economic ideology that arose in the mid 20th century. Labeling the IoM as simply fascist is like calling the Tau simply communists.

If there is an attempt to "redress the balance", it is probably more due to criticism that 40k is becoming more sanitized, what with the kid orientated Warhammer Adventure series, the return of Guilleman and return of hope to the setting, and a semblance of the IoM not suffering any notable setback following Cadia.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Also if by turn up the setting to 11, making it an utter skullflanderisation of unimaginable proportions to the point that it get's ridiculed then yes that is accurate

Eh, kind of?
On one hand, it does kind of feels like what a studio does with a project when they are running out of ideas. You see it with Star Wars and the like. "Hey, Star Wars had a Death Star, so lets have an even bigger Death Star that can shoot multiple planets, and even more Jedis with force powers that somehow surpass those of Yoda, the strongest Jedi, so we can show off our shiny CGI effects!"

Though on the other hand, you do see some pretty impressive bits of sepulchral religious art. I mean, in the local castle there's a catholic priest's robe on display that has a big ol' skull on it.
And then you have places like Sedlec Ossuary. Once you take those in consideration, 40k's skull fetish simply looks cute.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Catulle wrote:

Karol wrote:

Casualty 792072 10932058 wrote:

Something similar used to happen in Ireland, but it tailed off a bit at least in part because people started pointing out the images were in fact of cat fetuses. Because human fetuses didn't look human enough to provoke the reaction they were angling for.

I mention this because the imagery above, while creepy, is also extremely stylised, further because of how it's coloured. It's not even clear if the faces are organic at all. They are shocking and strange, but they aren't clearly practical or biological realistic - the intention is entirely to evoke and disturb.

Oh I don't claim it isn't stylised or that I have big know how in the nature of fetuses, but to me it doesn't seem historical or creepy. When I was 2 years younger and my mom was still forcing me to go to church, I had to dingle a censer that would fit in to w40k. 3 baby faced buttom and the cap in form of a stylised wings. And in a big convent near us, there is a censer, which is still being used durning big festivities, that has the bottom in the shape of a females face and the top is a saints top of the skull inlaid in silver. Now DG on the other hand, those models are creepy as hell. Worse they make me remember how dead horse smells.

Like, why does the wall of martyerers, have so many bloody skulls on it...

Well there are those things in churchs called ossoariums or martyr walls, whole rooms made out of monk and priests bones and skulls. There are a few in Poland, and I know they are also in spain. Maybe it was inspired by that.

Like, Sedlech isn't unique in execution, just in preservation .

I love Sedlec. That place is metal as feth

Sgt. Cortez wrote:I think you're reading too much into cherubs and similar things that have always been around in 40K.

I'm talking about emphasis. Obviously those things have been there all along. But GW seems to want to make them more prominent now.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:I don't think there were that many people who actually believed that,

Enough for GW to feel the need to put out an explicit statement telling them to feth off out of the hobby and making very clear that they don't advocate those kinds of beliefs or attitudes in the real world.

and if they thought the IoM is fascist they need to revise the definition of fascism. Authoritarian =/= Fascist (though Fascist = Authoritarian). Fascist is a very specific political and economic ideology that arose in the mid 20th century. Labeling the IoM as simply fascist is like calling the Tau simply communists.

Nobody cares about this sort of "well akshually" poli-sci definition. To most people, 'fascism' is just any authoritarian, militaristic regime that isn't obviously communist. That's how the term is used in like 99% of cases by the general public and even the mainstream media.

Snark aside, in a purely technical sense I agree with you. But I'm talking about general public perception, so technical definitions of terms like that are utterly irrelevant. To most people, the Imperium of Man 'looks' fascist, even if those of us who understand 20th century history and/or political science might 'know better'.

If there is an attempt to "redress the balance", it is probably more due to criticism that 40k is becoming more sanitized, what with the kid orientated Warhammer Adventure series, the return of Guilleman and return of hope to the setting, and a semblance of the IoM not suffering any notable setback following Cadia.

No, that's stuff only established fans of 40K care about. And they're already customers, so GW doesn't give a damn about their criticisms. What matters is what those outside the hobby think, because those are the people GW relies on to ensure they will still have customers tomorrow.

 Duskweaver wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:I think you're reading too much into cherubs and similar things that have always been around in 40K.

I'm talking about emphasis. Obviously those things have been there all along. But GW seems to want to make them more prominent now.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:I don't think there were that many people who actually believed that,

Enough for GW to feel the need to put out an explicit statement telling them to feth off out of the hobby and making very clear that they don't advocate those kinds of beliefs or attitudes in the real world.

Oh, you mean the statement that was released at a time when nearly every other company was releasing a similar statement? How very sincere.

Nobody cares about this sort of "well akshually" poli-sci definition. To most people, 'fascism' is just any authoritarian, militaristic regime that isn't obviously communist. That's how the term is used in like 99% of cases by the general public and even the mainstream media.

Snark aside, in a purely technical sense I agree with you. But I'm talking about general public perception, so technical definitions of terms like that are utterly irrelevant. To most people, the Imperium of Man 'looks' fascist, even if those of us who understand 20th century history and/or political science might 'know better'.

And those people are wrong, so to hell with them.
There were those who thought DnD and Harry Potter was devil worship, should we cater to them as well?
Its not a technical definition, its the proper bloody definition. Next you'll be telling me that anything with social services is communism.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

No, that's stuff only established fans of 40K care about. And they're already customers, so GW doesn't give a damn about their criticisms. What matters is what those outside the hobby think, because those are the people GW relies on to ensure they will still have customers tomorrow.

You know you can stop being a customer, right? Its within GW's best interest to care about their customers.
What people outside the hobby think is largely irrelevant. If that were truly the case, then DnD wouldn't have a fan base due to the satanic panic, neither would video games due to Jack Thompson, neither would metal due to Tipper Gore, and certainly not Judge Dredd, you know, one of the primary sources of inspiration for 40k.
40k has existed for 25+ years and is still doing quite well and the video game adaptations are fairly successful. I don't think those outside the hobby really care as much as you think. And besides, if they don't like the IoM, there's other factions to choose from.

 Sherrypie wrote:


This imagery is the heart of 40k, as well as the understanding of its sheer horror. Those pictures that show the brutal grind, oppression and squalor of its denizens tell a thousand stories with more humanity in them than any glorification of their "heroes" would.

I wonder how people would react if they saw our ortodox people wash the preserved body parts of saints, which are taken out for specific fests, and then everyone take the water home to bless people with it.

I guess that would be too hardcore too. Same as burning of the winter witch, hanging of the traitor on easters etc Most of the stuff predates christanity here. And according to my mother here great grandmother was a sheptucha. Which is my dad often called here family witchs

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Duskweaver wrote:
Of course GW are going to turn the creepy/horror aspect of the setting up to 11.

Without wanting to get too far into the dreaded politics/culture wars nonsense, GW recently became aware that there are... certain people out there who have come to see 40K as unironic pro-fascist propaganda. To the point that it was starting to damage GW's public image and might eventually have hurt its bottom line (remember that kids playing 40K in school clubs is a big part of GW's business model, at least in some countries).

That view was predicated on the Imperium being portrayed as not just the main protagonists in a setting with no good guys, but actually as the good guys.

GW inadvertently fuelled that wrong impression by bringing back Guilliman.

So they now need (or feel they need) to redress the balance.

Putting fetus-bolters in the new rulebook is their way of grabbing the reader firmly by the ears, shaking him until his teeth rattle, and screaming directly into his face: "The Imperium are not the good guys, you stupid numpty! They're monsters! Everybody in this setting is a monster, especially the humans! Stop idolising the Imperium and raving on the internet about how fascism is good actually! You absolute muppet!"

So expect to see more stuff showing that the Imperium is a total horror-show. Also expect Guilliman to get a serious dog-kicking moment before too long.

I don't think there were that many people who actually believed that, and if they thought the IoM is fascist they need to revise the definition of fascism.
Authoritarian =/= Fascist (though Fascist = Authoritarian). Fascist is a very specific political and economic ideology that arose in the mid 20th century. Labeling the IoM as simply fascist is like calling the Tau simply communists.

If there is an attempt to "redress the balance", it is probably more due to criticism that 40k is becoming more sanitized, what with the kid orientated Warhammer Adventure series, the return of Guilleman and return of hope to the setting, and a semblance of the IoM not suffering any notable setback following Cadia.

Well, I think there's actually a lot that allowsfor the Imperium to be classified as fascist.
It's militaristic, it's a dictatorship, either the emperor or Guilleman can be identified as duce/Führer, it is racist, its hatred against mutants mimics the "Euthanasie"program from nationalsocialism, it uses partly fascist iconography (you really shouldn't wear a Commissar uniform in Germany...), the whole approach to sacrifice and exterminatus can also be connected to fascist ideology.

That being said there's also the whole religious stuff in the imperium that is derived from christian monarchies in the middle ages. Though reading into some arguments from the churches in Germany during the NS reign and its connections to the pope one could even connect that to fascism as well.

I never understood how people came to see the Tau as communists, though... They have even less to do with communism than with fish, but I guess sometimes you can't stop internet memes...

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

You know you can stop being a customer, right? Its within GW's best interest to care about their customers.
What people outside the hobby think is largely irrelevant.

With respect, this isn't true at all.

There have been a number of articles in high profile outlets about the issue of very nasty people glomming onto 40Ks language and iconography, some including former GW staff expressing these exact concerns, and like it or not, if that's the only mainstream exposure somebody has to 40k, that's a significant liability from GWs perspective.

GW's business model is entirely dependent on new players coming in for the first time every year and buying new armies, paints, tools and rulebooks as older players cycle out, branch out into non GW stuff, or start selling each other stuff as much as they're buying new. There's a reason GW started that kid friendly offshoot and sends stuff to schools - that steady pipeline in is vital and they know it. GW has not built the success it has now by selling more to the same people, it's done it by finding new ways to sell to new people

The kind of nuance you're relying on here as a backstop is irrelevant. You can argue that well, it's silly for douchebags to adopt the IOM as their mascots because in a White Dwarf short story in 1995 it said x; or that it's unfair for Joe Public to see a wider association between 40k and those people, but it makes no difference. The only thing anybody outside 40kland might recognise about the game is Space Marines, so how they're depicted, now, defines the game and its community in the public eye, and that public perception does matter.

It is not analogous to satanic panic because it's not a figment of anyone's imagination, the kind of numpties were talking about are themselves making youtube networks and message boards illustrating their presence. Whether we like it or not, they're there. It's demonstrably a fact, (and frankly I don't think any of us here can honestly say we haven't encountered folks thusly inclined either online or face to face.)

In all honesty then, Joe Public wouldn't be unreasonable in their concerns - who would want to send their kids into an ecosystem where gimps like that had put down roots and established themselves as influences? Why would any woman or POC want to dip a toe into a community that's home to people like that? You can only have one in the end, do you want the people who think the Imperium represent something they'd like to see reflected in the real world - or do you want literally everyone else?

GW is a commercial concern and it's entirely in their long term interest to grimdark the IOM back up. That suits me anyway as a 40k fan, because I find the Adidas sneaker aesthetic the Primaris stuff was skewing towards bland, and the ESH universe was a big part of the appeal for me, but I also welcome anything that might complicate or frustrate that reading or use of the lore.

The IoM should be dirty and superstitious and impractical, it should be unreasonable and crumbling and regressive, because it always has been. Slap babyheads on bolters, wild OUT on the servitors, have IoM factions squabble and fail at least as much as they win. Dirty up that squeaky clean. Remind everyone that making it possible to wipe out entire planets due to a bureaucratic temper tantrum is probably stupid, actually. Make it clear that IoM are an operatic caricature of authoritarianism; and above all, make it impossible to use them as any kind of moral fable about heroic strength or ugly necessity.

It seems to me like GW is doing a little more of that recently. Whether that's deliberate or a happy accident I don't know, but we're all better off if it continues either way.

The idea of Guilliman having a kick-the-puppy moment hadn't really occurred to me, but it will be interesting to watch out for.

i think the new rulebook looks great and is very clear on the grimdarkyness of the setting.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Duskweaver wrote:
Of course GW are going to turn the creepy/horror aspect of the setting up to 11.

Without wanting to get too far into the dreaded politics/culture wars nonsense, GW recently became aware that there are... certain people out there who have come to see 40K as unironic pro-fascist propaganda. To the point that it was starting to damage GW's public image and might eventually have hurt its bottom line (remember that kids playing 40K in school clubs is a big part of GW's business model, at least in some countries).

That view was predicated on the Imperium being portrayed as not just the main protagonists in a setting with no good guys, but actually as the good guys.

GW inadvertently fuelled that wrong impression by bringing back Guilliman.

So they now need (or feel they need) to redress the balance.

Putting fetus-bolters in the new rulebook is their way of grabbing the reader firmly by the ears, shaking him until his teeth rattle, and screaming directly into his face: "The Imperium are not the good guys, you stupid numpty! They're monsters! Everybody in this setting is a monster, especially the humans! Stop idolising the Imperium and raving on the internet about how fascism is good actually! You absolute muppet!"

So expect to see more stuff showing that the Imperium is a total horror-show. Also expect Guilliman to get a serious dog-kicking moment before too long.

I don't think there were that many people who actually believed that, and if they thought the IoM is fascist they need to revise the definition of fascism.
Authoritarian =/= Fascist (though Fascist = Authoritarian). Fascist is a very specific political and economic ideology that arose in the mid 20th century. Labeling the IoM as simply fascist is like calling the Tau simply communists.

If there is an attempt to "redress the balance", it is probably more due to criticism that 40k is becoming more sanitized, what with the kid orientated Warhammer Adventure series, the return of Guilleman and return of hope to the setting, and a semblance of the IoM not suffering any notable setback following Cadia.

Well, I think there's actually a lot that allowsfor the Imperium to be classified as fascist.
It's militaristic, it's a dictatorship, either the emperor or Guilleman can be identified as duce/Führer, it is racist, its hatred against mutants mimics the "Euthanasie"program from nationalsocialism, it uses partly fascist iconography (you really shouldn't wear a Commissar uniform in Germany...), the whole approach to sacrifice and exterminatus can also be connected to fascist ideology.

That being said there's also the whole religious stuff in the imperium that is derived from christian monarchies in the middle ages. Though reading into some arguments from the churches in Germany during the NS reign and its connections to the pope one could even connect that to fascism as well.

I never understood how people came to see the Tau as communists, though... They have even less to do with communism than with fish, but I guess sometimes you can't stop internet memes...

Commissars are a reference to the Soviet Union, actually.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commissar

Commissar (or sometimes Kommissar) is an English transliteration of the Russian комиссáр, which means commissary. In English, the transliteration "commissar" is used to refer specifically to the political commissars of Soviet and Eastern Bloc armies, while administrative officers are called "commissary".

The word комисса́р is used in Russian for both political and administrative officials. The title has been used in the Soviet Union and Russia since the time of Peter the Great.

The executing cowardly soldiers is a (loose) reference to Order 227

2. Military councils of armies and first of all army commanders should;

a) Unconditionally remove from their offices, corps and army commanders and commissars who have accepted troop withdrawals from occupied positions without the order of the army command, and route them to the military councils of the fronts for court-martial;
b) Form within the limits of each army 3 to 5 well-armed defensive squads (up to 200 persons in each), and put them directly behind unstable divisions and require them in case of panic and scattered withdrawals of elements of the divisions to shoot in place panic-mongers and cowards and thus help the honest soldiers of the division execute their duty to the Motherland;
c) Form within the limits of each army up to ten (depending on the situation) penal companies (from 150 to 200 persons in each) where ordinary soldiers and low ranking commanders who have been guilty of a breach of discipline due to cowardice or bewilderment will be routed, and put them at difficult sectors of the army to give them an opportunity to redeem by blood their crimes against the Motherland.

The Soviet Union was also militaristic and authoritarian. Would you call the USSR fascist?

Whilst the IoM may have some surface fascist elements (it is a melting pot of every rotten political system known to man), it also supports member worlds to basically do what they want as long as they follow the imperial truth and pay taxes, which is anathema to fascist ideology, ie, absolute control over all aspects of life. The IoM is actually closer to feudalism in that regard, as much like you had dukes swearing fealty to kings and expected to contractually give soldiers to his liege in return for protection, you have worlds swearing fealty to the Emperor and expected to give soldiers in return for Imperial protection.

Now, as for the Tau = communist thing that's because the Tau have a strong collectivist aspect to them, and much like how people think the IoM is fascist because it has a few elements that happen to coincide with fascism, people think the Tau are communist because they happen to have a few elements that coincide with communism.

Well, fascism doesn't mean totalitarism necessarily, so it's possible to have worlds with limited autonomy. Later spanish fascism was also not as bad as what the Nazis did, for example.
I'm well aware where the Commissar comes from and that it's more connected to USSR, I was specifically talking about the look, skull on that hut, great coat which bears resemblance to SS. I once saw a Commissar Cosplay outfit for sale and thought, noone in their right mind in germany would wear that
I must say though we're heading straight to offtopic I'm afraid.

Casualty wrote:


It is not analogous to satanic panic because it's not a figment of anyone's imagination, the kind of numpties were talking about are themselves making youtube networks and message boards illustrating their presence. Whether we like it or not, they're there. It's demonstrably a fact, (and frankly I don't think any of us here can honestly say we haven't encountered folks thusly inclined either online or face to face.)

It is though? You had Jack Chick talking about how DnD is secretly making kids worship the devil, just as you have gits claiming that the IoM is great because its fascist or the setting is evil because its fascist and it somehow makes people nazis or some nonsense.
If you encountered such people in person you must have terrible luck, because in all of my years I haven't encountered such folks.

You know the best way to deal with them? You ignore them and mock them. You don't make a big deal out of it, because they feed off of outrage, and you certainly don't try to change the product to combat them.
Its like wanting to ban Helter Skelter because Charles Manson thought it was telling him to make a cult in preparation for a race war, its silly and bad for the product.

But that's besides the point, because 40k has always been something of a tragic parody, not an endorsement of such systems. If someone doesn't get the joke that's his problem.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Well, fascism doesn't mean totalitarism necessarily, so it's possible to have worlds with limited autonomy. Later spanish fascism was also not as bad as what the Nazis did, for example.
I'm well aware where the Commissar comes from and that it's more connected to USSR, I was specifically talking about the look, skull on that hut, great coat which bears resemblance to SS. I once saw a Commissar Cosplay outfit for sale and thought, noone in their right mind in germany would wear that
I must say though we're heading straight to offtopic I'm afraid.

It literally does though? One of the aspects of Fascism is totalitarianism.
From the Doctrine of Fascism, written by Mussolini, the guy who created that system.

"The Fascist conception of the State is all-embracing; outside of it no human or spiritual values can exist, much less have value. Thus understood, Fascism is totalitarian, and the Fascist State—a synthesis and a unit inclusive of all values—interprets, develops, and potentiates the whole life of a people".

If by limited autonomy, you mean the planetary governor can literally run his world how he wants, provided he pays his tithes and maintains the imperial truth to keep the eccliesarchy happy, sure.
Commissar uniforms look nothing like SS uniforms, so I'm not sure how you think that. Its more 19th century than 1930s.

You're right though, it is getting off topic.

Well this has been a huge disappointment. I came here looking for awesome fetus bolters! Instead I sifted through three pages and got a few pics of some baby face bolters

shortymcnostrill wrote:
Well this has been a huge disappointment. I came here looking for awesome fetus bolters! Instead I sifted through three pages and got a few pics of some baby face bolters

I know, I was disappointed too.
I was expecting something like a bolter that had that fetus bottle from Death Stranding welded to it, and instead I got some weird clunky looking gun that had a doll looking thing sculpted on top of it.

Once again I feel it's worth pointing out that the rulebook contains exactly zero pictures of "fetus bolters".

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
But that's besides the point, because 40k has always been something of a tragic parody, not an endorsement of such systems. If someone doesn't get the joke that's his problem.

Depends how many people don't get the joke. If a significant portion aren't getting the joke, it's probably time to review how you're portraying that joke, and telling people that they're missing the joke in the first place.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Depends how many people don't get the joke. If a significant portion aren't getting the joke, it's probably time to review how you're portraying that joke, and telling people that they're missing the joke in the first place.

A quick look at the comments of any Onion or Private Eye article will soon show you that some people are incapable of recognising even the most blatant of satire. I don't think we should be dumbing down for the sake of people that are never going to "get it".

If someone isn't smart enough to figure out that 40K isn't an endorsement of totalitarianism, then I suspect that that person has trouble with many things in their lives.

This is the same realm of stupidity where people claiming that liking a character like Darth Vader means you are an avid supporter of the Galactic Empire and all it does/stands for.

 Super Ready wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Depends how many people don't get the joke. If a significant portion aren't getting the joke, it's probably time to review how you're portraying that joke, and telling people that they're missing the joke in the first place.

A quick look at the comments of any Onion or Private Eye article will soon show you that some people are incapable of recognising even the most blatant of satire. I don't think we should be dumbing down for the sake of people that are never going to "get it".

I would call flattening out the immoral depictions of the imperiums savagery in favor of just portraying good clean sparkly hero space marines "dumbing down" but thats just me tho.

Admech codex, sisters codex, guard codex, all seem to "get it". Marine and custode codex not so much with the satire.

I love that picture of the banged-up guardsman with a purity seal nailed into his head jumping at the cultist. To me, it really showed the darkness and fanaticism that saturates the 40k world.

I honestly never understood the "40k promotes fascism" thing.

Now we all know that in real life fascist leaders use propaganda to try to spin a narrative portaying certain foreign countries and/or ethnicities in a way that they pose a threat to the fascist state and it's people. These foreigners and/or certain ethnicities are then dehumanized, which provides a justification and lowers the threshhold to accept commiting atrocities against this precieved "enemy".
We also know from examples in history, that these percieved threats, exacerbated by propaganda, are never true and/or extremely exaggerated, which is one of the many massive dangers of a charismatic totalitarian leader with a powerful propaganda machine behind his back.

Now, here's the thing. The imperium of man in 40k does the exact same thing, only that those threats are very real. Almost everything in this fictional universe is actively trying to destroy the imperium and kill it's citizens, or worse.
Does that mean that the imperium are the good guys and their ways are to be endorsed? Hell no! They are freaking horrible, but they also managed to survive through a ten thousand year period of cultural, philosophical and technical decline.
It's an interesting thought experiment as to what cicumstances would have to occur, that such a totalitarian, xenophobic way of thinking would be the most effective way forward for a civilization in total decline.

But leaving all those aspects aside. 40k is fiction, where super soldiers fight green fungus people.
If someone digests the lore of 40k and honestly comes to the conclusion that totalitarianism might be a good idea in a real life setting, they might have bigger issues the need to adress.

Edit: as for the rulebook looking creepy, or having creepy artwork. Not really, honestly imho. For me personally, as far as artwork is concerned, the 3rd ed rulebook is peek grimdark and captured the insanity of the imperium best.

Tiberias wrote:
I honestly never understood the "40k promotes fascism" thing.

Some people can't separate fiction from real life. That simple, unfortunately.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
I honestly never understood the "40k promotes fascism" thing.

Some people can't separate fiction from real life. That simple, unfortunately.

Unfortunately, this is true. We can all sit here and say "but no-one would think that the Imperium is good and right in what they do, and apply that to the real world", but there are people who do. And regardless if *we* know that they didn't get the joke, that's not much help when they're going around calling to "purge the heretics" and "tolerance is for the weak", and clearly didn't get the memo. The least we can do is say "hey bud, just to let you know, in black and white terms, the Imperium's awful, and those beliefs are awful".

Yeah we're more saying that the people who think that 40K promotes/endorses/approves of totalitarianism are stupid.

You've got it backwards.

I think that anyone seriously ascribing/inferring any kind of real world values to some made up toy solider make-believe universe needs their noggin checked lol..

GW as a company/PR however is a separate beast...

Its like separating the artist from the art. Some people just cant do that.

I think the creepiest thing about 9ed Books are those wierd bubble head aliens and the mushroom things! What is up with that art. That's nightmare worthy weirdness..

Tiberias wrote:


Now, here's the thing. The imperium of man in 40k does the exact same thing, only that those threats are very real. Almost everything in this fictional universe is actively trying to destroy the imperium and kill it's citizens, or worse.
Does that mean that the imperium are the good guys and their ways are to be endorsed? Hell no! They are freaking horrible, but they also managed to survive through a ten thousand year period of cultural, philosophical and technical decline.
It's an interesting thought experiment as to what cicumstances would have to occur, that such a totalitarian, xenophobic way of thinking would be the most effective way forward for a civilization in total decline.

But that's not true either. The Imperium is very much NOT the most effective system in its circumstances. It is a tragic, failing corpse in long, agonising life support that does stupid, wasteful things all the time. Rote ritual, superstition and veneration of old times when man hadn't fethed up everything aren't effective, they are barely functional enough to survive yet another day.

Part of the "40k promotes fascism ermahgerd" situation is that some folks really buy into that thought experiment. For someone who views the real world in ugly "us vs. them" narratives, it's not a big leap to think resorting to horrible draconian measures is "the only way" to keep "us" safe from "them" and sympathise with the Imperium. But that's bs. The Imperium doesn't have to be like that to survive, it could do much better by not oppressing its citizens, trading with nonhostile xenos cultures instead of destroying them and so on. It is like that because it has degenerated into a massive mockery of bad government and breakdown of basic human decency: it laughs at the hardliner idiots whose fault it is that the future is a hellhole instead of a Star Trek utopia. That's the whole point of forgetting the promise of technology and progress in the far future of only war: it's not that we must, it's just that we're too deep in to see we really could do better.

 Sherrypie wrote:
Part of the "40k promotes fascism ermahgerd" situation is that some folks really buy into that thought experiment.

And the other half are those that believe people support fascism because they like 40k.

Both are awful, but that latter group are by far the worst simply because the former can be easily dismissed as pack of idiots, where as those who genuinely think that liking the "bad guys" means you support/are a bad guy are very hard to interact with, as they tend to draw everything back to that completely off-base and unfounded notion.

*corrected spelling

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:
Part of the "40k promotes fascism ermahgerd" situation is that some folks really buy into that thought experiment.

And the other have are those that believe people support fascism because they like 40k.

Both are awful, but that latter group are by far the worst simply because the former can be easily dismissed as pack of idiots, where as those who genuinely think that liking the "bad guys" means you support/are a bad guy are very hard to interact with, as they tend to draw everything back to that completely off-base and unfounded notion.

Yes, that is also rather tiresome. Sometimes they can be reasoned with through other examples like pointing out that surely a massive portion of the planet's teenage population wasn't suddenly supporting violent anarchy just because they liked Loki in Marvel movies for a variety of reasons, but sometimes you just can't. Heck, usually the villains have better character motivations and more interesting stories of how they ended up in their spot than the usual protagonists anyway

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah we're more saying that the people who think that 40K promotes/endorses/approves of totalitarianism are stupid.

You've got it backwards.

I would like the know the way of thought that draws someone from w40k any faction lore, to actual political system in the real world. Because in the case of the imperial system, it would be rather hard to do, earth has only two kind of a similar govmerments, but I don't think I ever saw anyone on any forum express the need of building another Iran or Vattican where they live.

But on the other hand my own thoughts go on strange paths too, so who knows. Although if someone were to worry about people like me, thinking strange things, then everything would have to be banned, because everything can make you think strange things or in strange ways, when you are strange yourself.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
I honestly never understood the "40k promotes fascism" thing.

Some people can't separate fiction from real life. That simple, unfortunately.

Unfortunately, this is true. We can all sit here and say "but no-one would think that the Imperium is good and right in what they do, and apply that to the real world", but there are people who do. And regardless if *we* know that they didn't get the joke, that's not much help when they're going around calling to "purge the heretics" and "tolerance is for the weak", and clearly didn't get the memo. The least we can do is say "hey bud, just to let you know, in black and white terms, the Imperium's awful, and those beliefs are awful".

Do people really though? Or are there more people outraged about some people posting dumb quotes on the internet to try to be edgy or funny?
And even if there were, what would your solution be? Censor the lore of 40k? Censor the artwork? I'm sure you would agree that wouldn't be the best idea.
I am a firm advocate of letting people spout whatever nonsense they want, but I also think it's the responsibility of the remaining people who are still sane to challenge that nonsense and say that it is wrong and why.

Tiberias wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
I honestly never understood the "40k promotes fascism" thing.

Some people can't separate fiction from real life. That simple, unfortunately.

Unfortunately, this is true. We can all sit here and say "but no-one would think that the Imperium is good and right in what they do, and apply that to the real world", but there are people who do. And regardless if *we* know that they didn't get the joke, that's not much help when they're going around calling to "purge the heretics" and "tolerance is for the weak", and clearly didn't get the memo. The least we can do is say "hey bud, just to let you know, in black and white terms, the Imperium's awful, and those beliefs are awful".

Do people really though? Or are there more people outraged about some people posting dumb quotes on the internet to try to be edgy or funny?
And even if there were, what would your solution be? Censor the lore of 40k? Censor the artwork? I'm sure you would agree that wouldn't be the best idea.
I am a firm advocate of letting people spout whatever nonsense they want, but I also think it's the responsibility of the remaining people who are still sane to challenge that nonsense and say that it is wrong and why.

Also , a lot of the drama get's hyped up for no reason other then to generate traffic online.

In many ways further, it's like the old videgame shtick , aka videogames cause violence, nonsense that went arround and arround and still does.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah we're more saying that the people who think that 40K promotes/endorses/approves of totalitarianism are stupid.

Oh, they are stupid. Horrifically, undeniably stupid. But they're still doing those things, stupid or not.

Tiberias wrote:Do people really though? Or are there more people outraged about some people posting dumb quotes on the internet to try to be edgy or funny?

As far as I'm concerned, there's not a difference. Someone posting fashy stuff as a joke or because they genuinely believe it is still posting it. Someone behaving just a bit too "Imperial" in a hobby store is still doing it, even if it's a joke.

And even if there were, what would your solution be? Censor the lore of 40k? Censor the artwork? I'm sure you would agree that wouldn't be the best idea.

No, certainly not. I'm talking about making CLEAR that the Imperium are evil, with essentially statements of "hey, if you look at the Imperium and see something admirable, get lost", and straight-facedly saying "the Imperium's bad" instead of saying it with a bit of a tongue-in-cheek. Basically, to come back to the OP - make it clear that it being "creepy" is the intention and to be expected.

I am a firm advocate of letting people spout whatever nonsense they want, but I also think it's the responsibility of the remaining people who are still sane to challenge that nonsense and say that it is wrong and why.

I definitely agree with the latter, not so much the first.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Tiberias wrote:Do people really though? Or are there more people outraged about some people posting dumb quotes on the internet to try to be edgy or funny?

As far as I'm concerned, there's not a difference. Someone posting fashy stuff as a joke or because they genuinely believe it is still posting it. Someone behaving just a bit too "Imperial" in a hobby store is still doing it, even if it's a joke.

Heaven forbid people cosplay or get into character as anything other than the good guys.
Not that there are any good guys in 40k of course.


We should probably stop people playing the game at all come to think of it, since whatever side you play your glorifying horrific things. Better ban the PC games and the books too! Might get people being a little bit too Sisters-of-battley, or a little bit Tauish.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
We should probably stop people playing the game at all come to think of it, since whatever side you play your glorifying horrific things. Better ban the PC games and the books too! Might get people being a little bit too Sisters-of-battley, or a little bit Tauish.

The only faction that doesn't really do anything horrible would be the Exodites. They're just the Eldar Amish.

That's probably why they're not playable, they're just not evil enough for 40k standards

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Someone posting fashy stuff as a joke or because they genuinely believe it is still posting it. Someone behaving just a bit too "Imperial" in a hobby store is still doing it, even if it's a joke.

Heaven forbid people cosplay or get into character as anything other than the good guys.

That's not what I'm talking about, and you know it. Don't be disingenuous.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yeah we're more saying that the people who think that 40K promotes/endorses/approves of totalitarianism are stupid.

Oh, they are stupid. Horrifically, undeniably stupid. But they're still doing those things, stupid or not.

Tiberias wrote:Do people really though? Or are there more people outraged about some people posting dumb quotes on the internet to try to be edgy or funny?

As far as I'm concerned, there's not a difference. Someone posting fashy stuff as a joke or because they genuinely believe it is still posting it. Someone behaving just a bit too "Imperial" in a hobby store is still doing it, even if it's a joke.

And even if there were, what would your solution be? Censor the lore of 40k? Censor the artwork? I'm sure you would agree that wouldn't be the best idea.

No, certainly not. I'm talking about making CLEAR that the Imperium are evil, with essentially statements of "hey, if you look at the Imperium and see something admirable, get lost", and straight-facedly saying "the Imperium's bad" instead of saying it with a bit of a tongue-in-cheek. Basically, to come back to the OP - make it clear that it being "creepy" is the intention and to be expected.

I am a firm advocate of letting people spout whatever nonsense they want, but I also think it's the responsibility of the remaining people who are still sane to challenge that nonsense and say that it is wrong and why.

I definitely agree with the latter, not so much the first.

I heavily disagree with you on most points there. First of all when you say you disagree with my point on letting people freely spout their nonsense. How would you stop that? Prohibiting certain speech? I am sure you would also agree this would be a bad idea.
Also saying that GW has to spell out that the imperium are definitely the bad guys and it should not be in a challenging or tounge and cheek way is really patronizing and, sorry, frankly quite ridiculous.
Again we are talking about fiction here. If someone comes to the conclusion for example that the empire from star wars are in fact the good guys and their autocratic ways are the way to go, are the makers of star wars then morally compelled to issue a statement at the begin of every movie that states: beware! The empire are in fact the bad guys!" I mean come on...

Tiberias wrote:
I heavily disagree with you on most points there. First of all when you say you disagree with my point on letting people freely spout their nonsense. How would you stop that? Prohibiting certain speech? I am sure you would also agree this would be a bad idea.

"Certain speech" that calls for the demonisation of others because of reasons out of their control shouldn't be free. So, no, not a bad idea at all. But that's getting very near to politics (really shouldn't be political though), so I suggest this tangent end there.

Also saying that GW has to spell out that the imperium are definitely the bad guys and it should not be in a challenging or tounge and cheek way is really patronizing and, sorry, frankly quite ridiculous.

I wish it were ridiculous that it needed to be spelled out to some people, but unfortunately, there are those who need to be told that bluntly.
I'm not saying that those people have a point. I'm saying that, regardless if we say they're stupid or not, they're still doing it.

Again we are talking about fiction here. If someone comes to the conclusion for example that the empire from star wars are in fact the good guys and their autocratic ways are the way to go, are the makers of star wars then morally compelled to issue a statement at the begin of every movie that states: beware! The empire are in fact the bad guys!" I mean come on...

I mean... yeah. If a significant portion of the Star Wars fanbase were to turn around and say "yeah guys, the Empire was totally justified in everything it did", I *would* expect something to change regarding depiction of the Empire. But, thankfully, most people who watch Star Wars find it pretty easy to see that the Empire's evil. But 40k? First, you have to deal with the simple nature of anthropocentricism, which will put people on the "humans=good" side anyway, then that you have terms like "heroic" thrown around when talking about certain Imperial factions, and then the sheer amount of "well, sure everyone's a *bad* guy, but the Imperium's not THAT bad" comments that people make? Like, even to someone not familiar with SW, at least they can pretty easily identify who the bad guys are. The same can't be said for 40k, because *everyone* is. And it's okay that everyone's a bad guy - but when there's a fairly significant amount of people missing that, we really ought to consider *why* such a high percentage miss it.

In the context of the 40k universe I like the Imperium personally. Hell, I have the Imperium Flag on my wall, car, and tool chest at work(along with the Inquisition I, and a purity seal). In a real life context it is terrifying, but for the absolute horror (or at least how it was portrayed in the past) of the 41st millennium not as much. I only play Imperial forces (Ultramarines,Grey Knights, Custodes, Imperial Guard in kill team, Imperial Navy and Ultramarines in Battlefleet Gothic, Imperial Navy and IG in Aeronautica Imperialis, and Enforcers in Necromunda). I always viewed it as look how dystopian and totalitarian the Imperium is and they are nominally who you are supposed to root for as the lesser of evils (or weevils as Capt Aubrey would say) or as "a united humanity". Knowing our history I'd say an Imperium (not the "magic" stuff) is more likely than a utopia like Star Trek. I'd rather the system from Star Ship Troopers (the book damn it not the movie) if I had a choice. To be clear I don't want the Imperium to ever be a reality, but I like cheering them (and it's heroes who I do find many of which to be awesome) on in the lore. As for rulebook art? Go back to the grim dark look I say.

"Remind me, how do those ironic non-idiots show up in the ratings?"
"They show up the same, my friend, they show up just the same"

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
I heavily disagree with you on most points there. First of all when you say you disagree with my point on letting people freely spout their nonsense. How would you stop that? Prohibiting certain speech? I am sure you would also agree this would be a bad idea.

"Certain speech" that calls for the demonisation of others because of reasons out of their control shouldn't be free. So, no, not a bad idea at all. But that's getting very near to politics (really shouldn't be political though), so I suggest this tangent end there.

Also saying that GW has to spell out that the imperium are definitely the bad guys and it should not be in a challenging or tounge and cheek way is really patronizing and, sorry, frankly quite ridiculous.

I wish it were ridiculous that it needed to be spelled out to some people, but unfortunately, there are those who need to be told that bluntly.
I'm not saying that those people have a point. I'm saying that, regardless if we say they're stupid or not, they're still doing it.

Again we are talking about fiction here. If someone comes to the conclusion for example that the empire from star wars are in fact the good guys and their autocratic ways are the way to go, are the makers of star wars then morally compelled to issue a statement at the begin of every movie that states: beware! The empire are in fact the bad guys!" I mean come on...

I mean... yeah. If a significant portion of the Star Wars fanbase were to turn around and say "yeah guys, the Empire was totally justified in everything it did", I *would* expect something to change regarding depiction of the Empire. But, thankfully, most people who watch Star Wars find it pretty easy to see that the Empire's evil. But 40k? First, you have to deal with the simple nature of anthropocentricism, which will put people on the "humans=good" side anyway, then that you have terms like "heroic" thrown around when talking about certain Imperial factions, and then the sheer amount of "well, sure everyone's a *bad* guy, but the Imperium's not THAT bad" comments that people make? Like, even to someone not familiar with SW, at least they can pretty easily identify who the bad guys are. The same can't be said for 40k, because *everyone* is. And it's okay that everyone's a bad guy - but when there's a fairly significant amount of people missing that, we really ought to consider *why* such a high percentage miss it.

Since this discussion has remained quite civil, which is really awsome btw, I would not refrain from dicsussing general concepts while leaving specific political discussions at the side.
There are limits to free speech in a real life setting, and there should be. You can not incite explicit calls for violence against people or groups no matter their background ethnicity etc for example. I mean you theoretically can, but then you can be charged for doing so, which is a good thing.
But limiting free speech in art or fiction is a very, very slippery slope and 40k is far from requiring such censorship or warning label in my opinion.

And yes, you are correct discerning the imperium as "the bad guys" in the hellhole that is 40k is more challenging when you compare the imperium to other factions. So yeah, compared to what awaits a lowly imperial citizen in the hands of the chaos gods or dark eldar for example, the imperium isn't that bad. This is what makes the whole setting interesting in the first place, as I eluded towards in one of my previous posts. The ways of this horrible imperium of man only "make sense" in the grueling setting of 40k.

If some people can't understand that or want to draw some conclusions to include "lessons" from 40k lore into their real life political values, then those people can and will do the same with star wars, dune and every religious text ever written. Are you gonna put a warning label on the bad parts of every religious book ever written? These can also warp people pretty badly if misused.

And yes I know lets NOT get into religion specifically please, but my point is more on free speech I am NOT saying this or that specific religion is bad! There are some parts in most religions I heavily disagree with, but I will always fight for the right of the pracititioners so practice their religion in piece. I will adress the parts I do not like though, in a civil manner.

So gain, censoring 40k is absolutely not necessary and goes against my understanding of free speech and artistic freedom.

The discussen on these last pages seems to have shifted rather sharply, let's just say that I don't believe Warhammer 40k or similar works are in need of a disclaimer and that I dread any political influence by those who think it does.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Tiberias wrote:Do people really though? Or are there more people outraged about some people posting dumb quotes on the internet to try to be edgy or funny?

As far as I'm concerned, there's not a difference. Someone posting fashy stuff as a joke or because they genuinely believe it is still posting it. Someone behaving just a bit too "Imperial" in a hobby store is still doing it, even if it's a joke.

Heaven forbid people cosplay or get into character as anything other than the good guys.
Not that there are any good guys in 40k of course.


We should probably stop people playing the game at all come to think of it, since whatever side you play your glorifying horrific things. Better ban the PC games and the books too! Might get people being a little bit too Sisters-of-battley, or a little bit Tauish.

This isn't even mistakeable for OP's point, and I don't believe you thought it was when you chose to pretend as much.

What people are arguing for - and approving of - is GW doing more to reaffirm the fundamentals of the 40k universe, ie that there are no good guys here, and trying to map your political ideology to the IoM makes you look goofy. In other words, leaning back into the grimdark that made the brand iconic in the first place, as with the baby bolters.

It's not a question of free speech, it's a question of who you're choosing to foster in your playerbase and why. Nobody wants to sit across a gameboard from a guy who's spending the rest of his weekend preaching to a Youtube following that they're subhuman, much less doing it openly in the store. You can only choose to encourage one of the two - which is it to be?

You may think it's obvious IoM are awful already. I might even think it's obvious. But it's less obvious than it used to be, and clearly enough people don't find it so obvious that they're too embarrassed to try using them as a totem anyway.

GW has a corporate and community responsibility to make the ground as stony as reasonably possible for those people, and I'm heartened to see signs it recognizes as much.

The idea that the Imperium is 'necessary' is not something I remember seeing much ten or twenty years ago. IMO it rather misses the point of the setting; it turns it from a satire of authoritarianism into outright totalitarian/fascist fantasy.

I mean, we have a universe in which a galaxy-spanning totalitarian ethnostate perseveres under the guidance of a Great Leader, needing extreme measures of authority to defend against universally hostile aliens (with whom no negotiation or peace is possible) and subterfuge from within by (((heretics))), with policies of extermination carried out by a caste of ubermensch as routine, and with the entire civilization given over to a war footing. If that's not satirical, it's just The Iron Dream played straight.

I have to wonder how much of that perception has to do with the straight-faced presentation of Imperials, particularly Space Marines, as good guys. When they're both the heroic protagonists and the face of the setting, it's hard to read it as critical of them, their actions, or the society they defend. I think GW's put themselves in a rather difficult position with wanting to sanitize their protagonists for mass-market appeal, but in the process downplaying the negative characteristics that are necessary to avoid it reading like apologism for the Imperium. Gradually, it reads less like things are awful because the Imperium made it awful and continues to make it worse, and more like things are awful despite the best efforts of our noble heroes who rage against the dying of the light.

If there are people with a more surface-level understanding of the setting who are looking at the overtly grim, horrific imagery in the rulebook and asking 'are we the baddies?', then I think it's performing a necessary function.

 catbarf wrote:
Gradually, it reads less like things are awful because the Imperium made it awful and continues to make it worse, and more like things are awful despite the best efforts of our noble heroes who rage against the dying of the light.

If there are people with a more surface-level understanding of the setting who are looking at the overtly grim, horrific imagery in the rulebook and asking 'are we the baddies?', then I think it's performing a necessary function.

This. Since the addition of guilliman, warhammer 30k (and the introduction of that lore to 40k with many many many important characters and factions like the SOS and the Custodes who just "happen" to remember the events of 10,000 years ago with perfect accuracy and clarity) I have seen a great resurgence in folks who want to view the imperium as "only cruel because it has to be".

Events in the lore (like the recent story where the Custodes and SOS slaughter a bunch of probably totally heresy-free Primaris marines because their Firstborn cousins went Renegade) make these people EXTREMELY uncomfortable and they tend to get immediately up in arms. Because it portrays a Custode acting...exactly as someone who believes in the Imperium's ideology would act, and creating a problem for the imperium in doing so (the first canonical Primaris Renegades).

"the imperium creates its own problems" is absolutely a theme that is coming up less and less and less in the lore, particularly when that lore involves the factions within the imperium that people love to love.

the_scotsman wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
Gradually, it reads less like things are awful because the Imperium made it awful and continues to make it worse, and more like things are awful despite the best efforts of our noble heroes who rage against the dying of the light.

If there are people with a more surface-level understanding of the setting who are looking at the overtly grim, horrific imagery in the rulebook and asking 'are we the baddies?', then I think it's performing a necessary function.

This. Since the addition of guilliman, warhammer 30k (and the introduction of that lore to 40k with many many many important characters and factions like the SOS and the Custodes who just "happen" to remember the events of 10,000 years ago with perfect accuracy and clarity) I have seen a great resurgence in folks who want to view the imperium as "only cruel because it has to be".

Events in the lore (like the recent story where the Custodes and SOS slaughter a bunch of probably totally heresy-free Primaris marines because their Firstborn cousins went Renegade) make these people EXTREMELY uncomfortable and they tend to get immediately up in arms. Because it portrays a Custode acting...exactly as someone who believes in the Imperium's ideology would act, and creating a problem for the imperium in doing so (the first canonical Primaris Renegades).

"the imperium creates its own problems" is absolutely a theme that is coming up less and less and less in the lore, particularly when that lore involves the factions within the imperium that people love to love.

You definitely have a point with that. That is how I want to see the Imperium and therefore it is hoe I see them since it is fiction. To me the Imperium is the flickering light (not pure by any means) standing against pure horror thatvwants the destruction and enslavement of the Human species. Lol I know alot if people don't see it that way and it did start as a satire but the novels and newer lore have moved away from that (and to be fair I only read novels from the Imperium's pov). Especially since I play Ultras. Now that does not mean I ever want a human power to become that in reality.

the_scotsman wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
Gradually, it reads less like things are awful because the Imperium made it awful and continues to make it worse, and more like things are awful despite the best efforts of our noble heroes who rage against the dying of the light.

If there are people with a more surface-level understanding of the setting who are looking at the overtly grim, horrific imagery in the rulebook and asking 'are we the baddies?', then I think it's performing a necessary function.

This. Since the addition of guilliman, warhammer 30k (and the introduction of that lore to 40k with many many many important characters and factions like the SOS and the Custodes who just "happen" to remember the events of 10,000 years ago with perfect accuracy and clarity) I have seen a great resurgence in folks who want to view the imperium as "only cruel because it has to be".

Events in the lore (like the recent story where the Custodes and SOS slaughter a bunch of probably totally heresy-free Primaris marines because their Firstborn cousins went Renegade) make these people EXTREMELY uncomfortable and they tend to get immediately up in arms. Because it portrays a Custode acting...exactly as someone who believes in the Imperium's ideology would act, and creating a problem for the imperium in doing so (the first canonical Primaris Renegades).

"the imperium creates its own problems" is absolutely a theme that is coming up less and less and less in the lore, particularly when that lore involves the factions within the imperium that people love to love.

Well the story about the brazen drakes is quite recent so they still at least publish lore like that. But even if the custodes didn't kill those brazen drakes, they wouldn't automatically be "the good guys" that endorse the ways of the imperium or embody the good guys quite the opposite.
I've written this time and time again. The custodes are one of the last factions that remember the origin vision the emperor had for the imperium and they have the skills, knowledge and tech to further that vision, yet for ten thousand years they chose not to do it. Still, they lament the state of the imperium,even look down on it. Which makes them massive hypocrites. They lack the vision and initiative to act on their own on most things that does not concern the safety of the emperor or holy Terra (maybe the sol system). They also often act as completely uncharismatic, arrogant buffoons, who make horrible desicions despite their recources and training.
This is what makes them interesting.

With guilliman it's a similar thing. He woke up to a complete craphole of an imperium. A perverted version of what he fought for initially (though the primarchs weren't exactly good guys during the crusade but still...) and now he has to pick up the pieces and try to reform that rotting moloch of an empire. A task which he will most likely not succeed in doing.
This is what makes the recent "good" characters interesting imo, their efforts are ultimately in vain and they probably know it too.

And leaving all that aside. Guilliman and all the other primarchs are still and always have been, genocidal warlords even by the standards of 40k.

 catbarf wrote:
The idea that the Imperium is 'necessary' is not something I remember seeing much ten or twenty years ago. IMO it rather misses the point of the setting; it turns it from a satire of authoritarianism into outright totalitarian/fascist fantasy.

I mean, we have a universe in which a galaxy-spanning totalitarian ethnostate perseveres under the guidance of a Great Leader, needing extreme measures of authority to defend against universally hostile aliens (with whom no negotiation or peace is possible) and subterfuge from within by (((heretics))), with policies of extermination carried out by a caste of ubermensch as routine, and with the entire civilization given over to a war footing. If that's not satirical, it's just The Iron Dream played straight.

I have to wonder how much of that perception has to do with the straight-faced presentation of Imperials, particularly Space Marines, as good guys. When they're both the heroic protagonists and the face of the setting, it's hard to read it as critical of them, their actions, or the society they defend. I think GW's put themselves in a rather difficult position with wanting to sanitize their protagonists for mass-market appeal, but in the process downplaying the negative characteristics that are necessary to avoid it reading like apologism for the Imperium. Gradually, it reads less like things are awful because the Imperium made it awful and continues to make it worse, and more like things are awful despite the best efforts of our noble heroes who rage against the dying of the light.

If there are people with a more surface-level understanding of the setting who are looking at the overtly grim, horrific imagery in the rulebook and asking 'are we the baddies?', then I think it's performing a necessary function.

Bruh, don't use the triple parenthesis, especially when discussing this topic... Might give the wrong impression.

Tiberias wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
Gradually, it reads less like things are awful because the Imperium made it awful and continues to make it worse, and more like things are awful despite the best efforts of our noble heroes who rage against the dying of the light.

If there are people with a more surface-level understanding of the setting who are looking at the overtly grim, horrific imagery in the rulebook and asking 'are we the baddies?', then I think it's performing a necessary function.

This. Since the addition of guilliman, warhammer 30k (and the introduction of that lore to 40k with many many many important characters and factions like the SOS and the Custodes who just "happen" to remember the events of 10,000 years ago with perfect accuracy and clarity) I have seen a great resurgence in folks who want to view the imperium as "only cruel because it has to be".

Events in the lore (like the recent story where the Custodes and SOS slaughter a bunch of probably totally heresy-free Primaris marines because their Firstborn cousins went Renegade) make these people EXTREMELY uncomfortable and they tend to get immediately up in arms. Because it portrays a Custode acting...exactly as someone who believes in the Imperium's ideology would act, and creating a problem for the imperium in doing so (the first canonical Primaris Renegades).

"the imperium creates its own problems" is absolutely a theme that is coming up less and less and less in the lore, particularly when that lore involves the factions within the imperium that people love to love.

Well the story about the brazen drakes is quite recent so they still at least publish lore like that. But even if the custodes didn't kill those brazen drakes, they wouldn't automatically be "the good guys" that endorse the ways of the imperium or embody the good guys quite the opposite.
I've written this time and time again. The custodes are one of the last factions that remember the origin vision the emperor had for the imperium and they have the skills, knowledge and tech to further that vision, yet for ten thousand years they chose not to do it. Still, they lament the state of the imperium,even look down on it. Which makes them massive hypocrites. They lack the vision and initiative to act on their own on most things that does not concern the safety of the emperor or holy Terra (maybe the sol system). They also often act as completely uncharismatic, arrogant buffoons, who make horrible desicions despite their recources and training.
This is what makes them interesting.

With guilliman it's a similar thing. He woke up to a complete craphole of an imperium. A perverted version of what he fought for initially (though the primarchs weren't exactly good guys during the crusade but still...) and now he has to pick up the pieces and try to reform that rotting moloch of an empire. A task which he will most likely not succeed in doing.
This is what makes the recent "good" characters interesting imo, their efforts are ultimately in vain and they probably know it too.

And leaving all that aside. Guilliman and all the other primarchs are still and always have been, genocidal warlords even by the standards of 40k.

Images stick with people more than text. Every bit of text in 40k could have the space marines constantly, consistently portrayed as the baddest worst bad guys and the chaos space marines portrayed as unequivocally the heroes of the setting, and a large number of people would view the marines as the good guys. https://i.redd.it/mvkbm0ktks351.jpg this isn't an image of "a genocidal warlord even by the standards of 40k" that is an image of a hero you're supposed to look at and say "I am going to imagine myself as THAT GUY!"

Even if 100% every single punisher novel and issue hit the core themes of the punisher 100% perfectly, constantly and consistently portraying him as perpetuating a cycle of violence and at least as bad if not worse than the criminals he guns down (since he often responds to "something that is not murder but is a crime" with "murder") if you kept the images the same people would still be wearing punisher T-shirts and indicating that they're like that guy.

the_scotsman wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
Gradually, it reads less like things are awful because the Imperium made it awful and continues to make it worse, and more like things are awful despite the best efforts of our noble heroes who rage against the dying of the light.

If there are people with a more surface-level understanding of the setting who are looking at the overtly grim, horrific imagery in the rulebook and asking 'are we the baddies?', then I think it's performing a necessary function.

This. Since the addition of guilliman, warhammer 30k (and the introduction of that lore to 40k with many many many important characters and factions like the SOS and the Custodes who just "happen" to remember the events of 10,000 years ago with perfect accuracy and clarity) I have seen a great resurgence in folks who want to view the imperium as "only cruel because it has to be".

Events in the lore (like the recent story where the Custodes and SOS slaughter a bunch of probably totally heresy-free Primaris marines because their Firstborn cousins went Renegade) make these people EXTREMELY uncomfortable and they tend to get immediately up in arms. Because it portrays a Custode acting...exactly as someone who believes in the Imperium's ideology would act, and creating a problem for the imperium in doing so (the first canonical Primaris Renegades).

"the imperium creates its own problems" is absolutely a theme that is coming up less and less and less in the lore, particularly when that lore involves the factions within the imperium that people love to love.

Well the story about the brazen drakes is quite recent so they still at least publish lore like that. But even if the custodes didn't kill those brazen drakes, they wouldn't automatically be "the good guys" that endorse the ways of the imperium or embody the good guys quite the opposite.
I've written this time and time again. The custodes are one of the last factions that remember the origin vision the emperor had for the imperium and they have the skills, knowledge and tech to further that vision, yet for ten thousand years they chose not to do it. Still, they lament the state of the imperium,even look down on it. Which makes them massive hypocrites. They lack the vision and initiative to act on their own on most things that does not concern the safety of the emperor or holy Terra (maybe the sol system). They also often act as completely uncharismatic, arrogant buffoons, who make horrible desicions despite their recources and training.
This is what makes them interesting.

With guilliman it's a similar thing. He woke up to a complete craphole of an imperium. A perverted version of what he fought for initially (though the primarchs weren't exactly good guys during the crusade but still...) and now he has to pick up the pieces and try to reform that rotting moloch of an empire. A task which he will most likely not succeed in doing.
This is what makes the recent "good" characters interesting imo, their efforts are ultimately in vain and they probably know it too.

And leaving all that aside. Guilliman and all the other primarchs are still and always have been, genocidal warlords even by the standards of 40k.

Images stick with people more than text. Every bit of text in 40k could have the space marines constantly, consistently portrayed as the baddest worst bad guys and the chaos space marines portrayed as unequivocally the heroes of the setting, and a large number of people would view the marines as the good guys. https://i.redd.it/mvkbm0ktks351.jpg this isn't an image of "a genocidal warlord even by the standards of 40k" that is an image of a hero you're supposed to look at and say "I am going to imagine myself as THAT GUY!"

Even if 100% every single punisher novel and issue hit the core themes of the punisher 100% perfectly, constantly and consistently portraying him as perpetuating a cycle of violence and at least as bad if not worse than the criminals he guns down (since he often responds to "something that is not murder but is a crime" with "murder") if you kept the images the same people would still be wearing punisher T-shirts and indicating that they're like that guy.

I agree! He es depicted as an angelic figure against the demonic figure of abaddon. But here's the thing within the bounds of the fictional universe of 40k he is that angelic figure for the citizens of the imperium, he does actually fight for them.
Does that mean he is a good guy by our real life standards? No, no no!

But this is what I meant with my point about artistic freedom and free speech. Within the confines of your fictional universe that character might be a good guy, but only compared to the myrad of guys who are even worse by a considerable margin.

I honestly don't get at all what 'artistic freedom' and 'free speech' have to do with any of this.

This thread is a bunch of individuals voicing opinions on an image being present.

And you seem to be arguing against the people who are in favor of the image being present...by saying that they want to limit free speech?

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
It is though? You had Jack Chick talking about how DnD is secretly making kids worship the devil, just as you have gits claiming that the IoM is great because its fascist or the setting is evil because its fascist and it somehow makes people nazis or some nonsense.
If you encountered such people in person you must have terrible luck, because in all of my years I haven't encountered such folks.

The issue here, and why it's unlike somebody like Chick, Gore, or Thompson, is that these people don't hate the game. They love what they perceive its message to be and wish to co-opt it to promote their own hideous world views. GW can't have that because there is no fast way for a product to become publicly untouchable than to have the skinheads and KKK approving of it without making a formal rebuke and addressing the reasons they've come to your product.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
No, certainly not. I'm talking about making CLEAR that the Imperium are evil, with essentially statements of "hey, if you look at the Imperium and see something admirable, get lost", and straight-facedly saying "the Imperium's bad" instead of saying it with a bit of a tongue-in-cheek.

Basically what they did on Twitter (see sig), but in the medium itself, then?

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
It is though? You had Jack Chick talking about how DnD is secretly making kids worship the devil, just as you have gits claiming that the IoM is great because its fascist or the setting is evil because its fascist and it somehow makes people nazis or some nonsense.
If you encountered such people in person you must have terrible luck, because in all of my years I haven't encountered such folks.

The issue here, and why it's unlike somebody like Chick, Gore, or Thompson, is that these people don't hate the game. They love what they perceive its message to be and wish to co-opt it to promote their own hideous world views. GW can't have that because there is no fast way for a product to become publicly untouchable than to have the skinheads and KKK approving of it without making a formal rebuke and addressing the reasons they've come to your product.

Can't quite see the KKK or neo-Nazis in particular endorsing a game that has ALL of humanity fighting on the same side, brutal totalitarian state or not. The art is brutal and dark (especially in the past) but it doesn't quite fit their ideology.

the_scotsman wrote:
I honestly don't get at all what 'artistic freedom' and 'free speech' have to do with any of this.

This thread is a bunch of individuals voicing opinions on an image being present.

And you seem to be arguing against the people who are in favor of the image being present...by saying that they want to limit free speech?

Wait what? Either I am really terrible getting my point across or you really missed my point, maybe a bit of both.

I am arguing against censoring such images and putting warning labels on 40k lore. Doing these things goes against my understanding of free speech and artistic freedom. This was also the point in contention.

Freedom of speech and artistic freedom has everything to do with it. Warning labels or censoring won't stop people from drawing false conclusions or lessons from 40k lore if they are hellbent on doing so, they will just migrate to another fictional universe or religious text and do the same thing there.
You can only try to talk to and educate such people, but that is not the responsibility of GW and authors writing for black library, since again, this is a fictional universe.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
It is though? You had Jack Chick talking about how DnD is secretly making kids worship the devil, just as you have gits claiming that the IoM is great because its fascist or the setting is evil because its fascist and it somehow makes people nazis or some nonsense.
If you encountered such people in person you must have terrible luck, because in all of my years I haven't encountered such folks.

The issue here, and why it's unlike somebody like Chick, Gore, or Thompson, is that these people don't hate the game. They love what they perceive its message to be and wish to co-opt it to promote their own hideous world views. GW can't have that because there is no fast way for a product to become publicly untouchable than to have the skinheads and KKK approving of it without making a formal rebuke and addressing the reasons they've come to your product.

So? Charles Manson thought Helter Skelter was great, and Chapman thought Catcher in the Rye was a great book and murdering John Lennon was his way of showing tribute.
There will always be crazy arseholes who like a work of fiction and try to use it for their own ends. Changing the work to fight them is pointless, as then there'd be no works left, just the same bland timid mess devoid of anything that could possibly be used by extremists.
Especially when there's nothing wrong with the work to begin with.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
So? Charles Manson thought Helter Skelter was great, and Chapman thought Catcher in the Rye was a great book and murdering John Lennon was his way of showing tribute.
There will always be crazy arseholes who like a work of fiction and try to use it for their own ends.

Once is happenstance.
Twice is coincidence.
Thrice is enemy action.
If we get dozens of Manson wannabe all going off Helter Skelter, rational people are going to at least start asking questions and investigating about why.

 WhiteHaven wrote:
Can't quite see the KKK or neo-Nazis in particular endorsing a game that has ALL of humanity fighting on the same side, brutal totalitarian state or not. The art is brutal and dark (especially in the past) but it doesn't quite fit their ideology.

That's allegedly what's going on here. If I was GW and I caught even the barest whiff of that going around I'd act quickly to prevent it from taking root.

Tiberias wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I honestly don't get at all what 'artistic freedom' and 'free speech' have to do with any of this.

This thread is a bunch of individuals voicing opinions on an image being present.

And you seem to be arguing against the people who are in favor of the image being present...by saying that they want to limit free speech?

Wait what? Either I am really terrible getting my point across or you really missed my point, maybe a bit of both.

I am arguing against censoring such images and putting warning labels on 40k lore. Doing these things goes against my understanding of free speech and artistic freedom. This was also the point in contention.

Freedom of speech and artistic freedom has everything to do with it. Warning labels or censoring won't stop people from drawing false conclusions or lessons from 40k lore if they are hellbent on doing so, they will just migrate to another fictional universe or religious text and do the same thing there.
You can only try to talk to and educate such people, but that is not the responsibility of GW and authors writing for black library, since again, this is a fictional universe.

Sure.

...But that's not what people you appear to be arguing against are actually arguing for.

Art, particularly images, portraying the worst parts of the imperium is exactly what the game needs more of. For example, I hope that the "Servo-piloted" turret primaris are going to be getting actually does feature a Servitor primaris marine strapped into it and lobotomized to basically just act as a targeting computer.

Make it clear that primaris are just tools, no more important to the imperium as a whole as the guns that they're holding. If all the imperium needs from their brain is the capability to aim and fire a stationary turret, then sure, just strap him in and remove all those pesky motor functions and conscious decision making.

 catbarf wrote:
The idea that the Imperium is 'necessary' is not something I remember seeing much ten or twenty years ago. IMO it rather misses the point of the setting; it turns it from a satire of authoritarianism into outright totalitarian/fascist fantasy.

It is kind of necessary, but only because several matters have been handled so poorly or the deck has been so heavily stacked against them that the IoM really does have to do what it can to survive. And that's tragic. Much like the film Brazil, its a satire but its also tragic with what society had turned into.
Frostpunk has a similar premise. In that game you can do all sorts of horrible stuff, even establish a dictatorship, and the message at the end is basically "ok, so you lived, but at what cost? Your soul? All the progress and sacrifices that your ancestors have made to give you the liberties that you had? Wouldn't it have been better to just die?"

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
So? Charles Manson thought Helter Skelter was great, and Chapman thought Catcher in the Rye was a great book and murdering John Lennon was his way of showing tribute.

Individuals versus groups. One person, with a handful of devotees, isn't a huge issue next to a group with roots in multiple regions. It's like comparing a lone wolf style mass shooting versus a sustained military action or well funded terrorist group. One is bad, the other is an international issue.

There will always be crazy arseholes who like a work of fiction and try to use it for their own ends. Changing the work to fight them is pointless, as then there'd be no works left, just the same bland timid mess devoid of anything that could possibly be used by extremists.
Especially when there's nothing wrong with the work to begin with.

That claim makes no sense given that GW did the opposite of making 40k blander by doubling down on just how grim and dark the IoM is supposed to be.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
So? Charles Manson thought Helter Skelter was great, and Chapman thought Catcher in the Rye was a great book and murdering John Lennon was his way of showing tribute.
There will always be crazy arseholes who like a work of fiction and try to use it for their own ends.

Once is happenstance.
Twice is coincidence.
Thrice is enemy action.
If we get dozens of Manson wannabe all going off Helter Skelter, rational people are going to at least start asking questions and investigating about why.

Those are called copy cats. Which have everything to do with the individuals and not with the work.
See: The Catcher in the Rye shootings.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
It is though? You had Jack Chick talking about how DnD is secretly making kids worship the devil, just as you have gits claiming that the IoM is great because its fascist or the setting is evil because its fascist and it somehow makes people nazis or some nonsense.
If you encountered such people in person you must have terrible luck, because in all of my years I haven't encountered such folks.

The issue here, and why it's unlike somebody like Chick, Gore, or Thompson, is that these people don't hate the game. They love what they perceive its message to be and wish to co-opt it to promote their own hideous world views. GW can't have that because there is no fast way for a product to become publicly untouchable than to have the skinheads and KKK approving of it without making a formal rebuke and addressing the reasons they've come to your product.

So? Charles Manson thought Helter Skelter was great, and Chapman thought Catcher in the Rye was a great book and murdering John Lennon was his way of showing tribute.
There will always be crazy arseholes who like a work of fiction and try to use it for their own ends. Changing the work to fight them is pointless, as then there'd be no works left, just the same bland timid mess devoid of anything that could possibly be used by extremists.
Especially when there's nothing wrong with the work to begin with.

Worth noting that in this instance, however, the people doing the changing here are the ones making it less satirical.

The farther back in the lore you read, the more and more you'll see the imperium depicted as brutal, and the more and more you'll see the imperium being portrayed as causing their own problems through their brutality.

Space Marines and imperium higher-ups as heroic omniscient cartoon heroes that fully understand the technology they use, fully grasp all aspects of all situations, remember with perfect clarity the distant past and only ever display the brutality of the imperium when they are proven eventually to be correct is a new development. It's not where the lore of the game started from.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
So? Charles Manson thought Helter Skelter was great, and Chapman thought Catcher in the Rye was a great book and murdering John Lennon was his way of showing tribute.

Individuals versus groups. One person, with a handful of devotees, isn't a huge issue next to a group with roots in multiple regions. It's like comparing a lone wolf style mass shooting versus a sustained military action or well funded terrorist group. One is bad, the other is an international issue.

There will always be crazy arseholes who like a work of fiction and try to use it for their own ends. Changing the work to fight them is pointless, as then there'd be no works left, just the same bland timid mess devoid of anything that could possibly be used by extremists.
Especially when there's nothing wrong with the work to begin with.

That claim makes no sense given that GW did the opposite of making 40k blander by doubling down on just how grim and dark the IoM is supposed to be.

I really doubt that a niche hobby is going to start the Fourth Reich.

GW's approach is the correct one though. I just don't think it has that much to do with this perceived rise of warhammer nazis, and more to do with the perception that 40k was getting soft.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I really doubt that a niche hobby is going to start the Fourth Reich.

I never said it would. I pointed out that allowing such a group to put down roots in your game's community is a bad thing and one which a company would be smart to worry about.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Canadian 5th wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
So? Charles Manson thought Helter Skelter was great, and Chapman thought Catcher in the Rye was a great book and murdering John Lennon was his way of showing tribute.

Individuals versus groups. One person, with a handful of devotees, isn't a huge issue next to a group with roots in multiple regions. It's like comparing a lone wolf style mass shooting versus a sustained military action or well funded terrorist group. One is bad, the other is an international issue.

There will always be crazy arseholes who like a work of fiction and try to use it for their own ends. Changing the work to fight them is pointless, as then there'd be no works left, just the same bland timid mess devoid of anything that could possibly be used by extremists.
Especially when there's nothing wrong with the work to begin with.

That claim makes no sense given that GW did the opposite of making 40k blander by doubling down on just how grim and dark the IoM is supposed to be.

I really doubt that a niche hobby is going to start the Fourth Reich.

GW's approach is the correct one though. I just don't think it has that much to do with this perceived rise of warhammer nazis, and more to do with the perception that 40k was getting soft.

Yeah I honestly don't think the first factors into it at all. they wanted to "de-kiddify" the art a little bit so there's some more spooky geiger grooble in the new rulebook.

GW's prices have long since gotten past the point where they are even slightly targeting kids with their actual miniature game products. Little timmy ain't affording a 250$ starter box no way no how.

Alright, this is straying into just politics now. I'm outta this one folks.

the_scotsman wrote:
Alright, this is straying into just politics now. I'm outta this one folks.

Yeah, I've backed out already, because I don't see this going well on it's current tangent (which I fully admit to having steered this way).

From a quick google search regarding fascism and 40k:

Fun fact, you can find the same kind of links if you search for fascism and My Little Pony. Or fascism and Steven Universe. Shows that are explicitly primarily about caring about other people
Or even, and I typed this in as a joke, fascism and Teletubbies.

Whatever hay you're trying to make out of derailing onto this subject, you're coming off as the butt of a joke.

There are always people that are going to try to use <thing> as a platform for <ideology>. It doesn't matter which thing or which ideology. Usually multiple people will claim the same thing supports multiple <ideologies>. Caring about what idiots think only gives them legitimacy.

Voss wrote:

From a quick google search regarding fascism and 40k:

Fun fact, you can find the same kind of links if you search for fascism and My Little Pony. Or fascism and Steven Universe. Shows that are explicitly primarily about caring about other people
Or even, and I typed this in as a joke, fascism and Teletubbies.

There are always people that are going to try to use <thing> as a platform for <ideology>. It doesn't matter which thing or which ideology. Usually multiple people will claim the same thing supports multiple <ideologies>. Caring about what idiots think only gives them legitimacy.

The issue is that a normie can look at those silly examples and easily see them for silly. When they look at 40k and see the 'good guys' being hard men who do hard things while hard the line can look far more blurred. This isn't to say that it's any less silly overall, just that public perception is a fickle thing and one that GW may want to address in fluff and with a PR statement or two.

Also, I'm not even the one who started it. I'm just pointing out that if GW did add a little more grim dark and disturbing to 40k to curb this nonsense than that is a good thing. If they did it for another reason and this tangent ends up being about nothing that's good too.

Yeah, I think the image GW is trying to avoid is:

The "Good Guy" humans are united against a hateful OTHER (whether that be scheming and conniving 'friends' like the Eldar, outright genocidal murderers, literal hordes of Orcs, or whatever) and in order to survive, these Good Guys must be Hard Men making Hard Decisions and doing Hard Things in a Hard World while Hard.

GW needs to dial back the "good guy humans" bit and play up the "good guy OTHER" bit, I think. So you get the Aeldari and Necrons actually achieving goals and cooperating on friendly terms with humans against a common enemy (Ynnari stuff with Guilliman, necrons with Cawl over Cadia, the same theme with Eldar, Orks, and Humans in Dawn of War III...)

I think the rulebook is doing the opposite - while those stories played up the OTHER as being actual creatures and not just boltgun fodder, the rulebook art and whatnot plays down the "imperium is a good place full of good people doing What They Have To as Hard Men in a Hard World" in favor of "no, actually, the imperium has copious amounts of unnecessary suffering and bizarre fetishization of different imagery, including fetusguns"

the_scotsman wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
I honestly don't get at all what 'artistic freedom' and 'free speech' have to do with any of this.

This thread is a bunch of individuals voicing opinions on an image being present.

And you seem to be arguing against the people who are in favor of the image being present...by saying that they want to limit free speech?

Wait what? Either I am really terrible getting my point across or you really missed my point, maybe a bit of both.

I am arguing against censoring such images and putting warning labels on 40k lore. Doing these things goes against my understanding of free speech and artistic freedom. This was also the point in contention.

Freedom of speech and artistic freedom has everything to do with it. Warning labels or censoring won't stop people from drawing false conclusions or lessons from 40k lore if they are hellbent on doing so, they will just migrate to another fictional universe or religious text and do the same thing there.
You can only try to talk to and educate such people, but that is not the responsibility of GW and authors writing for black library, since again, this is a fictional universe.

Sure.

...But that's not what people you appear to be arguing against are actually arguing for.

Art, particularly images, portraying the worst parts of the imperium is exactly what the game needs more of. For example, I hope that the "Servo-piloted" turret primaris are going to be getting actually does feature a Servitor primaris marine strapped into it and lobotomized to basically just act as a targeting computer.

Make it clear that primaris are just tools, no more important to the imperium as a whole as the guns that they're holding. If all the imperium needs from their brain is the capability to aim and fire a stationary turret, then sure, just strap him in and remove all those pesky motor functions and conscious decision making.

Yes sure, but one point in contention was that 40k could need some sort of warning label or placative statement that the imperium are in fact the bad guys, which is what I am against, but whatever this thread has outlived itself. However I really honestly want to thank the people I have conversed with here, for having a civil discussion. On dakka, I am shocked and happy at the same time

 Grimtuff wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
The idea that the Imperium is 'necessary' is not something I remember seeing much ten or twenty years ago. IMO it rather misses the point of the setting; it turns it from a satire of authoritarianism into outright totalitarian/fascist fantasy.

I mean, we have a universe in which a galaxy-spanning totalitarian ethnostate perseveres under the guidance of a Great Leader, needing extreme measures of authority to defend against universally hostile aliens (with whom no negotiation or peace is possible) and subterfuge from within by (((heretics))), with policies of extermination carried out by a caste of ubermensch as routine, and with the entire civilization given over to a war footing. If that's not satirical, it's just The Iron Dream played straight.

I have to wonder how much of that perception has to do with the straight-faced presentation of Imperials, particularly Space Marines, as good guys. When they're both the heroic protagonists and the face of the setting, it's hard to read it as critical of them, their actions, or the society they defend. I think GW's put themselves in a rather difficult position with wanting to sanitize their protagonists for mass-market appeal, but in the process downplaying the negative characteristics that are necessary to avoid it reading like apologism for the Imperium. Gradually, it reads less like things are awful because the Imperium made it awful and continues to make it worse, and more like things are awful despite the best efforts of our noble heroes who rage against the dying of the light.

If there are people with a more surface-level understanding of the setting who are looking at the overtly grim, horrific imagery in the rulebook and asking 'are we the baddies?', then I think it's performing a necessary function.

Bruh, don't use the triple parenthesis, especially when discussing this topic... Might give the wrong impression.

Respectfully, that was my point- taken at face value, the setting reads like a thinly-veiled pro-fascist allegory. As the Imperials present it, all outsiders are monsters seeking the destruction of the human master race, and are fit only for extermination. Seemingly peaceful immigrants are secretly working to subvert populations to foreign powers. Traitors are among the populace, and must be rooted out and purged. The Imperium is so mighty that it spans the entire galaxy, but is constantly under such threat that constant war footing and total subservience to the state are required. Questioning the great leader is not only disallowed, it warrants summary execution. The angels of this empire are a race of supermen who enact its will through raw violence. It's really not hard to draw unsavory parallels.

Which, obviously, was originally all intentional, because it was built as a satire overtly criticizing those beliefs. The Imperials with these views were blinkered extremists, and made stupid decisions that worked out worse for them in the long run. Some of the aliens weren't actually secretly harboring an agenda of total extermination, and cooperation would be mutually beneficial- but oops, the Imperium's rabid xenophobia ruined that. Others were only aggressive because humanity provoked them, in a self-fulfilling prophecy. The authoritarian elements claimed that technology must be zealously guarded, while other upstart civilizations developed rapidly without the constraints of religious dogma on technological innovation. The Imperium was slowly coming to rest in a grave it dug for itself, even while the people in it saw themselves as heroes.

But the more the writers actually validate the Imperium's views, the less satirical it becomes. Oh, I guess the Tau really are closet authoritarians using mind-control on their subservient populations. Oh, I guess everything technological does have an AI 'soul' and the AdMech approach to technology is really pure scientific rationalism rather than religious zealotry. Oh, I guess Chaos really can take root from one person thinking a bad thought, and murdering thousands of innocents to stop it is perfectly justified. Huh, so maybe the Imperium actually is a rational, logical, necessary state, and perpetuating this hideously oppressive authoritarianism and all the evil it entails is a good thing. Hey, and these Space Marines carrying out the purges are actually noble, brotherly heroes after all!

And then it's like, yeah, no gak actual fascists flock to it. Without that element of satire, it's not making fun of them; instead it gives them a power fantasy where they can indulge their worldview and while being considered the good guys and with plausible deniability.

This is a bad look for a public corporation, and GW is clearly already aware of it. I don't think the game needs a warning label, it just needs to return to being up-front about 'there are no good guys here' rather than 'here's three hundred pages of glorious Space Marines upholding their brotherhood of honor and courage as the Defenders of Humanity'. Less bending over backwards to rationally justify everything the Imperium does, more acknowledgment that they're bad people who do bad things for bad reasons. Less told exclusively from the Imperial perspective, more from the perspective of the people they're trying to exterminate. Then the Imperials can consider their system 'necessary', while a more objective reader recognizes the lie.

 catbarf wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
The idea that the Imperium is 'necessary' is not something I remember seeing much ten or twenty years ago. IMO it rather misses the point of the setting; it turns it from a satire of authoritarianism into outright totalitarian/fascist fantasy.

I mean, we have a universe in which a galaxy-spanning totalitarian ethnostate perseveres under the guidance of a Great Leader, needing extreme measures of authority to defend against universally hostile aliens (with whom no negotiation or peace is possible) and subterfuge from within by (((heretics))), with policies of extermination carried out by a caste of ubermensch as routine, and with the entire civilization given over to a war footing. If that's not satirical, it's just The Iron Dream played straight.

I have to wonder how much of that perception has to do with the straight-faced presentation of Imperials, particularly Space Marines, as good guys. When they're both the heroic protagonists and the face of the setting, it's hard to read it as critical of them, their actions, or the society they defend. I think GW's put themselves in a rather difficult position with wanting to sanitize their protagonists for mass-market appeal, but in the process downplaying the negative characteristics that are necessary to avoid it reading like apologism for the Imperium. Gradually, it reads less like things are awful because the Imperium made it awful and continues to make it worse, and more like things are awful despite the best efforts of our noble heroes who rage against the dying of the light.

If there are people with a more surface-level understanding of the setting who are looking at the overtly grim, horrific imagery in the rulebook and asking 'are we the baddies?', then I think it's performing a necessary function.

Bruh, don't use the triple parenthesis, especially when discussing this topic... Might give the wrong impression.

Respectfully, that was my point- taken at face value, the setting reads like a thinly-veiled pro-fascist allegory. As the Imperials present it, all outsiders are monsters seeking the destruction of the human master race, and are fit only for extermination. Seemingly peaceful immigrants are secretly working to subvert populations to foreign powers. Traitors are among the populace, and must be rooted out and purged. The Imperium is so mighty that it spans the entire galaxy, but is constantly under such threat that constant war footing and total subservience to the state are required. Questioning the great leader is not only disallowed, it warrants summary execution. The angels of this empire are a race of supermen who enact its will through raw violence. It's really not hard to draw unsavory parallels.

Which, obviously, was originally all intentional, because it was built as a satire overtly criticizing those beliefs. The Imperials with these views were blinkered extremists, and made stupid decisions that worked out worse for them in the long run. Some of the aliens weren't actually secretly harboring an agenda of total extermination, and cooperation would be mutually beneficial- but oops, the Imperium's rabid xenophobia ruined that. Others were only aggressive because humanity provoked them, in a self-fulfilling prophecy. The authoritarian elements claimed that technology must be zealously guarded, while other upstart civilizations developed rapidly without the constraints of religious dogma on technological innovation. The Imperium was slowly coming to rest in a grave it dug for itself, even while the people in it saw themselves as heroes.

But the more the writers actually validate the Imperium's views, the less satirical it becomes. Oh, I guess the Tau really are closet authoritarians using mind-control on their subservient populations. Oh, I guess everything technological does have an AI 'soul' and the AdMech approach to technology is really pure scientific rationalism rather than religious zealotry. Oh, I guess Chaos really can take root from one person thinking a bad thought, and murdering thousands of innocents to stop it is perfectly justified. Huh, so maybe the Imperium actually is a rational, logical, necessary state, and perpetuating this hideously oppressive authoritarianism and all the evil it entails is a good thing. Hey, and these Space Marines carrying out the purges are actually noble, brotherly heroes after all!

And then it's like, yeah, no gak actual fascists flock to it. Without that element of satire, it's not making fun of them; instead it gives them a power fantasy where they can indulge their worldview and while being considered the good guys and with plausible deniability.

This is a bad look for a public corporation, and GW is clearly already aware of it. I don't think the game needs a warning label, it just needs to return to being up-front about 'there are no good guys here' rather than 'here's three hundred pages of glorious Space Marines upholding their brotherhood of honor and courage as the Defenders of Humanity'. Less bending over backwards to rationally justify everything the Imperium does, more acknowledgment that they're bad people who do bad things for bad reasons. Less told exclusively from the Imperial perspective, more from the perspective of the people they're trying to exterminate. Then the Imperials can consider their system 'necessary', while a more objective reader recognizes the lie.

I honestly don't think that your points are invalid, though I might disagree in some crucial parts as already discussed, but I have to ask honestly. Where do you see those actual fascists flocking to 40k? I am not saying they don't exist, I'm genuinely asking.

The guy with a totenkopf Knight and SS men in tow springs to mind.

Tiberias wrote:
I honestly don't think that your points are invalid, though I might disagree in some crucial parts as already discussed, but I have to ask honestly. Where do you see those actual fascists flocking to 40k? I am not saying they don't exist, I'm genuinely asking.

I posted links to a dozen or so articles about it but the mods removed my post. I don't know how many people think this versus how many people are pretending to be fascists for 't3h lulz', but it was enough to do the rounds back in 2016 and pop up again from time to time after that. This proves that some people as well as normie media types can see how 40k, and the IoM, can read as unironically fascist.

 Canadian 5th wrote:

Tiberias wrote:
I honestly don't think that your points are invalid, though I might disagree in some crucial parts as already discussed, but I have to ask honestly. Where do you see those actual fascists flocking to 40k? I am not saying they don't exist, I'm genuinely asking.

I posted links to a dozen or so articles about it but the mods removed my post. I don't know how many people think this versus how many people are pretending to be fascists for 't3h lulz', but it was enough to do the rounds back in 2016 and pop up again from time to time after that. This proves that some people as well as normie media types can see how 40k, and the IoM, can read as unironically fascist.

A heavily decentral , at best reliant upon a multitude of inter structural, loosely tied together factions running Billions of Planets with their controll basically limited to get tithe don't rebell is fascisct?
An ideology which demands total controll over all factions within the System to even the most basic civilian life and organisations .

Honestly that is more an issue with how often the Word get's thrown arround as a label rather then people actually having that ideology.


Granted gw did itself no favour by lowering the grimdark to appeal to mass Market Leading to the possibility of an Interpretation that at first glance it is just fascisct propganda rather then the worst of all human societies satirically cranked up to 11 but that IS gw's fault.

 Sherrypie wrote:
The guy with a totenkopf Knight and SS men in tow springs to mind.

There's also a genestealer cultist who has soviet inspired banner, so what?
Painters and modelers going to paint and model. One or two players with bad taste doesn't mean there's a fascism problem with the fan base, it just means there are fascists who like the hobby, just as there are communists.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:
The guy with a totenkopf Knight and SS men in tow springs to mind.

There's also a genestealer cultist who has soviet inspired banner, so what?
Painters and modelers going to paint and model. One or two players with bad taste doesn't mean there's a fascism problem with the fan base, it just means there are fascists who like the hobby, just as there are communists.

Yeah. And fascists who like the hobby aren't welcome, because they're fascists. Simple as that. Is that a controversial point? Not as far as I'm concerned.

(Also, it's very clearly not "one or two" players. There's more than a few out there, several who are/were regarded as "go-to"s for the 40k youtube community. I don't get what anyone get from downplaying that.)

 WhiteHaven wrote:

Can't quite see the KKK or neo-Nazis in particular endorsing a game that has ALL of humanity fighting on the same side, brutal totalitarian state or not. The art is brutal and dark (especially in the past) but it doesn't quite fit their ideology.

You might have a point if the vast majority of artwork that GW puts out for the Imperium wasn't composed entirely of white people.

Imperial Guard regiments are made up of soldiers from entire worlds, yet are often depicted in artwork as 100% white. Same issue with Space Marines, Sisters etc.

From a fascist point of view, going off the official artwork, you could quite easily assume that all of humanity is working together because all of the people who aren't white appear to have been exterminated already. Or they are neatly segregated away into their own forces, safe from the risk of mixing with the pure white people (looking at you Salamanders and White Scars).

Seriously, google Astra Militarum artwork or Imperial Guard artwork and tell me how far you have to scroll down until you find official GW artwork depicting a non-white Guardsman.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sherrypie wrote:
The guy with a totenkopf Knight and SS men in tow springs to mind.

There's also a genestealer cultist who has soviet inspired banner, so what?
Painters and modelers going to paint and model. One or two players with bad taste doesn't mean there's a fascism problem with the fan base, it just means there are fascists who like the hobby, just as there are communists.

Yeah. And fascists who like the hobby aren't welcome, because they're fascists. Simple as that. Is that a controversial point? Not as far as I'm concerned.

(Also, it's very clearly not "one or two" players. There's more than a few out there, several who are/were regarded as "go-to"s for the 40k youtube community. I don't get what anyone get from downplaying that.)

But Communists are?

Communism doesn't require the extermination of people based on the colour of their skin, their mental capacity, the shape of their skull etc. as a core tenet of the ideology. Communism calls for the abolition of the class system. Fascism calls for the abolition of people.

Jumping straight to page 6 of this topic makes me wonder how it went from grimdark artwork to where it is now.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Jumping straight to page 6 of this topic makes me wonder how it went from grimdark artwork to where it is now.

Art leads to censorship leads to politics leads to the Dark Side. Just as Master Yoda warned us.
Or was that fear, anger and toast?

Voss wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
Jumping straight to page 6 of this topic makes me wonder how it went from grimdark artwork to where it is now.

Art leads to censorship leads to politics leads to the Dark Side. Just as Master Yoda warned us.
Or was that fear, anger and toast?

Sounds like art should be banned.