Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

What are two clauses?

 Manchu wrote:

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
The fact that it was the Emperor speaking in his novel only makes that speech authoritative within that story.

This is totally incorrect. The HH is a series. What happens in one book affects what happens in others.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pilau Rice wrote:
Obviously this depends on the accuracy of the quote.

Yep. And we know there are different accounts. I don't have the sources in front of me at the moment but IIRC Index Astartes says one thing and Visions of Heresy says something else. Now we have A Thousand Sons.

Index Astartes is the least reliable in in-universe terms because it only purports to be the distant memory of the events. McNeill was involved with portions of Visions of Heresy and obviously wrote A Thousand Sons so it is likely there is more agreement between those sources.

No, just no. The Horus Heresy is a loosely organized series where authors are free to use, alter, or discard each others' versions of things. Aaron Dembski-Bowden talks about this frequently, here and on his blog: there is no canonical version of events in 40k. Everything is a matter of interpretation. Sorry, that's just how it is.

If you're talking "in-universe" accuracy, the Index Astartes material on Nikea should be as accurate as anything else you find in a codex (IA was largely drawn from older codices and other material and was written in the same voice and with the same authority as any other codex account of in-universe fact). IA said that Nikea was a pretty sweeping reform that dealt with psykers in many facets of the Imperium, and most of it still stood in M41. Only the portion about psykers within the ranks of the space marines was repealed. So unless the "in-universe" source in IA doesn't even know what the law is in M41, I would say you can take that version of things as largely reliable. And I see no reason not to take that at face value, since that was all the fluff had to say about Nikea for many, many years.

So if you assume that McNeill's Nikea speech was intended by McNeill to represent the exact Edict of Nikea in toto, you are free to ignore all previous fluff and to interpret any subsequent stories as necessary to fit your version of things. Whatever makes you happy.

It's a novel series. If you think that the books have nothing to do with each other, I don't know what to tell you. It's not a matter of canon; it's a matter of narrative coherence.

IA is the source least likely to be accurate because it is told from the perspective of the HH being ancient, half-forgotten history and a lot of myth. The HH series by contrast is told from the viewpoint of things happening in the present.

I don't assume McNeill's scene at Nikaea is the whole Edict. I don't need to. What I do assume is that McNeill told us in that scene everything we need to know to understand the rest of his book, which is about the SW and the Thousand Sons being in conflict principally over that scene.

 Manchu wrote:
What are two clauses?

Woops, misread, never mind me.

On the other hand, it's fairly easy to conclude that what the wolves were doing wasn't entirely above board.

 Inky wrote:
On the other hand, it's fairly easy to conclude that what the wolves were doing wasn't entirely above board.

From what?

 Manchu wrote:
My point is Azkaellon's reaction to the SW does not have to be based on some fuller version of the decree not available to the audience. In fact, that would be a major writing mistake. So Azkaellon's remarks do not necessitate a reading of A Thousand Sons contrary to the plain meaning of the words.

Also:

 Manchu wrote:
Just think about why the scene you are quoting exists in the first place. The point is to show a misunderstanding and suspicion between loyal Legions. The point is not to show that Azkaellon has accurately memorized the Edict.

Azkaellon's remarks do not and should not necessitate a reading of A Thousand Sons at all, because we should not be worried about parsing a speech from a different novel word for word in order to interpret this scene. Azkaellon states what the reader needs to know about Nikea, and Redknife does not say Azkaellon is wrong. Instead the Wolves claim Rune Priests aren't even psykers, their power comes from Fenris, and that is the ONLY explanation they will give. Suspicion and disagreement between loyal legions accomplished without resorting to lawyer-like knowledge of other texts.

This is the whole point. Making the Rune Priests special snowflakes on account of a technicality readers might not even catch is piss-poor writing. It's inferior to the original fluff for Nikea and it muddies the story line with regards to the tension over using psykers. This is why we're here debating semantics when this series of books (and this thread, hint hint) is supposed to be about the character and nature of the different legions and primarchs.

 Manchu wrote:

 Inky wrote:
On the other hand, it's fairly easy to conclude that what the wolves were doing wasn't entirely above board.

From what?

From (almost) every other portrayal of the wolves in the HH. They're not nice. They're nothing like they are in 40k; hence, in answer to the OPs question, I personally think he's a brute as it's my (and a fair few others) interpretation that he went completely OTT in his wrecking of Prospero, and was fairly hypocritical with the whole superstition thing. In my eyes (not necessarily yours) he's either a idiot or a cold hearted monster, and I honestly don't believe that he's an idiot.

On an unrelated note I'm not even surprised that a discussion on a historical decree in a fictional universe that doesn't even have that much of an effect on the rest of the hobby is bringing such heated debate/argument. Oh dakka, y you so cray.

 Manchu wrote:
It's a novel series. If you think that the books have nothing to do with each other, I don't know what to tell you. It's not a matter of canon; it's a matter of narrative coherence.

IA is the source least likely to be accurate because it is told from the perspective of the HH being ancient, half-forgotten history and a lot of myth. The HH series by contrast is told from the viewpoint of things happening in the present.

I didn't say they had nothing to do with each other. I stated what Black Library authors have said and what is obvious from reading: the novels are linked but nothing in this universe is set in stone, and authors are free to borrow or alter as they see fit. Not every detail gets carried through every book.

IA is only "inaccurate" in the sense that details are often vague and some things are literally presented as half-forgotten history. When multiple sources and the IA say Nikea was a huge deal that covered X, Y, and Z and is still enforced to the present day, that's no different from a codex telling us there was a battle between this faction and that faction on such and such a date thousands of years ago. Accept it with the same grain of salt you accept any other dispassionate statement of fact in a codex.

Similarly, the HH series and other Black Library novels are only "accurate" as far as they jive with what everyone else says - multiple versions of things are sometimes presented. Saying it's the one true version because there are direct quotes from primarchs is, like i said earlier, an appeal to a fictional authority. A new codex could land next month with a dispassionate historical account that contradicts it. All of these sources, IA and HH and any other BL novel, have equal weight as far as GW is concerned. When there's a conflict you're left to sort it out for yourself.

That's just how it is. I don't know what else I can say, because it's what actual authors have said.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
Azkaellon states what the reader needs to know about Nikea,

No, Azkaellon states what the reader needs to know about Azkaellon's view of things.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
and Redknife does not say Azkaellon is wrong. Instead the Wolves claim Rune Priests aren't even psykers

No, the Rune Priest says he's not a witch-mind. Whether that refers to psykers or Librarians (who the SW see as sorcerers) is purposefully (on the author's part) obscured because, as I have said, the scene is about misunderstanding and suspicion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inky wrote:
They're not nice.

Sure, the SW are not nice. No argument.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
I don't know what else I can say, because it's what actual authors have said.

One more time: we're not talking about canon; we're talking about a story told over a series of books making sense.

 Manchu wrote:

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
I don't know what else I can say, because it's what actual authors have said.

One more time: we're not talking about canon; we're talking about a story told over a series of books making sense.

And I'm not just talking about canon, I'm talking about the BL writing process in general. They are not required to stick to every detail and nuance of each other's novels, even within the HH series. It's entirely at the author's discretion. So you can continue reading that Scars scene as "everyone is confused and everything is veiled" or you can take it at face value and realize this author is not necessarily bound to the exact story as written by previous authors. That is really, honestly, just how it is.

If no one is bound to the same story then there is no basis to form any opinion of Leman Russ and the thread is pointless.

I'm not saying that "Magnus had it rough", but rather that your condemnation of Magnus as a traitor because he violated the edict is wrong. By that standard, most of the Primarchs are traitors, you just latched onto Russ because that's the only thing that's debatable. All the things you couldn't dispute you ignored. And obviously the Emperor's decree is not as cut and dry as you say, since people in and out of the universe are confused by its intent.

 Manchu wrote:
If no one is bound to the same story then there is no basis to form any opinion of Leman Russ and the thread is pointless.

Hey man, you're the one having trouble with it. Everyone else seems capable of synthesizing their own viewpoint, even if it means weighing different authors' interpretations of the Horus Heresy and the characters therein.

Honestly dude we just disagree. Visions of Heresy and especially McNeill's take on Nikea differed from previous fluff, no two ways about it. And it looks like some of James Swallow's characters at least are following a more "traditional" interpretation of Nikea.

I think Swallow is backing away from McNeill's version of things. That's how it seems to me. For me it's not hard to make McNeill's text jive with previous AND subsequent material. The meaning of McNeill's novel doesn't change so much, but that scene with Azkaellon has additional meaning. As a result the SW gain a more nuanced character, which I find interesting. They're utterly loyal, but convinced their own sh*t don't stink, arrogant in their superiority.

You can choose to see McNeill's Nikea as a clean break from previous material and ignore what came before, and you can interpret Swallow's scene with Azkaellon differently than I do. It isn't wrong because there's no canonically right answer.

And if more books come out with a more traditional take on Nikea, you may have to revise your views. And if more come out cementing McNeill's version of things, I might change my views (although I won't like it).

@Omegus:

I already agreed with you twice ITT that Magnus could likely only be punished for violating the Edict in the HH on a technicality, or as you put it that the edict was a convenient excuse. I am not sure to what extent Magnus relied on the conditions forbidden in the Edict to earn the Emperor's wrath but the real issue was him using sorcery (and breaching the Palace wards) rather than not disbanding his Librarius department or allowing former members to use psychic powers. The idea that Magnus was punished for violating the Edict is from IA and Visions of Heresy. Those sources are contradicted by A Thousand Sons in this regard.

Furthermore, I did not latch onto Russ. This is a thread about Leman Russ's character. As per the HH, he is not a hypocrite on the issue of Nikaea. Certainly neither of IA nor Visions of Heresy portrays him as a hypocrite on this issue, either.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
And it looks like some of James Swallow's characters at least are following a more "traditional" interpretation of Nikea.

Also incorrect. In the "traditional" account, there is no mention of the SW using psykers after the Emperor forbids it. Swallow is going along with McNeill, just not in the way you have misunderstood him.

 Manchu wrote:

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
And it looks like some of James Swallow's characters at least are following a more "traditional" interpretation of Nikea.

Also incorrect. In the "traditional" account, there is no mention of the SW using psykers after the Emperor forbids it. Swallow is going along with McNeill, just not in the way you have misunderstood him.

Dude, just no. I don't care what the Space Wolves did or didn't do, that has nothing to do with the contents of the Edict of Nikea. The "traditional" view of Nikea would be the one that was around unchanged from the time I read it in the 2E Ultramarines codex in like 1996 up until McNeill's novel. Nikea, among many other things, outlawed psykers in the legions. No ifs, ands or buts, that's what the old fluff said. Rune Priests were not special snowflakes, they got no mention, and what the Space Wolves did or didn't do is irrelevant. There is no mention of the Wolves using psykers after the Emperor forbids it because whether that did or did not happen is a whole different story.

Now you can interpret Swallow's Azkaellon as being misinformed based on McNeill's novel. That's fine. I interpret it as Swallow falling back to the older version of Nikea, and Azkaellon knowing what's going on.

Please post a source about the many other things Nikaea did.

IA and VoH have the Emperor putting Russ on the case. Unlike the HH series, including Swallow's work, no part of the story is about suspicion of sorcery or uneven application of the Edict among the Loyalist legions. This was invented for the HH series by McNeill and Swallow is going along with it.

 Manchu wrote:
Please post a source about the many other things Nikaea did.

"The Edicts of Nikaea stood largely untouched for the next 10,000 standard years as the primary Imperial policy regarding human psychic mutation. Only the edict against the use of Librarians within the ranks of the Space Marines would be reversed as a result of the Horus Heresy, as that terrible civil war made clear to the rulers of the Imperium that Astartes psykers were essential to combat the power of the Forces of Chaos."

From http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Council_of_Nikaea.

"Ultimately, in a speech to the gathered Astartes (which seemed to Azhek Ahriman to be directly intended for Magnus himself), the Emperor issued what would become known as the Edict of Nikaea, decreeing that the Legiones Astartes, beyond the use of Navigators and Astropaths, would no longer employ psykers."

From http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Council_of_Nikaea#.UnAOufmkpUk

Not a lot remains as far as old material there, because like I said, McNeill's version conflicts with the old fluff, and the bulk of those entries are a synopsis of Thousand Sons. When I get home from work I will personally scan ancient texts and post my results here just for you

 Manchu wrote:
IA and VoH have the Emperor putting Russ on the case. Unlike the HH series, including Swallow's work, no part of the story is about suspicion of sorcery or uneven application of the Edict among the Loyalist legions. This was invented for the HH series by McNeill and Swallow is going along with it.

Yeah, everyone knows Russ is sicced on Magnus, no clue why you're mentioning that. No part of the story is about uneven application of the edict among the legions because the edict literally covered all legions equally: no psykers, period. McNeill's version of Nikea is much narrower than the original. Swallow is "going along with" McNeill in the sense that the Wolves continue using Rune Priests, but his text doesn't support McNeill's version of Nikea. You can read it that way if you assume Azkaellon is misinformed, but nothing in that passage from Swallow supports that.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
When I get home from work I will personally scan ancient texts and post my results here just for you

I look forward to seeing what else Nikaea did in "ancient texts" besides ban SM psykers and not anyone else. Neither IA nor VoH lists anything else (apart from "sorcery" generally).

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
Swallow is "going along with" McNeill in the sense that the Wolves continue using Rune Priests

Yes, just as I posted. I posted this to counter your idea that Swallow is in continuity with IA and/or VoH rather than A Thousand Sons.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
You can read it that way if you assume Azkaellon is misinformed, but nothing in that passage from Swallow supports that.

Nothing in the passage supports that Azkaellon is well informed, either. As I already posted, all the passage supports is what Azkaellon's point of view is. The passage supports that Azkaellon is suspicious of the SW violating Nikaea. It is not proof that he understood Nikaea, that he understood the SW approach to psykers, much less that the SW were actually violating Nikaea.

 Manchu wrote:

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
When I get home from work I will personally scan ancient texts and post my results here just for you

I look forward to seeing what else Nikaea did in "ancient texts" besides ban SM psykers and not anyone else. Neither IA nor VoH lists anything else (apart from "sorcery" generally).

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
Swallow is "going along with" McNeill in the sense that the Wolves continue using Rune Priests

Yes, just as I posted. I posted this to counter your idea that Swallow is in continuity with IA and/or VoH rather than A Thousand Sons.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
You can read it that way if you assume Azkaellon is misinformed, but nothing in that passage from Swallow supports that.

Nothing in the passage supports that Azkaellon is well informed, either. As I already posted, all the passage supports is what Azkaellon's point of view is. The passage supports that Azkaellon is suspicious of the SW violating Nikaea. It is not proof that he understood Nikaea, that he understood the SW approach to psykers, much less that the SW were actually violating Nikaea.

Nothing ever gave a complete account of what Nikaea did. The implication was that banning psykers in the legions was only part of it, and Nikaea overall was an important bedrock of Imperial law concerning psykers. That's the most I could ever produce, and I'll share whatever I find.

And you're intentionally conflating a lot of things when you say Swallow is in continuity with A Thousand Sons and not IA or VoH. I'm not talking about what he says about Rune Priests or anything else in the plot (you realize it is possible for a book hundreds of pages long to agree with different sources in different places when it comes to entirely different topics).

I said, specifically, Swallow's treatment of the ruling at Nikaea appears to follow IA. Nothing in that scene referenced Librarians or dismantling Librarius organizations - Azkaellon just says all psykers were banned. That's either going back to older fluff, or Azkaellon is confused. Swallow does not make it clear either way, so interpret it as you wish.

Of course Nikaea is a foundational piece of Imperial law. But that doesn't mean the Edict itself did more than we have already discussed.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
That's either going back to older fluff, or Azkaellon is confused. Swallow does not make it clear either way, so interpret it as you wish.

Or you can interpret as a part of a series. Like it says on the cover.

It is worth remembering that McNeil has botched the characters of both Horus and the Emperor, and doesn't seem to understand the HH timeline, so all of his contributions are questionable.

Whether Russ is guilty of anything, it is a RAW vs RAI argument. I can't wait to read Scars for this very reason.

 Manchu wrote:
Drollery is no substitute for argument.

Answering the minute fraction of people's posts because you have no response to the rest of it is no substitute for argument.

Was Azkaellon at Nikaea?

The Sanguinary Guard were at Nikaea with Sanguinius so probably.

Thanks to Graham McNeill, we had front row seats.

As did Sanguinius, who was so close he wept at Magnus' trial. The Edict applied more to Sanguinius' Legion than most, since he helped Magnus develop the Librarius department. You could argue Azkaellon, Sanguinius' right hand man, was wrong, but it would be an uphill battle.

IIRC the Garro audiobooks support this as well, but I don't recall.

The only reason to pretend the text of A Thousand Sons is unclear is to bash the SW.

For someone who complains about Omegus, you sure are quick to commit to poisoning the well.

In the passage you quoted, all we see is the difference of perspective between Legions. The BA seem to assume Librarians and SM psykers are entirely and exclusively synonymous, which makes sense given their primarch's role in the development of the Librarius. The SW disagree. As I have said before, the Edict supports their view: the Emperor could have made any distinction he desired but the one he did make was between Librarius-trained psykers and all other psykers.

At best, the Space Wolves got off on a technicality. You may complain that this would mean the Space Wolves went behind daddy's back, but this isn't the first time that occurred. Leman Russ tried to sanction Angron without getting the approval to do so from daddy in a flashback in Betrayer, and in fact attacked a calm(!) Angron first, all because he lacked the ability to argue his point to Angron. He didn't have the authority to saction or kill Angron, and Angron called his bluff.

And in Fear to Tread, in the passage I quoted, we do indeed see how the Space Wolves deal with the other Legions rather underhandedly. Rather than argue against Azkaellon's wording of the Edict, Redknife just outright denies Stiel is a psyker. Stiel goes on to meet with the Blood Angels Librarians to help them psyker the feth out of Sanguinius to save his life.

Your admonishment of Magnus only holds value if you apply it to the other Primarchs who violated the Edict.

 Omegus wrote:

In these episodes, Magnus finally stops living in denial and accepts that he fethed up really bad.

Like he did in A Thousand Sons?

I think the authors might legitimately be giving Magnus Alzheimer's disease, considering that in Battle of the Fang he apparently frequently forgets that he's a Primarch, and in every Horus Heresy novel or novella since A Thousand Sons he forgets that he had already resigned himself to his fate, and admits that he fethed up pretty badly.

I can't wait to see what dementia-ridden adventures Wraight has in store for Magnus in Scars lol (No but for real the novel I think looks interesting).

 Manchu wrote:
@Omegus:

I already agreed with you twice ITT that Magnus could likely only be punished for violating the Edict in the HH on a technicality, or as you put it that the edict was a convenient excuse. I am not sure to what extent Magnus relied on the conditions forbidden in the Edict to earn the Emperor's wrath but the real issue was him using sorcery (and breaching the Palace wards) rather than not disbanding his Librarius department or allowing former members to use psychic powers. The idea that Magnus was punished for violating the Edict is from IA and Visions of Heresy. Those sources are contradicted by A Thousand Sons in this regard.

Furthermore, I did not latch onto Russ. This is a thread about Leman Russ's character. As per the HH, he is not a hypocrite on the issue of Nikaea. Certainly neither of IA nor Visions of Heresy portrays him as a hypocrite on this issue, either.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
And it looks like some of James Swallow's characters at least are following a more "traditional" interpretation of Nikea.

Also incorrect. In the "traditional" account, there is no mention of the SW using psykers after the Emperor forbids it. Swallow is going along with McNeill, just not in the way you have misunderstood him.

Russ is a two faced dishonest hypocrite on the issue of psykers and no word play or semantics is going to change that.

He may be correct according to a very narrow very debatable reading of the letter of the law that does not make him any less of a two faced hypocrite.

 Omegus wrote:
It is worth remembering that McNeil has botched the characters of both Horus and the Emperor, and doesn't seem to understand the HH timeline, so all of his contributions are questionable.

Whether Russ is guilty of anything, it is a RAW vs RAI argument. I can't wait to read Scars for this very reason.

How has McNeill botched the character of the Emperor?

You're so hung up on Outcast Dead.

What of ADB, who has botched Leman Russ and Magnus? And who generally doesn't seem to give a feth about other writers' precedents.

 Manchu wrote:
Of course Nikaea is a foundational piece of Imperial law. But that doesn't mean the Edict itself did more than we have already discussed.

How could Nikaea be a foundation of imperial law 10,000 years later if the entirety of Nikaea concerned a subject so narrow as the disbandment of the Librarius organizations, and it was repealed completely within years? Nikaea was a broad judgment concerning sorcery and how to handle psykers in general. Most of it still stands in M41. That's the old fluff.

Here's another excerpt, from Lexicanum:

Magnus had spoken passionately with great power and the Council became even more divided. While effective the Witch Hunters could not match Magnus' persuasiveness. The tension could easily have been cut with a knife when a group of Space Marine Librarians approached the Dais. The Emperor acknowledged them with a nod, and all fell silent. Among the group were some of the greatest Librarians of the Space Marine Legions. They formed a semi-circle around the Dais to indicate that they spoke as one voice, but it was a young Epistolary who spoke.

A psyker, he proposed, was like an athlete, a gifted individual whose native talent must be carefully nurtured. Psykers were not evil in themselves. Sorcery however was a knowledge that had to be sought for, even bargained for with evil powers. No one could be sure who benefited in the deal.

They proposed the education of all psykers and their priority would be to serve Mankind. This should become an immediate Imperial priority. Conducting sorcery would forever be outlawed as an unforgivable offense against Mankind and the worst kind of heresy.

The end result was a compromise that offered both factions something. It was as if this was what the Emperor was waiting for, and he ruled it as law immediately without allowing any rebuttal from either side. The Edicts of Nikaea stand to this millennium as the Imperial policy regarding human psychic mutation. Magnus attempted to storm out of the hall in protest, but was barred by the Emperor himself. The confrontation between father and son is recorded in the Grimoire Hereticus.

The Emperor ordered Magnus to cease the practice of sorcery and incantation, and the pursuit of all knowledge related to magic. Magnus of course did not like the idea, and it was said his face was brittle enough to crack. But in the end he bent his will to the Emperor and agreed to obey.

There are different versions of this story, so believe what you want.

 Manchu wrote:

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
That's either going back to older fluff, or Azkaellon is confused. Swallow does not make it clear either way, so interpret it as you wish.

Or you can interpret as a part of a series. Like it says on the cover.

Don't be a smartass. We already went over this. Black Library authors have leeway in their writing. If you can't handle that then come up with whatever mental contortions are required to make every word of every novel fit perfectly with each other. Let's agree to disagree.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Answering the minute fraction of people's posts because you have no response to the rest of it is no substitute for argument.

As explained, references to other Legions using psykers are irrelevant to the question of whether Nikaea banned Rune Priests.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
You could argue Azkaellon, Sanguinius' right hand man, was wrong, but it would be an uphill battle.

Not especially, given the nature of the scene in question.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
At best, the Space Wolves got off on a technicality.

I don't know if you read what you quoted. If the Emperor meant something different than what he said, he could have said that instead.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
You may complain that this would mean the Space Wolves went behind daddy's back

Don't care, not at issue.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Redknife just outright denies Stiel is a psyker.

Factually wrong and begging the question.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
How could Nikaea be a foundation of imperial law 10,000 years later if the entirety of Nikaea concerned a subject so narrow as the disbandment of the Librarius organizations

As I have posted twice already, the Emperor says in A Thousand Sons:

But no more shall the threat of sorcery be allowed to taint the warriors of the Astartes.

This is a precedent.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
There are different versions of this story, so believe what you want.

And Leman Russ is a hypocrite in NONE of the versions. The difference is that Magnus comes off much better in A Thousand Sons than in IA or even VoH.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
We already went over this.

If you refuse to believe the Horus Heresy is a series there's nothing more to say.

 Manchu wrote:
As explained, references to other Legions using psykers are irrelevant to the question of whether Nikaea banned Rune Priests.

I see you are still moving the goalposts.

My post:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
de·lu·sion
noun \di-ˈlü-zhən, dē-\

: a belief that is not true : a false idea

Leman Russ believed that:

A. Magnus was actively conspiring treachery against the Emperor.

B. That he fabricated Horus' heresy to further his own.

C. That he planted Kasper Hawser within the Space Wolves as a telepathic spy.

All of these beliefs are not true and largely unfounded, with only the first one being even kind of arguable.

Therefore, he was deluded. To argue otherwise is to be wrong.

Your response:

 Manchu wrote:
A. was true, B. only appears false to an overly literal mind in superficial analysis of events and motives (or in denial), and C. consists of a detail that could easily have been true.

Omegus' post calling you out:

 Omegus wrote:

If Magnus is a heretic for ignoring the decree (note that he received his vision during the "trial", and immediately left to investigate further) because he found out something that would literally tear the Imperium in half, then you must condemn Leman Russ for pretending it doesn't apply to him, Rogal Dorn for going a step further and imprisoning all his psykers, Lion El Johnson for deciding it was stupid and killing the chaplain monitoring for it, Sanguinius for forgiving its use in necessity, the Sigilite for setting up a secret cabal of psykers behind the Emperor's back, and Guilliman for outright overruling the Emperor and repealing it.

More abrasive than it needed to be, but you have yet to really address any other instance with the exception of Russ, because that is the only one you can even kind of argue. That you continue to pretend that our posts are only further undermines your every post.

Either:

A. Condemn the other Primarchs as conspiring treachery against the Emperor, for defying Nikaea with less reason than Magnus.

Or

B. Admit you were wrong.

This is not hard.

Not especially, given the nature of the scene in question.

The nature being that the closest confidant to Sanguinius (Next to Raldoran) believes Rune Priests fall under the Edict?

I don't know if you read what you quoted. If the Emperor meant something different than what he said, he could have said that instead.

You hold onto your one quote. I'll hold onto my several.

"‘How long has it been since the great conclave of Emperor and his sons on Nikaea?’ Annellus asked, and Kano knew his suspicions were correct.
‘Long enough,’ he replied, schooling his features. ‘I was not there to see the Angel and his brothers come before their father–’
‘But you know full well what was wrought in that place.’ It was not a question.
Kano’s patience thinned. ‘Don’t be obtuse, Warden. Of course I know. The decree absolute. The Edict of Nikaea.’
‘A command from the Emperor of Mankind himself,’ Annellus went on, his words taking on a lecturing tone. ‘A warning about the dark potential of the powers of the warp.’ The Warden
turned back to face him. ‘A command Sanguinius echoed, to forbid the use of preternatural powers within the Legiones Astartes. A command the Blood Angels accepted without
question.’"

Nothing about Librarians specifically. And sorry for the lack of page numbers, I have the book on pdf so can't really give an accurate page number.

Also, I found proof that Azkaellon was, in fact, accompanying Sanguinius at Nikaea.

"At first, Raldoron had been honoured to accept the duty of accompanying his primarch to the Emperor’s gathering; Azkaellon had, predictably, not seen the sense of it, but the Angel
knew it would mean more to arrive among his great brothers not just with the golden seraphs of his Sanguinary Guard, but among the host of his most elite warriors. Raldoron’s pride
swelled; the chance to represent his Legion and his company in the presence of several primarchs and the Emperor himself… Many Blood Angels went for centuries without ever having
such an opportunity."

The Space Wolves obeyed the letter of the command, but not the spirit, which was that Space Marines should not employ the use of psychic power in battle. Or do the Rune Priests not fall under that distinction? And if the Edict did indeed allow Rune Priests continued usage of their powers, why do the Space Wolves conceal the nature of a Rune Priest's abilities?

Factually wrong and begging the question.

I am not sure you know what "begging the question" means.

"Begging the question" would imply that I am asserting my conclusion is true based on my conclusion being true.

I am asserting my conclusion is true because the text supports it.

"For the first time, Azkaellon noted the presence of a Rune Priest standing in Redknife’s shadow. The Wolf cleric’s armour was dressed with scrimshawed bones, his open-faced
helm apparently carved out of a great canine’s skull. He was careful to stay at his commander’s shoulder, his hand forever on the hilt of a serrated force sword. The Sanguinary Guard
unconsciously mirrored the priest’s gesture, his gauntlet falling to the pommel of his glaive encarmine. ‘I see that is so,’ he said. ‘Not only do you break the simple rules of fleet protocol,
but you also defy the Emperor’s edict.’ He jutted his chin towards the Rune Priest. ‘You know that psykers are no longer permitted within the Legiones Astartes.’
The cleric answered in a tongue that Azkaellon could not understand, but he knew enough to recognise a Fenrisian dialect when he heard it. Redknife gave a brief nod. ‘My battlebrother
Stiel is not a witch-mind, Blood Angel, and he forgives you for your error. It is a common misconception.’"

Try not to state people are factually wrong about books you haven't actually read.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
This is not hard.

It really, really isn't.

 Manchu wrote:

 Omegus wrote:
Anyway, I don't think Magnus was punished so much for defying the edict, per se, although that was a convenient excuse.

YES! This is a big problem. As far as I can tell, the issue that got Magnus in trouble did not necessarily have anything to do with his Legion's Librarius department per se. After all, the Emperor did not decree that Magnus himself could not use psychic powers unless we talk about the spirit rather than the letter of the Edict. Going by the letter, Magnus got punished and Russ did not. Now, what Magnus did was obviously much more destructive than anything Russ could do but even so ...

 Manchu wrote:
As I mentioned above under the headline "points we can agree on," I'm not sure how not disbanding his Librarius department or allowing former members to practice sorcery is the cause of Magnus's breaching of the Palace wards, the event that triggered the Emperor to send Russ after Magnus. Was Magnus only able to achieve this because he violated the letter of the Edict? Possibly. I don't recall. But I see no reason that it must necessarily have been the case.

 Manchu wrote:
@Omegus:

I already agreed with you twice ITT that Magnus could likely only be punished for violating the Edict in the HH on a technicality, or as you put it that the edict was a convenient excuse. I am not sure to what extent Magnus relied on the conditions forbidden in the Edict to earn the Emperor's wrath but the real issue was him using sorcery (and breaching the Palace wards) rather than not disbanding his Librarius department or allowing former members to use psychic powers. The idea that Magnus was punished for violating the Edict is from IA and Visions of Heresy. Those sources are contradicted by A Thousand Sons in this regard.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
‘A command from the Emperor of Mankind himself,’ Annellus went on, his words taking on a lecturing tone. ‘A warning about the dark potential of the powers of the warp.’

We have a quotation from the Emperor and a quotation from someone else paraphrasing the Emperor. This isn't a new argument.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
The Space Wolves obeyed the letter of the command, but not the spirit

Conclusory. The spirit of the Edict could easily be "the way Magnus does things is wrong."

 Void__Dragon wrote:
"Begging the question" would imply that I am asserting my conclusion is true based on my conclusion being true.

You assume Redknife lied because you argue he and SW generally are liars. And you're also factually wrong: Redknife denied being a witch-mind. I don't think you're reading the thread as I have already addressed this. The point of the scene is to portray suspicion between the BA and SW. The author intentionally chooses phrases to heighten the ambiguity to this end.

 Manchu wrote:

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
How could Nikaea be a foundation of imperial law 10,000 years later if the entirety of Nikaea concerned a subject so narrow as the disbandment of the Librarius organizations

As I have posted twice already, the Emperor says in A Thousand Sons:

But no more shall the threat of sorcery be allowed to taint the warriors of the Astartes.

This is a precedent.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
There are different versions of this story, so believe what you want.

And Leman Russ is a hypocrite in NONE of the versions. The difference is that Magnus comes off much better in A Thousand Sons than in IA or even VoH.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
We already went over this.

If you refuse to believe the Horus Heresy is a series there's nothing more to say.

Deny the HH is a series? What in the holy hell are you talking about? Don't put words in my mouth.

It's a series. It's written by separate authors. Sometimes they contradict each other. The end.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
Sometimes they contradict each other.

Yep but mostly they don't.