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.

 Melissia wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
reveared by all

He can't exactly be "revered by all" when there's many who "believe that his time, and the time of all Primarchs is over"-- an irreverent belief.

Which is it? Is he a god worshiped by all, or is he not? You're contradicting yourself.

Revere, revered (past tense) - feel deep respect or admiration for (something).

You can absolutely revere something, and oppose it.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
The Shrine of the Primarch? Where millions of pilgrims (a RELIGIOUS term) went to visit Guilliman's frozen body on Macragge?

And? It's easy to pray to that which is already either dead or in such a situation so that it might as well be dead. It's very, very different regarding living beings, going around doing things and uprooting one's life, and saying things that contradict one's beliefs. Martyrs and heroes are more useful dead than alive.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Plus, we have examples of people in the Imperium being loved and obeyed instantly - Celestine and Saint Sabbat come to mind. They're largely worshipped and adored across the entire Imperium.

I recall there being numerous instances of politics being played against the interests and wishes of Saint Sabbat within the various books set in the Sabbat Worlds Crusade, and Sabbat herself was often treated as little more than a charismatic figurehead who had to obey the wishes and whims of the Lord Generals of the crusade.

As for Celestine-- she's not actually ahd much characterization within the novels until very recently, and furthermore, her very existence as a religious figure, the organization which she effectively represents, the Ecclesiarchy, is something that Guilliman ultimately opposes, making them not actually a great example to use, here... to say nothing of the fact that Celestine was not in fact always instantly loved and obeyed (Inquisitor Greyfax comes to mind).

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Given how Guilliman is now Imperial Regent

An office he took by force, stained in blood. Bloody coups beget resentment.

 Melissia wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
The Shrine of the Primarch? Where millions of pilgrims (a RELIGIOUS term) went to visit Guilliman's frozen body on Macragge?

And? It's easy to pray to that which is already either dead or in such a situation so that it might as well be dead. It's very, very different regarding living beings, going around doing things and uprooting one's life, and saying things that contradict one's beliefs.

Still worship, unless you claim that Christians don't worship Jesus, or that Muslims don't worship Muhammad (pbuh), or that Neo-Nazis don't worship Hitler, etc etc.

You said worship. Guilliman has been, and from EVERYTHING we gather, it's logical to assume he still is, if not more so.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Plus, we have examples of people in the Imperium being loved and obeyed instantly - Celestine and Saint Sabbat come to mind. They're largely worshipped and adored across the entire Imperium.

I recall there being numerous instances of politics being played against the interests and wishes of Saint Sabbat within the various books set in the Sabbat Worlds Crusade, and Sabbat herself was often treated as little more than a charismatic figurehead who had to obey the wishes and whims of the Lord Generals of the crusade.

Still worshipped, and could easily pull rank when she had to. Emphasis too on "largely".

As for Celestine-- she's not actually ahd much characterization within the novels until very recently, and furthermore, her very existence as a religious figure, the organization which she effectively represents, the Ecclesiarchy, is something that Guilliman ultimately opposes, making them not actually a great example to use, here... to say nothing of the fact that Celestine was not in fact always instantly loved and obeyed (Inquisitor Greyfax comes to mind).

And now Greyfax is practically in her pocket.
Plus, what would Greyfax do? We see by the fact Celestine is still alive that Greyfax wouldn't harm her, so that's holding some power right there.

I would also add my emphasis on the premodifier "largely" in my response. I haven't ever claimed a 100% loving of someone. I CAN, however, claim a majority, and that's supported by lore. Guilliman STILL upholds the Ecclesiarchy, and even if Celestine may represent the Ecclesiarchy, it's not that which makes her a Living Saint. That would be like saying "Well, Guilliman represents the Space Marines, which means he's basically a Space Wolf."

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Given how Guilliman is now Imperial Regent

An office he took by force, stained in blood. Bloody coups beget resentment.

And what force did he take it by? Which Imperials has Guilliman 100% definitely killed to be accepted into the Emperor's Throneroom, his exit of which heralded his status as Imperial Regent?

Basically, did Guilliman kill or wound anyone maliciously prior to his meeting before the Golden Throne?

If he did happen to kill anyone after (and still waiting on proof of a killing too - all I see is removed some HLOT from power, which isn't always killing), that's just him asserting his rewarded place, by grace of the Emperor. If someone opposed that, then they'd be going counter to the Emperor's will, and therefore, Guilliman wouldn't be taking by force.

Wait, did Guilliman actually MURDER some High Lords? What the actual feth?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
all I see is removed some HLOT from power, which isn't always killing

I recall him killing them. And, frankly? Removing them without killing them would cause even MORE politicking. Him ruthlessly killing them makes sense and to me is far more in character, for someone like him that believes he deserves to be in charge (even if he could not justify being in charge ten thousand years ago, for the Emperor, Horus, and Sanguinius were in the way). His actions causing ripples of resentment and potential rebellion for Chaos to use against him is far more fitting with the setting than this "suddenly, everything's okay and works and the Imperium is unified and stronger than it was even when the Emperor was around!" bs everyone's throwing around these days.

Or did 40k suddenly turn in to a 1d4chan noblebright parody?

 Crimson wrote:
Wait, did Guilliman actually MURDER some High Lords? What the actual feth?

Not so far as I know. But I wouldnt be surprised if some of them dont live to see the end of The Emperor's Legion. While I think they may be killed, I dont yet know for sure. It's just as likely that the Captain-General kills them for attempting to put reigns on them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
all I see is removed some HLOT from power, which isn't always killing

I recall him killing them.

Recall from what?

 Melissia wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
all I see is removed some HLOT from power, which isn't always killing

I recall him killing them. And, frankly? Removing them without killing them would cause even MORE politicking. Him ruthlessly killing them makes sense and to me is far more in character, for someone like him that believes he deserves to be in charge (even if he could not justify being in charge ten thousand years ago, for the Emperor, Horus, and Sanguinius were in the way). His actions causing ripples of resentment and potential rebellion for Chaos to use against him is far more fitting with the setting than this "suddenly, everything's okay and works and the Imperium is unified and stronger than it was even when the Emperor was around!" bs everyone's throwing around these days.

Or did 40k suddenly turn in to a 1d4chan noblebright parody?

Why can't both chaos AND the Imperium be stronger at the same time?

 Melissia wrote:
His actions causing ripples of resentment and potential rebellion for Chaos to use against him is far more fitting with the setting than this "suddenly, everything's okay and works and the Imperium is unified and stronger than it was even when the Emperor was around!" bs everyone's throwing around these days.

Or did 40k suddenly turn in to a 1d4chan noblebright parody?

Yeah, indeed. If they wanted to actually do something cool with this we would get 'Guilliman Heresy' and second Imperial civil war.

Melissia wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
all I see is removed some HLOT from power, which isn't always killing

I recall him killing them. And, frankly? Removing them without killing them would cause even MORE politicking. Him ruthlessly killing them makes sense and to me is far more in character, for someone like him that believes he deserves to be in charge (even if he could not justify being in charge ten thousand years ago, for the Emperor, Horus, and Sanguinius were in the way). His actions causing ripples of resentment and potential rebellion for Chaos to use against him is far more fitting with the setting than this "suddenly, everything's okay and works and the Imperium is unified and stronger than it was even when the Emperor was around!" bs everyone's throwing around these days.

Or did 40k suddenly turn in to a 1d4chan noblebright parody?

Look, I don't really mind what you think it should be, but where's the proof of him killing some of the HLOT? If I see that, I'll believe you, but I have no reason to right now.

I don't see Guilliman killing anyone unless they severely mess things up - look how he dealt with politics on Macragge. He only killed Gallan and his conspirators after they killed his "father" and began razing the city to the ground. We've not really seen anything beyond peaceful and meritocratic rule from Guilliman, so ejecting HLOT from power (which, in his position, he has all right to do) is more likely his style.

Again, good luck politicking against him - we have evidence of him controlling the Imperium's entire military, not to mention his sheer physicality making him harder to assassinate like a normal HLOT. He's only putting himself in charge because of how badly the Imperium seems to rule itself, not because he can suddenly seize power for his own nefarious goals.

Sure, some HLOT might feel the urge to fall in with Chaos. What will they take with them? No military forces, that's for sure, because canon states Guilliman has control of them.

Again, obviously what you want the lore to be, and what it is, are two different things. You call it "bs", I call it GW's canon.
You only say it's Noblebright because the Imperium's not 1 step from midnight. Why is Chaos and EVERYONE else allowed to get stronger then, but the Imperium can't have a Primarch return with a handful of new augmented Space Marines, in return for losing, well, half of their territory and resources within?

Double standard much.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
His actions causing ripples of resentment and potential rebellion for Chaos to use against him is far more fitting with the setting than this "suddenly, everything's okay and works and the Imperium is unified and stronger than it was even when the Emperor was around!" bs everyone's throwing around these days.

Or did 40k suddenly turn in to a 1d4chan noblebright parody?

Yeah, indeed. If they wanted to actually do something cool with this we would get 'Guilliman Heresy' and second Imperial civil war.

Apparently GW don't want that to be a thing. There's room for it, certainly, but not a full scale canon one. I think because a full scale canon civil war would forces one side into losing if the plot continued, unless they stagnate the plot again (which went down SO well last time...) someone would end up being a out-and-out loser.

HH seems to be fine because the outcome is already decided.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Recall from what?

I recall him killing them as part of the Gathering Storm trilogy.

What exactly do you think happened, if they were not killed (or imprisoned, which ultimately isn't much different in the Imperium)-- and thus made martyrs by those whose power is threatened by Guilliman's actions? Were they simply removed and put somewhere else? But that kind of demotion breeds resentment, too-- hell, far less important demotions have caused uprisings or worse in human history. Did they have their de jure power removed, their titles and authority revoked, and them tossed out of the Imperial Palace? But that would leave their de facto power, allowing them to work in the shadows, because I guarantee you the High Lords were all nobles with substantial resources and connections beyond their official rank. Did he strip them of these, too, leaving them penniless and adrift? The fear of that being done has, itself, caused violent uprisings in human history, too.

Actually, me saying he killed them is probably the solution LEAST prone to having resentment, unrest, and disorder, for there's an air of finality around death, where demotion is merely a setback for someone to work with.

Just because some people desire some bland, boring mary sue leader of the Imperium-- which even the Emperor was not, and he was FAR more interesting, flawed, and believable a character than you're making Guilliman out to be-- doesn't mean I have to want the same thing.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Why is Chaos and EVERYONE else allowed to get stronger then, but the Imperium can't have a Primarch return with a handful of new augmented Space Marines, in return for losing, well, half of their territory and resources within?

What makes you think I didn't oppose the introduction of the daemon primarchs? I don't think ANY of hte primarchs have a place in 40k. They should feth right off back to the gak-heap of 30k where they belong. So you can stuff that "double standard" crap right back down your throat.

I don't oppose the Imperium getting stronger. I oppose the mary sue bs that 30k fans are trying to shovel in to the far superior 40k.

 Melissia wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Recall from what?

I recall him killing them as part of the Gathering Storm trilogy.

Do you have a quote?

What exactly do you think happened, if they were not killed (or imprisoned, which ultimately isn't much different in the Imperium)-- and thus made martyrs by those whose power is threatened by Guilliman's actions? Were they simply removed and put somewhere else? But that kind of demotion breeds resentment, too-- hell, far less important demotions have caused uprisings or worse in human history. Did they have their de jure power removed, their titles and authority revoked, and them tossed out of the Imperial Palace? But that would leave their de facto power, allowing them to work in the shadows, because I guarantee you the High Lords were all nobles with substantial resources and connections beyond their official rank. Did he strip them of these, too, leaving them penniless and adrift? The fear of that being done has, itself, caused violent uprisings in human history, too.

I imagine they were deposed like any HLOT would who has their time on the council up (which we see - not all posts on the HLOT are permanent ones).

Again, what good will all their connections and power do when they've been replaced by someone who is the HEIR to the Emperor himself? As we've seen, he controls the Imperium's military power, and is a Primarch guarded by Space Marines and Custodes, making assassination near impossible.

Actually, me saying he killed them is probably the solution LEAST prone to having resentment, unrest, and disorder, for there's an air of finality around death, where demotion is merely a setback.

A setback which is near impossible to come back from in this scenario.

Just because some people desire some bland, boring mary sue leader of the Imperium-- which even the Emperor was not, and he was FAR more interesting, flawed, and believable a character than you're making Guilliman out to be-- doesn't mean I have to want the same thing.

I've not said I support it. I'm just saying that as far as GW's canon shows, in lore, Guilliman IS that. That's what the canon shows us, like it or loathe it.

 Melissia wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Recall from what?

I recall him killing them as part of the Gathering Storm trilogy.

What exactly do you think happened, if they were not killed (or imprisoned, which ultimately isn't much different in the Imperium)-- and thus made martyrs by those whose power is threatened by Guilliman's actions? Were they simply removed and put somewhere else? But that kind of demotion breeds resentment, too-- hell, far less important demotions have caused uprisings or worse in human history. Did they have their de jure power removed, their titles and authority revoked, and them tossed out of the Imperial Palace? But that would leave their de facto power, allowing them to work in the shadows, because I guarantee you the High Lords were all nobles with substantial resources and connections beyond their official rank. Did he strip them of these, too, leaving them penniless and adrift? The fear of that being done has, itself, caused violent uprisings in human history, too.

Actually, me saying he killed them is probably the solution LEAST prone to having resentment, unrest, and disorder, for there's an air of finality around death, where demotion is merely a setback for someone to work with.

Just because some people desire some bland, boring mary sue leader of the Imperium-- which even the Emperor was not, and he was FAR more interesting, flawed, and believable a character than you're making Guilliman out to be-- doesn't mean I have to want the same thing.

Having not yet finished the book where he comes back to Terra, I can't say for certain. Though I personally suspect he kills those that oppose him and the Custodes. While leaving those that support him to assist him in leading. We know he doesnt disband the HLoT, just takes control of them by taking his old title back.

Melissia wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Why is Chaos and EVERYONE else allowed to get stronger then, but the Imperium can't have a Primarch return with a handful of new augmented Space Marines, in return for losing, well, half of their territory and resources within?

What makes you think I didn't oppose the introduction of the daemon primarchs? I don't think ANY of hte primarchs have a place in 40k. They should feth right off back to the gak-heap of 30k where they belong. So you can stuff that "double standard" crap right back down your throat.

Bit aggressive, aren't we?

I'm just saying, but I believed that you only opposed the Imperium purely because you never mentioned anything else. You talk about 40k becoming more Noblebright, which implies the non-Chaos forces. Therefore, I don't think I came to an unreasonable assumption. My apologies if my assumption offended you that much.

I don't oppose the Imperium getting stronger. I oppose the mary sue bs that 30k fans are trying to shovel in to the far superior 40k.

What do the 30k fans have to do with this?

Realistically, the 40k characters are far less developed than 30k ones - it's only that the Primarchs happen to have more power, which, let's face it, if they DIDN'T have that power, they'd hardly be worth calling Primarchs.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Do you have a quote?

Nope. Don't have the books in front of me.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Again, what good will all their connections and power do when they've been replaced by someone who is the HEIR to the Emperor himself?

Discredit him. Spread discontent, misinformation, and wear down his public image. Disrupt his efforts by surreptitiously redirecting reinforcements, supplies, and information, so that his military and political victories are lessened, or even turned in to defeats. Manipulate words and events so that the worst news appears to be the fault of his actions, where the best news appears to be the doing of their allies. Explain away his victories that they seem lesser and not as important.

The ways of internal politics are often petty, underhanded, and dishonest, and the High Lords of Terra achieved that rank because they are masters of it. All these things above are things that have been done to the protagonists of 40k novels.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
As we've seen, he controls the Imperium's military power, and is a Primarch guarded by Space Marines and Custodes, making assassination near impossible.

For one, I never suggested assassination.

But since you want to talk about it as if it's the only possible way a political opponent could strike at him, even if he appears unassailable physically, don't forget that he's on life support right now. He's wholly dependent on the armor Cawl crafted for him to survive-- without it, he will once again suffer from the wounds Fulgrim gave him, wounds he was unable to heal without outside help, wounds that were as much a warp-phenomena as damage to the flesh. He is not as strong and healthy as he was during the Horus Heresy.

That said, I would certainly not bet on any assassin being able to kill him. Injure him, perhaps, damage his armor and render him weak, perhaps. Kill him? That is likely only going to be the result of some major, climactic event, like a battle with a fellow primarch, or a greater daemon, a massive Ork overlord like the Beast-- not a mere assassination.

A setback which is near impossible to come back from in this scenario.

But less impossible than death.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Bit aggressive, aren't we?

Always. That's why I play Blood Angels right now, and is also why in prior editions played Sisters and Orks.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I'm just saying, but I believed that you only opposed the Imperium purely because you never mentioned anything else.

In this thread, I never mentioned anything else. When Magnus and Mortarion came out, I spoke out against their inclusion in to 40k.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
What do the 30k fans have to do with this?

Fans of the primarchs as depicted in the Horus Heresy series and game are, as far as I'm concerned, 30k fans. I find that their inclusion in 40k is, at best, jarring and unsettling, and at worst, disruptive of the themes and ideas that made 40k great.

 Melissia wrote:
Discredit him. Spread discontent, misinformation, and wear down his public image.

You don't even need to use misinformation, actual information works; the guy was resurrected by a xenos witch! Your new leader is a zombie controlled by alien necromancy! How much more heretical can you get?

 Crimson wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Discredit him. Spread discontent, misinformation, and wear down his public image.

You don't even need to use misinformation, actual information works; the guy was resurrected by a xenos witch! Your new leader is a zombie controlled by alien necromancy! How much more heretiacal can you get?

Yep. It's all about framing, and powerful, experienced political leaders are very, very good at controlling exactly that. And I think Guilliman is competent and ruthless enough to know that, too-- and that killing them after deposing them is the best way to stop it from happening.

Dead men tell no tales. Well, most of the time, anyway.

 Crimson wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Discredit him. Spread discontent, misinformation, and wear down his public image.

You don't even need to use misinformation, actual information works; the guy was resurrected by a xenos witch! Your new leader is a zombie controlled by alien necromancy! How much more heretiacal can you get?

How many people that are aware of the nature of his resurection still live that aren't Ultramarines, the Eldar, Celestine, Cawl or Greyfax? All the Templar died, and had no issue with him being brought back. The Ultramarines are well that should be obvious. Greyfax and Celestine supported it and presumably would know how important it is to not reveal. The only person that could reveal it would be Cawl if he tries to use it as a bargaining chip, and then its his word vs Guilliman's. I suppose that the Eldar will reveal it when the time is right, but who are you gonna believe? A Xenos or the Lord Commander who happens to also be the Emperor's son?

That all depends on whether or not you believe you have a grievance against Guilliman.

 Melissia wrote:
That all depends on whether or not you believe you have a grievance against Guilliman.

Let me rephrase it then. Who do you think the massess of Soldiers, Sailors, Astartes and civilians are going to believe? What do you think the Custodes who guard him will believe? Will they care? No, they'll kill you for trying to kill him.

I am starting to see parallels here. A leader rises to make a nation great again, but his ascension has been aided by a hated foreign leader.

And in both cases I'm hoping for swift downfall.

 Crimson wrote:
I am starting to see parallels here. A leader rises to make a nation great again, but his ascension has been aided by a hated foreign leader.

And in both cases I'm hoping for swift downfall.

And contrary to the real world, in which the investigation did not find any evidence of foreign influence after months, in 40k it is true !
And, to keep on the parallels, these two great leaders will probably stay in command of their respective country for years, and years, to come, all for the better

As amusing as it would be to debunk your ignorance, godardc, US politics is not allowed even in off topic, never mind THIS forum.

 godardc wrote:

And contrary to the real world, in which the investigation did not find any evidence of foreign influence after months, in 40k it is true !

Let's see about that when Inquisitor Mueller has finished his investigation!

(But enough about this derail.)

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Let me rephrase it then. Who do you think the massess of Soldiers, Sailors, Astartes and civilians are going to believe?

Someone familiar with them, or some alien, inhuman being that claims to be from the past who is suddenly appearing and ordering them around and killing everyone who disagrees with him? No idea. But I know enough about humanity to know that the seed of doubt is very easy to plant, and grows even in the most hostile environments.

I have a better question, however; what makes you think that in a universe where the Emperor was betrayed, Guilliman wouldn't be? It may not happen immediately, for these things can take some time before they do. But the Horus Heresy took many years to reach fruition, after all.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
What do you think the Custodes who guard him will believe? Will they care? No, they'll kill you for trying to kill him.

I will repeat myself:

 Melissia wrote:
For one, I never suggested assassination.

 Melissia wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Let me rephrase it then. Who do you think the massess of Soldiers, Sailors, Astartes and civilians are going to believe?

Someone familiar with them, or some alien, inhuman being that claims to be from the past who is suddenly appearing and ordering them around and killing everyone who disagrees with him? No idea. But I know enough about humanity to know that the seed of doubt is very easy to plant, and grows even in the most hostile environments.

Him appearing and giving them orders, killing off those that disagree is hardly something unfamiliar to the citizens of the Imperium. What is unfamiliar, is it being someone considered a Demigod, Saint and the Savior of the Imperium now being in charge. Unfamiliar but not all together unwelcome in these dark times, as he's working to make things better in some fashion or the other. Now you have the guys that made everyone disappear, obviously clamoring against this Saint because they lost some of their power. Many of these indoctrinated persons will follow what the Saint and the Church say. After all he is working to keep the Ecclesiarchy on his side, inspite of his hatred of them.

Doubt does take hold easily as you say, but for people brought up in the manner they are, doubting one of their deities, will not come easily just because of some hearsay that he was brought back by an Alien.

I have a better question, however; what makes you think that in a universe where the Emperor was betrayed, Guilliman wouldn't be? It may not happen immediately, for these things can take some time before they do. But the Horus Heresy took many years to reach fruition, after all.

I dont think that he wont be, i just don't think it will be in the form of the High Lords of Terra. It will likely come from one of his brothers, because well thats just how GW does things.

 Melissia wrote:
For one, I never suggested assassination.

Fair, but at present there is no one with enough clout to present a threat in any way but assassination. Unless one of his Brothers comes back.

Melissia wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Do you have a quote?

Nope. Don't have the books in front of me.

Right. So, in absence of that, no real evidence that Guilliman actually did kill anyone. Still, it appears we've moved on from if he actually has, and onto the What If, or Should He Have.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Again, what good will all their connections and power do when they've been replaced by someone who is the HEIR to the Emperor himself?

Discredit him. Spread discontent, misinformation, and wear down his public image. Disrupt his efforts by surreptitiously redirecting reinforcements, supplies, and information, so that his military and political victories are lessened, or even turned in to defeats. Manipulate words and events so that the worst news appears to be the fault of his actions, where the best news appears to be the doing of their allies. Explain away his victories that they seem lesser and not as important.

The ways of internal politics are often petty, underhanded, and dishonest, and the High Lords of Terra achieved that rank because they are masters of it. All these things above are things that have been done to the protagonists of 40k novels.

And Guilliman is, again, FAR above anything else the HLOT have needed to deal with. A master politician in his own right (see the Realm of Ultramar), the only living Loyal Primarch to reveal themself since Vulkan, accredited with rearming and resupplying the Imperium's military, and securing better ties to Mars, and is officially the Emperor's Heir.

Redirecting reinforcements isn't wise considering Guilliman reorganised the Administratum to be more efficient (see. Codex Imperialis), and more than likely chose who he wanted in the main jobs for reliability.
Manipulating the media to such an extent, especially in such a reclusive and isolated society, only works if you have guarenteed sole control of it. Not to mention these deposed High Lords (because we know they have been) probably don't have the ability to replace Guilliman's own media, considering he's Imperial Regent.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
As we've seen, he controls the Imperium's military power, and is a Primarch guarded by Space Marines and Custodes, making assassination near impossible.

For one, I never suggested assassination.

I know. However, it IS a method of removing Guilliman from power. That's the only reason I mentioned it.

But since you want to talk about it as if it's the only possible way a political opponent could strike at him, even if he appears unassailable physically, don't forget that he's on life support right now. He's wholly dependent on the armor Cawl crafted for him to survive-- without it, he will once again suffer from the wounds Fulgrim gave him, wounds he was unable to heal without outside help, wounds that were as much a warp-phenomena as damage to the flesh. He is not as strong and healthy as he was during the Horus Heresy.

Not AS strong, but it relies on one to damage that armour. Something that not even Magnus has done.

That said, I would certainly not bet on any assassin being able to kill him. Injure him, perhaps, damage his armor and render him weak, perhaps. Kill him? That is likely only going to be the result of some major, climactic event, like a battle with a fellow primarch, or a greater daemon, a massive Ork overlord like the Beast-- not a mere assassination.

Most likely.

A setback which is near impossible to come back from in this scenario.

But less impossible than death.

Maybe so, but death doesn't seem to fit with Guilliman's methods. I have seen no record of him killing political opponents, save from the revenge killings on Macragge.

I don't know why you're so bent on him killing High Lords? Is it to make him more "grimdark"? Perhaps his ideology may come to bite him later. Maybe not. With GW, unlikely, but that's their rules.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I'm just saying, but I believed that you only opposed the Imperium purely because you never mentioned anything else.

In this thread, I never mentioned anything else. When Magnus and Mortarion came out, I spoke out against their inclusion in to 40k.

A fact I didn't know.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
What do the 30k fans have to do with this?

Fans of the primarchs as depicted in the Horus Heresy series and game are, as far as I'm concerned, 30k fans. I find that their inclusion in 40k is, at best, jarring and unsettling, and at worst, disruptive of the themes and ideas that made 40k great.

You're entitled to that opinion. Other people may disagree - I personally can understand what you mean about the Primarchs being unsettling in 40k, but I do disagree that anyone who's a fan of them is automatically a 30k fan. Still, semantics.

Melissia wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Let me rephrase it then. Who do you think the massess of Soldiers, Sailors, Astartes and civilians are going to believe?

Someone familiar with them, or some alien, inhuman being that claims to be from the past who is suddenly appearing and ordering them around and killing everyone who disagrees with him? No idea. But I know enough about humanity to know that the seed of doubt is very easy to plant, and grows even in the most hostile environments.

Again - who has Guilliman killed?

He's been blessed by the Custodes and a Living Saint, the Ecclesiarchy backs him, he defended Terra in the Second Battle of Terra and Luna - not to mention his face is probably just as recognizable as Sanguinius', and he's got a holiday in honour of him!

I think it's completely logical to assume that a bog standard Imperial citizen would follow the recognizable godlike figure who has led them to victory over and over again over someone who they've never seen before but says they're a "High Lord". The "normal" people probably wouldn't even consider Guilliman as an alien - he's one of the Emperor's Sons, how could he be?

Humanity can doubt easily. But they can also believe just as easily.

I have a better question, however; what makes you think that in a universe where the Emperor was betrayed, Guilliman wouldn't be? It may not happen immediately, for these things can take some time before they do. But the Horus Heresy took many years to reach fruition, after all.

The Emperor was betrayed by someone he had clouded judgement for - someone he didn't have contact with, someone he didn't really care for because the idea of betrayal hadn't really crossed his mind. Guilliman has seen the effects of the Heresy - I think he'd be a bit more cautious about the situation.

I'm not saying it's impossible though.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Right. So, in absence of that, no real evidence that Guilliman actually did kill anyone.

Nor do you have any evidence that he didn't. You assert he "removed" them, but it's very common in tyrannical regimes for "removal" to equate to death, so even if all it says is "removed" it's entirely plausible that he had them dragged away and quietly executed where no one would see. And it's also very much in Guilliman's character for him to do that, too.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
And Guilliman is, again, FAR above anything else the HLOT have needed to deal with.

It doesn't really matter. There's nothing that suggests he's invulnerable to the usual tactics. Resistant? Yes. Invulnerable? No.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Maybe so, but death doesn't seem to fit with Guilliman's methods. I have seen no record of him killing political opponents, save from the revenge killings on Macragge.

So you have no evidence of him killing political opponents, except for the evidence you have?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I don't know why you're so bent on him killing High Lords?

Because it makes the most sense both for Guilliman specifically and the setting in general. To simply remove them without killing them leaves a group of powerful individuals, desperate for their loss of title and the blow to their egos, willing to do whatever it takes to get it back, potentially leading to a heretical chaos-induced uprising from within by a group of individuals who are very closely tied to the power structures of the Imperium at large-- thus endangering the Imperium, something Guilliman would not want to do.

There is no logical reason TO keep them alive if he is going to just flat out remove them from power. Guilliman has always been quite utilitarian in his actions, and in this case, I just don't see any benefit in keeping them alive over killing them. He's not really known for his kindness-- that is more closely associated with Vulkan or Sanguinius-- but rather, for his pragmatism.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Guilliman has seen the effects of the Heresy - I think he'd be a bit more cautious about the situation.

Guilliman may be more cautious, but he is also massively less powerful, massively less influential, and massively less capable than the Emperor was. While the hype might declare Guilliman as god-like, the Emperor effectively WAS a god in all but name-- as high above the primarchs as the primarchs were above common people. Guilliman rightfully doubts his own abilities.

 Melissia wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Right. So, in absence of that, no real evidence that Guilliman actually did kill anyone.

Nor do you have any evidence that he didn't. You assert he "removed" them, but it's very common in tyrannical regimes for "removal" to equate to death, so even if all it says is "removed" it's entirely plausible that he had them dragged away and quietly executed where no one would see. And it's also very much in Guilliman's character for him to do that, too.

Is Guilliman ruling tyrannically? We know he's a meritocratic leader, judging from his treatment of Macragge when he became king there, so "removal" might simply be that.

Again, you're just using the "you can't prove it ISN'T true" approach, which is a fallacy. You're the one claiming he has killed people, so much so that there's written records - if I see them, I'll concede my argument. I'm just struggling to see with how GW has portrayed Guilliman so far him actually killing some High Lords.

I don't really see how it's his character to do that: we haven't seen him do it (even the example I gave below isn't a political killing), and whilst it may be more "efficient" to kill them, Guilliman still uses statesmanship and diplomacy in these situations.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Maybe so, but death doesn't seem to fit with Guilliman's methods. I have seen no record of him killing political opponents, save from the revenge killings on Macragge.

So you have no evidence of him killing political opponents, except for the evidence you have?

Except that's like saying Kharn is a master politician because he kills so many people.

Guilliman didn't kill them for political reasons. He killed them for murdering his father and terrorizing the city. That's no more evidence of him killing the deposed High Lords than him killing Word Bearers over Calth.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I don't know why you're so bent on him killing High Lords?

Because it makes the most sense both for Guilliman specifically and the setting in general. To simply remove them without killing them leaves a group of powerful individuals, desperate for their loss of title and the blow to their egos, willing to do whatever it takes to get it back, potentially leading to a heretical chaos-induced uprising from within by a group of individuals who are very closely tied to the power structures of the Imperium at large-- thus endangering the Imperium, something Guilliman would not want to do.

High Lords have often been removed position - hell, it routinely happens in the case of the more fringe posts of the HLOT, which aren't given a guaranteed seat.

I trust that Guilliman would have watchmen placed over the deposed Lords, but I cannot see.

There is no logical reason TO keep them alive if he is going to just flat out remove them from power. Guilliman has always been quite utilitarian in his actions, and in this case, I just don't see any benefit in keeping them alive over killing them. He's not really known for his kindness-- that is more closely associated with Vulkan or Sanguinius-- but rather, for his pragmatism.

Guilliman isn't as utilitarian as Dorn, however, He might not be AS kind as Vulkan and Sangy, but he's certainly leaning on their side. The Ultramarines as a Legion/Chapter are regarded as one of the kinder ones out there.

Frankly, I don't see Guilliman killing anyone: he COULD, and it would be logical, but I don't think he would.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Guilliman has seen the effects of the Heresy - I think he'd be a bit more cautious about the situation.

Guilliman may be more cautious, but he is also massively less powerful, massively less influential, and massively less capable than the Emperor was. While the hype might declare Guilliman as god-like, the Emperor effectively WAS a god in all but name-- as high above the primarchs as the primarchs were above common people. Guilliman rightfully doubts his own abilities.

No, agreed. He's not the Emperor, but it just means that his downfall would likely come from something the Emperor could dismiss. Guilliman probably won't meet an end via a HH-esque scenario, because he's already seen it happen.

Definitely agreed that he's not an ACTUAL God, like the Emperor.

Wait so Kharn ISN'T a master politician?

do you not think this is getting little silly, you've been batting backwards and forwarded did or didn't kill the high lords for days, which i plenty of time to pick up the book and provide a reference, other wise your never going to get any where