Are the HH books spoiling the fluff?

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.

**MOMUS**

Basically are the HH books putting too much 'down on paper'?

back in RT/2nd ed/3rd ed fluff was open to interpretation and a little hazy at best

i just wondering wether GW is painting itself into a corner

anybody else think that too much of the HH in detail is a bad thing? stifling imagination?

gamers are starting to take the books as FACT rather than one authors view.

i think i prefer to leave some things to the imagination and take the books with a pinch of salt.

'actually you cant do that! captain x never fought lord z cuz he died in book 5 chapter 12 page....'

**Habanero**

There would be a stronger case for this, one I'd certainly be behind myself, if it weren't for the fact that the HH series has been responsible for some of Black Library's best stuff. Recently, anyway.

I like the mystery behind the HH, but I like Fulgrim and Mechanicum more.

**Shaman**

I kinda of agree, especially when they butcher something like mechanicum.. Yes mechanicum was bad!

Also in legion the two primarch thing is well lame at best.. (I like the book but for that part)

But then again Im someone who finds the way they are doing HH unfortunate.

I want epic battles, Primarchs POV, inter legion rivalry, and the descent into madness that is chaos. And I want it done well.

What should be killed is Remeberancers, Pointless scenes, Joe space marine.

I can get all of that elsewhere. For example, Fulgrim which was pretty good, would of been better if told more for the primarch and senior marines POV.. As they are seduced by slaanesh.. who cares about remberancers.

**Kilkrazy**

Whatever is written in the HH books is ancient history.

Everything happened over 10,000 years ago, millions of light years away.

It's all completely deniable and malleable if you want to write your own local fluff.

**SagesStone**

Well I guess the suposed Ultramarines trilogy thats apparently set in the HH will come along and do that for the series. They really didn't do much and by the time that's through I think that it will end with the Ultramarines being the greatest thing to ever happen. It might even change to the Emperor injured Horus and he runs off only to find Roboute Guilliman, pen in one hand book in the other, and get smashed like a bug.

Just as planned.

**Dark Lord Seanron**

Nope, I like the HH books (except for Battle For The Abyss which was just god-awful) and I look forward to the rest of the series ^^ I should point out that I'm a total fluff-monkey!

I guess have a stronger frame-work for the history stops the turgid flow of "Huuur! My Spehss Marines is the Lost Legion and My Primarch is stronger than the Empror" drivel that seems to permeate alot of fan-fiction (not all, but alot)

And Mechanicum was awesome ^^ my favourite book of the lot

**MOMUS**

Just to clarify, this isnt about whether you thought the series is amazing or god-awful.

im interested to know if other gamers think some things are best left to the imagination, if they prefer when fluff is left ambiguous.

@ dark lord snearon
the thing that stops that 'turgid flow' is common sense and a mental age above 10

i love my fluff but as a long time 40k gamer, i am a bit 'concerned' about the way something as important as the HH is being treated.

40k fluff is at its best when it lets you join the dots by yourself, dnt you think?
rather than just explain EVERYTHING leaving nothing to the imagination.

**Dark Lord Seanron**

That is where we must differ my friend. I like having explanations for major things in the 40K universe. Sure I might not like it all, but tis is life and that is what makes a believable story. And that too is coming from a long-term 40Ker, who was frequently frustrated with the vagueness (and sometimes downright silliness) of the old fluff.

**karimabuseer**

Hey DLS....your first flag is british. Your second is the EU flag. Bwah?
Anyway, there's still alot of things which they haven't gone into much detail about.
For example:
The word bearers tried to own the smurfs...and you get a bit more on Kor Phaeron.
However how were the word bearers introduced to Chaos?
What happened to Vulkan?
I reckon the two could go hand in hand

The HH books are making the fluff better imo

**Quintinus**

I agree with you.

It was so much more interesting when there was very little known about the Horus Heresy. I mean, sure, we -kind- of knew the series of events, but that was it.

Now we have all of this lame crap, like strangling Avatars.

What's next, we find out the missing legions? They've removed everything else that's interesting about the Heresy, they might as well go the whole 9 yards.

**Lint**

I agree that the series is a positive thing. With a couple of exceptions (Battle for the abyss, Now written in crayon!) the books have been very good. Personally I enjoy reading as much background fluff as I can. I got into 40k because of the fluff, and how interesting I found it.

**Alpharius**

The mystery of the HH has gone on long enough.

I'm for full disclosure at this point.

I do want to know about the missing legions.

They are out to tell a good story, and there is little point in NOT telling the entire story.

**Da Boss**

When the first book came out I was really excited and enthusiastic because it was interesting and well plotted and well characterised. Since then, my enthusiasm has turned to cold dread at what horrible attrocity they're going to do in the next book. Their complete disregard for their own continuity is shocking, and the terrible writing and characterisation in pretty much all the other books is really disappointing. I'd be okay with a heresy series if it was going to be all top notch high quality stuff, but if it's going to be pants I'd rather leave it up to my own imagination.

**Alpharius**

Agreed on that - the overall quality good be a LOT better, and editorial control good use a bit of a boost too...

**MOMUS**

Nooooooooooooooo!
they should NEVER reveal the 2 missing legions

**Lord of battles**

I cant wait the Space Wolves and Thousand Sons books!!!!!!!

**Quintinus**

MOMUS wrote:Nooooooooooooooo!
they should NEVER reveal the 2 missing legions

Why not? They've ruined everything else.

**metallifan**

Should be safe - Just as long as the BL doesn't feel sorry for Goto and let him do the final HH book. And GW keeps Jervis confined to pulverising Codex CSM so that he can't pummel the Space Marine fluff with his Rapefist

If GW prevents both of those events from occuring, we should be okay.

**Armandloft**

I could see the Horus Heresy ruining preconceptions of certain primarchs and early chapter histories. However, I also see the books opening up new mysteries, for those concerned about the events of the previous 10 millenia being laid bare.

**Kilkrazy**

I don't read any of the books. I pretty much just skim the stuff in codexes, and I mainly read the stuff people post online.

Consequently, to me the whole body of fluff is an incomplete collection of rumours, propaganda, speculation, history, legend, and comment and claims by well- or badly-informed third parties.

This is a good way to approach the fluff since it leaves a lot of scope for making up your own stories (supposedly a big part of playing 40K.)

If you enjoy the books, then read them. You don't have to believe them.

**MOMUS**

"This is a good way to approach the fluff since it leaves a lot of scope for making up your own stories (supposedly a big part of playing 40K.) "

yes! exactly my point. SUPPOSEDLY. but making all the interesting history stuff concrete does not help this.

i think it was Rick Priestly who said "When you have a big, ever-expanding back story, it never pays to be too tidy with it. If you leave some plot threads unfinished and some enigmatic mentions unexplained you always have new elements to bring forward at a later date."

**karimabuseer**

And they've left plenty of loose ends imo (I love the fluff, so I'm going to be biased

)

**Kilkrazy**

MOMUS wrote:"This is a good way to approach the fluff since it leaves a lot of scope for making up your own stories (supposedly a big part of playing 40K.) "

yes! exactly my point. SUPPOSEDLY. but making all the interesting history stuff concrete does not help this.

i think it was Rick Priestly who said "When you have a big, ever-expanding back story, it never pays to be too tidy with it. If you leave some plot threads unfinished and some enigmatic mentions unexplained you always have new elements to bring forward at a later date."

You don't have to believe what you read in the books. Read them as stories like the King Arthur stories are read IRL.

Then dismiss them as propaganda or legend and do your own thing. GW don't have an inquisition snooping around everyone's house or club for deviations from 'official' history.

**JD21290**

Im no fluff nutter, but i do find GW are shooting themselves in the foot.

I found it good that they left alot of things vague and open to imagination.
However, its nice to have a solid base, but its also nice to have that level of mystery that shrouds it.

**Kilkrazy**

GW make a lot of money from the books. As long as people buy them, GW will publish more.

**Alpharius**

JD21290 wrote:Im no fluff nutter, but i do find GW are shooting themselves in the foot.

I found it good that they left alot of things vague and open to imagination.
However, its nice to have a solid base, but its also nice to have that level of mystery that shrouds it.

You've read these books though, right?

Because:

1) Some of them are actually really good!

2) This is GW, you know, the company that seemingly hates Editors, so a lot of stuff still IS vague and open to imagination.

**metallifan**

JD21290 wrote:Im no fluff nutter, but i do find GW are shooting themselves in the foot.

I found it good that they left alot of things vague and open to imagination.
However, its nice to have a solid base, but its also nice to have that level of mystery that shrouds it.

I'd have to disagree. I find that the HH books aren't really exposing as many mysteries as they are just telling us what we already know in greater detail. It's still leaving blanks, but it's showing us why things went the way they did for the Traitor Legions. There're still a lot of murky details, and I doubt that'll change. I think it's good that we see a more elaborate view of each Legion in the time of their undoing.

**Tyyr**

Frankly I was never a fan of how incredibly vague everything was. I like that we're getting a lot of the details of what happened drawn in. Not everything mind you, but quite a bit.

As for the two missing legions. While I kind of like them missing I don't think anything is lost if they're revealed. People create new space marine chapters, not legions.

**Shaman**

On the question of HH ruining the fluff buy revealing things Id say no.

For example the ghoul stars. No one knows anything about them.. would a book set in the ghoul stars hurt.. definitely not.

**MOMUS**

Im glad you mentioned the ghoul stars!

A book that explained the GS would render them pointless, they are intriguing because they are mysterious.

mysteries are fun because they are a MYSTERY!

its far more evocative to leave things to the imagination it also adds suspense and creates atmosphere.
thats why ALIEN is such a great film.