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.

Omegus wrote:Humanitarians and humanists are two different things. I can see Night Lords being labeled humanist.

I brought up humanitarian because I assumed the poster had confused the two, with humanism being an irrelevant point and humanitarianism being exactly and entirely pertinent.

They slaughter innumerable humans and leave the rest living in terror.

That is standard procedure in 40k, the Night Haunter though was known for one quality that the other Primarchs lacked, justice, while some Primarchs may have valued beauty, art, strength, faith, or human welfare none of them really cared about what is just, and wanting order and prosperity is different than wanting justice.

ZSO SAHALL wrote:while some Primarchs may have valued beauty, art, strength, faith, or human welfare none of them really cared about what is just

Neither did the night haunter.

depends on whos account you believe, my opinion mainly comes from Zso Sahaals account which characterises him as a just man who was forced into the role of a tame monster by a father who thought nothing of using his son.

Considering that he was prepped to be the Night Haunter's heir, it hardly seems likely that he wouldn't have honored him as a hero even if it meant embellishing the truth.

Considering that he was prepped to be the Night Haunter's heir, it hardly seems likely that he wouldn't have honored him as a hero even if it meant embellishing the truth.

You could say that about the Emporer or any of the Primarchsm, its Curzes willingness to stand trial trial and eventually allow himself to be assasinated that makes me see him as giving an honest account.

The way Kurze is presented in the Night Lords books, he was bipolar in the extreme, waxing poetic about justice and rtribution one moment, and ripping the heads off his servants in the next. In Savage Weapons, he's portrayed asdownright deranged.

He didn't turn into a monster for the Emperor, he was a monster shaped by his environment. What he foresaw was that the Emperor would use his talents until they became a political liability, and then Kurze and his Legion would be sanctioned and discarded. That's why he was so tortured/bitter.

The way Kurze is presented in the Night Lords books, he was bipolar in the extreme, waxing poetic about justice and rtribution one moment, and ripping the heads off his servants in the next. In Savage Weapons, he's portrayed asdownright deranged.

The boweden books paint a fine picture of present day Night Lords, but Lord of the Night paints the best picture of Horus Heresy Night Lords. He certainly became deranged, his behavior at the end of his life shows this.

He assimilated knowledge almost greedily, and became considered a fair and temperate ruler, until word of some injustice reached his ears. He would then hunt the guilty through the streets, wearing them down and then killing and mutilating them. The unpredictable pattern of benevolent wisdom and hideous vengeance ushered in a new level of efficiency and honesty. Other cities around the planet followed suit, in an attempt to keep the Night Haunter from their doors.

The Night Haunter always had two sides about him, those two sides made him a good ruler, but the Emporer gave one side victory over the other, and pushed his monstrous tendencies to the surface.

The reason he allowed himself to killed is obvious, he was both rejecting his role as monster and atoning for his sins. His death shows much similarity to the Legion punishment of condemnation, Curze spent the remainder of his life leading his Legion so they would survive the long war before offering his throat as penance for his sins against humanity.

ZSO SAHALL wrote:
The reason he allowed himself to killed is obvious, he was both rejecting his role as monster and atoning for his sins. His death shows much similarity to the Legion punishment of condemnation, Curze spent the remainder of his life leading his Legion so they would survive the long war before offering his throat as penance for his sins against humanity.

No. The reason he allowed himself to be killed was to prove that the Emperor/Imperium was not above extra-juidicial assassination and violence to remove threats to its social order, the very same "methods" he championed as a violent vigilante and for which he was condamned. Hence, the all rage about "vindication". There was no attonement in his death. Just a self-righteous "gotcha!", you're no better than I am.

Unless its the nids codex, every book makes their army look like the good guy...

ZSO SAHALL wrote:

They slaughter innumerable humans and leave the rest living in terror.

That is standard procedure in 40k, the Night Haunter though was known for one quality that the other Primarchs lacked, justice, while some Primarchs may have valued beauty, art, strength, faith, or human welfare none of them really cared about what is just, and wanting order and prosperity is different than wanting justice.

Dorn absolutely valued justice, in fact his IF still use trials (read: Phalanx) and he allowed Nathaniel Garro to speak, despite Garro's thing being the most mind-bogglingly insane claim ever (that happened to be true)

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Dorn absolutely valued justice, in fact his IF still use trials (read: Phalanx) and he allowed Nathaniel Garro to speak, despite Garro's thing being the most mind-bogglingly insane claim ever (that happened to be true)

Uh, I guess.

He also nearly killed Garro because he was butthurt.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Je suis2 au hazard wrote:
Dorn absolutely valued justice, in fact his IF still use trials (read: Phalanx) and he allowed Nathaniel Garro to speak, despite Garro's thing being the most mind-bogglingly insane claim ever (that happened to be true)

Uh, I guess.

He also nearly killed Garro because he was butthurt.

He pulled the punch.

And it was stated that any other primarch would have killed him outright.

Anyways, for an equivalent, go up to an inquisitor and tell them that the emperor is tainted and you need their help to kill him. Or say that to a SoB.

They will execute you immediately. Only Dorn's sense of fairness and justice kept Garro alive long enough for him to present his evidence.

ZSO SAHALL wrote:
That is standard procedure in 40k, the Night Haunter though was known for one quality that the other Primarchs lacked, justice, while some Primarchs may have valued beauty, art, strength, faith, or human welfare none of them really cared about what is just, and wanting order and prosperity is different than wanting justice.

Vigilantism is not justice. Judge and executioner in one person is not justice. An unaccountable half-god claiming for himself the privilige to decide what deserves punishment and what doesn't is not justice.

He might have "justified" his actions before himself as "justice", just as Angron might have (initially) justified his actions as "the end justify the means". But neither makes any of their actions less the atrocities they were.

Vigilantism is not justice.

All justice is Vigilantism in some way or another.

He might have "justified" his actions before himself as "justice", just as Angron might have (initially) justified his actions as "the end justify the means". But neither makes any of their actions less the atrocities they were.

Everyone in 40k uses the ends justifies the means argument, Curze was only honest about it unlike the Emperor who hid his true colors by letting others do his dirty work.

ZSO SAHALL wrote:

Vigilantism is not justice.

All justice is Vigilantism in some way or another.

Unless you're saying the government can never dispense justice, then you are hilariously wrong.


Actually ,you're wrong either way.

All justice is Vigilantism in some way or another.

Vigilante: A member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate

Unless you're saying the law works without legal authority?

Now, how many of you hate the Space Wolves because you got beat a few times on the table top, and not because of their fluff?

ZSO SAHALL wrote:
Everyone in 40k uses the ends justifies the means argument, Curze was only honest about it unlike the Emperor who hid his true colors by letting others do his dirty work.

Or he succeeded in bringing the Emperor down to his debased level. That's what Terrorists do. They terrorize you until you start to compromise - at first - and soon forget and/or overlook you ethic considerations and moral standards until you're down in the mess with them and their unfavourable view of the world in general and their opponents/victims in particular, which justfied their terror from the start, has become a perversely self-fullfulling prophecy.

The Emperor may not have been any better than Curze at the start. The 40K Imperium post-Heresy clearly isnt. But that doesn't mean it never was.

That's what Terrorists do.

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.

But that doesn't mean it never was.

Was the Imperium better, really? The way I see it if the traitor Legions are evil then the Imperium must be evil for creating them in the first place.

perversely self-fullfulling prophecy.

Like the Emporer forcing Curze to become his tame monster, Curze never even wanted to leave his planet, he wanted to be left alone, it would be like telling a troubled 17 year old you can either go to prison or join the army and then judging him when he becomes a killer.

One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.

Except they fight for NO ONE'S freedom.

You seem to have your view point thoroughly skewed by reading books written from THEIR PERSPECTIVE. Of course it'll sound reasonable, coming directly from their thoughts, because they have already rationalized it. That's why codices are good, they are usually from the PoV of a neutral fact-stating narrator.

Zweischneid wrote:
Vigilantism is not justice. Judge and executioner in one person is not justice. An unaccountable half-god claiming for himself the privilige to decide what deserves punishment and what doesn't is not justice.

Yes, it's only Justice when it's done by a Government which is an Immortal half God that claims for itself the privilege to decide what deserves punishment what doesn't.

So, yeah, when you think about it there is no such thing as justice, just a near Biblical need for vengeance and the urge to punish disobedience.

BaronIveagh wrote:
Yes, it's only Justice when it's done by a Government which is an Immortal half God that claims for itself the privilege to decide what deserves punishment what doesn't.

So, yeah, when you think about it there is no such thing as justice, just a near Biblical need for vengeance and the urge to punish disobedience.

Not necessarily. Any government, even an imperial one, would necessarily (try to) claim a monopoly on the legitimate use of force, not least to ensure that justice is precisely not punitive, retributive and arbitrary, but consistent, proportionate and transparently rules-based, precisely not religious, but administrative. Attempts to install something akin to a galactic rule of law could easily have been part of the much derided attempts of the Emperor creating bureaucracy (e.g. standard procedures), administration (e.g. universally standardised applications of these procedures) and politics (e.g.distribution of power along with checks-and-balances in the system), which the more old-testamentarian Primarch's instinctively saw as threat to their raison-d'etre.

Zweischneid wrote:

ZSO SAHALL wrote:
Everyone in 40k uses the ends justifies the means argument, Curze was only honest about it unlike the Emperor who hid his true colors by letting others do his dirty work.

Or he succeeded in bringing the Emperor down to his debased level. That's what Terrorists do. They terrorize you until you start to compromise - at first - and soon forget and/or overlook you ethic considerations and moral standards until you're down in the mess with them and their unfavourable view of the world in general and their opponents/victims in particular, which justfied their terror from the start, has become a perversely self-fullfulling prophecy.

The Emperor may not have been any better than Curze at the start. The 40K Imperium post-Heresy clearly isnt. But that doesn't mean it never was.

Oh, the Emperor was very much on board with Curze's methods. I mean, his thunder warriors were basically rage-gorillas that make Astartes look puny, and their weapons and tactics were designed to be as brutal and terrifying as possible. Unity at the end of a boltgun. If anything, the Emperor didn't go far enough, since he tolerated political dissent and could be influenced by the Terran council (see Council of Nikea). It was due to political pressure that he recalled the Night Lords in the first place. The actual sanction came when Kurze almost murdered Dorn, and then rather than face his other brothers, slaughtered a bunch of custodians and marines and escaped to the unknown regions.

At the end of the day, with his growing schitzophrenia and the ever more criminal recruits, Night Lords very quickly degenerated into brutality for brutality's sake. They were no longer inspiring fear to ensure compliance, they were just getting off on inspiring fear.

Omegus wrote:
Oh, the Emperor was very much on board with Curze's methods. I mean, his thunder warriors were basically rage-gorillas that make Astartes look puny, and their weapons and tactics were designed to be as brutal and terrifying as possible. Unity at the end of a boltgun. If anything, the Emperor didn't go far enough, since he tolerated political dissent and could be influenced by the Terran council (see Council of Nikea). It was due to political pressure that he recalled the Night Lords in the first place. The actual sanction came when Kurze almost murdered Dorn, and then rather than face his other brothers, slaughtered a bunch of custodians and marines and escaped to the unknown regions.

At the end of the day, with his growing schitzophrenia and the ever more criminal recruits, Night Lords very quickly degenerated into brutality for brutality's sake. They were no longer inspiring fear to ensure compliance, they were just getting off on inspiring fear.

Yes and no. The Emperor surely had those aspects in him. But he also had the nobler aspects you'd find in Guilliman, Dorn or others. If you wanna go meta-narrative, the different Primarchs perhaps all expressed parts of the Emperors persona. But Curze was definitly on the darker side of the spectrum. His was part of what the Emperor was, and perhaps he was cast out for this as much as for anything else. It was still only part of what the Emperor was. It was all that Curze was however, with no redeeming factors to balance the viciousness.

Again, yes and no. Kurze's has tragic elements to his tale (although what Primarch doesn't). He took on his father's mission, at the head of a Legion of the same kind of monsters he despised in his childhood, even knowing how his part in it would end. He hated his Legion, and took no joy in what he did.




But for all these noble inclinations, (if you consider a guy whose idea of justice is crucifying and disemboweling anyone who steps out of line "noble"), he was as much a monster as his Legion. If he had a reason for hating them, it's because they learned his lessons all too well. Towards the end, he was purposefully antagonizing the Imperium to force the Emperor to send assassins after him. He hated the Emperor for his supposed betrayal, he hated the planet he grew up on for its corruption and weakness, he hated his brothers for what he perceived as having a better lot in life, he hated his Legion because they were pale reflections of him, and most of all he hated himself for being no better than those he prosecuted. It could be argued that Kurze recognized what he truly was, and wanted to be put out of his misery. All the talk of vindication and lessons was just lip service, and at least some of his Legion recognized this:



He's basically the archtypical Chaos Warlord.


Anyway, how did we get on the topic of Kurze? We're wasting valuable time that could be used to hate on Leman Russ some more.

Zweischneid wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:
Yes, it's only Justice when it's done by a Government which is an Immortal half God that claims for itself the privilege to decide what deserves punishment what doesn't.

So, yeah, when you think about it there is no such thing as justice, just a near Biblical need for vengeance and the urge to punish disobedience.

Not necessarily. Any government, even an imperial one, would necessarily (try to) claim a monopoly on the legitimate use of force, not least to ensure that justice is precisely not punitive, retributive and arbitrary, but consistent, proportionate and transparently rules-based, precisely not religious, but administrative. Attempts to install something akin to a galactic rule of law could easily have been part of the much derided attempts of the Emperor creating bureaucracy (e.g. standard procedures), administration (e.g. universally standardised applications of these procedures) and politics (e.g.distribution of power along with checks-and-balances in the system), which the more old-testamentarian Primarch's instinctively saw as threat to their raison-d'etre.

I hate to say it, but law is generally punitive, retributive, arbitrary, inconstant, and in-proportionate. Checks and balances are laughable, and corruption is quietly condoned under a mask of righteousness. The wealthy and influential generally sneer at the law and if the Government isn't on the winning side of the law, they just make new ones to get their way.

Sadly, I'm not talking about 40k.

suggesting some d

Do you truly believe I care what happens to any of you after my death?

The night haunter said and did conflicting things at the time of his death.

suggesting some deep sickness within... his cadaverous visage ...

Their have been hints in several books that something was physically wrong with him, like somehow the emps genes had not settled right in him and he was dying. If so that explains some of his self-destructive behavior.

You also have to take into to account whose saying what. Talos is meant to represent both the present legion as well the melancholy of the Legion, and is even rebuked by others who say "he wanted us to survive the long war" "your not the only one he confided in". Sahaal is his hope, his hope against all odds of winning and creating something better for humanity "and the Imperium will prosper under nocturnal eyes. Most likely he said different things to different captains who connected to him on different levels.
Regardless of what he said to Talos Curze enjoyed far more dedication from his sons that Horus whose legion came to despise him.

BaronIveagh wrote:

Zweischneid wrote:

BaronIveagh wrote:
Yes, it's only Justice when it's done by a Government which is an Immortal half God that claims for itself the privilege to decide what deserves punishment what doesn't.

So, yeah, when you think about it there is no such thing as justice, just a near Biblical need for vengeance and the urge to punish disobedience.

Not necessarily. Any government, even an imperial one, would necessarily (try to) claim a monopoly on the legitimate use of force, not least to ensure that justice is precisely not punitive, retributive and arbitrary, but consistent, proportionate and transparently rules-based, precisely not religious, but administrative. Attempts to install something akin to a galactic rule of law could easily have been part of the much derided attempts of the Emperor creating bureaucracy (e.g. standard procedures), administration (e.g. universally standardised applications of these procedures) and politics (e.g.distribution of power along with checks-and-balances in the system), which the more old-testamentarian Primarch's instinctively saw as threat to their raison-d'etre.

I hate to say it, but law is generally punitive, retributive, arbitrary, inconstant, and in-proportionate. Checks and balances are laughable, and corruption is quietly condoned under a mask of righteousness. The wealthy and influential generally sneer at the law and if the Government isn't on the winning side of the law, they just make new ones to get their way.

Sadly, I'm not talking about 40k.

I can see you're not an essay writer, as you didn't explain what makes you feel that way.

Punitive and retributive, yes, and there's nothing wrong with that. Arbitrary? Hardly.

Arbitrary: Based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.

You think laws are just randomly passed for no purpose? A code of laws is needfully specific, having it simplified down to "Don't kill, Don't steal, Don't hit, Don't rape" just doesn't work. Every law passed is thoroughly thought out and voted on.

Inconstant? I don't even get where this is coming from. Is rape "sometimes" okay where you live? I know I am being extremely literal on this one, without an explanation from you to go on, I have to be general.

In-proportionate. Are you saying criminals should spend the weekend in jail for genocide orrrr...? Or are you saying it is too light? Clarify! Statements are useless without supporting arguments!

Corruption is rarer than you seem to think. Very few police officers are ever corrupted. Especially not individuals. You usually see this happen with entire precincts, and there is nothing subtle about it.

The wealthy and influential are brought down harder than anyone. Have you seen the stories in the news about the British man being put on trial for accusations of manipulating prime ministers? Forget the name. Anyways, when rich people are brought down, they really are put to ruin. Even on the occasion they escape conviction with a team of crack lawyers, they are brought down twice as hard by the condemning media and the people.

And WHEN has a major government ever changed the laws to protect themselves? Especially on the personal basis you seem to be hinting at.

You seem to have an overly romanticized, somewhat illogical, Night Lords-series influenced view of the world that is simplified to the point of being incorrect...unless you would care to clarify your points and present solid examples/evidence?

The grimdark tag comes from 40K for a reason; in a universe constantly in turmoil due to war, plagued by suffering and destruction, innocence is dead. The gods have abandoned every race, leaving the various species of the galaxy to fend for themselves. The truth is ever obscured from us by the veil of time and ignorance.

The Imperial truth as taught by the Emperor is dead. The Eldar are a dying race doomed to extinction. The orks are forever in a state of turmoil, fated to endlessly war between each other. The Necrons have lost their souls, and the one true thing they desire with it; life. The Tau are reliant on an Aristocracy of Orwellian proportions led by a ruling caste which condemns the creative mind. The dark eldar are doomed to a slow death from the curse of Slaanesh, prolonged only by suffering of unimaginable proportions. The Space Marines have lost much of the brotherhood they were designed for, now descending into petty squabbles, and fractured to the point that they are near overwhelmed. The Tyranids are fated to consume prey until they are destroyed or starve. Even the forces of Chaos can never truly gain control, as they war amongst themselves in a constant battle for control over the Immaterium and real space.

...So yeah, it's all pretty depressing. All that to say that the 40K universe is not designed to have good factions. The only good in the galaxy is found in brave individuals that fight the spread of discord in an attempt to bring harmony to the galaxy. The space wolves are no exception to this rule.

And thats my two cents