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.
2011/09/15 03:59:24
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
And such things continued in the Deathwatch roleplay's depiction of Tau.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2011/09/15 04:40:56
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
The codices are conjecture, as their statlines are rough estimates rather than exact stats.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2011/09/15 05:45:31
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
ph34r wrote:DoW2 is a good game. It follows the 40k canon and doesn't mess with anything.
Except for the part were nine or so Marines carve through several planet's worth of xenos and a couple of Avatars. And Khornate psykers. Again.
Hey, there _has_ to be Khornate psykers out there somewhere. Otherwise who summons the Bloodthirsters and other Khorny daemons? What are they going to do, trust some Tzeenchian to do it for them?
ChrisWWII wrote:"Yea verily, though I pass through the valley of the shadow of death, I shall fear no evil for I am driving a house sized mass of FETH YOU!"
themocaw wrote:I view slaanesh as a giant ball of boobs and genitalia of both sexes.
Edmondblack: There's something about some str10, AP2 blast weaponry which says "i love you" in that very special way.
2011/09/15 06:15:11
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Yeah we do, based off of information in subsequent games.
Eldar won in DoW: WA (Taldeer was hunted down in DC by the Guard for what she did in victory; meanwhile, Gorgutz won over Crull, but didn't win the campaign), Marines won in DoW: DC (referenced in DoW2), Marines definitely lost in DoW: SS (the entire campaign was considered a mistake by Cyrus, and he lost many good initiates there). Avitus was the traitor in DoW2:CR, and the Blood Ravens performed remarkably well in Retribution, probably being the victors (based off of info in Space Marine).
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/09/15 07:02:28
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2011/09/15 08:05:15
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Melissia wrote:and the Blood Ravens performed remarkably well in Retribution, probably being the victors (based off of info in Space Marine).
Which leaves Eliphas definitely failing at his task (someone killed Kyras before he could), and the Tyranids probably failing. The Inquisitor/Guard probably arrived just in time to see Kyras killed, and declared the surviving Blood Ravens untainted. The Eldar probably waited until everyone had left the area and then retrieved a small bauble (i.e. Taldeer's Soulstone) from Kyras's remains while no one was watching. And the Orks had a rip-roaring good time looting all of the nearby planets while everyone else was distracted by Kyras.
2011/09/15 08:14:41
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
ph34r wrote:DoW2 is a good game. It follows the 40k canon and doesn't mess with anything.
Except for the part were nine or so Marines carve through several planet's worth of xenos and a couple of Avatars. And Khornate psykers. Again.
They're fun games with interesting ideas, but Dawn of War only follows the lore until it becomes in convenient, then they start to bend it (Much like a certain BL author).
Its called plot armour and a video game. Ever played one before?
I'm both orderly and rational. I value control, information, and order. I love structure and hierarchy, and will actively use whatever power or knowledge I have to maintain it. At best, I am lawful and insightful; at worst, I am bureaucratic and tyrannical.
" border="0" />
2011/09/15 09:09:17
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
There is no hard canon, so all this " ITS NOT CANON" talk, is completely useless. If BL isn't canon, then that doesn't leave enough fluff to actually have fun with the Universe IMO.
2011/09/15 10:30:09
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
AustonT wrote:No, I meant Germanic. I know the commissariat is a Russian concept, but they totally look like gothic Gestapo, or East German Polizei (don't remember thier name).
Historically, the commissaire politique (political commissary) first appeared in the French Revolution (1789–99), guarding it against anti-Revolutionary (ideological) thought and action, and so ensuring the Republican victory.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_commissar
chromedog wrote:I see it as an aberration.
In much the same way as I see any game-related book by certain writers.
I don't play rts versions of tabletop miniature games (hell, I don't play ANY rts games). It kinda defeats the purpose for me.
I regard MOST computer games as a waste of my time anyway. I was never a 'hardcore' gamer and never will be.
Defeats the purpose? Lol what?
The DoW series is a great game set in the 40k universe, if anything it expands and enhances the tabletop experience. DoW2 has so much good detail.
ph34r's Forgeworld Phobos blog, current WIP: Iron Warriors and Skaven Tau +From Iron Cometh Strength+ +From Strength Cometh Will+ +From Will Cometh Faith+ +From Faith Cometh Honor+ +From Honor Cometh Iron+
The Polito form is dead, insect. Are you afraid? What is it you fear? The end of your trivial existence?
When the history of my glory is written, your species shall only be a footnote to my magnificence.
2011/09/15 20:25:12
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Soladrin wrote:There is no hard canon, so all this " ITS NOT CANON" talk, is completely useless. If BL isn't canon, then that doesn't leave enough fluff to actually have fun with the Universe IMO.
Pretty much this, if you just went with what the codexs say, it makes the game a bit more bland and boring.
750 points
1000 Points
2011/09/16 07:02:05
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
The purpose for wargaming for me: I play with toy soldiers because I like to paint them and field them on a physical table battlefield where I've often also made the terrain.
Playing a video game where little icons of soldiers get to run around on a virtual battlefield defeats the purpose of me playing the game.
It requires no assembly, no painting, nothing more than button pushing. Just because YOUR purpose is different, doesn't make mine wrong.
The DoW games had neat trailers, but underneath that were pretty stock RTS games not unlike C&C or Dune and nothing spectacular.
I'm OVER 50 (and so far over everyone's BS, too).
Old enough to know better, young enough to not give a ****.
That is not dead which can eternal lie ...
... and yet, with strange aeons, even death may die.
2011/09/16 08:58:36
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Buts its a different purpose all together. You playing a video game doesn't make it pointless to play a miniatures game. They are very different things to do.
I'm both orderly and rational. I value control, information, and order. I love structure and hierarchy, and will actively use whatever power or knowledge I have to maintain it. At best, I am lawful and insightful; at worst, I am bureaucratic and tyrannical.
" border="0" />
2011/09/16 10:37:10
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Small, Far Away wrote:NO. Whilst they are good games, they have about 7 endings. Therefore, it cannot be cannon, as we don't know which ending is 'the ending'.
Well I dont agree, reason is 2 fold. Firstly while any story or fluff made by video games are either bad or great you can't really deny it didnt happen because that would ruin the hold warhammer 40k fluff thing. Its the same as saying blood ravens doesnt exist because it was made for video game.
Other reason is more solid. DoW has 7 endings yes but only one of them is canon, and if you would so kindly look at http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Blood_Ravens you will see that blood ravens do exist and that Gabriel angelos is now the Chapter master of the blood ravens. Yes I am aware its an unofficial warhammer40k site but it is widely known and used.
Also their is slight hints on how the dark crusade campaign whent in DoWII. Adding it was a mestake and that blood ravens took heavy losses.
Small things like that is why I both like and think its canon, tireing one warhammer40 fluff to another.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/09/16 10:41:55
2011/09/27 18:28:27
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
ChocolateGork wrote:Buts its a different purpose all together. You playing a video game doesn't make it pointless to play a miniatures game. They are very different things to do.
Agree. I started out with the DoW games but found it much more fun when i actually started the wargaming version with my black templars
Your honor is your life, let non dispute it!
2011/09/28 10:56:04
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Ehm..Avitus was the "canon"-traitor? What do you have to do to get him as the boss? My squats were all loyal to the end but i got the Techmarine :( (and tbh, even tho i like marthellus (i think was his name), i liked avitus more. damnation! xD)
Do i smell Heresy?
2011/09/28 20:08:47
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
iDevour wrote:Ehm..Avitus was the "canon"-traitor? What do you have to do to get him as the boss? My squats were all loyal to the end but i got the Techmarine :( (and tbh, even tho i like marthellus (i think was his name), i liked avitus more. damnation! xD)
I went evil all the way and trusty tarkus went traitor on me >.> the traitor differs depending on your taint i guess 100% pure = martellus 100% Evil = Tarkus, i don't know about the others though. Personally i'd rather cyrus be the traitor, maybe it's just me but i just don't like the guy
Your honor is your life, let non dispute it!
2011/10/10 13:09:51
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
But..if you get Tarkus as enemy when you are 100% tainted, and this is the canon boss..isn't the conclusion that the Blood Ravens are tainted in the canon? O.o
So much for clearing out the chapter master with the "untainted" SM from the chapter..
Do i smell Heresy?
2011/10/10 13:52:35
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Lynata wrote:Given that it was written and produced in the same way (-> not by GW), Dawn of War is as canon as any other licensed material. Which is to say not.
It does, however, provide good inspiration (and aside from a few nitpicks I would agree about the quality of writing and that most of it does actually fit quite well), so I see no reason why one should not adopt things from it that they like - just without expecting anyone else to stick to that.
AustonT wrote:I view DoW the way I view BL stuff, non canon. But interesting to gain ideas from and helpful in expanding the background and playerbase of TT. It's not canon until it's in the studio material. Blood Ravens themselves are now in C:SM we'll see what else shows up.
I really don't understand guys who have your positions, especially you Lynata? Didn't you say in an earlier thread that 40k has no canon and yet in this thread you say that only the codexes are canon? Do you have a single consistent position or do you simply change position whenever it suits you?
You say that non-codex material is power creep and inconsistent and yet I have to ask what the hell is Kaldor Draigo? And the current Ultramarines?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
gabrielhorus wrote:
Molten Butter wrote:
One of the alternate endings is often used in Tau debates (The sterilization camps). So it seems it's not just one faction affected.
That ending was sanctioned by GW as a (desperate) attempt to bring the tau more into line with the Grim-dark nature of 40K.
Of course right, I mean its not like history has shown that as nations expand in power and territory they become more and more darker in character and commit dark acts to keep their power. The Tau are perfect, they like all perfect being will avoid the traps of the easy way to power and the danger of arrogance cause they are perfect. The entire universe is ignorant cause they won't listen to the benevolent and divine Tau who know the secret of the universe
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/10/10 13:56:44
Stated by Grey Templar:The Ward of the Codices
"It began, with the writing of the Great Codices,
2 were given to the Eldar. Immortal, Capricious, and most farsighted of all,
2 also to Chaos. Traitorous, Deceitful, Servants of the Dark Gods,
3 to the Xenos races. T'au, Orks, and Necrons. the Young, the Beast, and the Spiteful,
7 to the race of men. Servents of the God Emperor, the Inheritors of the Galaxy.
But they were all of them, decieved. for another Codex was written…
In the Land of Ward'or, in the Fires of Mount Doom, the Dark Lord Matthew wrote in secret, a Master Codex, to rule all the others. One by one, all the armies of the other Codices fell to the power of the Codex, and from this Darkness, none could see hope.
But there were some, who resisted. a Last Alliance of Men and Xenos took up arms against the forces of Ward'or and on the Slopes of Mount Doom they fought for the freedom of 40k."
2011/10/10 15:32:03
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
ChocolateGork wrote:Buts its a different purpose all together. You playing a video game doesn't make it pointless to play a miniatures game. They are very different things to do.
Agree. I started out with the DoW games but found it much more fun when i actually started the wargaming version with my black templars
I also agree DoW is what brought me into 40k...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
akkados wrote:Also their is slight hints on how the dark crusade campaign went in DoWII. Adding it was a mistake and that blood ravens took heavy losses.
No...the Kronus campaign was a success...the Karuva campaign(soulstorm) was the one where they lost like...half their chapter...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/10/10 15:35:37
750 points
1000 Points
2011/10/10 17:17:46
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Corporal_Reznov wrote:I really don't understand guys who have your positions, especially you Lynata? Didn't you say in an earlier thread that 40k has no canon and yet in this thread you say that only the codexes are canon? Do you have a single consistent position or do you simply change position whenever it suits you?
I said that my current position is that I only view studio material as canon, but that (following various comments made by GW/BL/FFG employees) I can see the possibility of there being no canon at all - and that I may have to change my stance towards this in the future, but that I will stick to the studio material for the time being until I've seen more statements that unambiguously clarify the subject. I thought I made that clear in all my posts where I mentioned that. :/
Corporal_Reznov wrote:You say that non-codex material is power creep and inconsistent and yet I have to ask what the hell is Kaldor Draigo? And the current Ultramarines?
There's a number of silly ideas in studio material, too, especially concerning Draigo and some of the SW stuff. Not sure what's supposed to be wrong with the Ultras. Either way, it generally does not approach the levels of inconsistency and silliness I've seen in some licensed products - this may well be a simple side effect of studio material being written by much fewer people who are much more tightly connected in their work than, say, a few freelancing BL novel writers, some of whom have already admitted to making liberal use of artistic licence. Why should I expect consistency from sources whose creators publicly announced that they don't care about stuff somebody else wrote?
Don't get me wrong, though, I like to use licensed material for inspiration, for there are also a number of cool ideas coming from those sources. It's just that I'm currently doing a "personal pick and choose" approach there, whereas I've always regarded the studio material as the common ground for everyone. As mentioned above, this stance is currently "threatened", but for the moment I'm still sticking to it, coz' I'm a fluff nut and I think consistency is awesome.
Hope this should clear up the misunderstanding.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/10/10 17:18:35
2011/10/11 07:20:45
Subject: Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Corporal_Reznov wrote:I really don't understand guys who have your positions, especially you Lynata? Didn't you say in an earlier thread that 40k has no canon and yet in this thread you say that only the codexes are canon? Do you have a single consistent position or do you simply change position whenever it suits you?
I said that my current position is that I only view studio material as canon, but that (following various comments made by GW/BL/FFG employees) I can see the possibility of there being no canon at all - and that I may have to change my stance towards this in the future, but that I will stick to the studio material for the time being until I've seen more statements that unambiguously clarify the subject. I thought I made that clear in all my posts where I mentioned that. :/
Corporal_Reznov wrote:You say that non-codex material is power creep and inconsistent and yet I have to ask what the hell is Kaldor Draigo? And the current Ultramarines?
There's a number of silly ideas in studio material, too, especially concerning Draigo and some of the SW stuff. Not sure what's supposed to be wrong with the Ultras. Either way, it generally does not approach the levels of inconsistency and silliness I've seen in some licensed products - this may well be a simple side effect of studio material being written by much fewer people who are much more tightly connected in their work than, say, a few freelancing BL novel writers, some of whom have already admitted to making liberal use of artistic licence. Why should I expect consistency from sources whose creators publicly announced that they don't care about stuff somebody else wrote?
Don't get me wrong, though, I like to use licensed material for inspiration, for there are also a number of cool ideas coming from those sources. It's just that I'm currently doing a "personal pick and choose" approach there, whereas I've always regarded the studio material as the common ground for everyone. As mentioned above, this stance is currently "threatened", but for the moment I'm still sticking to it, coz' I'm a fluff nut and I think consistency is awesome.
Hope this should clear up the misunderstanding.
Codexes being consistent . 10 plus years of canon stated that Grey Knights needed 300 of themselves to even beat up Angron and 12 or 13 Bloodthirsters but current codex fluff makes it that Kaldor Draigo, one man, beat a daemon Primarch and his bodyguard by charging at them. Yeah, thats very consistent and non silly. Yeah the novels are very silly, after all in 10,000 years its impossible for different types of the same gun to be produced, its impossible that some people get ideas to experiment, its impossible that IG commanders do have a brain and use tactics other than charge that codexes keep claiming is all they know. Right? Variations on belief and legends like what happens in RL is impossible right.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2011/10/11 11:51:17
Stated by Grey Templar:The Ward of the Codices
"It began, with the writing of the Great Codices,
2 were given to the Eldar. Immortal, Capricious, and most farsighted of all,
2 also to Chaos. Traitorous, Deceitful, Servants of the Dark Gods,
3 to the Xenos races. T'au, Orks, and Necrons. the Young, the Beast, and the Spiteful,
7 to the race of men. Servents of the God Emperor, the Inheritors of the Galaxy.
But they were all of them, decieved. for another Codex was written…
In the Land of Ward'or, in the Fires of Mount Doom, the Dark Lord Matthew wrote in secret, a Master Codex, to rule all the others. One by one, all the armies of the other Codices fell to the power of the Codex, and from this Darkness, none could see hope.
But there were some, who resisted. a Last Alliance of Men and Xenos took up arms against the forces of Ward'or and on the Slopes of Mount Doom they fought for the freedom of 40k."
2011/10/11 11:02:11
Subject: Re:Would you call the fluff in the DoW Games Canon?
Dawn of War's as canon as anything else produced by Games Workshop, Forge World, Black Library, Fantasy Flight Games, and Relic. No one attached to any of those companies, anywhere, has ever been proven to have said otherwise in public.
2000 points
1500 points
Your honor is your life, let non dispute it! 
Fluff for the Fluff God! 
750 points
1000 Points
Of course right, I mean its not like history has shown that as nations expand in power and territory they become more and more darker in character and commit dark acts to keep their power. The Tau are perfect, they like all perfect being will avoid the traps of the easy way to power and the danger of arrogance cause they are perfect. The entire universe is ignorant cause they won't listen to the benevolent and divine Tau who know the secret of the universe 