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.

Connor MacLeod wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:
Hoare is known for taking extraordinary liberties in his novels--especially when the Tau are involved. That's what it has to do with what you referenced.

Yes, which makes him different from other authors how? I've seen people make similar claims about Abnett, Swallow, ADB, McNeill, Goto, etc.

And out of those, you really only have a case for Swallow, McNeill, and Goto.
Swallow and McNeill however do get a certain bit of leeway as they started writing their stuff quite a bit ago when the Black Library let people go crazy with the fluff they wrote.
Goto flatout had no clue what the feth 40k was about, and included such wonders as the backflipping Terminators and a pedophile Farseer.

The only people who I know that complain about Abnett complain because they haven't actually read the book which generates the most controversy("Traitor General"), and operate upon the Internet Hyperbole Machine in which "GAUNT KILLED A DOZEN MARINES111!11!1!" or the other piece generated by the IHM which is "THE GHOSTS KILL MARINES WITH LASPISTOLS!".

Both of those are untrue.

I've yet to hear that about ADB, but I wouldn't be surprised to hear it when his Grey Knights novel comes out.

Just because an author screws up certain details or decides to do things differently than the Codexes state does not mean that the entire source/series/etc is wrong and should be tossed out, does it?

When they screw up critical details, yeah--it does.

Andy Hoare is a well known Tau fanboy, and was given the chance to write a full fledged series of novels for them.
He did a terrible, terrible, terrible job doing so.
His short stuff about the Tau? Fantastic. But when writing a full novel, he apparently decided to take a page from Goto and make everything winning x20.

I didn't say that Karthan troops were Guard.

I said that using them as an example is like if I were to say that "Because Cadia's PDF are full Imperial Guard Regiments, then every single PDF is". I then finished with "Situations are different".

Just because Kartha's PDF were used to fight Huron and his Astral Claws does not mean it's necessarily going to happen in every single situation.

I never said that EVERY PDF has to be like Kartha or the ones from Rogue Star, did I?. I'm simply pointing out that it can happen, and it would fit the requirements for Fenris (even if it isn't called a PDF or act like most PDFs.)

Except ONCE AGAIN.

Planets which tithe to the Space Marines very, very, very, very, very, very rarely have PDFs. Many of these planets aren't even at the technological level of having industrial metalworking capabilities, let alone standing militias which can defend the planet against planetary invasions.

Ultramar and Rynn's World are the exceptions, not the rule.

The most advanced, non-Space Wolves part of Fenris are one of the island nations which are known for their metalworking skills.

I mean if we're going to insist on precise definitions, a PDF is basically representative of the planet's own armies, under the control of people from that planet (either the planetary commader, planetary nobles, both , etc.) and they can be used for any conceivable purpose, including waging war offplanet (if the transport issue can be dealt with, that is.)

If we're going to insist on precise definitions, a PDF is not representative of the planet's own armies. It's representative of the elite of the planet's armies, and requires an Imperial Governor to be present.

Guess what is missing from that for the 'home' planets which traditionally are the exclusive recruiting grounds of the Astartes?

Kanluwen wrote:[
And out of those, you really only have a case for Swallow, McNeill, and Goto.
Swallow and McNeill however do get a certain bit of leeway as they started writing their stuff quite a bit ago when the Black Library let people go crazy with the fluff they wrote.
Goto flatout had no clue what the feth 40k was about, and included such wonders as the backflipping Terminators and a pedophile Farseer.

The only people who I know that complain about Abnett complain because they haven't actually read the book which generates the most controversy("Traitor General"), and operate upon the Internet Hyperbole Machine in which "GAUNT KILLED A DOZEN MARINES111!11!1!" or the other piece generated by the IHM which is "THE GHOSTS KILL MARINES WITH LASPISTOLS!".

Both of those are untrue.

I've yet to hear that about ADB, but I wouldn't be surprised to hear it when his Grey Knights novel comes out.

My point was that saying "your authro is known for making flaws" is no argument, because you're basically appealing to "common sense" - something that few will agree on. (and even if they do agree, group consensus is not neccesarily a sign something is "better" or "right.") In short: This is not an actual rebuttal.

When they screw up critical details, yeah--it does.

Andy Hoare is a well known Tau fanboy, and was given the chance to write a full fledged series of novels for them.
He did a terrible, terrible, terrible job doing so.
His short stuff about the Tau? Fantastic. But when writing a full novel, he apparently decided to take a page from Goto and make everything winning x20.

Which proves what exactly? I'm pretty sure fans don't get the right to declare what is or isn't canon in 40K, if there even IS a canon (noone can even agree on that, I've noticed.)

Except ONCE AGAIN.

Planets which tithe to the Space Marines very, very, very, very, very, very rarely have PDFs. Many of these planets aren't even at the technological level of having industrial metalworking capabilities, let alone standing militias which can defend the planet against planetary invasions.

Ultramar and Rynn's World are the exceptions, not the rule.

The most advanced, non-Space Wolves part of Fenris are one of the island nations which are known for their metalworking skills.

Fine, would it be less objectionable if I were to change my words from "Fenris PDF" to "mortal troopers which help the Space Wolves in there fighting, which MAY include defending at least parts of the planet, but are not a true PDF"? All I care about in my definition is PDF = troops that defend a planet. I don't get more precise than that, becuase if you get more precise than that you start having to cherry pick sources, and that causes even further problems (see above Re: Hoare vs other authors and what constitutes "errors".) If you choose to opt for a differnet definition that's fine by me.

If we're going to insist on precise definitions, a PDF is not representative of the planet's own armies. It's representative of the elite of the planet's armies, and requires an Imperial Governor to be present.

Wait, since when are hive gangers, which can be conscripted as PDF forces on hive worlds (for example) considered elites?

Guess what is missing from that for the 'home' planets which traditionally are the exclusive recruiting grounds of the Astartes?

So again I just change my definition from "PDF" to "something that may be used like a PDF" - hardly undermines me to change terms.

Edit: I'm going to add in an apology for seeming to get overly combative here, but from my POV it seems like you are basically saying to me "I don't like your sources, you're wrong because I say you're wrong and I know the material better, even though I won't be more specific about why." I don't respond nicely when it seems someone just decides to dismiss me arbitrarily because they may think they know better but won't demonstrate it. So if there is some miscommunication, or if I misunderstood something, or whatever I'm sorry for getting combative. But I'm not fully conceding the matter, either.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Sound like serfs. Which are certainly not PDF.

yep because Leman Russ himself doesn't want a complex bureaucracy there.
he simply wants Fenrisians to remain being a barbarian and fights that way instead of being a levy to a crook governor.

i'm not sure how much self autonomy does Fenrisian leaders got? and what is the fenrisian beliefs? if they don't know the existence of IoM, how do those folks know the existence (and the 'divine' status) of the Emperor himself before becoming SW?

Connor MacLeod wrote:
My point was that saying "your authro is known for making flaws" is no argument, because you're basically appealing to "common sense" - something that few will agree on. (and even if they do agree, group consensus is not neccesarily a sign something is "better" or "right.") In short: This is not an actual rebuttal.

It's not even simply that "Your author is known for making flaws".

It's "your author is known for making flaws and just not being a good author".

Andy Hoare works best when he's given a set task and an outline to work from. When you let him write whatever he wants, he tends to lose focus.

When they screw up critical details, yeah--it does.

Andy Hoare is a well known Tau fanboy, and was given the chance to write a full fledged series of novels for them.
He did a terrible, terrible, terrible job doing so.
His short stuff about the Tau? Fantastic. But when writing a full novel, he apparently decided to take a page from Goto and make everything winning x20.

Which proves what exactly? I'm pretty sure fans don't get the right to declare what is or isn't canon in 40K, if there even IS a canon (noone can even agree on that, I've noticed.) Are you trying to tell me you get to decide what is or isn't valid as evidence in a debate?

You can cite it all you want.

Just like I can dismiss it because Hoare blows the Tau's capabilities out of proportion.

Except ONCE AGAIN.

Planets which tithe to the Space Marines very, very, very, very, very, very rarely have PDFs. Many of these planets aren't even at the technological level of having industrial metalworking capabilities, let alone standing militias which can defend the planet against planetary invasions.

Ultramar and Rynn's World are the exceptions, not the rule.

The most advanced, non-Space Wolves part of Fenris are one of the island nations which are known for their metalworking skills.

Fine, would it offend your sensibilities less if I were to change my words from "Fenris PDF" to "mortal troopers which help the Space Wolves in there fighting, which MAY include defending at least parts of the planet, but are not a true PDF"?

I don't know why you keep being so fixated on the term PDF being kept so pure, but if it matters that much to you I'll happily concede the point.

Because you keep bringing up PDFs. PDFs do not exist on Astartes homeworlds, barring a few notable exceptions such as Ultramar and Rynn's World.

Someone else also said that the unit in question only defends The Fang, which means it's likely a cadre of Chapter Serfs who are actually trained in defending the Fang.

Which fits the Space Wolf idea I guess, since I can't see them having scholars and invalids amongst their Serfs.

If we're going to insist on precise definitions, a PDF is not representative of the planet's own armies. It's representative of the elite of the planet's armies, and requires an Imperial Governor to be present.

Wait, since when are hive gangers, which can be conscripted as PDF forces on hive worlds (for example) considered elites?

Wait, since when are hive gangers (y'know, individuals who've spent their lives fighting for their survival in the Underhives) not considered elites?

Most hive gangers have far far more combat experience than the PDF of most worlds will. If they need a cadre of individuals who know what the hell they're doing, you'd be remiss to ignore the hive gangers.

Guess what is missing from that for the 'home' planets which traditionally are the exclusive recruiting grounds of the Astartes?

So again I just change my definition from "PDF" to "something that may be used like a PDF" - hardly undermines me to change terms.

Because then the situation entirely changes.

The Astartes do not command "mortal" Warriors, nor can they have standing armies of their own.

To me, the difference comes down to "Area of Responsibility" :

A PDF comprises of units that can be deployed to ANY area of a planet in response to an off-world threat, as opposed to the forces supporting the Space Wolves - for whom the area is much more localised and are therefore are NOT required to defend the planet as a whole.

Given that fact, irrespective of such things as recruitment, numbers or equipment, they are by definition NOT a Planetary Defence Force as their Area of Responsibility can only be described as "Regional" rather than "Planetary"

Of course, this is just my opinion,

Kanluwen wrote:
It's not even simply that "Your author is known for making flaws".

It's "your author is known for making flaws and just not being a good author".

Andy Hoare works best when he's given a set task and an outline to work from. When you let him write whatever he wants, he tends to lose focus.

I don't think he's a good author. That has no bearing on his validity as a source. Plenty of people I've known don't like Abnett because he doesn't write the Guard the way he ought to. Or they don't like the way McNeill wrote the Ultramarines. Why is it acceptable to ignore an author just because you think he's bad, but not ignore another one because you like the stuff he writes? Basically you're appealing to completely arbitrary standards, and that goes nowhere as far as a debate goes.

You can cite it all you want.

Just like I can dismiss it because Hoare blows the Tau's capabilities out of proportion.

Which again gets us back to "arbitrary standards", which means that it's pointless to debate this becaues you're just going to decide what you will or won't accept as canon, and will ignore what you don't like. Which is fine, but it proves nothing because your "personal canon' is just as valid as everyone else and it just makes debating this further a waste of time.

Since we've made that clear, I'm just going to bow out. Feel free to take that as a concession if you like.

What has ADB ever done? I've read all his books and I can't see anything in it that would be a point of contention.

As a rule I've heard that ADB isn't writing traitors properly. or some silliness like that. apparently I just gather they don't like his take on the Night Lords because they don't fit into the Traitor Legion LOLCHAOS stereotype or something like that. Part of the reason why the people I've known complain about Abnett are pretty much along those reasons - basically Abnett doesn't write 40K properly, or the way it should be "thematically" (especially the IG, in the context of the ghosts novels. Generally I gather he's writing them far more competently than they ought to be. Which is silly.)

And then of course there's the whole Matt Ward issue... there's plenty of people that love/hate him, so what can ya do.

The complaining I've heard about Aaron is that he's either too much of a Space Marine fanboy and makes them "unkillable" or that he writes the Night Lords as whiny emos.

Which is purely silly, as it's one character(Talos) who is essentially a "whiny emo" and is pining for the Legion's "Lost Glory"--and Talos is constantly regarded by the other Night Lords with what amounts to a huge bowl of "Bwuh?!"

ADB broke into writing with Cadian blood, which was an excellent novel and probably the best IG novel written bar none. I'm reading Soul Hunter right now and while I am not a big Traitor Legion fan, he is getting the characterization of a non-Chaos aligned SM Legion pretty accurate I'd say given the stuff in the Horus Heresy series (It also seems to be a masive jab at Lord of the Night, I gather ADB Does not like Simon Spurrier's take on the Night Lords at all) The Night Lords in his book seem to run quite a gamut of different personalities - Talos is the "hero" of sorts, but he's not the defining trait of the Legion as a whole.

What it ultimately comes down to, in my experience, is that people wiht any familiarty to 40K have their own "image" how eveything in it is supposed to be, and if something falls outside those parameters, they don't like it and it doesn't "feel" 40K.

Example: When Salvation's REach came out, I grabbed it and thoroughly enjoyed it. It felt like we were getting back to the roots of the Ghosts (eg Necroplois to Sabbat Martyr) and it felt like there was a war going on out there and things were progressing. But when discussing it with others, I found some people disliked the series because they felt (among other things) that the space combat was not appropriately 40K. That is it didn't completely emulate Space Fleet/BFG style combat the way it gets portrayed in some novels (a good contrast would be "Ancient History" by Andy Chambers.) And on that reason (or by how competent/well equipped Abnett-grade Guard typically are) that Abnett doesn't really write 40K novels.

Gentlemen, whilst this book/author review is informative in it's own way I would like to ask if it is really necessary and on topic ?

Lone Cat wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Sound like serfs. Which are certainly not PDF.

yep because Leman Russ himself doesn't want a complex bureaucracy there.
he simply wants Fenrisians to remain being a barbarian and fights that way instead of being a levy to a crook governor.

i'm not sure how much self autonomy does Fenrisian leaders got? and what is the fenrisian beliefs? if they don't know the existence of IoM, how do those folks know the existence (and the 'divine' status) of the Emperor himself before becoming SW?

Although Russ did want that he really didn't have a choice. Fenris is so horrible that everyday is a struggle to raise themselves above being cavemen.

Fenrisians are a tribal society and so the leaders of those tiny tribes can do whatever they want. They're not very aware of the IoM but do worship The Emperor as their God. They know some of his laws too: All mutants must die, for example.

Lone Cat wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Sound like serfs. Which are certainly not PDF.

yep because Leman Russ himself doesn't want a complex bureaucracy there.
he simply wants Fenrisians to remain being a barbarian and fights that way instead of being a levy to a crook governor.

i'm not sure how much self autonomy does Fenrisian leaders got? and what is the fenrisian beliefs? if they don't know the existence of IoM, how do those folks know the existence (and the 'divine' status) of the Emperor himself before becoming SW?

The divine status of the Emperor was instilled by the event of him coming down to Fenris looking like a golden god, while the Space Wolves do not actively invovle themselves in Fenrisians lives Leman Russ set certain belief systems and laws in place that would become the religion of the tribes.

Connor MacLeod wrote:Let's not go investing too much importance in names here.

You are missing the entire point of the debate then.

PDF and chapter serfs have completely different roles so it is VERY important to understand what the names mean. Chapter serfs defend the fortress monestry and chapter ships and any other chapter facility, they do not perform military maneuvers on the rest of Fenris, as PDFs perform military maneuvers anywhere on the planet they are raised it is quite clear to see that by any definition of PDF, Fenris does not have one.

The meanings of words and names are actually important, something that is often forgotten

Not to mention that Fenris doesn't really need a PDF. Most of the planet is small islands that only last a decade or two until they're destroyed by tectonic activity. They're not even worth taking to use as a staging area. The only thing that is really a worthwhile target is the Fang, and that has the Space Wolves and the serfs guarding it.