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.
Let me explain it in another way. During the heresy the BA underwent the red thirst and after the black rage consistently, enough to warrant the creation of the death company. We have 10,000 years of evidence of this happening regularly.
Now the Ultramarines? Not one in 10,000 years. Sons of Horus? Not one in 10,000 years. Raven Guard? Not one in 10,000 years. Iron Hands? Not one in 10,000 years. Do you see where this is going? Scientifically that is enough to say that there is a high degree of probability that the affliction is unique to the Blood Angels. What makes them different? The gene-seed! We have so many millions points of measurement over 10,000 years that you can say it is within reasonable doubt. It can be linked to the gene-seed and therefore is a strict biological result. We know recruits during the heresy were mass picked and then sent to different legions, and we only see that flaw happen with the Blood Angels. The same can be said for the flesh change and the EC... cancer thing. Sure we don't know the ins and outs of gene-seed, but we can make observations and after 10,000 years of data I think the result is conclusive. The condition is biological, it's like hereditary genetics, if the host doesn't even have the gene then it is literally impossible for the condition to occur. We know the big E made each gene-seed different from each other as they are based on their primarch. While "brothers" genetically they might as well be strangers. It's like saying that man over there has cystic fibrosis so my child could get it! Technically yes as mutations occur, but if I don't have the gene currently the odds are close to zero, and that is what we see with the Ultramarines.
We KNOW loyalist WB existed, it's not like I'm saying what are the odds Erebus turns loyal randomly one day. The purge proves that there are/were WB who would turn loyal. Again the issue we are talking about is psychological. An ultramarine can not randomly decide to change his genetics at will and undergo the black rage, any more I can will my DNA to give me cystic fibrosis. But the condition of "loyalty" is an abstract and fluid concept because it is a cumulative effect of thoughts and opinions by the person. A WB can change their opinion on the subject of chaos while it is the start of the heresy. Narek proves this. I'm saying what are the odds one of those WB change their opinion and switch sides? None have done so in the fluff but it is physical possible, it is not a question of genetics like the BA, it's a question of ideology and opinion, and that can easily change. Therefore it is an entirely legitimate move for someone to base an army on them. Black rage Ultramarines is genetically impossible, loyal WB are very unlikely, there is a difference.
While I agree all that have been seen are anti-imperium, that again does not mean that loyalists do not exist. Nor am I talking about the tau or any other subject so that is irrelevant, and plus that's a statement that has no basis in the fluff anyway and is there to get your point across, it's the argument of ignorance to a level that is misused, my claim is based on the premise that there is a precedent for it, that one has no precedent.
I think you are oversimplifying things. The evidence of other traitor legions does not correlate to no loyal WB. It correlates that there is significantly less of them at most. If you have a chemical sample with 4 different readings visible at a broad reading, that does not exclude a 5th or 6th at levels so low they are not measured unless you comb through the sample. The same can be said for the loyal WB. Yes there has been no evidence but do we expect to see one in the records? Maybe, it depends. Do the documents the author use talk about every sector for every day? No, so again while there is no evidence it does not exclude the possibility of a small loyal WB force, it's still an argument of ignorance. Let's say it's a single squad of loyal WB, what are the odds someone who is trying to document the heresy sees them during the war? If they change the armor color then no one will know. The problem is that he is talking in hind-sight, which is great in some ways but you lose the ability to physically check these sort of facts because it's already long gone.
Let me put it this way. we know loyalist WB exist, it's been observed so there is a precedent for them, and while none of them has been seen by the heresy, because they previously existed, it's an argument of ignorance to say none now exist by the heresy- we truly don't know if, and if so how many, could be around. The Ultramarines with black rage have no precedent. We have observed 10,000 years of implants of BA, and from before and after they develop the black rage. We have 10,000 years of ultramarine implants and none have experienced the black rage. While a negative ( no Ultramarines have the black rage) it is an observable negative, we see the marine be implanted and he is fine, we see the BA implanted and we have problems. The WB is like the okapi of its day. Native tribes (forgive my ignorance of African ethnic groups) saw the okapi, and reported it to Europeans. Europeans did not see it so they assumed it did not exist. We are looking into the forest (heresy universe) and seeing nothing. That is negative with no tangible observation that leads to a conclusive answer. Again there's a critical difference.
Why is it an exception? If the OP gives a similar back story- i.e. Maybe they found out before Istvaan V tragedy and tried to warn someone then they are in a similar situation. That can easily be accomdated for by a thoughtful backstory.
Edit: grammar and omitted words and the following:
A better example than the okapi could be: there are no dentists living in my neighborhood. It's an argument from ignorance UNTIL I ask every neighbor what their profession is, until then there is the possibility one may be a dentist, you don't know but you do know dentists exist as a possibility. Loyal Word Bearers are like dentists, 40 years before the heresy they existed, and being a psychological trait can also be induced by a variety of life experiences and opinions. Unless you are arguing Word Bearers do not have free will, there is the chance one will decide to leave the legion, and there is precedent for that (Narek), so it's not unreasonable for one to form the opinion that the Emperor was the right choice. Until you know the outcome of every single WB and ask them their choice then there is doubt as each WB is, psychologically, unique. WB number 203,642 can not speak for WB 20,482, and vice versa, people are much more complicated than gene-seeds, and that is why the argument of ignorance is different for the Ultramarines/BA and loyal WB.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/25 02:07:34
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Why is saying "We've never seen a Loyal Word Bearer, so they don't exist" an argument of ignorance, but saying "We've never seen a Black Rage Ultramarine, so they don't exist" is perfectly logical?
It's an argument of ignorance because we're looking at a psychological state (i.e. Loyalty) that has not been proven for all Word Bearers. What I mean to say is - as R0bcrt has tried to point out several times now - the idea that all Words Bearers are traitors to the Imperium is a generalisation of the Legion and not a testament to the loyalties of every single surviving Word Bearer. I also agree with R0bcrt that as along as the fluff I introduce is sufficiently believable and doesn't fall into the classic cliches, then I don't see any reason why this couldn't work. The reason why saying "We've never seen a Black Rage Ultramarine, so they don't exist" is perfectly logical is because it's a genetic absolute as opposed to a psychological phenomenon. I think R0bcrt's 'cystic fibrosis' example supports this.
The problem with your Ultramarines w/ Black Rage example is you're comparing a genetic flaw to someone's psychological position on loyalty. That's like comparing a truck to a dog - they're not at all the same thing, thus rendering the comparison and any points you draw from it meaningless.
This is why my idea revolves around a relatively small group of Word Bearers (i.e. the Chapter I mentioned) with an even smaller group of loyalists. This is not impossible (nor is it even implausible) in and of itself. If it weren't possible let alone plausible, then there would have been no reason for Lorgar to enact the Second Purge at all. Then there's my second layer, which is the "Reverse Warrior Lodge" (for lack of a better name) - If the Warrior Lodges of the Traitor Legions played a big part in their Legions as a whole falling to Chaos, then this lodge could help cement the loyalties of its members to the Imperium (not to mention their secrecy would help their true loyalties to the Imperium remain hidden). With this as what I believe to be a relatively solid basis, I can add in the fact that their Terran-born to make them more likely to "Betray" Lorgar and be part of the Imperium as well as give Lorgar at least one reason to want them dead (regardless of whether he knew about their true loyalties and their own lodge).
As a final point, I disagree with all that you've concluded with regards to "There cannot be any Loyalist Word Bearers since we have not seen any evidence of it." Just because something hasn't happened or been seen before does not mean it can't happen. For example - I haven't skydived, there is no evidence of me ever skydiving, and it's highly unlikely I will ever skydive since I have a powerful fear of heights, but this does not mean that it is impossible for me to skydive sometime during the rest of my life. The same theory can be applied to loyalists among the Word Bearers. Relatively high unlikelihood as well as lack of evidence does not mean they did not exist unless you can prove beyond any doubt that they didn't. With regards to evidence, the Imperium managed to destroy everything about two Space Marine Legions except the fact that they existed in the first place, so if the Imperium can do that, then - especially when you combine it with the fact that keeping complete records during a civil war is difficult - it's not unreasonable to say that the existence of Loyalist Word Bearers within the Imperium can also be covered up.
r0bcrt - I am not disagreeing that Loyalist Word Bearers EXISTED. That much is true. However, it's a case of whether they could have existed afterwards.
If a group of Word Bearers went missing in the warp prior to Monarchia, and popped out later, they'd be absolutely loyal. However, they'd also very insistently say that their Primarch was loyal, given what we've seen from other characters in the Horus Heresy. Therefore, despite them being wrong, they'd fervently believe that Lorgar was absolutely loyal, which is a one-way ticket to heresytown.
As for Word Bearers POST-Monarchia, we see no evidence of any surviving loyalists. That's my whole point - there is no evidence that any survived. If there was evidence against my point, I can see your argument, but at the moment, the absence of any evidence to support your point would indicate that it is, at the moment, an impossibility.
IllumiNini - Your skydiving analogy isn't quite right. I'm not saying that it's impossible to skydive. I'm saying that you have never skydived, and it would be wrong to say you have skydived. I'm saying that we've seen no Loyal Word Bearers at all (that is, when the Legion was aligned to Chaos), so it's wrong to say there were.
As for the Ultramarine/Black Rage situation, no-one knows truly how geneseed works. So, maybe the Blood Angels have just triggered the right situation or it deteriorated? What's to say that the Ultramarines could never have a similar situation? I mean, just because it's never been seen doesn't mean it's impossible. As for the cystic fibrosis situation - well, none of us are omnipotent. Science is just a collection of theories, after all. So it's not impossible that your child could get cystic fibrosis, because we don't know everything. Can you see why I dislike the idea that "just because we haven't seen it and don't know it, it could still happen"?
If we're going to assume that because we haven't seen it, it can exist, theoretically ANYTHING in 40k becomes possible, because we haven't seen it yet. You want Star Wars clone troopers in your 40k? Well, because we haven't seen them, they could be there! You want a faction of cat-people who carry pistols that fire suns and could wipe out everyone in the galaxy without trying but they won't because they're too honorable for that? We've not seen any evidence of them, but that's okay, they could totally exist! You want literally anything at all in 40k? Go ahead!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/25 13:44:30
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm saying that we've seen no Loyal Word Bearers at all (that is, when the Legion was aligned to Chaos), so it's wrong to say there were.
But to me, this statement sounds like "It's impossible for intelligent life to exist on other planets because we haven't seen any." I know there's a 'Yet' in that analogy, but I believe the fundamental point is there.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: As for the Ultramarine/Black Rage situation, no-one knows truly how geneseed works. So, maybe the Blood Angels have just triggered the right situation or it deteriorated? What's to say that the Ultramarines could never have a similar situation?
You got any canon source of material on the Blood Angels it it will list the Red Thirst and Black Rage as either a Gene-Seed flaw specific to the Blood Angels Gene-See, something inherent in that genetic lineage (which implies a direct connection to the Gene-Seed of the Blood Angels), or something to that effect. So regardless of how Gene-Seed works and whether or not we know how it works, there is a clear connection between the Blood Angels Gene-Seed and these flaws. Therefore, by virtue of being part of any genetic lineage other than the Blood Angels(in our example - Ultramarines), it is impossible for you to suffer the same Black Rage and Red Thirst that afflicts the Blood Angels. There is no two ways about that, meaning that we can say it is a definitively impossible for the Ultramarines to suffer one of the Twin Flaws of the Blood Angels.
You're Ultramarines analogy doesn't work. The only thing it does is show that you are rigid on there being no Loyalist Word Bearers.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Can you see why I dislike the idea that "just because we haven't seen it and don't know it, it could still happen"?
I understand why you don't like it, especially given the events of the Second Purge, the fact that Lorgar is turned his Legion into the arch-heretics, etc etc etc, but nothing is absolute when it comes to this. I understand that it is at least implied that all the true loyalists in the Word Bearers Legion were killed, but so far nothing I've read has made me believe that it's fact and not a strong implication. There is a margin of error to this. And given that there were loyalists in every other Traitor Legion and traitors in many (if not all) of the Loyalist Legions, why is it such a stretch to say that there were at least a handful (even a dozen or two out of a Legion that numbered anywhere between 100,000 and 150,000 Legionaries at its peak) that remained loyal to and kept their faith in the Emperor?
There might be no canon example, sure, but does that mean there can't be at all?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: If we're going to assume that because we haven't seen it, it can exist, theoretically ANYTHING in 40k becomes possible, because we haven't seen it yet.
You want Star Wars clone troopers in your 40k? Well, because we haven't seen them, they could be there!
You want a faction of cat-people who carry pistols that fire suns and could wipe out everyone in the galaxy without trying but they won't because they're too honorable for that? We've not seen any evidence of them, but that's okay, they could totally exist!
You want literally anything at all in 40k? Go ahead!
Let's not take it to ridiculousness, shall we? It doesn't help anyone and it doesn't help the discussion.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm saying that we've seen no Loyal Word Bearers at all (that is, when the Legion was aligned to Chaos), so it's wrong to say there were.
But to me, this statement sounds like "It's impossible for intelligent life to exist on other planets because we haven't seen any." I know there's a 'Yet' in that analogy, but I believe the fundamental point is there.
I mean, is that wrong? Can you tell me there IS intelligent life on other planets? Yes, I am aware that is a real-world extreme, but is it any different?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: As for the Ultramarine/Black Rage situation, no-one knows truly how geneseed works. So, maybe the Blood Angels have just triggered the right situation or it deteriorated? What's to say that the Ultramarines could never have a similar situation?
You got any canon source of material on the Blood Angels it it will list the Red Thirst and Black Rage as either a Gene-Seed flaw specific to the Blood Angels Gene-See, something inherent in that genetic lineage (which implies a direct connection to the Gene-Seed of the Blood Angels), or something to that effect. So regardless of how Gene-Seed works and whether or not we know how it works, there is a clear connection between the Blood Angels Gene-Seed and these flaws. Therefore, by virtue of being part of any genetic lineage other than the Blood Angels(in our example - Ultramarines), it is impossible for you to suffer the same Black Rage and Red Thirst that afflicts the Blood Angels. There is no two ways about that, meaning that we can say it is a definitively impossible for the Ultramarines to suffer one of the Twin Flaws of the Blood Angels.
You're Ultramarines analogy doesn't work. The only thing it does is show that you are rigid on there being no Loyalist Word Bearers.
It shows Red Thirst and Black Rage as being confirmed to Blood Angels geneseed AT THE MOMENT. As far as we see, there is also a direct correlation between being a Word Bearer and being anti-Imperial. Why is one correlation wrong, but the other is waivable?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Can you see why I dislike the idea that "just because we haven't seen it and don't know it, it could still happen"?
I understand why you don't like it, especially given the events of the Second Purge, the fact that Lorgar is turned his Legion into the arch-heretics, etc etc etc, but nothing is absolute when it comes to this. I understand that it is at least implied that all the true loyalists in the Word Bearers Legion were killed, but so far nothing I've read has made me believe that it's fact and not a strong implication. There is a margin of error to this. And given that there were loyalists in every other Traitor Legion and traitors in many (if not all) of the Loyalist Legions, why is it such a stretch to say that there were at least a handful (even a dozen or two out of a Legion that numbered anywhere between 100,000 and 150,000 Legionaries at its peak) that remained loyal to and kept their faith in the Emperor?
The second purge is mentioned as occurring "around a century after the first, following Lorgar's secret betrayal of the Emperor" in order to "purge the legion's ranks of all Terran Astartes, who unfortunately had become corrupted from their initial isolation from their Primarch and were too deeply infected with the lies of the False Emperor." So, emphasis mine.
Given that in every other traitor legion there have been Loyalists shown, EXCEPT the Word Bearers, I have to be skeptical. Why have no loyalists been shown from that Legion? In every other Legion, we have examples. Garro, Varren, Loken, Tarvitz, Arvida, pretty much any Alpha Legionnaire, Dantioch, Zharost, and that's just one from each Traitor Legion. Yet no Word Bearers are shown at all. If it's seen in EVERYONE else, except one, does that mean nothing? Especially when nearly every source we have on the Word Bearers is that they never had a loyalist member?
There might be no canon example, sure, but does that mean there can't be at all?
And that's my point. There is no canon example, so you can never say that it CAN 100% happen, because there's absolutely no evidence of it.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: If we're going to assume that because we haven't seen it, it can exist, theoretically ANYTHING in 40k becomes possible, because we haven't seen it yet. You want Star Wars clone troopers in your 40k? Well, because we haven't seen them, they could be there! You want a faction of cat-people who carry pistols that fire suns and could wipe out everyone in the galaxy without trying but they won't because they're too honorable for that? We've not seen any evidence of them, but that's okay, they could totally exist! You want literally anything at all in 40k? Go ahead!
Let's not take it to ridiculousness, shall we? It doesn't help anyone and it doesn't help the discussion.
I mean, is that not the point being risen? As you say:
There might be no canon example, sure, but does that mean there can't be at all?
Is that not what I've just done? Or perhaps, suggesting that "just because there's no proof supporting it, it can still be a thing" isn't quite as cut and dry?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/07/25 15:19:10
Okay I see the problem, I don't want to sound preachy but I don't think you understand how to properly use the argument of ignorance, rather you are taking it too far by then assuming stormtroopers and anything is possible once one uses the argument in-universe. The argument of ignorance is predicated by a precedent. That is to say there is a "within logical reason" clause to it. Ex- my argument of the dentists only works because we know dentists are a possible profession. If I said: Space time traveling wizard lizard man, then argument of ignorance is implausible beyond validity as there has been no documented case of such things. Let me try to lay out my logic and see if you agree:
So we agree loyalists existed before the WB purged themselves yes or no?
We agree Astartes have free will yes or no?
We agree Narek left the legion and turned agaisnt chaos as a WB (even if he does not fight for the big E) yes or no?
We agree other traitors and loyalists changed sides during the war yes or no?
If we agree then it is theoretically possible for a WB to change sides. I'm not saying thousands did so, and you don't have to think any did. But can you agree on the plausibility of it? If it is plausible then some one has enough claim to make an army, whether it actually happened or not is up to personal opinion, but I stress again there is no hard barrier stopping someone from making a WB loyalist force.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm saying that we've seen no Loyal Word Bearers at all (that is, when the Legion was aligned to Chaos), so it's wrong to say there were.
But to me, this statement sounds like "It's impossible for intelligent life to exist on other planets because we haven't seen any." I know there's a 'Yet' in that analogy, but I believe the fundamental point is there.
I mean, is that wrong? Can you tell me there IS intelligent life on other planets? Yes, I am aware that is a real-world extreme, but is it any different?
I can't tell you that there is because I don't know. I have no proof that there isn't. But you haven't proven to me that it is impossible for there to be any Loyalist Word Bearers, what you've shown me (with what I knew already) is that the strong implication is that there are none. That's not proof of non-existence.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: It shows Red Thirst and Black Rage as being confirmed to Blood Angels geneseed AT THE MOMENT.
At the moment it does, which means at the moment, this is fact. The Twin Flaws are a genetic trait specific to Blood Angels only. I don't care if in 3 weeks time they retcon this so that all Legions have the Twin Flaws. At the moment, it is a Blood Angels thing only. To say otherwise at the moment is wrong.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: As far as we see, there is also a direct correlation between being a Word Bearer and being anti-Imperial. Why is one correlation wrong, but the other is waivable?
Because the Twin Genetic Flaws isn't a correlation, it's caused by their Gene-Seed. So there isn't just correlation to between the Twin-Flaws and being a Blood Angel, there's causation. As for Word Bearers and being anti-Imperium, that IS correlation because being a Word Bearer doesn't automatically mean that you were anti-Imperium in the same way that being a Blood Angel means you suffer the Twin Flaws. The anti-Imperium sentiment is malleable and subjective since it's psychological. That's the difference. That's why I'm waiving your Ultramarines example.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The second purge is mentioned as occurring "around a century after the first, following Lorgar's secret betrayal of the Emperor" in order to "purge the legion's ranks of all Terran Astartes, who unfortunately had become corrupted from their initial isolation from their Primarch and were too deeply infected with the lies of the False Emperor."
So at the time of the Heresy, I think it is more than safe to say that there are no Astartes loyal to the Emperor still within the Legion. This is undisputed in my mind. But just because they were no longer part of the Legion doesn't mean they could not exist. The fact that they existed in the first place and Lorgar felt the need to purge them immediately opens up the possibility of survivors.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Given that in every other traitor legion there have been Loyalists shown, EXCEPT the Word Bearers, I have to be skeptical. Why have no loyalists been shown from that Legion?
In every other Legion, we have examples.
Garro, Varren, Loken, Tarvitz, Arvida, pretty much any Alpha Legionnaire, Dantioch, Zharost, and that's just one from each Traitor Legion. Yet no Word Bearers are shown at all.
If it's seen in EVERYONE else, except one, does that mean nothing? Especially when nearly every source we have on the Word Bearers is that they never had a loyalist member?
So far I think you're limiting yourself to a "When". The likelihood of a Word Bearer that is still part of the Legion suddenly showing their Loyalty to the Emperor during the Horus Heresy? All but impossible. During the time of the Second Purge? That's definitely reasonable.
There might be no canon example, sure, but does that mean there can't be at all?
And that's my point. There is no canon example, so you can never say that it CAN 100% happen, because there's absolutely no evidence of it.
Absence of a case doesn't make it impossible. Again - as I've said above - you're stuck on a "When": The Horus Heresy. And as far as I know, there aren't a lot of canon sources (if any) that explore the Second Purge in great detail, leaving the possibility of Word Bearers Loyal to the Emperor escaping wide open.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: If we're going to assume that because we haven't seen it, it can exist, theoretically ANYTHING in 40k becomes possible, because we haven't seen it yet.
You want Star Wars clone troopers in your 40k? Well, because we haven't seen them, they could be there!
You want a faction of cat-people who carry pistols that fire suns and could wipe out everyone in the galaxy without trying but they won't because they're too honorable for that? We've not seen any evidence of them, but that's okay, they could totally exist!
You want literally anything at all in 40k? Go ahead!
Let's not take it to ridiculousness, shall we? It doesn't help anyone and it doesn't help the discussion.
I mean, is that not the point being risen?
You want Star Wars Clone Troopers in 40K? I'd call you unimaginative and uninspired.
You want to create a race of ridiculous cat people? You can go be ridiculous on your own.
You want literally anything in 40K? Then you don't belong anywhere near fanfiction writing for 40K.
I'm not exploring copy-pasting Star Wars or making your own ridiculousness or wanting "literally anything in 40K", I'm exploring the idea of loyalist Word Bearers and how to make them work. I know they're possible, just not in large numbers and only with the fluff done right.
You want to start exploring copy-pasting Star Wars or making your own ridiculousness or wanting "literally anything in 40K"? You're welcome to start your own thread.
R0bcrt wrote: Okay I see the problem, I don't want to sound preachy but I don't think you understand how to properly use the argument of ignorance, rather you are taking it too far by then assuming stormtroopers and anything is possible once one uses the argument in-universe. The argument of ignorance is predicated by a precedent. That is to say there is a "within logical reason" clause to it. Ex- my argument of the dentists only works because we know dentists are a possible profession. If I said: Space time traveling wizard lizard man, then argument of ignorance is implausible beyond validity as there has been no documented case of such things.
And we've seen no documented case of a Word Bearer Loyalist. Hence my point. If this was a case of talking about any other Legion, I'd agree with you, but the Word Bearers are currently the exception, as we've seen no evidence of them having Loyal members still.
Let me try to lay out my logic and see if you agree:
So we agree loyalists existed before the WB purged themselves yes or no?
Yes. That's why there were purges.
We agree Astartes have free will yes or no?
Largely, unless possessed/controlled by Chaos, yes, Astartes possess free will.
We agree Narek left the legion and turned agaisnt chaos as a WB (even if he does not fight for the big E) yes or no?
Yes. However, he is not a Loyalist, which we agree on.
We agree other traitors and loyalists changed sides during the war yes or no?
I'm not sure on this point - how far into the war are we talking, and what examples are there of wholesale changes prior? Do we have cases of previous Traitors turning Loyal after something like Istvaan or Calth?
I remember that Sevatar prove this right, but we don't know his fate. I'm going to have to put a maybe on this.
If we agree then it is theoretically possible for a WB to change sides. I'm not saying thousands did so, and you don't have to think any did. But can you agree on the plausibility of it? If it is plausible then some one has enough claim to make an army, whether it actually happened or not is up to personal opinion, but I stress again there is no hard barrier stopping someone from making a WB loyalist force.
I can see it being "possible", yes. I only believe it is possible under the scenarios of:
A - Word Bearer group is cut off prior to Monarchia. They arrive in Imperial space, declare themselves to be Word Bearers, and like most Legionnaires, are staunchly loyal to their Primarch first (doubly so for the Word Bearers). They refuse to back down until they either see proof of Lorgar's treachery, or are killed.
B - A group of Word Bearers remain loyal to Lorgar during the 2nd Purge. They only convert after Calth/Istvaan/later. However, I am not sure if any Word Bearers could still be loyal to the Emperor at this point, given we have seen none.
I think the circumstances need to be as close to point B as possible for best chances of success. However, still seeing the lack of any Word Bearer Loyalist puts me at doubt if they could still exist, especially when we see none as compared to every other legion.
I will admit, R0bcrt, you are making a solid point, but I would want to see evidence of a Loyal Word Bearer before I believe 100% that they are a thing. And trust me, I'd have no problems with that - a Loyal Word Bearer army would be a very fun project for me indeed.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/25 16:09:27
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I'm saying that we've seen no Loyal Word Bearers at all (that is, when the Legion was aligned to Chaos), so it's wrong to say there were.
But to me, this statement sounds like "It's impossible for intelligent life to exist on other planets because we haven't seen any." I know there's a 'Yet' in that analogy, but I believe the fundamental point is there.
I mean, is that wrong? Can you tell me there IS intelligent life on other planets? Yes, I am aware that is a real-world extreme, but is it any different?
I can't tell you that there is because I don't know. I have no proof that there isn't. But you haven't proven to me that it is impossible for there to be any Loyalist Word Bearers, what you've shown me (with what I knew already) is that the strong implication is that there are none. That's not proof of non-existence.
No, it's not PROOF of non-existence. It's evidence that none exist as we see. That's more evidence than them existing, which has none.
Or from a purely evidence-based point: We currently see no sign of a Loyal Word Bearer. That leads to there being more evidence of no Loyal Word Bearers than there being some, unless somehow not seeing anything is more evidence that there is something.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: It shows Red Thirst and Black Rage as being confirmed to Blood Angels geneseed AT THE MOMENT.
At the moment it does, which means at the moment, this is fact. The Twin Flaws are a genetic trait specific to Blood Angels only. I don't care if in 3 weeks time they retcon this so that all Legions have the Twin Flaws. At the moment, it is a Blood Angels thing only. To say otherwise at the moment is wrong.
Yes, at the moment, it is. I agree on this. However, also AT THE MOMENT, there have been no signs of a Loyal Word Bearer. Therefore, a loyal Word Bearer is just a likely as an Ultramarine with the flaws.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: As far as we see, there is also a direct correlation between being a Word Bearer and being anti-Imperial. Why is one correlation wrong, but the other is waivable?
Because the Twin Genetic Flaws isn't a correlation, it's caused by their Gene-Seed. So there isn't just correlation to between the Twin-Flaws and being a Blood Angel, there's causation. As for Word Bearers and being anti-Imperium, that IS correlation because being a Word Bearer doesn't automatically mean that you were anti-Imperium in the same way that being a Blood Angel means you suffer the Twin Flaws. The anti-Imperium sentiment is malleable and subjective since it's psychological. That's the difference. That's why I'm waiving your Ultramarines example.
Yes, but being a Word Bearer at the time of the 2nd Purge means that you were a traitor. As we have seen, there have been no Loyal Word Bearers after that 2nd Purge, due to that Purge, which is exclusive to the Word Bearers. Hence, being a Word Bearer after that 2nd Purge, as far as we see, means you must have not been Loyal.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The second purge is mentioned as occurring "around a century after the first, following Lorgar's secret betrayal of the Emperor" in order to "purge the legion's ranks of all Terran Astartes, who unfortunately had become corrupted from their initial isolation from their Primarch and were too deeply infected with the lies of the False Emperor."
So at the time of the Heresy, I think it is more than safe to say that there are no Astartes loyal to the Emperor still within the Legion. This is undisputed in my mind. But just because they were no longer part of the Legion doesn't mean they could not exist. The fact that they existed in the first place and Lorgar felt the need to purge them immediately opens up the possibility of survivors.
Except we see no evidence of any survivors. At all. All evidence of Loyal Word Bearers points to them being dead, via the Purge.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Given that in every other traitor legion there have been Loyalists shown, EXCEPT the Word Bearers, I have to be skeptical. Why have no loyalists been shown from that Legion? In every other Legion, we have examples. Garro, Varren, Loken, Tarvitz, Arvida, pretty much any Alpha Legionnaire, Dantioch, Zharost, and that's just one from each Traitor Legion. Yet no Word Bearers are shown at all. If it's seen in EVERYONE else, except one, does that mean nothing? Especially when nearly every source we have on the Word Bearers is that they never had a loyalist member?
So far I think you're limiting yourself to a "When". The likelihood of a Word Bearer that is still part of the Legion suddenly showing their Loyalty to the Emperor during the Horus Heresy? All but impossible. During the time of the Second Purge? That's definitely reasonable.
During, yes. That's why there were purges. However, AFTER? No, because we don't see any. The second Purge took place before Horus fell. Plenty of time for a Loyalist to emerge, yet we don't see any.
There might be no canon example, sure, but does that mean there can't be at all?
And that's my point. There is no canon example, so you can never say that it CAN 100% happen, because there's absolutely no evidence of it.
Absence of a case doesn't make it impossible. Again - as I've said above - you're stuck on a "When": The Horus Heresy. And as far as I know, there aren't a lot of canon sources (if any) that explore the Second Purge in great detail, leaving the possibility of Word Bearers Loyal to the Emperor escaping wide open.
Again, just because there isn't evidence of something NOT doesn't mean that it does.
An idea requires evidence. As it stands, there is no evidence supporting a Loyal Word Bearer, because we haven't seen one.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: If we're going to assume that because we haven't seen it, it can exist, theoretically ANYTHING in 40k becomes possible, because we haven't seen it yet. You want Star Wars clone troopers in your 40k? Well, because we haven't seen them, they could be there! You want a faction of cat-people who carry pistols that fire suns and could wipe out everyone in the galaxy without trying but they won't because they're too honorable for that? We've not seen any evidence of them, but that's okay, they could totally exist! You want literally anything at all in 40k? Go ahead!
Let's not take it to ridiculousness, shall we? It doesn't help anyone and it doesn't help the discussion.
I mean, is that not the point being risen?
You want Star Wars Clone Troopers in 40K? I'd call you unimaginative and uninspired.
But I can still have it, according to your statement, yes?
You want to create a race of ridiculous cat people? You can go be ridiculous on your own.
But your statement?
You want literally anything in 40K? Then you don't belong anywhere near fanfiction writing for 40K.
Even when your quote supports that?
I'm not exploring copy-pasting Star Wars or making your own ridiculousness or wanting "literally anything in 40K", I'm exploring the idea of loyalist Word Bearers and how to make them work. I know they're possible, just not in large numbers and only with the fluff done right.
How do you know they're possible? We have seen no evidence of them. That's the crux of my argument. You insist that they're a thing. I'm asking for proof of that.
I know that you're not creating Star Wars, or cat-people, or literally anything. But you're still talking about creating something that we have not seen in universe. At that point, is there a difference?
You want to start exploring copy-pasting Star Wars or making your own ridiculousness or wanting "literally anything in 40K"? You're welcome to start your own thread.
I mean, under your statement, I shouldn't need to start a thread. You already support it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/25 16:11:57
Sgt_Smudge wrote: As far as we see, there is also a direct correlation between being a Word Bearer and being anti-Imperial. Why is one correlation wrong, but the other is waivable?
Because the Twin Genetic Flaws isn't a correlation, it's caused by their Gene-Seed. So there isn't just correlation to between the Twin-Flaws and being a Blood Angel, there's causation. As for Word Bearers and being anti-Imperium, that IS correlation because being a Word Bearer doesn't automatically mean that you were anti-Imperium in the same way that being a Blood Angel means you suffer the Twin Flaws. The anti-Imperium sentiment is malleable and subjective since it's psychological. That's the difference. That's why I'm waiving your Ultramarines example.
Yes, but being a Word Bearer at the time of the 2nd Purge means that you were a traitor. As we have seen, there have been no Loyal Word Bearers after that 2nd Purge, due to that Purge, which is exclusive to the Word Bearers. Hence, being a Word Bearer after that 2nd Purge, as far as we see, means you must have not been Loyal.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The second purge is mentioned as occurring "around a century after the first, following Lorgar's secret betrayal of the Emperor" in order to "purge the legion's ranks of all Terran Astartes, who unfortunately had become corrupted from their initial isolation from their Primarch and were too deeply infected with the lies of the False Emperor."
So at the time of the Heresy, I think it is more than safe to say that there are no Astartes loyal to the Emperor still within the Legion. This is undisputed in my mind. But just because they were no longer part of the Legion doesn't mean they could not exist. The fact that they existed in the first place and Lorgar felt the need to purge them immediately opens up the possibility of survivors.
Except we see no evidence of any survivors. At all. All evidence of Loyal Word Bearers points to them being dead, via the Purge.
But this is exactly what I'm saying:
-- There were Word Bearers loyal to the Emperor leading up to and during the Second Purge who were still alive.
-- There is only a strong indication - NOT 100% solid proof that every one of the aforementioned loyalists were dead by the end of the Second Purge.
With that in mind, it is entirely possible that some loyal to the Emperor escaped their former Legion. If they can escape, then I now have a basis for Loyalist Word Bearers.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Given that in every other traitor legion there have been Loyalists shown, EXCEPT the Word Bearers, I have to be skeptical. Why have no loyalists been shown from that Legion?
In every other Legion, we have examples.
Garro, Varren, Loken, Tarvitz, Arvida, pretty much any Alpha Legionnaire, Dantioch, Zharost, and that's just one from each Traitor Legion. Yet no Word Bearers are shown at all.
If it's seen in EVERYONE else, except one, does that mean nothing? Especially when nearly every source we have on the Word Bearers is that they never had a loyalist member?
So far I think you're limiting yourself to a "When". The likelihood of a Word Bearer that is still part of the Legion suddenly showing their Loyalty to the Emperor during the Horus Heresy? All but impossible. During the time of the Second Purge? That's definitely reasonable.
During, yes. That's why there were purges. However, AFTER? No, because we don't see any. The second Purge took place before Horus fell. Plenty of time for a Loyalist to emerge, yet we don't see any.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: As it stands, there is no evidence supporting a Loyal Word Bearer, because we haven't seen one.
You're missing the point. You can explicitly prove to anyone here that there were absolutely no Loyalist Word Bearers after the conclusion of the Second Purge. The only thing you seem to be able to regurgitate to me is that there are no example of Loyalist Word Bearers. Just because there's no canon precedent for it doesn't make it impossible, it only adds to the implications of it not happening. Note the difference.
I'm not exploring copy-pasting Star Wars or making your own ridiculousness or wanting "literally anything in 40K", I'm exploring the idea of loyalist Word Bearers and how to make them work. I know they're possible, just not in large numbers and only with the fluff done right.
How do you know they're possible? We have seen no evidence of them. That's the crux of my argument. You insist that they're a thing. I'm asking for proof of that.
They can exist by virtue of the fact that you can't seem to prove that they don't. Furthermore, if there can be loyalist elements of other Traitor Legions and traitor elements of Loyalist Legions, then when you combine it with what I've been talking about with regards to surviving the Second Purge, then why is it such a radical idea that you seem to insist is impossible?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I know that you're not creating Star Wars, or cat-people, or literally anything. But you're still talking about creating something that we have not seen in universe. At that point, is there a difference?
Yes there is. The ridiculous examples you've borught up of Star Wars etc etc etc are simply not possible within the 40K universe as we know it. I think all can agree on that. But we know the Word Bearers exist in the 40K universe, we know that - at least at some point during their history - their loyalties were split, and I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to speculate that some Loyalists survived the Second Purge (regardless of whether or not they survived until the HH or managed to warn the Imperium about their Legion's treachery).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/25 16:30:39
Sgt_Smudge wrote: As far as we see, there is also a direct correlation between being a Word Bearer and being anti-Imperial. Why is one correlation wrong, but the other is waivable?
Because the Twin Genetic Flaws isn't a correlation, it's caused by their Gene-Seed. So there isn't just correlation to between the Twin-Flaws and being a Blood Angel, there's causation. As for Word Bearers and being anti-Imperium, that IS correlation because being a Word Bearer doesn't automatically mean that you were anti-Imperium in the same way that being a Blood Angel means you suffer the Twin Flaws. The anti-Imperium sentiment is malleable and subjective since it's psychological. That's the difference. That's why I'm waiving your Ultramarines example.
Yes, but being a Word Bearer at the time of the 2nd Purge means that you were a traitor. As we have seen, there have been no Loyal Word Bearers after that 2nd Purge, due to that Purge, which is exclusive to the Word Bearers. Hence, being a Word Bearer after that 2nd Purge, as far as we see, means you must have not been Loyal.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean here.
Basically, we have evidence of Loyal and Traitor Word Bearers prior to the Purge. Then, the Purge happened. All evidence of Loyal Word Bearers is then gone. As far as the actual evidence says, they are all dead. Therefore, with the evidence we have, being a Word Bearer after the Purge must mean that you were not Loyal.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The second purge is mentioned as occurring "around a century after the first, following Lorgar's secret betrayal of the Emperor" in order to "purge the legion's ranks of all Terran Astartes, who unfortunately had become corrupted from their initial isolation from their Primarch and were too deeply infected with the lies of the False Emperor."
So at the time of the Heresy, I think it is more than safe to say that there are no Astartes loyal to the Emperor still within the Legion. This is undisputed in my mind. But just because they were no longer part of the Legion doesn't mean they could not exist. The fact that they existed in the first place and Lorgar felt the need to purge them immediately opens up the possibility of survivors.
Except we see no evidence of any survivors. At all. All evidence of Loyal Word Bearers points to them being dead, via the Purge.
But this is exactly what I'm saying:
-- There were Word Bearers loyal to the Emperor leading up to and during the Second Purge who were still alive.
-- There is only a strong indication - NOT 100% solid proof that every one of the aforementioned loyalists were dead by the end of the Second Purge.
With that in mind, it is entirely possible that some loyal to the Emperor escaped their former Legion. If they can escape, then I now have a basis for Loyalist Word Bearers.
Except we have no knowledge that any DID escape. Your whole premise is based on the notion that some survived. We have no evidence that this is the case.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Given that in every other traitor legion there have been Loyalists shown, EXCEPT the Word Bearers, I have to be skeptical. Why have no loyalists been shown from that Legion?
In every other Legion, we have examples.
Garro, Varren, Loken, Tarvitz, Arvida, pretty much any Alpha Legionnaire, Dantioch, Zharost, and that's just one from each Traitor Legion. Yet no Word Bearers are shown at all.
If it's seen in EVERYONE else, except one, does that mean nothing? Especially when nearly every source we have on the Word Bearers is that they never had a loyalist member?
So far I think you're limiting yourself to a "When". The likelihood of a Word Bearer that is still part of the Legion suddenly showing their Loyalty to the Emperor during the Horus Heresy? All but impossible. During the time of the Second Purge? That's definitely reasonable.
During, yes. That's why there were purges. However, AFTER? No, because we don't see any. The second Purge took place before Horus fell. Plenty of time for a Loyalist to emerge, yet we don't see any.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: As it stands, there is no evidence supporting a Loyal Word Bearer, because we haven't seen one.
You're missing the point. You can explicitly prove to anyone here that there were absolutely no Loyalist Word Bearers after the conclusion of the Second Purge. The only thing you seem to be able to regurgitate to me is that there are no example of Loyalist Word Bearers. Just because there's no canon precedent for it doesn't make it impossible, it only adds to the implications of it not happening. Note the difference.
So we're going back to the argument of "because there's no canon that says I can't, I can do it". If this logic is true, then everything is possible unless it is explicitly said not to be allowed.
I hope you enjoy my cat-person clones.
I'm not exploring copy-pasting Star Wars or making your own ridiculousness or wanting "literally anything in 40K", I'm exploring the idea of loyalist Word Bearers and how to make them work. I know they're possible, just not in large numbers and only with the fluff done right.
How do you know they're possible? We have seen no evidence of them. That's the crux of my argument. You insist that they're a thing. I'm asking for proof of that.
They can exist by virtue of the fact that you can't seem to prove that they don't. Furthermore, if there can be loyalist elements of other Traitor Legions and traitor elements of Loyalist Legions, then when you combine it with what I've been talking about with regards to surviving the Second Purge, then why is it such a radical idea that you seem to insist is impossible?
On the other hand, they don't exist by virtue of the fact you can't seem to prove they do.
The problem with saying "the other traitor legions have loyalists, why can't the Word Bearers" is that we see loyalists from all the other Legions. We don't see any from the Word Bearers. That's why there's an issue for me - we see it from EVERYONE else except the Word Bearers. Why is that?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I know that you're not creating Star Wars, or cat-people, or literally anything. But you're still talking about creating something that we have not seen in universe. At that point, is there a difference?
Yes there is. The ridiculous examples you've borught up of Star Wars etc etc etc are simply not possible within the 40K universe as we know it.
As are your Loyal Word Bearers. We see no evidence of them existing, so are "simply not possible within the 40K universe as we know it".
I think all can agree on that. But we know the Word Bearers exist in the 40K universe, we know that - at least at some point during their history - their loyalties were split, and I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to speculate that some Loyalists survived the Second Purge (regardless of whether or not they survived until the HH or managed to warn the Imperium about their Legion's treachery).
Yes, I agree that Loyal Word Bearers existed at the time of the 2nd Purge. That's why the Purge actually happened. But I refuse to accept that, just because we aren't told by an omniscient narrator that all of them died, that some Loyalists survived it. There is simply no proof. Yes, it's possible, but it's just as possible as all the ridiculous ideas I mentioned, simply because there is no proof that it did happen.
You can keep on saying "it could have happened", but there's no proof. Under those circumstances, I can continue saying that there are cat-person clones in 40k, without any proof, and it's just as valid.
R0bcrt wrote: Okay I see the problem, I don't want to sound preachy but I don't think you understand how to properly use the argument of ignorance, rather you are taking it too far by then assuming stormtroopers and anything is possible once one uses the argument in-universe. The argument of ignorance is predicated by a precedent. That is to say there is a "within logical reason" clause to it. Ex- my argument of the dentists only works because we know dentists are a possible profession. If I said: Space time traveling wizard lizard man, then argument of ignorance is implausible beyond validity as there has been no documented case of such things.
And we've seen no documented case of a Word Bearer Loyalist. Hence my point. If this was a case of talking about any other Legion, I'd agree with you, but the Word Bearers are currently the exception, as we've seen no evidence of them having Loyal members still.
Let me try to lay out my logic and see if you agree:
So we agree loyalists existed before the WB purged themselves yes or no?
Yes. That's why there were purges.
We agree Astartes have free will yes or no?
Largely, unless possessed/controlled by Chaos, yes, Astartes possess free will.
We agree Narek left the legion and turned agaisnt chaos as a WB (even if he does not fight for the big E) yes or no?
Yes. However, he is not a Loyalist, which we agree on.
We agree other traitors and loyalists changed sides during the war yes or no?
I'm not sure on this point - how far into the war are we talking, and what examples are there of wholesale changes prior? Do we have cases of previous Traitors turning Loyal after something like Istvaan or Calth?
I remember that Sevatar prove this right, but we don't know his fate. I'm going to have to put a maybe on this.
If we agree then it is theoretically possible for a WB to change sides. I'm not saying thousands did so, and you don't have to think any did. But can you agree on the plausibility of it? If it is plausible then some one has enough claim to make an army, whether it actually happened or not is up to personal opinion, but I stress again there is no hard barrier stopping someone from making a WB loyalist force.
I can see it being "possible", yes. I only believe it is possible under the scenarios of:
A - Word Bearer group is cut off prior to Monarchia. They arrive in Imperial space, declare themselves to be Word Bearers, and like most Legionnaires, are staunchly loyal to their Primarch first (doubly so for the Word Bearers). They refuse to back down until they either see proof of Lorgar's treachery, or are killed.
B - A group of Word Bearers remain loyal to Lorgar during the 2nd Purge. They only convert after Calth/Istvaan/later. However, I am not sure if any Word Bearers could still be loyal to the Emperor at this point, given we have seen none.
I think the circumstances need to be as close to point B as possible for best chances of success. However, still seeing the lack of any Word Bearer Loyalist puts me at doubt if they could still exist, especially when we see none as compared to every other legion.
I will admit, R0bcrt, you are making a solid point, but I would want to see evidence of a Loyal Word Bearer before I believe 100% that they are a thing. And trust me, I'd have no problems with that - a Loyal Word Bearer army would be a very fun project for me indeed.
I've also heard Sevatar defects but I don't remember anything factual related to it, I know he was captured by the loyalists as there is a story about him, but that's about it right now.
I'm glad you think I am making a solid point, and I also hope they add more definitive information. It's not that I believe 100% beyond any doubt loyalist WB exist, it's more so that when I consider the margin of error in the statement that none exist, I find it large enough to not have much confidence in the statement, and when you consider the different possibilities and routes a loyalist WB could survive/change their mind at the start of the Heresy, I think it is more likely at least 1 exists than 0 exist. It's a claim that has no evidence it's true, but it's one I put through the ringer to make sure it was plausible. I would balk at 10,000 strong WB force suddenly appearing at Istvaan or Calth, but a knight errant, or a few squad members here or there, or even the tattered remains of a loyal-minded company that couldn't bring themselves to fire on brothers when the time came to commit fratricide? Those range in probabilities but all could make sense. Maybe in the last example the WB commander ran into a "blood brother" from another legion he served in a living hell like the Rangdan Xenocides, and if he was on the fence like Sor Talgron or Narek then he may decide to help them, not necessarily for love of the Emperor which makes him like Narek, but because this man saved his life on more than one occasion through decades of fighting, and "am I really going to stab him in the back right now?" sort of dilemma. Heck you could make it where the Company basically sacrifices itself to save the Blood Brother which explains why they were never documented- it was a sudden and emotional change of heart. Say at Istvaan V, a single rogue WB vessel suddenly breaking formation and mauling a path clear for a second Salamanders/Raven Guard/Iron Hands could be seen to be hijacked by one of the 3 massacred legions.
I had hoped Lorgar Bearer of the Word would provide more information, and it kinda does but not really. (minor spoilers ahead)
Spoiler:
We know Kor Phaeron was hiding his faith from Lorgar before Monarchia but during the Great Crusade (the book jumps around alot in the time-line), and it is implied he was already keeping tabs on those who could be traitors and who could not in the Word Bearers section on page 8 and obviously was keeping chaos cults on the whole alive during this time, but it does not really state it others within the legion and how many were in the "inner circle" at this time, but we know they were still checking loyalties after Monarchia but I'll get there. This supports your claim (increases your odds/reduces margin of error of being true). Now later while Lorgar was sulking after Monarchia he has an interesting conversation with Kor Phaeron, and on page 127:
"Was Lorgar really asking Kor Phaeron to do it again? The primarch would never say as much, perhaps he could never bring himself to do so. He knew little enough of the Dark Heart and the Brotherhood that had defended the Truth on Colchis."
Of course we know Lorgar ordered this before, but it seems to imply that Lorgar, at least initially, did not wish to hear the gritty details of the purge as he refused to know the details of the first purge. Now Kor Phaeron is the right hand so effectively it does not change much, but at the same time I feel like it, again assuming Lorgar felt this way through the purge, undermines the effectiveness of the purge in the sense that a Primarch's mind would have been much more effective at killing all WB. Kor Phaeron is not stupid, to the contrary, but I feel like keeping track of all the different WB groups is a higher challenge for him than Lorgar. Effectively it increases the margin of error to the claim.
Lastly we see Kor Phaeron order the death of a loyalist squad Kor Phaeron:
"In thirty seconds, one hundred Space Marines were felled, armour slashed, broken and shattered by the treacherous attack. 'Some of them still live.' reported Jarulek as he looked down on the form of Menelek at his feet. The lieutenant-Commander weakly grabbed at the captain's greaves before being kicked away, Jarulek aimed his bolter at Menelek's head.
'No,' ordered Kor Phaeron. He gestured towards the main doors while smoke and fire continued to fill space around them, an almost living thing. Oil flasks and flamer ammunition casks started to smoke and explode among the fallen. The moans of the wounded became curses across the vox until Kor Phaeron silenced the compnay link to address Jarulek and his brothers. 'Leave them among the ashes of the Emperor they failed.'" page 188
On the one hand it proves the mass slaughter of obvious loyalists happened, and it makes your option B the much more likely route (these guys were so obvious about their loyalty it hurts though, one that wasn't so obvious could slip through the cracks). However I have issues with how Kor Phaeron handled the situation, rather it opens some interesting hypothetical situations. The fact Kor Phaeron did not physically check every WB, and even cut the vox off before making sure the curses stopped, is a mistake in my opinion. Now we can be almost sure that Menelek and his men burned to death in the building, but I just find it crazy Kor Phaeron and the other WB just left. Think of it this way, Loken was wounded yet survived multiple orbital bombardments at Istvaan III and the resulting barren waste-land, Kor Phaeron is asking for trouble by not checking these things haha. What if one was only slighted wounded and was able to escape, or what if one was buried under other astartes and survived the fire by virtue of being under several layers of bodies and ceramite? While only hypothetical it makes an explanation for a WB survival scenario a bit more possible, i.e. maybe a small WB force that are loyalists teleport/get a lift to a space hulk and the traitor legions just leave or shoot up the area in the space hulk they were last known, but somehow one or a couple or even a squad get deeper in the space hulk and only during the Heresy does a ship come across them. Likely? not particularly, but it's possible within the universe, which is what matters.
Oh and believe it or not your cat-people clones are plausible. Felinids exist, and Death Korp of Krieg having cloning tech so.....
The more we argue the point, one thing has become abundantly clear: There seems to be more than one interpretation of the information surrounding the possibility of Word Bearers that are still loyal to the Emperor surviving the Second Purge let alone surviving until the Horus Heresy. In light of this and for the sake of the original thread topic, I'd like to say let's stop the discussion on whether or not it's viable to have Loyalist Word Bearers and go with this:
Let's continue from the original topic.
Let's assume a vessel of loyal Astartes from a Traitor Legion arrived "Garro - Sword of Truth" style. How would they be treated?
If this is unlikely to go well for these Astartes (i,e, they end up dying): What would be a better scenario for these Astartes to encounter loyalist elements of the Imperium (e.g. a loyalist Legion. planet, or army force) that could result in them being brought back into the fold and/or surviving to serve the Imperium post-Heresy?
My thoughts dwell around the idea of direct intervention from Malcador since he has time that in which specific details are unaccounted for that could be use for my advantage or - as I think it was R0bcrt who mentioned it - have a loyalist Company fight alongside an element of a Loyalist Legion and thus help me work a narrative around which they survive. Of course I'm open to other suggestions on how this might work.
Maybe one of the books said that, I will check later. However even if that is true, the problem with FW/BL books is that it follows the "Everything said is cannon, but not necessarily true.", which is extremely important to understand as a concept. That is to say the very first HH black series book has a preface where it says the entire book is written from the perspective of one person compiling the history of the heresy (ie it's not meta and telling us what happened word for word). Here is one of the paragraphs from page 9:
Spoiler:
"It is for this reason I have assembled this record, the first volume of which you hold in your hand. Into it I have poured my learning and my memory. I know there are those now who would call my words lies or worse, treason, and I have no doubt that in the grim darkness oh what is surely to follow, my words at best may seem a cruel joke."
They should emblazon this in colossal red letters across the first 10 pages of every novel, and/or make people take a quick quiz to ensure they understand what it means before they read the novel.
It's fantastically, utterly important to the continued creative flexibility that makes 40k as compelling as it is. Without the wiggle-room that 'everything is canon, but not everything is true', 40k becomes just another dead and static story that only comes alive once in a blue moon when the authors actually release something official, rather than something that's living and breathing and changing with every addition we the fans make.
I also absolutely love the idea that the Heresy is a textbook example of revisionist history. Of course the Traitors will be vilified, as the Imperium was victorious. Perhaps they were doing it because it's humanity's greatest shot at survival (these eldritch beings exist, and trying to fight them will only result in extinction, so learn to live with the universe as it is), or because victory against Chaos had too high a price (the Emperor's plan to cut humanity off from the warp could have resulted in humans committing the same mistake as the Necrons, given that emotion and souls are intrinsically linked to the warp and cutting one off from the other could be the equivalent of a soul-lobotomy).
Only perhaps mind you. Also perhaps they were willing architects of horrific plans whose only desire is to sow destruction and carnage. Perhaps the Imperium was right, and anyone who is believing that the Traitors did anything for the good of humanity will be confronted by the single greatest 'oh crap' moment of their life when they realise just what they've unleashed.
The point is we don't know, and that leaves it open for all kinds of creativity.
R0bcrt wrote:I've also heard Sevatar defects but I don't remember anything factual related to it, I know he was captured by the loyalists as there is a story about him, but that's about it right now.
I'm glad you think I am making a solid point, and I also hope they add more definitive information. It's not that I believe 100% beyond any doubt loyalist WB exist, it's more so that when I consider the margin of error in the statement that none exist, I find it large enough to not have much confidence in the statement, and when you consider the different possibilities and routes a loyalist WB could survive/change their mind at the start of the Heresy, I think it is more likely at least 1 exists than 0 exist. It's a claim that has no evidence it's true, but it's one I put through the ringer to make sure it was plausible. I would balk at 10,000 strong WB force suddenly appearing at Istvaan or Calth, but a knight errant, or a few squad members here or there, or even the tattered remains of a loyal-minded company that couldn't bring themselves to fire on brothers when the time came to commit fratricide? Those range in probabilities but all could make sense. Maybe in the last example the WB commander ran into a "blood brother" from another legion he served in a living hell like the Rangdan Xenocides, and if he was on the fence like Sor Talgron or Narek then he may decide to help them, not necessarily for love of the Emperor which makes him like Narek, but because this man saved his life on more than one occasion through decades of fighting, and "am I really going to stab him in the back right now?" sort of dilemma. Heck you could make it where the Company basically sacrifices itself to save the Blood Brother which explains why they were never documented- it was a sudden and emotional change of heart. Say at Istvaan V, a single rogue WB vessel suddenly breaking formation and mauling a path clear for a second Salamanders/Raven Guard/Iron Hands could be seen to be hijacked by one of the 3 massacred legions.
We do actually have cases of Word Bearers fighting their bond brothers - Kurtha Sedd is the bond brother of Steloc Atheon of the Ultramarines and Sorot Tchure is the bond brother to Honorius Luciel, another Ultramarine. It ends badly for both Ultramarines.
As far as these are concerned, the Word Bearers follow their oaths to their Legion over their bonds to their comrades.
I had hoped Lorgar Bearer of the Word would provide more information, and it kinda does but not really. (minor spoilers ahead)
Spoiler:
We know Kor Phaeron was hiding his faith from Lorgar before Monarchia but during the Great Crusade (the book jumps around alot in the time-line), and it is implied he was already keeping tabs on those who could be traitors and who could not in the Word Bearers section on page 8 and obviously was keeping chaos cults on the whole alive during this time, but it does not really state it others within the legion and how many were in the "inner circle" at this time, but we know they were still checking loyalties after Monarchia but I'll get there. This supports your claim (increases your odds/reduces margin of error of being true). Now later while Lorgar was sulking after Monarchia he has an interesting conversation with Kor Phaeron, and on page 127:
"Was Lorgar really asking Kor Phaeron to do it again? The primarch would never say as much, perhaps he could never bring himself to do so. He knew little enough of the Dark Heart and the Brotherhood that had defended the Truth on Colchis."
Of course we know Lorgar ordered this before, but it seems to imply that Lorgar, at least initially, did not wish to hear the gritty details of the purge as he refused to know the details of the first purge. Now Kor Phaeron is the right hand so effectively it does not change much, but at the same time I feel like it, again assuming Lorgar felt this way through the purge, undermines the effectiveness of the purge in the sense that a Primarch's mind would have been much more effective at killing all WB. Kor Phaeron is not stupid, to the contrary, but I feel like keeping track of all the different WB groups is a higher challenge for him than Lorgar. Effectively it increases the margin of error to the claim.
Lastly we see Kor Phaeron order the death of a loyalist squad Kor Phaeron:
"In thirty seconds, one hundred Space Marines were felled, armour slashed, broken and shattered by the treacherous attack. 'Some of them still live.' reported Jarulek as he looked down on the form of Menelek at his feet. The lieutenant-Commander weakly grabbed at the captain's greaves before being kicked away, Jarulek aimed his bolter at Menelek's head.
'No,' ordered Kor Phaeron. He gestured towards the main doors while smoke and fire continued to fill space around them, an almost living thing. Oil flasks and flamer ammunition casks started to smoke and explode among the fallen. The moans of the wounded became curses across the vox until Kor Phaeron silenced the compnay link to address Jarulek and his brothers. 'Leave them among the ashes of the Emperor they failed.'" page 188
On the one hand it proves the mass slaughter of obvious loyalists happened, and it makes your option B the much more likely route (these guys were so obvious about their loyalty it hurts though, one that wasn't so obvious could slip through the cracks). However I have issues with how Kor Phaeron handled the situation, rather it opens some interesting hypothetical situations. The fact Kor Phaeron did not physically check every WB, and even cut the vox off before making sure the curses stopped, is a mistake in my opinion. Now we can be almost sure that Menelek and his men burned to death in the building, but I just find it crazy Kor Phaeron and the other WB just left. Think of it this way, Loken was wounded yet survived multiple orbital bombardments at Istvaan III and the resulting barren waste-land, Kor Phaeron is asking for trouble by not checking these things haha. What if one was only slighted wounded and was able to escape, or what if one was buried under other astartes and survived the fire by virtue of being under several layers of bodies and ceramite? While only hypothetical it makes an explanation for a WB survival scenario a bit more possible, i.e. maybe a small WB force that are loyalists teleport/get a lift to a space hulk and the traitor legions just leave or shoot up the area in the space hulk they were last known, but somehow one or a couple or even a squad get deeper in the space hulk and only during the Heresy does a ship come across them. Likely? not particularly, but it's possible within the universe, which is what matters.
Again - there's just no data. There's certainly the ability for a small amount of Legionnaires - less than a squad's worth, I'd say - to have survived against the astronomical odds, but there's simply no precedent, which is my point.
Oh and believe it or not your cat-people clones are plausible. Felinids exist, and Death Korp of Krieg having cloning tech so.....
I knew about the felinids, and kinda forgot about the Death Korps cloning tech - never thought to combine them!
Still, I guess that actually rebuts IllumiNini saying that idea was ridiculous, as it's in fluff, but the gist of the point remains.
IllumiNini wrote:The more we argue the point, one thing has become abundantly clear: There seems to be more than one interpretation of the information surrounding the possibility of Word Bearers that are still loyal to the Emperor surviving the Second Purge let alone surviving until the Horus Heresy. In light of this and for the sake of the original thread topic, I'd like to say let's stop the discussion on whether or not it's viable to have Loyalist Word Bearers and go with this:
Let's continue from the original topic.
Let's assume a vessel of loyal Astartes from a Traitor Legion arrived "Garro - Sword of Truth" style. How would they be treated?
If this is unlikely to go well for these Astartes (i,e, they end up dying): What would be a better scenario for these Astartes to encounter loyalist elements of the Imperium (e.g. a loyalist Legion. planet, or army force) that could result in them being brought back into the fold and/or surviving to serve the Imperium post-Heresy?
My thoughts dwell around the idea of direct intervention from Malcador since he has time that in which specific details are unaccounted for that could be use for my advantage or - as I think it was R0bcrt who mentioned it - have a loyalist Company fight alongside an element of a Loyalist Legion and thus help me work a narrative around which they survive. Of course I'm open to other suggestions on how this might work.
I think when we're dealing with an entire vessel of Legionnaires, only Malcador could make it work. Short of his influence, they'd probably be shot down, given what we've seen from the majority of reactions to members of traitor legions.
Ynneadwraith wrote:They should emblazon this in colossal red letters across the first 10 pages of every novel, and/or make people take a quick quiz to ensure they understand what it means before they read the novel.
It's fantastically, utterly important to the continued creative flexibility that makes 40k as compelling as it is. Without the wiggle-room that 'everything is canon, but not everything is true', 40k becomes just another dead and static story that only comes alive once in a blue moon when the authors actually release something official, rather than something that's living and breathing and changing with every addition we the fans make.
However, as a counterpoint to this, if "not everything is true", then everything is malleable. If there aren't aspects wherein "this definitely happened", then the setting falls apart. If not everything is true, then central tenets of the world cease to be, when I can say "the Warp is just a lie made up by Chaos", or "Guilliman being alive is just propaganda", or "Tyranids don't exist, they're just an excuse by the Imperium to explain why so many of their worlds have been lost on the Eastern Fringe".
Yes, I think that creative flexibility is ultimately good, but only if it is tempered with evidence and a core level of stability. If it solely devolved to fanon, then the setting would never be agreed upon, because we'd be left with hundreds of unique interpretations (not a bad thing) which are all simultaneously right at the same time. Whilst not completely bad, or completely from the truth as it is, in a situation where fanon supersedes canon, I can say "the Emperor doesn't exist, and humanity died long ago", and be right. Do you support that?
R0bcrt wrote:I've also heard Sevatar defects but I don't remember anything factual related to it, I know he was captured by the loyalists as there is a story about him, but that's about it right now.
I'm glad you think I am making a solid point, and I also hope they add more definitive information. It's not that I believe 100% beyond any doubt loyalist WB exist, it's more so that when I consider the margin of error in the statement that none exist, I find it large enough to not have much confidence in the statement, and when you consider the different possibilities and routes a loyalist WB could survive/change their mind at the start of the Heresy, I think it is more likely at least 1 exists than 0 exist. It's a claim that has no evidence it's true, but it's one I put through the ringer to make sure it was plausible. I would balk at 10,000 strong WB force suddenly appearing at Istvaan or Calth, but a knight errant, or a few squad members here or there, or even the tattered remains of a loyal-minded company that couldn't bring themselves to fire on brothers when the time came to commit fratricide? Those range in probabilities but all could make sense. Maybe in the last example the WB commander ran into a "blood brother" from another legion he served in a living hell like the Rangdan Xenocides, and if he was on the fence like Sor Talgron or Narek then he may decide to help them, not necessarily for love of the Emperor which makes him like Narek, but because this man saved his life on more than one occasion through decades of fighting, and "am I really going to stab him in the back right now?" sort of dilemma. Heck you could make it where the Company basically sacrifices itself to save the Blood Brother which explains why they were never documented- it was a sudden and emotional change of heart. Say at Istvaan V, a single rogue WB vessel suddenly breaking formation and mauling a path clear for a second Salamanders/Raven Guard/Iron Hands could be seen to be hijacked by one of the 3 massacred legions.
We do actually have cases of Word Bearers fighting their bond brothers - Kurtha Sedd is the bond brother of Steloc Atheon of the Ultramarines and Sorot Tchure is the bond brother to Honorius Luciel, another Ultramarine. It ends badly for both Ultramarines.
As far as these are concerned, the Word Bearers follow their oaths to their Legion over their bonds to their comrades.
I had hoped Lorgar Bearer of the Word would provide more information, and it kinda does but not really. (minor spoilers ahead)
Spoiler:
We know Kor Phaeron was hiding his faith from Lorgar before Monarchia but during the Great Crusade (the book jumps around alot in the time-line), and it is implied he was already keeping tabs on those who could be traitors and who could not in the Word Bearers section on page 8 and obviously was keeping chaos cults on the whole alive during this time, but it does not really state it others within the legion and how many were in the "inner circle" at this time, but we know they were still checking loyalties after Monarchia but I'll get there. This supports your claim (increases your odds/reduces margin of error of being true). Now later while Lorgar was sulking after Monarchia he has an interesting conversation with Kor Phaeron, and on page 127:
"Was Lorgar really asking Kor Phaeron to do it again? The primarch would never say as much, perhaps he could never bring himself to do so. He knew little enough of the Dark Heart and the Brotherhood that had defended the Truth on Colchis."
Of course we know Lorgar ordered this before, but it seems to imply that Lorgar, at least initially, did not wish to hear the gritty details of the purge as he refused to know the details of the first purge. Now Kor Phaeron is the right hand so effectively it does not change much, but at the same time I feel like it, again assuming Lorgar felt this way through the purge, undermines the effectiveness of the purge in the sense that a Primarch's mind would have been much more effective at killing all WB. Kor Phaeron is not stupid, to the contrary, but I feel like keeping track of all the different WB groups is a higher challenge for him than Lorgar. Effectively it increases the margin of error to the claim.
Lastly we see Kor Phaeron order the death of a loyalist squad Kor Phaeron:
"In thirty seconds, one hundred Space Marines were felled, armour slashed, broken and shattered by the treacherous attack. 'Some of them still live.' reported Jarulek as he looked down on the form of Menelek at his feet. The lieutenant-Commander weakly grabbed at the captain's greaves before being kicked away, Jarulek aimed his bolter at Menelek's head.
'No,' ordered Kor Phaeron. He gestured towards the main doors while smoke and fire continued to fill space around them, an almost living thing. Oil flasks and flamer ammunition casks started to smoke and explode among the fallen. The moans of the wounded became curses across the vox until Kor Phaeron silenced the compnay link to address Jarulek and his brothers. 'Leave them among the ashes of the Emperor they failed.'" page 188
On the one hand it proves the mass slaughter of obvious loyalists happened, and it makes your option B the much more likely route (these guys were so obvious about their loyalty it hurts though, one that wasn't so obvious could slip through the cracks). However I have issues with how Kor Phaeron handled the situation, rather it opens some interesting hypothetical situations. The fact Kor Phaeron did not physically check every WB, and even cut the vox off before making sure the curses stopped, is a mistake in my opinion. Now we can be almost sure that Menelek and his men burned to death in the building, but I just find it crazy Kor Phaeron and the other WB just left. Think of it this way, Loken was wounded yet survived multiple orbital bombardments at Istvaan III and the resulting barren waste-land, Kor Phaeron is asking for trouble by not checking these things haha. What if one was only slighted wounded and was able to escape, or what if one was buried under other astartes and survived the fire by virtue of being under several layers of bodies and ceramite? While only hypothetical it makes an explanation for a WB survival scenario a bit more possible, i.e. maybe a small WB force that are loyalists teleport/get a lift to a space hulk and the traitor legions just leave or shoot up the area in the space hulk they were last known, but somehow one or a couple or even a squad get deeper in the space hulk and only during the Heresy does a ship come across them. Likely? not particularly, but it's possible within the universe, which is what matters.
Again - there's just no data. There's certainly the ability for a small amount of Legionnaires - less than a squad's worth, I'd say - to have survived against the astronomical odds, but there's simply no precedent, which is my point.
Oh and believe it or not your cat-people clones are plausible. Felinids exist, and Death Korp of Krieg having cloning tech so.....
I knew about the felinids, and kinda forgot about the Death Korps cloning tech - never thought to combine them!
Still, I guess that actually rebuts IllumiNini saying that idea was ridiculous, as it's in fluff, but the gist of the point remains.
IllumiNini wrote:The more we argue the point, one thing has become abundantly clear: There seems to be more than one interpretation of the information surrounding the possibility of Word Bearers that are still loyal to the Emperor surviving the Second Purge let alone surviving until the Horus Heresy. In light of this and for the sake of the original thread topic, I'd like to say let's stop the discussion on whether or not it's viable to have Loyalist Word Bearers and go with this:
Let's continue from the original topic.
Let's assume a vessel of loyal Astartes from a Traitor Legion arrived "Garro - Sword of Truth" style. How would they be treated?
If this is unlikely to go well for these Astartes (i,e, they end up dying): What would be a better scenario for these Astartes to encounter loyalist elements of the Imperium (e.g. a loyalist Legion. planet, or army force) that could result in them being brought back into the fold and/or surviving to serve the Imperium post-Heresy?
My thoughts dwell around the idea of direct intervention from Malcador since he has time that in which specific details are unaccounted for that could be use for my advantage or - as I think it was R0bcrt who mentioned it - have a loyalist Company fight alongside an element of a Loyalist Legion and thus help me work a narrative around which they survive. Of course I'm open to other suggestions on how this might work.
I think when we're dealing with an entire vessel of Legionnaires, only Malcador could make it work. Short of his influence, they'd probably be shot down, given what we've seen from the majority of reactions to members of traitor legions.
Ynneadwraith wrote:They should emblazon this in colossal red letters across the first 10 pages of every novel, and/or make people take a quick quiz to ensure they understand what it means before they read the novel.
It's fantastically, utterly important to the continued creative flexibility that makes 40k as compelling as it is. Without the wiggle-room that 'everything is canon, but not everything is true', 40k becomes just another dead and static story that only comes alive once in a blue moon when the authors actually release something official, rather than something that's living and breathing and changing with every addition we the fans make.
However, as a counterpoint to this, if "not everything is true", then everything is malleable. If there aren't aspects wherein "this definitely happened", then the setting falls apart. If not everything is true, then central tenets of the world cease to be, when I can say "the Warp is just a lie made up by Chaos", or "Guilliman being alive is just propaganda", or "Tyranids don't exist, they're just an excuse by the Imperium to explain why so many of their worlds have been lost on the Eastern Fringe".
Yes, I think that creative flexibility is ultimately good, but only if it is tempered with evidence and a core level of stability. If it solely devolved to fanon, then the setting would never be agreed upon, because we'd be left with hundreds of unique interpretations (not a bad thing) which are all simultaneously right at the same time. Whilst not completely bad, or completely from the truth as it is, in a situation where fanon supersedes canon, I can say "the Emperor doesn't exist, and humanity died long ago", and be right. Do you support that?
My last thing I want to say before I agree with IlummiNini to move on is in regards to canon, fan fluff, and evidence. In science different statements are more plausible from others. It's the difference of saying Loch-Ness doesn't exist versus extra-terrastial life in some form doesn't exist, one we have searched the lake to a reasonable extent, the other we have not even left our solar system. However assuming aliens exist (not necessarily intelligent, just that one multi-cellular organisms exists somewhere) or even admitting the low probability Loch-Ness monster exists does not mean I think gravity is bogus or that the earth is flat; if one subject is open ended enough for doubt despite there being no evidence it does not mean the whole world is suddenly in question and the current system is false. This is not a central nor fundamental tenet of the universe, so it being open to interpretation is by no means world ending nor does someone's belief being contrary to yours means the Emperor is false and humanity does not exist.
Rather it is not evidence that should be used when creating, but margin of error effectively. There is no evidence for insert peoples home-brew chapters, at all. There is no evidence of cloned felinids. There's no evidence of any particular army someone makes UNLESS they are basing it on a known group in a book. Nor is there evidence that humanity is a lie. And ofcourse there is no evidence for loyal WB. Does that mean people can't create home-brew chapters and can only make a force that exists in the book and nothing else? This is the logical conclusion of your argument if we use evidence to make conclusions exclusively (i.e. it is the opposite and equal argument you are using to say that if something is plausible but is not fact anything can happen, both are ridiculous positions to have). It is not evidence that makes these possible, but margin of error/plausibility. It is confirmed more chapters than we know exist (they've told us) and very plausible insert someones chapter can exist, pretty plausible Felinids get cloning tech. Highly plausible someone's Ultramarine strike-force of 4 tac squads and a vindicator exists. There is a 0 margin of error that humanity exists and a basically 0 margin of error that the Emperor is not a lie. Loyalist Word Bearers does not have a margin of error of 0 on the statement that none exist, we already agreed it is possible. If it is possible one can make a WB army and not break any core tenet in the universe.
Okay IlumiNini I'll move on now XD.
I also agree Ynneadwaith that FW really should explain this concept in clear terms whenever someone approaches these books as it's fundamental to truly understanding the 40k universe. It's the difference of taking Thucydides, Livy, Dio Cassius etc. as hard fact versus knowing that the histories themselves are malleable and not bereft of inaccuracies, ranging from accidental hear-say being taken as fact and deliberate altering the records to make people either look better or worse. It adds another layer of complexity to it that I think not many people actually know exists.
In regards to a large-ish group of WB I suppose it depends on how large? For most horus heresy game sized armies I don't think you'd need to have Malcador but he can be involved (Malcador helps in the sense that no trace of them would be left in the HH black books because all data would have been deleted by the time the author decided to write about the events so his observation of no WB would still be valid, it's the same way grey knights/knights errants wouldn't be known about). Here are some hypotethicals:
so using your previous idea (I think it was me but I've typed so much in this thread XD) WB fighting along loyalists legions during the crusade and swearing oaths to brothers take precedent, while Sgnt. Smudge points out previous examples didn't end well but that has no bearing on your particular chapter as astartes have free will. I would still have a minor civil war between the force though as it would basically be a "reverse purge" as those with Lorgar would try and fight back. Depending on the legion dictates a number of possible outcomes. Ultramarines? Repaint the armor and have them stay the f*^% back whenever an "outsider" Ultramarine comes by the group, other wise I think Guiliman would probably imprison them if not kill them in rage, but he is logical so a long heart to heart may stay his hand enough (kinda hypocritical to have IW but reject WB if they proved themselves), but that is pretty unlikely. Most other legions though would treat them like any other loyalist traitor legionary; with skepticism but ultimately would work with them if they had a history or could prove themselves. At that point Malcador could intervene and change their history (Proven by him trying to recruit Narek he would not scoff at WB). Maybe he doesn't have them join the knights errants, but instead he treats them like the Minotaur chapter of 40k where he makes them the "fist of Malcador" (secretly obviously). WB would be perfect for this as they are fanatic, willing to follow any orders, etc. He doesn't have to do this, he could just deem them loyal, remove their history knowing they'd be judged and move on, but the Minotaur equivalent explains why he would be interested and is an interesting concept. Depending on the numbers after the Heresy they could form their own chapter, or they get incorporated into a wierd mixed chapter with their partner legion force
another idea without Malcador
Loyal WB force of some unknown size runs into a system they conquered early in the crusade that either was not corrupted or the attempted coup failed. The governor has not run into any astartes; they are away at the front lines but he knows the war will come here eventually. Suddenly legionaries that brought the emperor's light into your life 70 years ago come to you and say they will protect you from their lost and thrice damned Fathers (they betrayed the legion, his brothers, and his father (emperor)). How does he react? Pretty happy I think, maybe they make an oath to the emperor or maybe they make an oath to kill WB (they don't have to believe in the imperial cult anymore, like Sgt. Smudge said it's more likely a neutral WB would survive the purge) but the governor won't kill them. If they did not believe in the emperor anymore then maybe it plays out like Euphrati Keeler, where her faith inspires them to renew their faith in the emperor. This also gives them the time to go from a small rag-tag force of WB to something of a bit more size using the gene-seed of the WB who were killed when they went renegade. Now let's say the governor is not stupid, he knows the mention of WB could upset people, so maybe he has them change their paint and claim they are from a different legion (or a loyal blackshield force) purposefully hides them from as many eyes as possible. They stay here, defend the planet until after the heresy. At this point things are chaotic and at the second founding maybe they slip into a false identity, after the heresy it's not like people will be going around fact checking this things.
I may add more later but I'm currently out of steam haha.
Ynneadwraith wrote:They should emblazon this in colossal red letters across the first 10 pages of every novel, and/or make people take a quick quiz to ensure they understand what it means before they read the novel.
It's fantastically, utterly important to the continued creative flexibility that makes 40k as compelling as it is. Without the wiggle-room that 'everything is canon, but not everything is true', 40k becomes just another dead and static story that only comes alive once in a blue moon when the authors actually release something official, rather than something that's living and breathing and changing with every addition we the fans make.
However, as a counterpoint to this, if "not everything is true", then everything is malleable. If there aren't aspects wherein "this definitely happened", then the setting falls apart. If not everything is true, then central tenets of the world cease to be, when I can say "the Warp is just a lie made up by Chaos", or "Guilliman being alive is just propaganda", or "Tyranids don't exist, they're just an excuse by the Imperium to explain why so many of their worlds have been lost on the Eastern Fringe".
Yes, I think that creative flexibility is ultimately good, but only if it is tempered with evidence and a core level of stability. If it solely devolved to fanon, then the setting would never be agreed upon, because we'd be left with hundreds of unique interpretations (not a bad thing) which are all simultaneously right at the same time. Whilst not completely bad, or completely from the truth as it is, in a situation where fanon supersedes canon, I can say "the Emperor doesn't exist, and humanity died long ago", and be right. Do you support that?
It's a logical fallacy to assume that if not everything is true then nothing is. Not everything is true, but some things might be, we just don't know what they are. What's actually deemed to be accurate changes radically between people (as opinions on this forum demonstrate), amd is based on a sliding scale of 'what is written is sacrosanct' to 'rule of cool trumps all'.
So, you can say 'the Emperor doesn't exist and humanity died long ago' and hell, you might actually be right. I could say the opposite, and i might be right too. We don't actually really know.
As a caveat though, i do think there's a lot of value the other way too, so i'm not a complete and utter fluff anarchist i just cherish the ability to selectively ignore any piece of fluff whatsoever (up to and including the emperor's existance) if it makes something that sounds cool and fits the bokeh of the universe
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/07/27 19:16:13
