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.

Andykp wrote:
Hitler wanted to save the aryan race but that doesn’t make him a hero. Just a dick with a cause. Like the emperor. He didn’t punish them because he didn’t really care. As said above it was all about results. He was ok with mass murder and use of force against civilian populations. (Human and alien). Regardless of his good intentions he was as guilty of genocide as any of them.

And you can not justify genocide. End of.

The Emperor knows he commits atrocities, that's why he suffers so much with mankinds anguish. The Emperor does everything and anything to save and secure mankind's existence, so the end justifies the means. In a universe where there are daemons, orks and tyranids you aren't going to be successful protecting humanity as a jesus figure. Genocide can be justified, just like if a person is going to kill you then its kill or be killed, the Emperor also pre-empts dangers but people need to grow up when it comes to the Emperor 'but he's a meanie' so what, if he was a nice guy he'd never have united terra, nevermind the galaxy. He doesn't just kill and commit genocide for the fun of it.

Onething123456 wrote:




Psychopaths do not have empathy by definition. The Emperor has empathy. He gave Uriah Olathaire sympathies for his family's murder at the hands of raiders, and knew how he felt.

just becausze someone SAYS "I feel sympathy and know how you feel" doesn't mean he really DOES. the Emperor's ACTIONS suggest a LACK of empathy. As the saying goes, "Actions speak louder then words"

While an argument could be made to say we can't judge the Emperor's actions based on the morals and standards of today, the setting was designed as a semi-satirical dystopian society (with much of the satire now sadly having been expunged), so part of the point is to view it in terms of today's society. On that basis the Emperor is a tyrant. All this talk about him wanting to "save" humanity is exactly how other tyrants and despots justify their actions. It doesn't matter whether the Emperor truly, genuinely believes he's trying to do that or not. What matters are his actions. Speaking of which, that's why the example of the Laer that Onething keeps bringing up is completely useless. It's irrelevant what the dissenting voices wanted to do, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, we don't know whether these proposals were serious and seriously considered, or just one opinion voiced among many that's only mentioned in order to highlight not absolutely everyone is a genocidal maniac during the Crusade. Secondly, and most importantly, the Laer were completely wiped out. Regardless of any hand-wringing or second-guessing that happened before the campaign, the Imperium annihilated them and for all we know, even if the dissenting opinions had initially been listened to, the Emperor may well have come along later and decreed they were all to be slaughtered anyway. So yeah, can we stop mentioning the Laer as any sort of example of how the Imperium wasn't completely xenophobic?

Basically, if you believe the Emperor is trying to save humanity, and that makes everything alright, I think you may have catastrophically missed the point of the setting. He's hardly being selfless about it. The guy appoints himself the Emperor, ruler over all of humanity. He may claim it's all out of a selfless desire to protect humanity but, again, that's what tyrants always say. If you look at his actions and methods, the Emperor is a textbook tyrant. The fact those acitons and methods may be the only way to save humanity is what makes the setting interesting.

As for Angron, the answer is pretty simple. He needed him. While the Legions were pretty much just the most effective fighting forces the Emperor could command, most of them were pretty similar in their methods, but the Emperor clearly valued the abilities of some of the Legions enough to overlook their methods. In Angron's case, it was the ability to take planets quickly, regardless of the cost in lives on either side. For Legions like the Iron Warriors he valued their siegecraft. I don't think the Emperor saw much difference between the two - they're both just slightly different tools to use and the effects of the World Eaters' way of warfare didn't bother him. There's a scene in Master of Mankind where the Emperor admits he can't fix what the Nails have done to Angron. That seems odd, given that this is the guy who created them in the first place and he obviously has considerable knowledge and skill when it comes to bio-engineering and medicine. So was he lying because it suited his purposes to have a whole Legion moulded in Angron's damaged imaged? Even if he wasn't lying, he could easily have ended the Legion's atrocities there and then. He didn't. For a being with the power of the Emperor, anything short of the destruction of the World Eaters is an acceptance of their methods, regardless of what he might have said publicly.

Is he a psychopath? Quite possibly, though it's more the case that he's not really human in the first place so perhaps applying human definitions to the Emperor doesn't quite work. He may or may not have shown empathy in the past. One thing a lot of high-functioning psychopaths and sociopaths learn to do very effectively is mimic emotions. So when the Emperor shows emapthy it could just be him going through the motions because that's what you're supposed to do. The real question is whether he feels the emotion, or simply says he does.

Someone else brought up the idea that the Emperor just sees the survival of humanity as a whole as his end goal. That means individual lives, and even worlds lives matter little in the “big picture”. So what if Angron and his legion slaughtered a whole population here and there? It’s not ideal, but in the long run it’s efficient and they can move on to conquering the next world faster and new colonists can always be brought in to reinhabit the shattered cities!

So basically, Angron was a bastard but he was the Emperors bastard and really the worst he did was spill a bit to much blood. Compared to Lorgar and Magnus who were dabbling in ideas that the Emperor was trying to suppress because it would hinder the success of the “big picture” (spread of religion, dealing in sorcery) they go censured hard. Hence the disparity between Angron’s and also Curz’s punishments vs the other two.

The Emperor's incompetent and couldn't see the obvious really. That's the result of writing around vague lore though.

pm713 wrote:
The Emperor's incompetent and couldn't see the obvious really. That's the result of writing around vague lore though.

I don’t see why he would be obviously incompetent for not censuring Angron as harshly as the others. The World Eaters were conquering worlds quickly, their fleets were moving the borders of the imperium further, and much faster than say Lorgar. So what if a few billion here or there died, perhaps unnecessarily, when Angron showed up? If there is one thing the Imperium never suffered it was a shortage of humans. The Emperor was trying to get the Galaxy to come to heel as quickly as possible, as long as Angron didn’t turn and bit his masters hand I think the Emperor could have cared less. The big picture was still working even with Angron running around.

Onething123456 wrote:

BTW, page 28 in the Fulgrim book shows the Council of Terra thought about making the Laer a protectorate (they never intended to destroy them) and Fulgrim rejected because they held their beliefs to be comparable to humanity, not because they were aliens.

Onething123456 wrote:
The Laer prove the Imperium was not completely xenophobic.

This was only considered due to the cost and estimated time taken to resolve the conflict. Not because they wanted to actually protect them.

IA: Emperors Children. The Cleansing of Laeran

Observers from the Adeptus Administratum wondered if perhaps the Laer might be made a protectorate of the Imperium as conquering such an efficient race could prove to be a long and costly endeavour.

Most if not all the legions committed atrocities. The ultramarines destroyed monarchia with express permission of the emperor.

All wars are atrocities anyhow.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

BTW, page 28 in the Fulgrim book shows the Council of Terra thought about making the Laer a protectorate (they never intended to destroy them) and Fulgrim rejected because they held their beliefs to be comparable to humanity, not because they were aliens.

Onething123456 wrote:
The Laer prove the Imperium was not completely xenophobic.

This was only considered due to the cost and estimated time taken to resolve the conflict. Not because they wanted to actually protect them.

IA: Emperors Children. The Cleansing of Laeran

Observers from the Adeptus Administratum wondered if perhaps the Laer might be made a protectorate of the Imperium as conquering such an efficient race could prove to be a long and costly endeavour.

And the Council was first going to make conquer, not destroy them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slipspace wrote:
While an argument could be made to say we can't judge the Emperor's actions based on the morals and standards of today, the setting was designed as a semi-satirical dystopian society (with much of the satire now sadly having been expunged), so part of the point is to view it in terms of today's society. On that basis the Emperor is a tyrant. All this talk about him wanting to "save" humanity is exactly how other tyrants and despots justify their actions. It doesn't matter whether the Emperor truly, genuinely believes he's trying to do that or not. What matters are his actions. Speaking of which, that's why the example of the Laer that Onething keeps bringing up is completely useless. It's irrelevant what the dissenting voices wanted to do, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, we don't know whether these proposals were serious and seriously considered, or just one opinion voiced among many that's only mentioned in order to highlight not absolutely everyone is a genocidal maniac during the Crusade. Secondly, and most importantly, the Laer were completely wiped out. Regardless of any hand-wringing or second-guessing that happened before the campaign, the Imperium annihilated them and for all we know, even if the dissenting opinions had initially been listened to, the Emperor may well have come along later and decreed they were all to be slaughtered anyway. So yeah, can we stop mentioning the Laer as any sort of example of how the Imperium wasn't completely xenophobic?

Basically, if you believe the Emperor is trying to save humanity, and that makes everything alright, I think you may have catastrophically missed the point of the setting. He's hardly being selfless about it. The guy appoints himself the Emperor, ruler over all of humanity. He may claim it's all out of a selfless desire to protect humanity but, again, that's what tyrants always say. If you look at his actions and methods, the Emperor is a textbook tyrant. The fact those acitons and methods may be the only way to save humanity is what makes the setting interesting.

As for Angron, the answer is pretty simple. He needed him. While the Legions were pretty much just the most effective fighting forces the Emperor could command, most of them were pretty similar in their methods, but the Emperor clearly valued the abilities of some of the Legions enough to overlook their methods. In Angron's case, it was the ability to take planets quickly, regardless of the cost in lives on either side. For Legions like the Iron Warriors he valued their siegecraft. I don't think the Emperor saw much difference between the two - they're both just slightly different tools to use and the effects of the World Eaters' way of warfare didn't bother him. There's a scene in Master of Mankind where the Emperor admits he can't fix what the Nails have done to Angron. That seems odd, given that this is the guy who created them in the first place and he obviously has considerable knowledge and skill when it comes to bio-engineering and medicine. So was he lying because it suited his purposes to have a whole Legion moulded in Angron's damaged imaged? Even if he wasn't lying, he could easily have ended the Legion's atrocities there and then. He didn't. For a being with the power of the Emperor, anything short of the destruction of the World Eaters is an acceptance of their methods, regardless of what he might have said publicly.

Is he a psychopath? Quite possibly, though it's more the case that he's not really human in the first place so perhaps applying human definitions to the Emperor doesn't quite work. He may or may not have shown empathy in the past. One thing a lot of high-functioning psychopaths and sociopaths learn to do very effectively is mimic emotions. So when the Emperor shows emapthy it could just be him going through the motions because that's what you're supposed to do. The real question is whether he feels the emotion, or simply says he does.

Oh, so you are saying Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader are wrong about the Emperor wanting to save humanity? The Emperor absolutely wants to save humanity. Its an irrefutable fact. Its a fact of the lore, so stop babbling about it.

And he only took charge after 40,000 years during the Age of Strife when he had no choice.

This is Warhammmer 40k. It ain't Star Trek.


EDIT: And bud, its not the Emperor claiming that, its the lore itself. You are just ignoring the facts. Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader confirm that. He wants humanity to psychically evolve.

Onething123456 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

BTW, page 28 in the Fulgrim book shows the Council of Terra thought about making the Laer a protectorate (they never intended to destroy them) and Fulgrim rejected because they held their beliefs to be comparable to humanity, not because they were aliens.

Onething123456 wrote:
The Laer prove the Imperium was not completely xenophobic.

This was only considered due to the cost and estimated time taken to resolve the conflict. Not because they wanted to actually protect them.

IA: Emperors Children. The Cleansing of Laeran

Observers from the Adeptus Administratum wondered if perhaps the Laer might be made a protectorate of the Imperium as conquering such an efficient race could prove to be a long and costly endeavour.

And the Council was first going to make conquer, not destroy them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slipspace wrote:
While an argument could be made to say we can't judge the Emperor's actions based on the morals and standards of today, the setting was designed as a semi-satirical dystopian society (with much of the satire now sadly having been expunged), so part of the point is to view it in terms of today's society. On that basis the Emperor is a tyrant. All this talk about him wanting to "save" humanity is exactly how other tyrants and despots justify their actions. It doesn't matter whether the Emperor truly, genuinely believes he's trying to do that or not. What matters are his actions. Speaking of which, that's why the example of the Laer that Onething keeps bringing up is completely useless. It's irrelevant what the dissenting voices wanted to do, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, we don't know whether these proposals were serious and seriously considered, or just one opinion voiced among many that's only mentioned in order to highlight not absolutely everyone is a genocidal maniac during the Crusade. Secondly, and most importantly, the Laer were completely wiped out. Regardless of any hand-wringing or second-guessing that happened before the campaign, the Imperium annihilated them and for all we know, even if the dissenting opinions had initially been listened to, the Emperor may well have come along later and decreed they were all to be slaughtered anyway. So yeah, can we stop mentioning the Laer as any sort of example of how the Imperium wasn't completely xenophobic?

Basically, if you believe the Emperor is trying to save humanity, and that makes everything alright, I think you may have catastrophically missed the point of the setting. He's hardly being selfless about it. The guy appoints himself the Emperor, ruler over all of humanity. He may claim it's all out of a selfless desire to protect humanity but, again, that's what tyrants always say. If you look at his actions and methods, the Emperor is a textbook tyrant. The fact those acitons and methods may be the only way to save humanity is what makes the setting interesting.

As for Angron, the answer is pretty simple. He needed him. While the Legions were pretty much just the most effective fighting forces the Emperor could command, most of them were pretty similar in their methods, but the Emperor clearly valued the abilities of some of the Legions enough to overlook their methods. In Angron's case, it was the ability to take planets quickly, regardless of the cost in lives on either side. For Legions like the Iron Warriors he valued their siegecraft. I don't think the Emperor saw much difference between the two - they're both just slightly different tools to use and the effects of the World Eaters' way of warfare didn't bother him. There's a scene in Master of Mankind where the Emperor admits he can't fix what the Nails have done to Angron. That seems odd, given that this is the guy who created them in the first place and he obviously has considerable knowledge and skill when it comes to bio-engineering and medicine. So was he lying because it suited his purposes to have a whole Legion moulded in Angron's damaged imaged? Even if he wasn't lying, he could easily have ended the Legion's atrocities there and then. He didn't. For a being with the power of the Emperor, anything short of the destruction of the World Eaters is an acceptance of their methods, regardless of what he might have said publicly.

Is he a psychopath? Quite possibly, though it's more the case that he's not really human in the first place so perhaps applying human definitions to the Emperor doesn't quite work. He may or may not have shown empathy in the past. One thing a lot of high-functioning psychopaths and sociopaths learn to do very effectively is mimic emotions. So when the Emperor shows emapthy it could just be him going through the motions because that's what you're supposed to do. The real question is whether he feels the emotion, or simply says he does.

Oh, so you are saying Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader are wrong about the Emperor wanting to save humanity? The Emperor absolutely wants to save humanity. Its an irrefutable fact.

No, I'm saying his definition of "save" is indistinguishable from the same usage of the word employed by tyrants and dictators since time immemorial. I even believe he's sincere about wanting to save humanity, I just don't think he's necessarily actually doing that. He certainly isn't from the point of view of all the human civilisations his armies wipe out during the Crusade. That's a nuance you seem to be completely missing. The Emperor saying something, and even believing it, doesn't mean that's the result he gets.

Here's an example directly from the BL novels. I'm currently re-reading First Heretic and after the Monarchia debacle, the Word Bearers eventually go back out on the Crusade and utterly destroy an advanced human civilisation. No questions asked, they just straight up wipe out 200 million people and their culture along with them. They, and presumably the Emperor, view it as a necessary step on the path to saving humanity, because the humans refused to integrate with the Imperial Truth. Do you think the humans of that civilisation saw things the same way? How can anyone be sure their destruction was required in order to "save" humanity?

Slipspace wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

BTW, page 28 in the Fulgrim book shows the Council of Terra thought about making the Laer a protectorate (they never intended to destroy them) and Fulgrim rejected because they held their beliefs to be comparable to humanity, not because they were aliens.

Onething123456 wrote:
The Laer prove the Imperium was not completely xenophobic.

This was only considered due to the cost and estimated time taken to resolve the conflict. Not because they wanted to actually protect them.

IA: Emperors Children. The Cleansing of Laeran

Observers from the Adeptus Administratum wondered if perhaps the Laer might be made a protectorate of the Imperium as conquering such an efficient race could prove to be a long and costly endeavour.

And the Council was first going to make conquer, not destroy them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slipspace wrote:
While an argument could be made to say we can't judge the Emperor's actions based on the morals and standards of today, the setting was designed as a semi-satirical dystopian society (with much of the satire now sadly having been expunged), so part of the point is to view it in terms of today's society. On that basis the Emperor is a tyrant. All this talk about him wanting to "save" humanity is exactly how other tyrants and despots justify their actions. It doesn't matter whether the Emperor truly, genuinely believes he's trying to do that or not. What matters are his actions. Speaking of which, that's why the example of the Laer that Onething keeps bringing up is completely useless. It's irrelevant what the dissenting voices wanted to do, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, we don't know whether these proposals were serious and seriously considered, or just one opinion voiced among many that's only mentioned in order to highlight not absolutely everyone is a genocidal maniac during the Crusade. Secondly, and most importantly, the Laer were completely wiped out. Regardless of any hand-wringing or second-guessing that happened before the campaign, the Imperium annihilated them and for all we know, even if the dissenting opinions had initially been listened to, the Emperor may well have come along later and decreed they were all to be slaughtered anyway. So yeah, can we stop mentioning the Laer as any sort of example of how the Imperium wasn't completely xenophobic?

Basically, if you believe the Emperor is trying to save humanity, and that makes everything alright, I think you may have catastrophically missed the point of the setting. He's hardly being selfless about it. The guy appoints himself the Emperor, ruler over all of humanity. He may claim it's all out of a selfless desire to protect humanity but, again, that's what tyrants always say. If you look at his actions and methods, the Emperor is a textbook tyrant. The fact those acitons and methods may be the only way to save humanity is what makes the setting interesting.

As for Angron, the answer is pretty simple. He needed him. While the Legions were pretty much just the most effective fighting forces the Emperor could command, most of them were pretty similar in their methods, but the Emperor clearly valued the abilities of some of the Legions enough to overlook their methods. In Angron's case, it was the ability to take planets quickly, regardless of the cost in lives on either side. For Legions like the Iron Warriors he valued their siegecraft. I don't think the Emperor saw much difference between the two - they're both just slightly different tools to use and the effects of the World Eaters' way of warfare didn't bother him. There's a scene in Master of Mankind where the Emperor admits he can't fix what the Nails have done to Angron. That seems odd, given that this is the guy who created them in the first place and he obviously has considerable knowledge and skill when it comes to bio-engineering and medicine. So was he lying because it suited his purposes to have a whole Legion moulded in Angron's damaged imaged? Even if he wasn't lying, he could easily have ended the Legion's atrocities there and then. He didn't. For a being with the power of the Emperor, anything short of the destruction of the World Eaters is an acceptance of their methods, regardless of what he might have said publicly.

Is he a psychopath? Quite possibly, though it's more the case that he's not really human in the first place so perhaps applying human definitions to the Emperor doesn't quite work. He may or may not have shown empathy in the past. One thing a lot of high-functioning psychopaths and sociopaths learn to do very effectively is mimic emotions. So when the Emperor shows emapthy it could just be him going through the motions because that's what you're supposed to do. The real question is whether he feels the emotion, or simply says he does.

Oh, so you are saying Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader are wrong about the Emperor wanting to save humanity? The Emperor absolutely wants to save humanity. Its an irrefutable fact.

No, I'm saying his definition of "save" is indistinguishable from the same usage of the word employed by tyrants and dictators since time immemorial. I even believe he's sincere about wanting to save humanity, I just don't think he's necessarily actually doing that. He certainly isn't from the point of view of all the human civilisations his armies wipe out during the Crusade. That's a nuance you seem to be completely missing. The Emperor saying something, and even believing it, doesn't mean that's the result he gets.

Here's an example directly from the BL novels. I'm currently re-reading First Heretic and after the Monarchia debacle, the Word Bearers eventually go back out on the Crusade and utterly destroy an advanced human civilisation. No questions asked, they just straight up wipe out 200 million people and their culture along with them. They, and presumably the Emperor, view it as a necessary step on the path to saving humanity, because the humans refused to integrate with the Imperial Truth. Do you think the humans of that civilisation saw things the same way? How can anyone be sure their destruction was required in order to "save" humanity?

Was it that one human civilization that had AI?

Onething123456 wrote:

EDIT: And bud, its not the Emperor claiming that, its the lore itself. You are just ignoring the facts. Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader confirm that. He wants humanity to psychically evolve.

That's not salvation. That's control.

The entire crusade is about as big of an atrocity as it gets. The empire was basically a xenophobic, racist, religion and culture intolerant machine geared for conquest that purged everything and anything in it's path. In light of that the individual actions of how the primarchs went about doing their thing is a bit small in scale.

Now the thing is that in the setting this is ok since the crusade may be the only viable way to save humanity from chaos. Or to put it differently in the 30k universe what Lorgar and Magnus did could have much much worse long term consequences than a small bit of genocide here or there. Small potatoes more or less...

axxiomatic wrote:
The entire crusade is about as big of an atrocity as it gets. The empire was basically a xenophobic, racist, religion and culture intolerant machine geared for conquest that purged everything and anything in it's path. In light of that the individual actions of how the primarchs went about doing their thing is a bit small in scale.

Now the thing is that in the setting this is ok since the crusade may be the only viable way to save humanity from chaos. Or to put it differently in the 30k universe what Lorgar and Magnus did could have much much worse long term consequences than a small bit of genocide here or there. Small potatoes more or less...

The Emperor's chastisement of Lorgar and Angron, and my quote from Age of Darkness (other Legions being horrified at what Kurze and Angron do) would indicate that what Angron and Kurze did was mostly exclusive to themselves.


But the Emperor let it slide.

Slipspace, I don't think using anything after Monarchia is really pro/against the Emperor as by the time the Word Bearers go back on Crusade Kor Phaeron and Erebus have done their work on Lorgar and he has now found the Chaos Gods.

Onething123456 wrote:



And the Council was first going to make conquer, not destroy them.

Destroy is a synonym for conquer. The Imperium doesn't do anything by half.

Sterling191 wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

EDIT: And bud, its not the Emperor claiming that, its the lore itself. You are just ignoring the facts. Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader confirm that. He wants humanity to psychically evolve.

That's not salvation. That's control.

He wants humanity to psychically evolve so they will not need him anymore, and so they will be safe from Chaos.

The lore has always said as far back as the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader that the Emperor did not want to take control. And Malcador said he disagreed with the Emperor in wanting to leave humanity after it can take care of itself. Malcador thinks that humanity will never be at that point while the Emperor does think so.

Onething123456 wrote:


The lore has always said as far back as the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader that the Emperor did not want to take control. And Malcador said he disagreed with the Emperor in wanting to leave humanity after it can take care of itself. Malcador thinks that humanity will never be at that point while the Emperor does think so.

Big E so desperately didn't want to take control...that he launched a genocidal crusade to wipe out anyone who wouldn't do what he told them.

Yeah that checks out.

Onething123456 wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

BTW, page 28 in the Fulgrim book shows the Council of Terra thought about making the Laer a protectorate (they never intended to destroy them) and Fulgrim rejected because they held their beliefs to be comparable to humanity, not because they were aliens.

Onething123456 wrote:
The Laer prove the Imperium was not completely xenophobic.

This was only considered due to the cost and estimated time taken to resolve the conflict. Not because they wanted to actually protect them.

IA: Emperors Children. The Cleansing of Laeran

Observers from the Adeptus Administratum wondered if perhaps the Laer might be made a protectorate of the Imperium as conquering such an efficient race could prove to be a long and costly endeavour.

And the Council was first going to make conquer, not destroy them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slipspace wrote:
While an argument could be made to say we can't judge the Emperor's actions based on the morals and standards of today, the setting was designed as a semi-satirical dystopian society (with much of the satire now sadly having been expunged), so part of the point is to view it in terms of today's society. On that basis the Emperor is a tyrant. All this talk about him wanting to "save" humanity is exactly how other tyrants and despots justify their actions. It doesn't matter whether the Emperor truly, genuinely believes he's trying to do that or not. What matters are his actions. Speaking of which, that's why the example of the Laer that Onething keeps bringing up is completely useless. It's irrelevant what the dissenting voices wanted to do, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, we don't know whether these proposals were serious and seriously considered, or just one opinion voiced among many that's only mentioned in order to highlight not absolutely everyone is a genocidal maniac during the Crusade. Secondly, and most importantly, the Laer were completely wiped out. Regardless of any hand-wringing or second-guessing that happened before the campaign, the Imperium annihilated them and for all we know, even if the dissenting opinions had initially been listened to, the Emperor may well have come along later and decreed they were all to be slaughtered anyway. So yeah, can we stop mentioning the Laer as any sort of example of how the Imperium wasn't completely xenophobic?

Basically, if you believe the Emperor is trying to save humanity, and that makes everything alright, I think you may have catastrophically missed the point of the setting. He's hardly being selfless about it. The guy appoints himself the Emperor, ruler over all of humanity. He may claim it's all out of a selfless desire to protect humanity but, again, that's what tyrants always say. If you look at his actions and methods, the Emperor is a textbook tyrant. The fact those acitons and methods may be the only way to save humanity is what makes the setting interesting.

As for Angron, the answer is pretty simple. He needed him. While the Legions were pretty much just the most effective fighting forces the Emperor could command, most of them were pretty similar in their methods, but the Emperor clearly valued the abilities of some of the Legions enough to overlook their methods. In Angron's case, it was the ability to take planets quickly, regardless of the cost in lives on either side. For Legions like the Iron Warriors he valued their siegecraft. I don't think the Emperor saw much difference between the two - they're both just slightly different tools to use and the effects of the World Eaters' way of warfare didn't bother him. There's a scene in Master of Mankind where the Emperor admits he can't fix what the Nails have done to Angron. That seems odd, given that this is the guy who created them in the first place and he obviously has considerable knowledge and skill when it comes to bio-engineering and medicine. So was he lying because it suited his purposes to have a whole Legion moulded in Angron's damaged imaged? Even if he wasn't lying, he could easily have ended the Legion's atrocities there and then. He didn't. For a being with the power of the Emperor, anything short of the destruction of the World Eaters is an acceptance of their methods, regardless of what he might have said publicly.

Is he a psychopath? Quite possibly, though it's more the case that he's not really human in the first place so perhaps applying human definitions to the Emperor doesn't quite work. He may or may not have shown empathy in the past. One thing a lot of high-functioning psychopaths and sociopaths learn to do very effectively is mimic emotions. So when the Emperor shows emapthy it could just be him going through the motions because that's what you're supposed to do. The real question is whether he feels the emotion, or simply says he does.

Oh, so you are saying Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader are wrong about the Emperor wanting to save humanity? The Emperor absolutely wants to save humanity. Its an irrefutable fact.

No, I'm saying his definition of "save" is indistinguishable from the same usage of the word employed by tyrants and dictators since time immemorial. I even believe he's sincere about wanting to save humanity, I just don't think he's necessarily actually doing that. He certainly isn't from the point of view of all the human civilisations his armies wipe out during the Crusade. That's a nuance you seem to be completely missing. The Emperor saying something, and even believing it, doesn't mean that's the result he gets.

Here's an example directly from the BL novels. I'm currently re-reading First Heretic and after the Monarchia debacle, the Word Bearers eventually go back out on the Crusade and utterly destroy an advanced human civilisation. No questions asked, they just straight up wipe out 200 million people and their culture along with them. They, and presumably the Emperor, view it as a necessary step on the path to saving humanity, because the humans refused to integrate with the Imperial Truth. Do you think the humans of that civilisation saw things the same way? How can anyone be sure their destruction was required in order to "save" humanity?

Was it that one human civilization that had AI?

Yes, that's the one. Presumably you'll now point out that AI was outlawed and dangerous? Again, according to the Imperial Truth. It's not an inviolate fact all AI is dangerous, even if there was an AI uprising in humanity's history.

Pilau Rice wrote:Slipspace, I don't think using anything after Monarchia is really pro/against the Emperor as by the time the Word Bearers go back on Crusade Kor Phaeron and Erebus have done their work on Lorgar and he has now found the Chaos Gods.

Possibly not, but at the time the Word Bearers were still trying to at least give the outward appearance of following the Imperial Truth and nobody from the Legion questions the decision to wipe out the civilisation. Argel Tal even justifies it using the Imperial Truth as support for his reasoning. Regardless, it's just an example of the sort of campaigns that were commonplace during the Crusade. There are plenty of others from earlier in the Crusade or from loyalist Legions. This just happened to be the freshest in my memory.

Slipspace wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

Slipspace wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

BTW, page 28 in the Fulgrim book shows the Council of Terra thought about making the Laer a protectorate (they never intended to destroy them) and Fulgrim rejected because they held their beliefs to be comparable to humanity, not because they were aliens.

Onething123456 wrote:
The Laer prove the Imperium was not completely xenophobic.

This was only considered due to the cost and estimated time taken to resolve the conflict. Not because they wanted to actually protect them.

IA: Emperors Children. The Cleansing of Laeran

Observers from the Adeptus Administratum wondered if perhaps the Laer might be made a protectorate of the Imperium as conquering such an efficient race could prove to be a long and costly endeavour.

And the Council was first going to make conquer, not destroy them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slipspace wrote:
While an argument could be made to say we can't judge the Emperor's actions based on the morals and standards of today, the setting was designed as a semi-satirical dystopian society (with much of the satire now sadly having been expunged), so part of the point is to view it in terms of today's society. On that basis the Emperor is a tyrant. All this talk about him wanting to "save" humanity is exactly how other tyrants and despots justify their actions. It doesn't matter whether the Emperor truly, genuinely believes he's trying to do that or not. What matters are his actions. Speaking of which, that's why the example of the Laer that Onething keeps bringing up is completely useless. It's irrelevant what the dissenting voices wanted to do, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, we don't know whether these proposals were serious and seriously considered, or just one opinion voiced among many that's only mentioned in order to highlight not absolutely everyone is a genocidal maniac during the Crusade. Secondly, and most importantly, the Laer were completely wiped out. Regardless of any hand-wringing or second-guessing that happened before the campaign, the Imperium annihilated them and for all we know, even if the dissenting opinions had initially been listened to, the Emperor may well have come along later and decreed they were all to be slaughtered anyway. So yeah, can we stop mentioning the Laer as any sort of example of how the Imperium wasn't completely xenophobic?

Basically, if you believe the Emperor is trying to save humanity, and that makes everything alright, I think you may have catastrophically missed the point of the setting. He's hardly being selfless about it. The guy appoints himself the Emperor, ruler over all of humanity. He may claim it's all out of a selfless desire to protect humanity but, again, that's what tyrants always say. If you look at his actions and methods, the Emperor is a textbook tyrant. The fact those acitons and methods may be the only way to save humanity is what makes the setting interesting.

As for Angron, the answer is pretty simple. He needed him. While the Legions were pretty much just the most effective fighting forces the Emperor could command, most of them were pretty similar in their methods, but the Emperor clearly valued the abilities of some of the Legions enough to overlook their methods. In Angron's case, it was the ability to take planets quickly, regardless of the cost in lives on either side. For Legions like the Iron Warriors he valued their siegecraft. I don't think the Emperor saw much difference between the two - they're both just slightly different tools to use and the effects of the World Eaters' way of warfare didn't bother him. There's a scene in Master of Mankind where the Emperor admits he can't fix what the Nails have done to Angron. That seems odd, given that this is the guy who created them in the first place and he obviously has considerable knowledge and skill when it comes to bio-engineering and medicine. So was he lying because it suited his purposes to have a whole Legion moulded in Angron's damaged imaged? Even if he wasn't lying, he could easily have ended the Legion's atrocities there and then. He didn't. For a being with the power of the Emperor, anything short of the destruction of the World Eaters is an acceptance of their methods, regardless of what he might have said publicly.

Is he a psychopath? Quite possibly, though it's more the case that he's not really human in the first place so perhaps applying human definitions to the Emperor doesn't quite work. He may or may not have shown empathy in the past. One thing a lot of high-functioning psychopaths and sociopaths learn to do very effectively is mimic emotions. So when the Emperor shows emapthy it could just be him going through the motions because that's what you're supposed to do. The real question is whether he feels the emotion, or simply says he does.

Oh, so you are saying Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader are wrong about the Emperor wanting to save humanity? The Emperor absolutely wants to save humanity. Its an irrefutable fact.

No, I'm saying his definition of "save" is indistinguishable from the same usage of the word employed by tyrants and dictators since time immemorial. I even believe he's sincere about wanting to save humanity, I just don't think he's necessarily actually doing that. He certainly isn't from the point of view of all the human civilisations his armies wipe out during the Crusade. That's a nuance you seem to be completely missing. The Emperor saying something, and even believing it, doesn't mean that's the result he gets.

Here's an example directly from the BL novels. I'm currently re-reading First Heretic and after the Monarchia debacle, the Word Bearers eventually go back out on the Crusade and utterly destroy an advanced human civilisation. No questions asked, they just straight up wipe out 200 million people and their culture along with them. They, and presumably the Emperor, view it as a necessary step on the path to saving humanity, because the humans refused to integrate with the Imperial Truth. Do you think the humans of that civilisation saw things the same way? How can anyone be sure their destruction was required in order to "save" humanity?

Was it that one human civilization that had AI?

Yes, that's the one. Presumably you'll now point out that AI was outlawed and dangerous? Again, according to the Imperial Truth. It's not an inviolate fact all AI is dangerous, even if there was an AI uprising in humanity's history.

Pilau Rice wrote:Slipspace, I don't think using anything after Monarchia is really pro/against the Emperor as by the time the Word Bearers go back on Crusade Kor Phaeron and Erebus have done their work on Lorgar and he has now found the Chaos Gods.

Possibly not, but at the time the Word Bearers were still trying to at least give the outward appearance of following the Imperial Truth and nobody from the Legion questions the decision to wipe out the civilisation. Argel Tal even justifies it using the Imperial Truth as support for his reasoning. Regardless, it's just an example of the sort of campaigns that were commonplace during the Crusade. There are plenty of others from earlier in the Crusade or from loyalist Legions. This just happened to be the freshest in my memory.

But the reason the Imprium then and now hates AI is because they turned on humanity.

Slipspace wrote:
While an argument could be made to say we can't judge the Emperor's actions based on the morals and standards of today, the setting was designed as a semi-satirical dystopian society (with much of the satire now sadly having been expunged), so part of the point is to view it in terms of today's society. On that basis the Emperor is a tyrant. All this talk about him wanting to "save" humanity is exactly how other tyrants and despots justify their actions. It doesn't matter whether the Emperor truly, genuinely believes he's trying to do that or not.

Basically, if you believe the Emperor is trying to save humanity, and that makes everything alright, I think you may have catastrophically missed the point of the setting.

I agree that, by today's standards, the Emperor is a tyrant. And the 40k setting is a nightmare of religion and bureaucracy, and it's a satire of current-day religions and bureaucratic systems. But, as said elsewhere, the entire setting, GW themselves, all the books HEAVILY IMPLY that the Emperor was correct in his belief that the Imperium is necessary to save humanity.

If you throw that bit out, you catastrophically miss the point of the setting. The tragedy of the 40k setting rests on the idea that the Emperors' plan WAS a noble one, even if it was harsh, and that the Great Crusade of 30k was necessary to save humanity.

This gives texture and grey areas to 30k because it's a true 'necessary tyranny' in opposition to the ones in our world, something commented on and questioned in-universe by characters in the books. Primarchs wring hands about if the Crusade is just, if it's right to do, and regret it when they have to fight. Even Lorgar's actions post-Monarchia (that you point out earlier) are deliberately shown to be BAD, because those humans would have joined and Larger just went straight to the fighting. Primarchs who really do think the Emperor is just a tyrant are mostly shown to be naive or short-sighted. All this if dependent on the idea that the Crusade IS ultimately a noble cause, but involved horrible things.

But, more importantly, it also makes 40k the tragedy it is - a noble idea in an uncaring universe, that has been twisted into the opposite. If the Emperor was a lying tyrant all along, a huge part of the setting is lost.


EDIT - rewritten and rearranged for clarity (but not before it got quoted dammit!)

 ArbitorIan wrote:

Slipspace wrote:
While an argument could be made to say we can't judge the Emperor's actions based on the morals and standards of today, the setting was designed as a semi-satirical dystopian society (with much of the satire now sadly having been expunged), so part of the point is to view it in terms of today's society. On that basis the Emperor is a tyrant. All this talk about him wanting to "save" humanity is exactly how other tyrants and despots justify their actions. It doesn't matter whether the Emperor truly, genuinely believes he's trying to do that or not.

Basically, if you believe the Emperor is trying to save humanity, and that makes everything alright, I think you may have catastrophically missed the point of the setting.

As said elsewhere, the entire setting, GW themselves, all the books HEAVILY IMPLY that the Emperor is correct in his belief that the Imperium is necessary to save humanity. Even the events post-Heresy kinda prove that. There are plenty of example in the HH series of Primarchs handwringing because they realise that the Crusade is a really harsh necessity. It's talked about constantly. Even the one example you give of the Word Bearers (post-monarchic) going out and trashing a civilisation is specifically shown as a bad thing because they didn't even give them a chance to join.

The Primarchs who do think of the Emperor as a tyrant are mostly shown to be incredibly short-sighted.

Of course, you could infer from all this that those Primarchs are right, it's all a massive conspiracy, that the Emperor is secretly just a tyrant - either well-meaning but wrong, or lying so he can hold on to power (despite being able to do that for 25000 years previous and...not) and that humanity would be absolutely fine without him.

But then I think you'd be missing the point of the setting. If you think that, then it's no longer a story about cosmic horror and being stuck between a rock and a hard place, and the tragedy of hubris ruining the only chance to change things. It's just a story about an evil ruler tricking people.

I thought its a known fact the Emperor wants to save humanity? Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader (yes, the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader) confirm this. Its an irrefutable fact. Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind and the from 1st Edition Rogue Trader show this.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And the Emperor wants to save humanity. Haven't I already said that Dark Imperium, Master of Mankind, and the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader (yes, the lore from 1st Edition Rogue Trader) confirm this? Its irrefutable.

The "lore" from 1st edition also says that the Emperor still communicates with his followers and that Astropaths, Navigatgors and half-Eldar can be Space Marines; things have changed since then.

Back to the point; what are you arguing against here? No-one's saying the Emperor didn't want to "save" humanity - they're saying that his definition of "save" is textbook tyranny - humanity can only be saved his way, anything else is doomed to failure because he says so; any competition is crushed before it can be held up as a counterexample. There were a couple of moustachioed gentlemen in the 1920s and 30s who thought the same way. The thing that gives 40k its texture is that, distasteful as it my be, the Emperor appears to be right.

 agurus1 wrote:

pm713 wrote:
The Emperor's incompetent and couldn't see the obvious really. That's the result of writing around vague lore though.

I don’t see why he would be obviously incompetent for not censuring Angron as harshly as the others. The World Eaters were conquering worlds quickly, their fleets were moving the borders of the imperium further, and much faster than say Lorgar. So what if a few billion here or there died, perhaps unnecessarily, when Angron showed up? If there is one thing the Imperium never suffered it was a shortage of humans. The Emperor was trying to get the Galaxy to come to heel as quickly as possible, as long as Angron didn’t turn and bit his masters hand I think the Emperor could have cared less. The big picture was still working even with Angron running around.

Angron was motivated purely by a desire to kill the enemy and was almost definitely going to be against the Emperor at some point given how badly he got shafted. Angron was essentially guaranteed to turn on the Imperium, he was an active detriment to his Legion and was an awful commander.

The World Eaters were better off before Angron, served better as an army and were more loyal to boot.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
humanity can only be saved his way, anything else is doomed to failure because he says so;

Ding ding ding.

It's why the Farsight Enclaves are of so much interest to me, because they're a 40k example of the status quo being shown to be one giant self-fulfilling lie.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
The "lore" from 1st edition also says that the Emperor still communicates with his followers and that Astropaths, Navigatgors and half-Eldar can be Space Marines; things have changed since then.

Back to the point; what are you arguing against here? No-one's saying the Emperor didn't want to "save" humanity - they're saying that his definition of "save" is textbook tyranny - humanity can only be saved his way, anything else is doomed to failure because he says so; any competition is crushed before it can be held up as a counterexample. There were a couple of moustachioed gentlemen in the 1920s and 30s who thought the same way. The thing that gives 40k its texture is that, distasteful as it my be, the Emperor appears to be right.

And because Games Workshop says so. Do you have proof any other way or faction would have worked?


EDIT: Put it this way, the Interex was undone was Erebus stealing a Chaos artifact from their museum. If those factions could not hold off the Imperium, then they are not suitable for replacements.

Onething123456 wrote:
Do you have proof any other way or faction would have worked?

You mean besides every single previously peaceful society, human or otherwise, that Big E rolled up on, conquered and enslaved?

Onething123456 wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
The "lore" from 1st edition also says that the Emperor still communicates with his followers and that Astropaths, Navigatgors and half-Eldar can be Space Marines; things have changed since then.

Back to the point; what are you arguing against here? No-one's saying the Emperor didn't want to "save" humanity - they're saying that his definition of "save" is textbook tyranny - humanity can only be saved his way, anything else is doomed to failure because he says so; any competition is crushed before it can be held up as a counterexample. There were a couple of moustachioed gentlemen in the 1920s and 30s who thought the same way. The thing that gives 40k its texture is that, distasteful as it my be, the Emperor appears to be right.

And because Games Workshop says so. Do you have proof any other way or faction would have worked?


EDIT: Put it this way, the Interex was undone was Erebus stealing a Chaos artifact from their museum. If those factions could not hold off the Imperium, then they are not suitable for replacements.

Spoken like a true tyrant. Might makes right, yes?

Onething123456 wrote:


Psychopaths do not have empathy by definition. The Emperor has empathy. He gave Uriah Olathaire sympathies for his family's murder at the hands of raiders and knew how he felt.

Psychopaths can and do do things like this. They may not internally understand it or actually mean it, but lots of psychopaths have charmed the pants off people in many ways throughout history if it achieves their goals, whatever they may be.

Lets also be real, 40k has no strict canon, what the Emperor (or really almost any character) actually is, can and does shift and morph between different authors and books and editions.

I really don't think that the narrative or themes of 40K require that the Emperor has to be right. Sure, they require that a better way does not succeed, but they don't require that it fundamentally could not succeed. Emperor thinks he is right and that he is doing all these horrible things for a greater cause. That's what tyrants always do.