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.

GW need to make up their mind about undivided daemon princes first!

Is Belakor the only one? If so, what gods raised Lorgar and Pert?

Not really? Lorgar is pretty clearly undivided and Perterabo doesn't worship anyone. He's agnostic.

Personally, I'd love to see both models come to 40k, but the trick here is one of balance. What do you do when the CHaos side has all of its "living" Primarchs in the game, but the loyalist side can really only have what? 3? 4? I forget but it's not nearly as many. Then again, maybe that would make up for the fact that CSM are so terrible and loyalists have been on a non-stop release cycle for about 18 months now.

 Stux wrote:
It's not so much a big issue for me as it is a point of amusement.

If GW just say "actually in 40k Belakor is not the only undivided Daemon Prince" then fine! He's nowhere near as important to the narrative as Lorgar and Perturabo, and so their narrative needs should take precedence.

Its the feeling that GW instead seem to just skirt around the issue that I find quite funny!

In a perfect world we'd get the Primarchs, the Emperor and then something a king to "Avatars of the 4 Gods of Chaos" as LoW models that you could field. Basically I want to see HH 2: 40K edition, but with even more!

Tycho wrote:

GW need to make up their mind about undivided daemon princes first!

Is Belakor the only one? If so, what gods raised Lorgar and Pert?

Not really? Lorgar is pretty clearly undivided and Perterabo doesn't worship anyone. He's agnostic.

Personally, I'd love to see both models come to 40k, but the trick here is one of balance. What do you do when the CHaos side has all of its "living" Primarchs in the game, but the loyalist side can really only have what? 3? 4? I forget but it's not nearly as many. Then again, maybe that would make up for the fact that CSM are so terrible and loyalists have been on a non-stop release cycle for about 18 months now.

Not at all. The big problem with releasing primarchs is that it doesn't even vaguely address the systemic problems with the armies. It doesn't 'make up' for anything, they're just shiny centerpiece models for those that like 'em.



The loyalist vs chaos divide isn't very big, actually. Its just the fate of all the Chaos Primarchs is known (excepting Omegon, if he even exists ). The surviving loyalists largely 'vanished' in various contrived ways, but none are verifiably dead beyond Sanguinius and Ferrus. Dorn is definitely missing a hand, but is only believed to be dead. Vulkan did his dramatic thing, but he's explicitly immortal so that automatically qualifies as a comic book 'death.'

This compares to Horus, Curze and probably Alpharius on the chaos side. So technically speaking 'chaos' probably has more dead primarchs than the loyalists do. But had a spare, so whatever. Assuming the AL actually went to chaos and yaddayadda mystery. But if they want to do 7 on 7, they can do that without issue. Well, beyond the contrivance that everybody got bored of their daemon world, personal quests and probable imprisonments simultaneously, but that's just bad writing, not a real barrier.

On the plus side, they have been taking their time, rather than rushing everybody out as quick as they can. (They've passed up at least two opportunities for the Lion, for example- the 8th edition codex and the PA book).

Tycho wrote:

GW need to make up their mind about undivided daemon princes first!

Is Belakor the only one? If so, what gods raised Lorgar and Pert?

Not really? Lorgar is pretty clearly undivided and Perterabo doesn't worship anyone. He's agnostic.

He might be agnostic, but he has still been explicitly referred to as a daemon prince. And that means someone raised him.

In previous canon, raising a daemon prince is an overt action by a chaos god. That's why undivided ones are proplematic, as the gods don't like working together.

Its also part of what is unique about Abaddon. He realised ascending to daemonhood meant selling his freedom to a god to raise him. Its not just a thing that happens if you chaos hard enough, its a bargain.

Belakor's whole shtick is supposed to be he was the one time, long long ago, that the 4 powers managed to put aside their differences to make an undivided champion. But Belakor was such a pain in the ass for all of them they vowed not to do it again.

Now as I said before, I'm not averse to retconning all that if you have a good enough reason. It just needs to be realised that handwaving it has some repercussions for the lore.

Well, yeah, except they did work together again: they all empowered Horus, and Abaddon does have blessings from all four.

Agreeing to collectively raise Lorgar and Perturabo as part of HH served their purposes as well.
It isn't their 'normal' behavior, but chaos gods are supposed to be whimsical and changeable, with schemes and plots.

----
Also, given that their ascension to daemonhood predates the 'no undivided princes' rule, I'd hardly call Lorgar and Perturabo the retcon.

Ironically, GW's concept of chaos has gotten far to stilted and regimented. It used to be a lot more anything goes, until they realized they had no IP control over chaos as a general concept.

I believe Bel'akor is the first Daemon Prince, so the rule predates all othero Daemon Princes.

Fair point on them working together on Horus etc. But that doesn't explicitly break th DP rule - which is more about how badly Bel'akor turned out for them than a rule about not working together. They tend not to work together just because they hate each other.

I would agree that moving away from strict rules on how chaos works might be a good thing though!

 Stux wrote:
I believe Bel'akor is the first Daemon Prince, so the rule predates all othero Daemon Princes.

You misunderstand me. I'm not talking about 'in the 40k timeline.' I'm talking about GW happily having undivided princes for years- two decades or so- before they gradually started phasing it out.

Lorgar and Perturabo were established as daemon princes in...Epic or early chaos codexes- early to mid 90s at latest. Bel'akor didn't exist until years after that (2004). Bel'akor (and the 'rule') is the retcon here.

Voss wrote:

 Stux wrote:
I believe Bel'akor is the first Daemon Prince, so the rule predates all othero Daemon Princes.

You misunderstand me. I'm not talking about 'in the 40k timeline.' I'm talking about GW happily having undivided princes for years- two decades or so- before they gradually started phasing it out.

Lorgar and Perturabo were established as daemon princes in...Epic or early chaos codexes- early to mid 90s at latest. Bel'akor didn't exist until years after that (2004). Bel'akor (and the 'rule') is the retcon here.

Oh right, yes that's true.