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.

And I mean what do you personally consider canon. Not what is, or what should be, but what sources do you count as official material. How do you personally handle inconsistencies?

This may depend on how you define canon. For me, I consider canon as the background material that I cannot alter when devising my own fluff.

For my sources of canon, I accept GW, FW, BL and DH (though I haven't read them) products, in their entirety. If there are inconsistencies, I don't consider one source above the other and chock it up to historical inaccuracies with the most likely history being the one that coincides with other material. This way old sources can still be considered canon, in so far as they agree with other sources. I used to count video games as canon, but have now realized (with the advent of the mmo and multiple endings), that they are equivalent of creating your own fluff. The video game novels fill the canon slot.

I've pondered using the simple rule of 'whatever has a GW logo,' but I don't know how far that'd extend.

How about you guys? And play nice.

Fiend wrote:And I mean what do you personally consider canon. Not what is, or what should be, but what sources do you count as official material. How do you personally handle inconsistencies?

This may depend on how you define canon. For me, I consider canon as the background material that I cannot alter when devising my own fluff.

For my sources of canon, I accept GW, FW, BL and DH (though I haven't read them) products, in their entirety. If there are inconsistencies, I don't consider one source above the other and chock it up to historical inaccuracies with the most likely history being the one that coincides with other material. This way old sources can still be considered canon, in so far as they agree with other sources. I used to count video games as canon, but have now realized (with the advent of the mmo and multiple endings), that they are equivalent of creating your own fluff. The video game novels fill the canon slot.

I've pondered using the simple rule of 'whatever has a GW logo,' but I don't know how far that'd extend.

How about you guys? And play nice.

Army books, then rule book, then black library, then forge-world for me. Though the GW logo = canon logic works. Newer stuff trumping older/contradicting items. Though don't let that stifle your imagination if you have what you think would be a great army theme for yourself.

I consider anything with an offiicial GW stamp of approval on it as cannon.

Regarding inconsistancies, well a lot of them seem to come from the Codex books, or novels and from my view I see all of those as propaganda for each race its centred on.

Of course each race will see it's self as the best, so I just read the neutral line if possible, or not really worry about it if there isn't one.

Of course with GW's history of changing things on a whim when it suits a model sale, or lack of it. I generally don't take it too seriously and try to enjoy the ride where I can.

First line 'canon': GW Army Books, Dark Heresy material, FW fluff.
Second line 'canon': GW's rulebooks, Black Library books released post-C.S. Goto's tenure or by their A-Team of authors.
Third line 'canon': Everything else Black Library/White Dwarf.

Anything predating third edition need not apply for canon, as it's outdated beyond belief.

Canon:

- has a GW logo
- is still available officially
- doesn't pre-date the oldest codex in use in 5th ed. Actually, everything after release of 3rd ed would be usable.

Sorted in order of 'weigth':

- 40k + expansions rulebooks, codices
- BL , FW
- 3rd party companies ( licensed products )
-
-
-
- fan made

1. 4chan farseer/assassin pronz.

2. CS Goto.

3. Soul Drinkers.

4. The other stuff.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:1. 4chan farseer/assassin pronz.

2. CS Goto.

3. Soul Drinkers.

4. The other stuff.

Thanks stompa. Now I have to clean crisps off my computer screen from laughing!

Lexx wrote:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:1. 4chan farseer/assassin pronz.

2. CS Goto.

3. Soul Drinkers.

4. The other stuff.

Thanks stompa. Now I have to clean crisps off my computer screen from laughing!

Yeah. Not good when boss asks why I'm laughing.

The reason I include so much material equally is that I really enjoy just absorbing 40k material. Although I understand my rules are arbitrary to begin with, I use them so as to not selectively include material I think is right, i.e. I don't exclude 'certain' authors.

Any GW-sanctioned fluff that I like... if it's retconned and I like it, I ignore the retconning.

That doesn't apply to squats.

Good riddance.

The usual mantra is that there is no canon. But we all know that's rubbish. I think the order of precedence (from most to least reliable) goes something like this:

(1) Current gaming materials published by GW/Citadel.

(1.5) Although it is relatively new and there is no assurance of how committed GW is to it in the long run, I think the FFG books are just a half step below top level.

(2) OOP gaming material published by GW/Citadel that is not totally contradicted by current materials.

(3) Forgeworld and Black Library Publications. (With no internal divisions: IMO, Visions of Heresy is as canonical as the Horus Heresy series. To paraphrase Nurglitch, contradictions in fiction reflect contradictions in reality.) I'd also put the coming Ultramarines movie in this category.

(4) Video games and "Heretical Press" Black Library publications.

(5) Generally accepted internet tropes and usages.

I'm almost with Manchu, with a few shifts:

(1) Current gaming materials published by GW/Citadel.

(2) Forgeworld and Black Library Publications. (With no internal divisions: IMO, Visions of Heresy is as canonical as the Horus Heresy series. To paraphrase Nurglitch, contradictions in fiction reflect contradictions in reality.) I'd also put the coming Ultramarines movie in this category.

(3) Although it is relatively new and there is no assurance of how committed GW is to it in the long run, I think the FFG books are just a half step below top level.

(4) Video games - though I'd really say that the video games represent some alternative reality version of 40K - one that is close, but still 'wrong'.

I'd say it depends on what video games we're talking about.

Dark Millenium and Space Marine are likely to have far, far more canon controlled subjects than Dawn of War did.

I think the Vindicator has a Cannon.
Same with Defilers.
I consider the Hammerhead Railgun a Cannon
Alot of IG tanks have Cannons.


Seriously to me it's in this order to me: Codex(even the BFF BA+Necrons), Rulebook, Novels(even the Tank surfing multilazor Marines that rape pedophile Slanneshi Farseers), Movies(inquistor and the Ultramarines one), Video games, then Fan fic(Including Fandexes, Battle Reports, and any Fan made Fluffs).

Edit: forgot Video Games.

Alpharius wrote:the video games represent some alternative reality version of 40K - one that is close, but still 'wrong'.

I think this is spot on. As for Dark Millennium, I doubt it will have much affect on the Grimdark canon. Like DoW, it will most likely just be the source of many eventual 1d4chan entries. The effect of Ultramarines--both game and movie--will depend greatly on how good they are . . . which I have no great hopes for. I can see reedy-voiced John Hurt as a techpriest or Dark Eldar in a pinch. But a Space Marine? Nah. Also, the Marine Terence Stamp plays looks like an 80 year old regular human. Not good.

And the reason that I added number five to my list is that internet stuff does get the occasional nod from officialdom.

Huh? Huuuuuuuuh?

Whatever GW says happened, happened. They make the rules.

Manchu wrote:

Alpharius wrote:the video games represent some alternative reality version of 40K - one that is close, but still 'wrong'.

I think this is spot on. As for Dark Millennium, I doubt it will have much effect on the Grimdark canon. Like DoW, it will most likely just be the source of many eventual 1d4chan entries. The effect of Ultramarines--both game and movie--will depend greatly on how good they are . . . which I have no great hopes for. I can see reedy-voiced John Hurt as a techpriest or Dark Eldar in a pinch. But a Space Marine? Nah. Also, the Marine Terence Stamp plays looks like an 80 year old regular human. Not good.

Marines do age though. Without juvenat treatments, they would end up looking "like an 80 year old regular human".

As for Dark Millenium...we won't know.
But Warhammer Online did spawn "Island of Blood", so...

Kanluwen wrote:Marines do age though. Without juvenat treatments, they would end up looking "like an 80 year old regular human".

No, they would end up looking like an 80 year old super human. Remember the too-wide eye spacing and the lantern jaws of BL? What's this hollow-cheeked vulture look? Doesn't bode well. Also, it seems like the graphics in Wings of Liberty are better. But this debate is for another thread.

I'd say current codices, the rulebook, forgeworld books and Black Library, unless the black library has some really ridiculous books I haven't read or heard of. I'm pretty sure there's one awful author though I don't know who he is.

Lizar7 wrote:unless the black library has some really ridiculous books I haven't read or heard of

Lizar7 wrote:I'm pretty sure there's one awful author though I don't know who he is.

Who????

Manchu wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Marines do age though. Without juvenat treatments, they would end up looking "like an 80 year old regular human".

No, they would end up looking like an 80 year old super human. Remember the too-wide eye spacing and the lantern jaws of BL? What's this hollow-cheeked vulture look? Doesn't bode well. Also, it seems like the graphics in Wings of Liberty are better. But this debate is for another thread.

Remember that the features of the Astartes aren't standardized across every single one of them. "The too-wide eye spacing and lantern jaws" could very well just be a trait of the Luna Wolves and their Cthonian recruits. Roboute Guilleman wasn't described like that, nor was Sanguinius, Lion El' Jonson, etc.

The graphics thing is a totally different issue either way. DVD players don't use the same kind of graphic rendering hardware as most PCs, now do they?

Those features were described as the product of becoming a Space Marines. But that's "level 3" canon even by my own reckoning.

Maybe I am misunderstanding you but what does the difference between a DVD plater and a PC have to do with what the graphics in a movie look like? If anything movie graphics (funny ring to it, that) should be a lot better.

With a huge budget hiring out to a firm like ILM or WETA Workshop and a movie theater release guaranteed?

Sure, the movie graphics will be better. These are being done by a company that specializes in straight to dvd, full length feature films.
And doing them on a budget akin to one or two scenes in Lord of the Rings.

Also, those features were a Remembrancer describing Loken and the other Luna Wolves/Sons of Horus.

Kanluwen wrote:Also, those features were a Remembrancer describing Loken and the other Luna Wolves/Sons of Horus.

Yeah, but the remebrancer wasn't thinking over their distinctly Cthonian appearance but rather reflecting upon what it's like to be a Space Marine.

And I didn't compare Ultramarines to LotR but rather Wings of Liberty cutscenes.

Fiend wrote:And I mean what do you personally consider canon.

Anything that isn't stupid, and doesn't on other armies' fluff.

2nd Edition explanation of how a Gauss Flayer works? Canon.

Tyranids eating a world fortified by a thousand Iron Warriors and half as many Defilers? Uncanon.

How about Sanguinius/Fulgrim fan-fiction?

Even better, Russ/Lion fan-fiction?

*vomits*

Well, okay, I'll take a look at that first one . . .

Manchu wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Also, those features were a Remembrancer describing Loken and the other Luna Wolves/Sons of Horus.

Yeah, but the remebrancer wasn't thinking over their distinctly Cthonian appearance but rather reflecting upon what it's like to be a Space Marine.

And I didn't compare Ultramarines to LotR but rather Wings of Liberty cutscenes.

Blizzard has an extensive in-house cinematics department.

Games Workshop doesn't. Nor does THQ/Relic. They'd have to hire out, no matter what.

Well, here's hoping it's better than the trailer suggests. The last thing the Ultramarines need is a movie with their names on it that makes future 40k movies . . . extremely improbable.

Both the "teaser" and the "teaser-trailer" we've seen are unfinished WIP bits. The thing's not due out until what, next spring? Early/mid summer?

That's alot of time for finishing and polishing.

Kanluwen wrote:Both the "teaser" and the "teaser-trailer" we've seen are unfinished WIP bits. The thing's not due out until what, next spring? Early/mid summer?

That's alot of time for finishing and polishing.

According to the trailer itself, the movie will be out this year.
According to Abnett, they are already in post-production.
Now, me? I'm not too worried about the animation. It can look like Clone Wars, it just has to have a good story. And as Abnet wrote it, I'm not too worried about that either.