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.

anyone notice a mistake the author made in FULGRIM,pg 92?

No.

Can to detail it for those of us that happened to have forgotten our copy of FULGRIM at home today?

Thanks!

Well the whole book was a bit of a mistake, but what specific error are you referring to?

in the middle of the war against the Laer,in the great crusade,Graham McNeill writes that Thunderhawks fly in with Land Raiders,predators and Vindicators.

btw please no spoilers as i havent read it yet

Deadshot wrote:in the middle of the war against the Laer,in the great crusade,Graham McNeill writes that Thunderhawks fly in with Land Raiders,predators and Vindicators.

And the error is?

They were all apparently in use at the time of the heresy, maybe I'm wrong

The only exception might be the Predator but they have been referenced in other books and audio in the Series, Ravens Flight springs to mind.

Deadshot wrote:in the middle of the war against the Laer,in the great crusade,Graham McNeill writes that Thunderhawks fly in with Land Raiders,predators and Vindicators.

btw please no spoilers as i havent read it yet

As Pilau Rice said, they're all in use during the Great Crusade.

Thunderhawks were relatively new to service, but were slowly replacing the Stormbirds that had been in use at that point.

Thunderhawks,LR and preds are fine.it's the vindicator

Deadshot wrote:Thunderhawks,LR and preds are fine.it's the vindicator

The Vindicator has been around since the Dark Age of Technology.

There's no mistake here, at least on the author's part.

Kanluwen wrote:

Deadshot wrote:Thunderhawks,LR and preds are fine.it's the vindicator

The Vindicator has been around since the Dark Age of Technology.

There's no mistake here, at least on the author's part.

Oh snap! kanluwendonetoldyou.jpg

Now if it said that there was an Baal Predator, LR Crusader or CAAT being dropped off, we might be a bit suspicious.

according to codex space marines,the vindicator was developed during the Heresy,to combat the entrenched enemy in the streets of Rothern I,although they were armed with thunderer cannons and no siege shield


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pilau Rice wrote:Well the whole book was a bit of a mistake

imn what way but no spoilers please

Fulgrim was written in 2007, C: SM 2008? I don't have a copy of 4th ed SM to check if it was always like that.

And according to Imperial Armour Volume 2, it was created during the Dark Age of Technology.

It did not see much action during the Great Crusade or Heresy, and was not mentioned again until Guilleman laid down the Codex Astartes.

Since I'm sure you'll ask: IA2 was published in 2004.

Kanluwen wrote:And according to Imperial Armour Volume 2, it was created during the Dark Age of Technology.

It did not see much action during the Great Crusade or Heresy, and was not mentioned again until Guilleman laid down the Codex Astartes.

So sounds like there was a change in background since Fulgrim was written, Deadshot. Or if you prefer... It has been 10,000 years, sometimes records aren't as completely reliable as you think they are.

pretre wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:And according to Imperial Armour Volume 2, it was created during the Dark Age of Technology.

It did not see much action during the Great Crusade or Heresy, and was not mentioned again until Guilleman laid down the Codex Astartes.

So sounds like there was a change in background since Fulgrim was written, Deadshot. Or if you prefer... It has been 10,000 years, sometimes records aren't as completely reliable as you think they are.

Or it sounds like exactly what the background in IA2 described.

The reason it didn't see much action or even production/usage was because of the fact that it had fallen in disfavor amongst Imperial commanders when they were reclaiming worlds. The Rhino chassis that it was based upon was too vulnerable, while the Thunderer Siege Tank was more durable.

According to codex chaos space marines( 2007 ), the vindicators were used in the heresy. Mostly by Iron warriors.
Chaos vindicators exist, because vindicators existed before the legions split.

Except C:SM makes it sound like the idea was invented on Rothern I and immediately saw heavy use during the Heresy, including siege of Terra.

I haven't read IA2 in a long time, but that doesn't sound like how it is listed there.

Old Fluff: Pre-Heresy
New Fluff: During Heresy.

/shrug

Hold on...

GW fluff with inconsistencies? I'll alert the media!

Monster Rain wrote:Hold on...

GW fluff with inconsistencies? I'll alert the media!

Go for it

We all know its the fault of he who shall not be named.

pretre wrote:Except C:SM makes it sound like the idea was invented on Rothern I and immediately saw heavy use during the Heresy, including siege of Terra.

I haven't read IA2 in a long time, but that doesn't sound like how it is listed there.

Old Fluff: Pre-Heresy
New Fluff: During Heresy.

/shrug

IA2 lists it as "fragmentary records of the development of the Vindicator indicate that it was first deployed during the Dark Age of Technology".
It was first utilized, and built specifically for street fighting on the planet of "Rotstern", at the request of a "General Vindictis".
"Records mention very little of the Vindicator throughout the time of the Great Crusade, it is assumed that the Vindicator fell out of favour. It may be that production of the vehicle was halted during the Great Crusade and Horus Heresy or that the manufacturing site was destroyed. Today the truth is unknowable. It was not until Roboute Guilliman laid down the 'Codex Astartes' that the Vindicator is mentioned again, when it was specifically designated as a Space Marine vehicle and included in a Chapter's 'codex' order of battle, where it has remained every since."

Codex Space Marines can claim whatever the hell it wants, because it's not right.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

1hadhq wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Hold on...

GW fluff with inconsistencies? I'll alert the media!

Go for it

We all know its the fault of he who shall not be named.

Yes. It's the fault of whoever the hell wrote the Index Astartes article.

Kanluwen wrote:Codex Space Marines can claim whatever the hell it wants, because it's not right.

Woah, you're turning a perfectly civil discussion about imaginary tanks sour. Smile. It is Monday!

For most folks, the most recent official GW publication will trump any others. It is nice to know what previous sources said, but...

pretre wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:Codex Space Marines can claim whatever the hell it wants, because it's not right.

Woah, you're turning a perfectly civil discussion about imaginary tanks sour. Smile. It is Monday!

For most folks, the most recent official GW publication will trump any others. It is nice to know what previous sources said, but...

It's nice to know that the most recent official GW publication is wrong.

The fluff in question, as far as I can tell, was written by that jerk Pete Haines. I don't like him, and this is just another piece for me to lay at the feets of that hamfisted hack.

Anyways, Dark Age of Technology. It was built then. If I have to conform it to this stupid fluff, it was 'lost' during the Great Crusade and then found sitting in an armory when a call for a siege tank was necessary

/Rawr

Pete Haines is, to me, what many people consider Mat Ward.

Mat Ward at least is writing something that's slightly compatible with the 40k universe as most fluff players see it.

Pete Haines just wrote whatever the hell he wanted to justify his army of the month.

1hadhq wrote:According to codex chaos space marines( 2007 ), the vindicators were used in the heresy. Mostly by Iron warriors.
Chaos vindicators exist, because vindicators existed before the legions split.

yes the C:SM agrees it was developed early in the Heresy so thats fine

im only reading the codex 5thed so thats what im going by.which says Heresy so if going by codex(which i am)it would be illogical to have it pre-Heresy

Deadshot wrote:

1hadhq wrote:According to codex chaos space marines( 2007 ), the vindicators were used in the heresy. Mostly by Iron warriors.
Chaos vindicators exist, because vindicators existed before the legions split.

yes the C:SM agrees it was developed early in the Heresy so thats fine

im only reading the codex 5thed so thats what im going by.which says Heresy so if going by codex(which i am)it would be illogical to have it pre-Heresy

Then I'd suggest you read more, because McNeill is pretty clearly going by the fluff that I'm citing.

mat ward has made mistakes here i think.although the codex does supercede all other sources..ie IA2

Deadshot wrote:mat ward has made mistakes here i think.although the codex does supercede all other sources..ie IA2

Except Mat Ward is not the only one who wrote the book. Sorry, you're not blaming this on him--especially when the Codex came out AFTER what is widely regarded as one of the shoddiest novels in the Horus Heresy line-up and the fluff in question that was in the Codex was published in an Index Astartes article prior to 2007 and written by Pete Haines.

So if you want to whine and whine about Mat Ward, take it elsewhere.

wasn't whining.lets just agree to disagree

i actually like mat wards work as opposed to alot of my friends.probably xcos he gave the BA the flying fortress known as stormraven

There's no "agreeing to disagree here".

I'm telling you that the fluff in question that is in Codex: Space Marines was also used in an Index Astartes article when the plastic Vindicator kit released. That piece was written by Pete Haines.

Mat Ward didn't write it. Pete Haines did. Ward just didn't think to check with Forge World if they had a non-sucky origin that would contradict a novel that was released(meaning written quite a bit beforehand as well) not long before the release of the Space Marines Codex.

Macneill is a functional writer, but I agree that the whole book is a mistake. Even if there was a continuity error there, it's a little like griping about the food at Auschwitz.