Switch Theme:

Adepta Sororitas Codex Rumors  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





A.T. wrote:
Sarouan wrote:
They said she's a High Lord because of Roboute Guilliman. It's clear she's not a "regular High Lord of Terra", if such a thing does exist.
By the (old) fluff the most senior member of the sororitas holds one of the non-permanent seats of the high lords (whereas individuals such as the fabricator general always have a seat at the table).

The sisters had been voluntarily leaving the position vacant since the disappearance of it's previous holder, with the Ecclesiarch representing their interests at the top table.


Yep, but since the old fluff, Guilliman happened and he was already clear he's not interested into maintaining the status quo if it makes no sense for his plans.

Also, the other High Lords know pretty much they can't stand in the way of a resurrected Primarch.

So Roboute decided to change that, clearly. And the others nodded, because that's what they can only do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoletta wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Iracundus wrote:
The whole suit just doesn't do it for me personally just on appearances alone. I find it also a bit ridiculous for a High Lord to be on the battlefield.

I think it would be darkly humorous if she gets charged for dereliction of a High Lord's duties. A High Lord can do the most good for the Imperium role by trying to steer and streamline (ha!) the bureaucracy, not by pulping random cultists or Orks.



Which is and was true for every sufficiently high authority for all armies in 40K since they show up. There's no reason Eldrad or Aun'va or the Silent King or Mortarion or any Chapter Master or even a random GSC Patriarch would ever go into a fight of a few dozens or so soldiers fighting over a roughly 150 feet by 100 feet patch of battleground somewhere.



This always irked me to no end, and is the reason why I always avoid any kind of unique/named char.
It even bothers me that the tyranids have "artifacts". I play bugs because they are 100% anonimous and would love if OOE became just an alpha strain of fex, same for Red Terror or Death Leaper. Unique things have no place in the bug's faction.


Yes, I understand that feeling. But on the other hand, the purpose of making miniatures for a game is to use them in that said game.

There are plenty of justifications for their presence at the head of such a "small army". The core book offers a few of them (like the game is just a window at the most crucial part of a bigger engagement, with the supreme commander and its personnal guard while the (bigger) rest of his army is busy on other fronts).

It's really just a matter of how you see it. Doesn't have to be always litteral.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/11 14:45:45


 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut





Iracundus wrote:
The whole suit just doesn't do it for me personally just on appearances alone. I find it also a bit ridiculous for a High Lord to be on the battlefield.

I think it would be darkly humorous if she gets charged for dereliction of a High Lord's duties. A High Lord can do the most good for the Imperium role by trying to steer and streamline (ha!) the bureaucracy, not by pulping random cultists or Orks.

I like how people are apparently unaware most High Lords don't bother attending proceedings at all (because these are long, boring, and mostly pointless) and just send a representative, only appearing if there is a crisis or something. Fabricator General is High Lord, too, while never leaving Mars - I guess they also fail their duty? Or that Admiral dude in Beast series who also took to the battlefield - or is it just Sisters, because reasons?
   
Made in us
Battle-tested Knight Castellan Pilot





Since when have the High Lords been looking out for what's "most good" for the Imperium, anyways?
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran





Sarouan wrote:
Spoiler:
A.T. wrote:
Sarouan wrote:
They said she's a High Lord because of Roboute Guilliman. It's clear she's not a "regular High Lord of Terra", if such a thing does exist.
By the (old) fluff the most senior member of the sororitas holds one of the non-permanent seats of the high lords (whereas individuals such as the fabricator general always have a seat at the table).

The sisters had been voluntarily leaving the position vacant since the disappearance of it's previous holder, with the Ecclesiarch representing their interests at the top table.


Yep, but since the old fluff, Guilliman happened and he was already clear he's not interested into maintaining the status quo if it makes no sense for his plans.

Also, the other High Lords know pretty much they can't stand in the way of a resurrected Primarch.

So Roboute decided to change that, clearly. And the others nodded, because that's what they can only do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spoletta wrote:
Sunny Side Up wrote:
Iracundus wrote:
The whole suit just doesn't do it for me personally just on appearances alone. I find it also a bit ridiculous for a High Lord to be on the battlefield.

I think it would be darkly humorous if she gets charged for dereliction of a High Lord's duties. A High Lord can do the most good for the Imperium role by trying to steer and streamline (ha!) the bureaucracy, not by pulping random cultists or Orks.



Which is and was true for every sufficiently high authority for all armies in 40K since they show up. There's no reason Eldrad or Aun'va or the Silent King or Mortarion or any Chapter Master or even a random GSC Patriarch would ever go into a fight of a few dozens or so soldiers fighting over a roughly 150 feet by 100 feet patch of battleground somewhere.



This always irked me to no end, and is the reason why I always avoid any kind of unique/named char.
It even bothers me that the tyranids have "artifacts". I play bugs because they are 100% anonimous and would love if OOE became just an alpha strain of fex, same for Red Terror or Death Leaper. Unique things have no place in the bug's faction.


Yes, I understand that feeling. But on the other hand, the purpose of making miniatures for a game is to use them in that said game.

There are plenty of justifications for their presence at the head of such a "small army". The core book offers a few of them (like the game is just a window at the most crucial part of a bigger engagement, with the supreme commander and its personnal guard while the (bigger) rest of his army is busy on other fronts).

It's really just a matter of how you see it. Doesn't have to be always litteral.


This times a billion. I find it humorous that people "hate" and "despise" things like Guilleman and the Silent King, while I'm over here having an amazing time painting them and enjoying looking at them when finished. If you don't want to use them in your game, then don't, but don't be a baby about other people enjoying their toys.
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






Rihgu wrote:
Since when have the High Lords been looking out for what's "most good" for the Imperium, anyways?


Since the return of Guilliman and making 40K noblebright.

Only the insane have strength enough to prosper. Only those who prosper may truly judge what is sane. 
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

 Crimson wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
Since when have the High Lords been looking out for what's "most good" for the Imperium, anyways?


Since the return of Guilliman and making 40K noblebright.

It's not noblebright. The point of someone like Guilliman existing is to provide contrast that makes the horror stand out stronger. To give an example: if you stand in the woods in the middle of the night your eyes adjust, but if you have a light source your eyes only adjust to that light making the shadows stronger and limiting your ability to truly look into the darkness. Adding something like Guilliman who provides hope to the Imperium does that as well. It keeps us from being too adjusted to the grimdark so the dark doesn't lose its punch. It gives us a person who isn't used to the modern setting to connect with and say with them "wow, this is really messed up" instead of quietly accepting it like the normal stories have us do.
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
Since when have the High Lords been looking out for what's "most good" for the Imperium, anyways?


Since the return of Guilliman and making 40K noblebright.

It's not noblebright. The point of someone like Guilliman existing is to provide contrast that makes the horror stand out stronger. To give an example: if you stand in the woods in the middle of the night your eyes adjust, but if you have a light source your eyes only adjust to that light making the shadows stronger and limiting your ability to truly look into the darkness. Adding something like Guilliman who provides hope to the Imperium does that as well. It keeps us from being too adjusted to the grimdark so the dark doesn't lose its punch. It gives us a person who isn't used to the modern setting to connect with and say with them "wow, this is really messed up" instead of quietly accepting it like the normal stories have us do.


And that person is a powerful demigod and the de facto leader of imperium. Sorry but no. If you have demigod good guy as the leader of Imperium, you have noblebright with some cosmetic grimdark trappings and I'm not interested in that.

Only the insane have strength enough to prosper. Only those who prosper may truly judge what is sane. 
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

 Crimson wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
Since when have the High Lords been looking out for what's "most good" for the Imperium, anyways?


Since the return of Guilliman and making 40K noblebright.

It's not noblebright. The point of someone like Guilliman existing is to provide contrast that makes the horror stand out stronger. To give an example: if you stand in the woods in the middle of the night your eyes adjust, but if you have a light source your eyes only adjust to that light making the shadows stronger and limiting your ability to truly look into the darkness. Adding something like Guilliman who provides hope to the Imperium does that as well. It keeps us from being too adjusted to the grimdark so the dark doesn't lose its punch. It gives us a person who isn't used to the modern setting to connect with and say with them "wow, this is really messed up" instead of quietly accepting it like the normal stories have us do.


And that person is a powerful demigod and the de facto leader of imperium. Sorry but no. If you have demigod good guy as the leader of Imperium, you have noblebright with some cosmetic grimdark trappings and I'm not interested in that.

And even with all that he's plagued by insominia, is being so stressed he's starting to have grey hairs in his temples and had to declare the Indomitus Crusade a success for a moral victory despite the fact it didn't win anything, merely reinforced the front lines.

He's a demigod but he's being pushed to his breaking point at every turn. But you're too focused on his title to notice the load he's carrying I guess.
   
Made in ca
Oberleutnant




Hogtown

 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
Since when have the High Lords been looking out for what's "most good" for the Imperium, anyways?


Since the return of Guilliman and making 40K noblebright.

It's not noblebright. The point of someone like Guilliman existing is to provide contrast that makes the horror stand out stronger. To give an example: if you stand in the woods in the middle of the night your eyes adjust, but if you have a light source your eyes only adjust to that light making the shadows stronger and limiting your ability to truly look into the darkness. Adding something like Guilliman who provides hope to the Imperium does that as well. It keeps us from being too adjusted to the grimdark so the dark doesn't lose its punch. It gives us a person who isn't used to the modern setting to connect with and say with them "wow, this is really messed up" instead of quietly accepting it like the normal stories have us do.


And that person is a powerful demigod and the de facto leader of imperium. Sorry but no. If you have demigod good guy as the leader of Imperium, you have noblebright with some cosmetic grimdark trappings and I'm not interested in that.

And even with all that he's plagued by insominia, is being so stressed he's starting to have grey hairs in his temples and had to declare the Indomitus Crusade a success for a moral victory despite the fact it didn't win anything, merely reinforced the front lines.

He's a demigod but he's being pushed to his breaking point at every turn. But you're too focused on his title to notice the load he's carrying I guess.


Grey hairs and insomnia do not a grimdark make. He's a WoW paladin inserted into 40k. It's as if Battlefront Games released Hercules in Flames of War. Crimson is right.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/11 16:10:57


 
   
Made in us
Uhlan



Troy, OH

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lammia wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lammia wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
And if she got anything it'll likely be a bonus to Acts of Faith, or Faith Dice or something similar. That's the big Sisters mechanic after all.
It's such a Sisters mecanic there are is already a named character and a slew of unnamed characters/models that do that. None of which feature in most lists.

Named character is faction locked to the faction that generates bonus Faith dice as a mechanic. Everyone is more for Bloody Rose though because it lets the army (mainly Repentia) blend better and hard hitting melee is strong in this edition.
Umm... no. Triumph isn't faction locked. I think we may have crossed wires...

I thought you were talking about Junith, but she gives rerolls to OoML:
Fiery Conviction: Re-roll hit rolls of 1 and wound rolls of 1 for attacks made by models in friendly ORDER OF OUR MARTYRED LADY units whilst their unit is within 6" of this model.

Which really just points out the real disappointment I have with the special character reveals we've got -- 9th edition is going to continue the intra-faction unit imbalance where non-OML orders don't even know who their Cannoness Supreme is, much less have rules to field them. Like, if they're going to insist on giving us named characters (instead of, I don't know, a generic jump-palatine or something), *I'd* be much more interested in a set of named characters to flesh out the other orders and give GW balancing levers to make, say, Ebon Chalice, Sacred Rose, and to maybe a lesser extent Argent Shroud more appealing by giving them badass or synergistically buffing named heads of their Orders to make up for underwhelming Order Convictions, and fluffy but relatively tame heads of Bloody Rose and Valorous Heart heads because they don't need the help. But instead of those 5 named characters, we get two gussied up banner bearers and a likely Lord of War that is only reasonable to field in games much larger than I care about. Who are great models, for sure, but much less thematically interesting to me than really helping to stake out individual orders' character more by spotlighting some of their important personalities.
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

 Las wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
Since when have the High Lords been looking out for what's "most good" for the Imperium, anyways?


Since the return of Guilliman and making 40K noblebright.

It's not noblebright. The point of someone like Guilliman existing is to provide contrast that makes the horror stand out stronger. To give an example: if you stand in the woods in the middle of the night your eyes adjust, but if you have a light source your eyes only adjust to that light making the shadows stronger and limiting your ability to truly look into the darkness. Adding something like Guilliman who provides hope to the Imperium does that as well. It keeps us from being too adjusted to the grimdark so the dark doesn't lose its punch. It gives us a person who isn't used to the modern setting to connect with and say with them "wow, this is really messed up" instead of quietly accepting it like the normal stories have us do.


And that person is a powerful demigod and the de facto leader of imperium. Sorry but no. If you have demigod good guy as the leader of Imperium, you have noblebright with some cosmetic grimdark trappings and I'm not interested in that.

And even with all that he's plagued by insominia, is being so stressed he's starting to have grey hairs in his temples and had to declare the Indomitus Crusade a success for a moral victory despite the fact it didn't win anything, merely reinforced the front lines.

He's a demigod but he's being pushed to his breaking point at every turn. But you're too focused on his title to notice the load he's carrying I guess.


Grey hairs and insomnia do not a grimdark make. He's a WoW paladin inserted into 40k. It's as if Battlefront Games released Hercules in Flames of War. Crimson is right.

Pft. He's a Horus Heresy character inserted into 40k, not a WoW character. I love the level of maturity here to immediately start strawmanning things that aren't pizza cutter levels of dark and edgy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kaffis wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lammia wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lammia wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
And if she got anything it'll likely be a bonus to Acts of Faith, or Faith Dice or something similar. That's the big Sisters mechanic after all.
It's such a Sisters mecanic there are is already a named character and a slew of unnamed characters/models that do that. None of which feature in most lists.

Named character is faction locked to the faction that generates bonus Faith dice as a mechanic. Everyone is more for Bloody Rose though because it lets the army (mainly Repentia) blend better and hard hitting melee is strong in this edition.
Umm... no. Triumph isn't faction locked. I think we may have crossed wires...

I thought you were talking about Junith, but she gives rerolls to OoML:
Fiery Conviction: Re-roll hit rolls of 1 and wound rolls of 1 for attacks made by models in friendly ORDER OF OUR MARTYRED LADY units whilst their unit is within 6" of this model.

Which really just points out the real disappointment I have with the special character reveals we've got -- 9th edition is going to continue the intra-faction unit imbalance where non-OML orders don't even know who their Cannoness Supreme is, much less have rules to field them. Like, if they're going to insist on giving us named characters (instead of, I don't know, a generic jump-palatine or something), *I'd* be much more interested in a set of named characters to flesh out the other orders and give GW balancing levers to make, say, Ebon Chalice, Sacred Rose, and to maybe a lesser extent Argent Shroud more appealing by giving them badass or synergistically buffing named heads of their Orders to make up for underwhelming Order Convictions, and fluffy but relatively tame heads of Bloody Rose and Valorous Heart heads because they don't need the help. But instead of those 5 named characters, we get two gussied up banner bearers and a likely Lord of War that is only reasonable to field in games much larger than I care about. Who are great models, for sure, but much less thematically interesting to me than really helping to stake out individual orders' character more by spotlighting some of their important personalities.

I'm with you that it'd be nice to get 5 more Canoness characters, but I'll take what I can get. I mean had an Abbess in 2nd, then lost her, and now we have a new one.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/11 16:17:17


 
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

Spoiler:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Las wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
 Crimson wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
Since when have the High Lords been looking out for what's "most good" for the Imperium, anyways?


Since the return of Guilliman and making 40K noblebright.

It's not noblebright. The point of someone like Guilliman existing is to provide contrast that makes the horror stand out stronger. To give an example: if you stand in the woods in the middle of the night your eyes adjust, but if you have a light source your eyes only adjust to that light making the shadows stronger and limiting your ability to truly look into the darkness. Adding something like Guilliman who provides hope to the Imperium does that as well. It keeps us from being too adjusted to the grimdark so the dark doesn't lose its punch. It gives us a person who isn't used to the modern setting to connect with and say with them "wow, this is really messed up" instead of quietly accepting it like the normal stories have us do.


And that person is a powerful demigod and the de facto leader of imperium. Sorry but no. If you have demigod good guy as the leader of Imperium, you have noblebright with some cosmetic grimdark trappings and I'm not interested in that.

And even with all that he's plagued by insominia, is being so stressed he's starting to have grey hairs in his temples and had to declare the Indomitus Crusade a success for a moral victory despite the fact it didn't win anything, merely reinforced the front lines.

He's a demigod but he's being pushed to his breaking point at every turn. But you're too focused on his title to notice the load he's carrying I guess.


Grey hairs and insomnia do not a grimdark make. He's a WoW paladin inserted into 40k. It's as if Battlefront Games released Hercules in Flames of War. Crimson is right.

Pft. He's a Horus Heresy character inserted into 40k, not a WoW character. I love the level of maturity here to immediately start strawmanning things that aren't pizza cutter levels of dark and edgy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kaffis wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lammia wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
Lammia wrote:
 ClockworkZion wrote:
And if she got anything it'll likely be a bonus to Acts of Faith, or Faith Dice or something similar. That's the big Sisters mechanic after all.
It's such a Sisters mecanic there are is already a named character and a slew of unnamed characters/models that do that. None of which feature in most lists.

Named character is faction locked to the faction that generates bonus Faith dice as a mechanic. Everyone is more for Bloody Rose though because it lets the army (mainly Repentia) blend better and hard hitting melee is strong in this edition.
Umm... no. Triumph isn't faction locked. I think we may have crossed wires...

I thought you were talking about Junith, but she gives rerolls to OoML:
Fiery Conviction: Re-roll hit rolls of 1 and wound rolls of 1 for attacks made by models in friendly ORDER OF OUR MARTYRED LADY units whilst their unit is within 6" of this model.

Which really just points out the real disappointment I have with the special character reveals we've got -- 9th edition is going to continue the intra-faction unit imbalance where non-OML orders don't even know who their Cannoness Supreme is, much less have rules to field them. Like, if they're going to insist on giving us named characters (instead of, I don't know, a generic jump-palatine or something), *I'd* be much more interested in a set of named characters to flesh out the other orders and give GW balancing levers to make, say, Ebon Chalice, Sacred Rose, and to maybe a lesser extent Argent Shroud more appealing by giving them badass or synergistically buffing named heads of their Orders to make up for underwhelming Order Convictions, and fluffy but relatively tame heads of Bloody Rose and Valorous Heart heads because they don't need the help. But instead of those 5 named characters, we get two gussied up banner bearers and a likely Lord of War that is only reasonable to field in games much larger than I care about. Who are great models, for sure, but much less thematically interesting to me than really helping to stake out individual orders' character more by spotlighting some of their important personalities.

I'm with you that it'd be nice to get 5 more Canoness characters, but I'll take what I can get. I mean had an Abbess in 2nd, then lost her, and now we have a new one.


I see your point and you are actually right in the proper official 40k fluff and interpretation of those events.

But is true that GW is marketing 40k as a much more palatable product in this past years, more heroic and the imperium much more as the good guys with less emphasis in how crazy they are outside stuff like Necromunda.
I have no problem with that, and TBH, people have such a absurd hard on about how grimdark is sacred and all mighty when warhammer has been grimdark far less than it has been silly and colorfull. And I'll add that my favourite "version" of all warhammers are the grimdark ones.

In Fantasy the "grimdarkess", for example, lasted from 6th to the end of 7th. Warhammer Fantasy from 1st to 5th was full of heroic colors and sillyness, and we all know Age of Sigmar. But as many, many people here started with 6th Fantasy, for them is the "golden age". And I'll say again, my favourite period of Warhammer Fantasy is the narrative of the storm of chaos and 6th edition, but people is too fast to lose perspective and believe THATS the ONLY AND TRUE WARHAMMER and everything else is crap.

And the same applies to warhammer 40k.

But personally I don't like loyalist primarchs returning, I loathe them as characters.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/11 16:22:18


 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

Marketting is not setting. Never confuse the two.

And I like the grimdark, but without contrast it lacks punch. You need to set people up to fail for the failure to have impact, otherwise the story has no dramatic tension.

Heck, in this supposed "noblebright" setting Chaos is more of a threat than they ever where before. I fail to understand how a flickering candlelight changes the whole setting to being "noblebright" instead of providing contrast to sell the horror better.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




But in fact it doesn't provide contrast. It could, but it doesn't.

In reality, Gulliman turns the whole story into some weird Make the Imperium Great Again story complete with a heroic outsider fighting an entrenched Deep State that is conveniently blamed for the polity's degeneration, when in fact, the Imperium was never great to begin with unless you retcon 40 years of 40k history.

Modern 40k is retconning the foundational terribleness of the Imperium and instead substituting a story about renewal and bringing back the good old days by kicking out the bureaucrats, which completely undermines the original point of the setting. It's especially weird because HH itself is very much the opposite, and has spent a lot of time spinning out just how bad the Imperium actually was from its very founding, and how the Heresy itself was basically a big avoidable own-goal by a ruthless despot and his incompetent man-child generals.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/11 16:49:50


 
   
Made in it
Longtime Dakkanaut





The imperium before Gman: Sieged on all fronts. Warcrimes and slaughters being common sight. No hopes of winning.

The imperium after Gman: Sieged on fronts that they didn't even thougth they could be defined as fronts. Warcrimes and slaughters still being a common sight. Even less hopes of winning.

Yeah, such a huge shake in the setting.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






Spoletta wrote:
The imperium before Gman: Sieged on all fronts. Warcrimes and slaughters being common sight. No hopes of winning.

The imperium after Gman: Sieged on fronts that they didn't even thougth they could be defined as fronts. Warcrimes and slaughters still being a common sight. Even less hopes of winning.

Yeah, such a huge shake in the setting.

Even less hope of winning, but the Imperium are able to rise more armies, build more ships, wage war on more fronts than ever before.
Even less hope of winning, but every Marine Chapter gets rescued and reinforced with even better Marines.
Even less hope of winning, but nobody important ever dies from attempting to cross the supposedly very dangerous Rubicon Primaris; or even dies in battle.
Even less hope of winning, but Imperial armies are seemingly able to cross the Cicatrix Maledictum whenever and wherever the plot requires it.
Even less hope of winning, but the Custodes are back, the Sisters of Silence are back, a Primarch is back, Celestine is back, Stern is back, etc. etc.
Even less hope of winning, but there are significant technological advances all over the place.
Even less hope of winning, but what have any of the Imperium's myriad enemies actually done to capitalise on their supposed advantage(s)?
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




That's deliberately ignoring the point. Nobody's saying the problem with modern 40k is that the good guys have it too easy. In fact, the more you transition away from a grimdark setting where everybody is the bad guys, the more you need to raise the stakes re: the threat the Imperium faces, because the only way to create tension in a superhero story is to make the situation more dire.

Escalating the stakes is a classic superhero narrative.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/11 17:20:20


 
   
Made in ca
Oberleutnant




Hogtown

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Marketting is not setting. Never confuse the two.

And I like the grimdark, but without contrast it lacks punch. You need to set people up to fail for the failure to have impact, otherwise the story has no dramatic tension.

Heck, in this supposed "noblebright" setting Chaos is more of a threat than they ever where before. I fail to understand how a flickering candlelight changes the whole setting to being "noblebright" instead of providing contrast to sell the horror better.


Dangerous threats don't make or break the tone or themes of the setting, at least not on their own. Pixar movies have dangerous threats. The scaling of odds of success against those threats likewise do not really influence tone or theme.

40K has never had a truly "good" hero on geopolitical level of the Imperium who is positioned as being "right". It does now, and it reduces the level of grimdark.

That may seem trivial to some, but grimdark is the key differentiator for GW's IP. So much so that the term is now in common parlance in genre fiction - and increasingly beyond - to denote overly pessimistic, violent, ironic, and absurdist fiction.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/11 17:29:27


 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





yukishiro1 wrote:
That's deliberately ignoring the point. Nobody's saying the problem with modern 40k is that the good guys have it too easy. In fact, the more you transition away from a grimdark setting where everybody is the bad guys, the more you need to raise the stakes re: the threat the Imperium faces, because the only way to create tension in a superhero story is to make the situation more dire.

Escalating the stakes is a classic superhero narrative.


There is no good guy in the current setting.

Roboute may try to do things right, but he's often forced to do horrible things nonetheless.

The true grimdark is not to be gloom and doom without any light of hope. The true grimdark is having that hope twisted or extinguished after a brief time of radiance. That's the true horror : making people hope for nothing in the end, simply because the universe is a cold, dark and uncaring place for mankind.

But to achieve that, there must be hope first. Without it, you can't see the true terror of the situation.

Current sisters aren't good guys (girls, rather) at all. They burn innocents and inflict horrible suffering for themselves and citizens of the Imperium. They do it for what they believe are good reasons, but that doesn't make their methods any less horrifying. Same for Space Marines, Adeptus Custodes and Roboute Guilliman.

And the superhero narrative ? It was always there. Always. Named characters aren't new, they were at the very beginning of Rogue Trader itself. And they were quite powerful too in comparison to the troops. Why ? Because stories need heroes, and when you're building a whole universe at a galactic level...you need powerful characters to be able to stand out at the scale of the said universe.

I remember the days of Major Heroes profiles...and it wasn't especially better than now.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/11 17:31:25


 
   
Made in ca
Oberleutnant




Hogtown

Sarouan wrote:
yukishiro1 wrote:
That's deliberately ignoring the point. Nobody's saying the problem with modern 40k is that the good guys have it too easy. In fact, the more you transition away from a grimdark setting where everybody is the bad guys, the more you need to raise the stakes re: the threat the Imperium faces, because the only way to create tension in a superhero story is to make the situation more dire.

Escalating the stakes is a classic superhero narrative.


There is no good guy in the current setting.

Roboute may try to do things right, but he's often forced to do horrible things nonetheless.

The true grimdark is not to be gloom and doom without any light of hope. The true grimdark is having that hope twisted or extinguished after a brief time of radiance. That's the true horror : making people hope for nothing in the end, simply because the universe is a cold, dark and uncaring place for mankind.

But to achieve that, there must be hope first. Without it, you can't see the true terror of the situation.

Current sisters aren't good guys (girls, rather) at all. They burn innocents and inflict horrible suffering for themselves and citizens of the Imperium. They do it for what they believe are good reasons, but that doesn't make their methods any less horrifying. Same for Space Marines, Adeptus Custodes and Roboute Guilliman.

And the superhero narrative ? It was always there. Always. Named characters aren't new, they were at the very beginning of Rogue Trader itself. And they were quite powerful too in comparison to the troops.

I remember the days of Major Heroes profiles...and it wasn't especially better than now.


Disagree. As Dan Abnett said in a recent interview, there is no room for hope on the macro level for Warhammer 40,000. It can exist on the human level, the ground level as a story telling device, but not at the galactic scale. Roboute is a personified representation of hope at the galactic level, and it stinks.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/11 17:33:04


 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Las wrote:


Disagree. As Dan Abnett said in a recent interview, there is no room for hope on the macro level for Warhammer 40,000. It can exist on the human level, the ground level as a story telling device, but not at the galactic scale. Roboute is a personified representation of hope at the galactic level, and it stinks.


That's why Roboute's failing. You didn't read what I wrote ? To show the true horror of the situation, there must be hope first. If it's at a galactic scale, then the pressure is even greater...and the fall even harder when eventually it is doomed.

Dan Abnett is just one author. He has his views on his own stories, but that doesn't mean he's right for everything. And besides...His character of Saint Sabbat is pretty much hope at a far greater level than a mere human. So...that shows he himself can write something different.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/11 17:42:25


 
   
Made in ca
Oberleutnant




Hogtown

Sarouan wrote:
 Las wrote:


Disagree. As Dan Abnett said in a recent interview, there is no room for hope on the macro level for Warhammer 40,000. It can exist on the human level, the ground level as a story telling device, but not at the galactic scale. Roboute is a personified representation of hope at the galactic level, and it stinks.


That's why he's failing. You didn't read what I wrote ? To show the true horror of the situation, there must be hope first. If it's at a galactic scale, then the pressure is even greater...and the fall even harder when eventually it is doomed.

Dan Abnett is just one author. He has his views on his own stories, but that doesn't mean he's right for everything.


I don't think he is failing, though. I think he's been set up as an indestructible poster-boy underdog to forever battle the forces of Chaos, saturday morning cartoon style.

On your point on Abnett: totally fair. I only brought him up because he's a well respected figure in 40K lore, and I happen to agree with him. Completely subjective though, I admit.

EDIT re your EDIT: Haha, that's very true. I did dislike the saint as well.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/05/11 17:41:03


 
   
Made in be
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Las wrote:


I don't think he is failing, though. I think he's been set up as an indestructible poster-boy underdog to forever battle the forces of Chaos, saturday morning cartoon style.


That's really not how he's portrayed in the recent books where he's the center of the story, though.
   
Made in ca
Oberleutnant




Hogtown

Sarouan wrote:
 Las wrote:


I don't think he is failing, though. I think he's been set up as an indestructible poster-boy underdog to forever battle the forces of Chaos, saturday morning cartoon style.


That's really not how he's portrayed in the recent books where he's the center of the story, though.


That totally could be the case. I haven't read a new BL book in years. However, I would say that I think the primary vessel for conveying the themes, tone, and lore of 40k are and always have been the rulebooks and codeces. There has been a marked departure since 8th (but maybe 6th) in these materials toward a more heroic, optimistic setting that gravitates around a central cast of characters than in the past.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/11 17:51:07


 
   
Made in us
Three Color Minimum





Tangentville, New Jersey

I think the move from customizable "my guys" character approach to "buy this awesome fething centerpiece model!" has a lot to do with the tone shift, perceived or otherwise.

EDIT: just cleaning up syntax.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/05/11 17:53:13



 
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






I believe Guilliman can fail when he's dead in a ditch.

Only the insane have strength enough to prosper. Only those who prosper may truly judge what is sane. 
   
Made in pl
Longtime Dakkanaut






 Las wrote:

40K has never had a truly "good" hero on geopolitical level of the Imperium who is positioned as being "right". It does now, and it reduces the level of grimdark.


Except Logan Grimnar. Or Creed. Or Macharius.

'Good' and 'right' are necessary elements of any dystopian setting. Black on black does not make a picture..
   
Made in us
Blessed Living Saint




On the Internet

Rulebooks and codexes are far to small to really give more than a Lacroix level taste of the themes and drives of a faction. BL is where the main themes are really shown.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Sarouan wrote:


That's why Roboute's failing. You didn't read what I wrote ? To show the true horror of the situation, there must be hope first. If it's at a galactic scale, then the pressure is even greater...and the fall even harder when eventually it is doomed.


Again, that's not how it actually plays out in practice. GW's treatment of G-man has repositioned the Imperium as not fundamentally bad but just as run by bad, lazy, corrupt administrators who have been poor guardians of what could be a sound institution. It becomes a story about whether there's enough good people like him to overcome the dual threats of the deep state and outside enemies, not a story about the slow crumbling of an institution that was fundamentally rotten to begin with and that has never had any rationale to justify its existence except that the alternative is (supposedly) worse.

The HH story has made clear that the Imperium is a fundamentally terrible institution that crushed many better societies in the process of its birth, run by a man who repeatedly made terrible decisions that led directly to the Heresy and his own near-death.

But at the same time, 40k has moved away from that by resurrecting G-man to "restore" the Imperium, which only makes sense if there is something heroic to restore in the first place.

It's all a bit incoherent. The consistent, grimdark thing would have been to have Guilliman return only to finally realize that his dad was never worth following in the first place and is now dead anyway, and therefore to have him come out of his "audience" with the pathetic, dead husk of "the Emperor"...and just leave, letting the Imperium burn itself down while he creates his own, better institution in Ultramar.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/11 17:57:52


 
   
Made in ca
Oberleutnant




Hogtown

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Rulebooks and codexes are far to small to really give more than a Lacroix level taste of the themes and drives of a faction. BL is where the main themes are really shown.


I disagree. Honestly, I think the 2nd-4th edition rulebooks have more atmosphere dripping off a single lore page than most BL books manage to achieve. They are, after all, what defined the setting. BL is supplemental and always has been.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/05/11 18:06:01


 
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: