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.

Sane characters in 40k are a pitfall of mainstreaming. This is the big problem I had with Titanicus and Abnett more generally.

Eldar... Prophecy...

I don't care WHAT C.S. Goto writes anymore, whether it ends up being a steaming pile of crap or somehow it turns into the greatest thing ever, I officially loathe him and everything he does because of this one book...

Manchu wrote:Sane characters in 40k are a pitfall of mainstreaming. This is the big problem I had with Titanicus and Abnett more generally.

The climax of Titanicus involves the theocratic crisis of whether not to allow the creation myth of your religion to be co-opted and corrupted by the mainstream faith in the interest of not destroying one's nation. State or church what is more important? If this is mainstreaming then I welcome it. I find the central issue in most BL books is whether the Space Marines should "pwn n00bs" or totally "totally pwn n00bs."

I hated the 2nd and 3rd Last Chancers books.. the 1st one was alright, but the meat grinder of the last 2 just put me the hell off.

The main character was really unlikeable, and I just kept waiting for him to fail whatever Invul save he was pulling out his .. well.. nether regions.

Manchu wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Manchu wrote:I love love love Ian Watson. In terms of literary quality, he produced the very pinnacle of BL's catalog, IMO. There has yet to be an equally talented writer in terms of sheer creativity working for them.

So I take it you recommend Inquisition War?

A thousand times yes. It reads like no other BL books, however. Flip through if you find a copy in a bookstore before buying. I think it's the only 40k yarn that could stand alone as sci-fi (i.e., being a part of the 40k world is not its principal selling point).

The Inquisition War was the first BL book I read. It started out friggin' awesome, but by 1/3 through Chaos Child had lost all momentum and sense of direction, and just fizzled out.

I thought Dead Sky, Black Sun was pretty bad.

I don't think there's ever been one I've not been able to finish, but the one that I disliked most?

Probably the Soul Drinker series.

It's interesting, reading this thread, how people seem to fall into two categories based on the reasons they give. I'm pretty sure I've seen this in other BL threads on here as well.

1. People who describe Mechanicum, Eisenstein, Descent of Angels as 'boring', dislike Ian Watson's older stuff, and seem to prefer reading BL books with lots of action and battle scenes, rather than dialogue, mystery etc.

2. People who describe Battle for the Abyss, Ultramarines, Soul Drinker as 'boring', on account of it just being endless Space Marine fighting with predictable bad guys. They seem to prefer a book that opens up the background, regardless of how much action is in it.


It seems BL is catering for some hugely different tastes. I personally fall into the second section - I found Mechanicum, Eisenstien et al really interesting, as they show sections of the background that I've never seen before. I don't care if there's no battle scenes at all - that's not why I'm reading a BL book.

I have to admit Ian, I wouldn't say I'm in either category and that's genuine, not different for the sake of being different. Although I guess at a push, I could fall into the 2nd.

For me, much like your final sentence, it's not so much about how much battle there is in it, it's the depth of the 40K background - which I love. If there's no substance then there's no reason for me to like it (eg. Space Wolf/Ragnar novel), whether or not there's any fighting in it.
That's why I like the HH series so much due to the depth, quality and richness of the background they dive into.
For me, First Heretic had a great balance of dialogue and action.

There is a third category Ian. One that understands that BL aren't true novels in the sense of most of the sci-fi genre and read them like some people read trashy romance novels

Which is why my favorite ones are the ones actually written well enough to qualify as true books (i.e. they'd probably get published without the support of BL with a slight modification to the back of the book intro).

Hulksmash wrote:There is a third category Ian. One that understands that BL aren't true novels in the sense of most of the sci-fi genre and read them like some people read trashy romance novels

Which is why my favorite ones are the ones actually written well enough to qualify as true books (i.e. they'd probably get published without the support of BL with a slight modification to the back of the book intro).

Oh, I absolutely agree with this. I realise that the GOOD ones are the ones that read like actual novels - with character development, psychology and interesting motives. I find this these books to fall into the second section more than the first, mainly because it's practically impossible to put decent character development into a novel about Space Marines (honourable exception goes to Brothers of the Snake). But I guess, on the other hand, there's a few complaints about DoA and Mechanicum that, while they add to the world, they don't necessarily have the most engaging characters...

Havent read a whole lot of BL books, mainly the HH ones but the first DA novel was truely appalling in my opinion.

I don't know that many BL books outside of Ian Watson that wouldn't fit into Hulksmash's "trash romance." I recently read Steve Lyons's Dead Men Walking, which might just barely qualify if so much of its theme didn't rely on the protagonists and antagonists being DKoK and Necrons respectively. (I started a review & discussion thread here.)

@KC: By mainstreaming, I was talking more about the merely human characters in Titanicus. The same thing shows up in Dead Men Walking. These civilian characters are supposed to be the "Luke Skywalkers" of BL (i.e., the substitute for the reader) and I think they're a touch too removed from the sensibilities of their own world in an effort to be more relatable to ours.

Well if you re-wrote the back of Storm of Iron or First Heretic or the Eisenhorn series that marketed them in a non-40k but generic sci-fi fashion they would pass muster.

Ian Watsons stuff to me was appalling. Yes it's different than standard BL stuff but it's just as in it's own way. Personal opinion on that though

Blood ravens DOW omnibus - it was actually painful to read and I quit after about 50-100 pages - stayed far away from Mr. Goto ever since. ....

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Just Dave wrote:

Kid_Kyoto wrote:Why the hate for Battle For Abyss? I know it didn't advance the HH plot much (spoiler, Horus turns to chaos!) but it was a fine adventure story.

I thought it was a horrible novel, the only likable character or part was the Thousand Son. I found the story incredibly predictable; skirmish, skip through space, loyalists survive despite the odds... Rinse and repeat.
As I said, the story was predictable and underwhelming, the Word Bearers were the worst bad guys in 40K, they were almost as useless as Storm Troopers in SW's.
The ending was really underwhelming and the chief bad guy did nothing but screw up over and over again.
Then, as you said, it didn't advance the Horus Heresy plot much.
To me, it was definitely the worst HH book so far.

Monster Rain wrote:I'll go to my grave saying that Ben Counter is worse than C.S. Goto.

I've heard a lot of hate for both these writers although from what I've heard of his stories C.S. Goto is much worse, I was impressed with Ben Counters 3rd HH novel, Galaxy In Flames I think it was?

For me, the worst Black Library Novel I've read would have to be Battle for the Abyss. Possibly one of the Space Wolf ones too though.

I must agree. Although I have many HH books to go Battle for the Abyss has been the worst one so far. The Ultramarine Captain is a stereotypical Ultramarine Captain. The Space Wolf Captain is an unbearably stereotypical Space Wolf. Mhotep is a stereotypical 1K but he's lucky that makes him awesome anyway. Skraal however was a pretty cool guy. It's all by the numbers except for the part where Cestus (I think his name was) goes to hell. It's not the worst book evar! or anything just found it to be the weakest so far in the series.

Wait your complaints with the book are that the Ultramarine acts like, well an Ultramarine and the Space Wolf acts like, shock, a Space Wolf? I don't really get your argument.

For me the worst book in the series is the 2nd one, I think. Whichever one describes Horus' fall to Chaos. The entire Heresy gets summed up in about 15 pages where essentially Horus is tricked. Lame.

I'll mention C.S Goto's eldar book, but I was really really bored by the two Dark Angel Horus Heresy books. I finished the first book and thought what was the point of that? Then made the mistake of thinking the follow-up could only get better. It didn't.

Manchu wrote:I don't know that many BL books outside of Ian Watson that wouldn't fit into Hulksmash's "trash romance." I recently read Steve Lyons's Dead Men Walking, which might just barely qualify if so much of its theme didn't rely on the protagonists and antagonists being DKoK and Necrons respectively. (I started a review & discussion thread here.)

@KC: By mainstreaming, I was talking more about the merely human characters in Titanicus. The same thing shows up in Dead Men Walking. These civilian characters are supposed to be the "Luke Skywalkers" of BL (i.e., the substitute for the reader) and I think they're a touch too removed from the sensibilities of their own world in an effort to be more relatable to ours.

I see. Abnett like a lot of writers relies on the "common-man" and/or "eyes of the audience" characters. I don't mind them because they can keep the craziness of a world like 40k in perspective. It's been a while but I don't recall any unbearable skywalker-like guys in Titanicus. I do remember this one guy who made toy-titans that was kinda weird. I didn't mind the guy but it just seems like if every scene he was in was edited out then it really would have no effect on anything in the story.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ArbitorIan wrote:It's interesting, reading this thread, how people seem to fall into two categories based on the reasons they give. I'm pretty sure I've seen this in other BL threads on here as well.

1. People who describe Mechanicum, Eisenstein, Descent of Angels as 'boring', dislike Ian Watson's older stuff, and seem to prefer reading BL books with lots of action and battle scenes, rather than dialogue, mystery etc.

2. People who describe Battle for the Abyss, Ultramarines, Soul Drinker as 'boring', on account of it just being endless Space Marine fighting with predictable bad guys. They seem to prefer a book that opens up the background, regardless of how much action is in it.


It seems BL is catering for some hugely different tastes. I personally fall into the second section - I found Mechanicum, Eisenstien et al really interesting, as they show sections of the background that I've never seen before. I don't care if there's no battle scenes at all - that's not why I'm reading a BL book.

I don't know. My favorite is Gaunts Ghosts and that would fall under catagory 1. But I also liked Descent of Angels and Flight of The Eisenstein. I think if its good and succeeds in what it sets out to do then its good regardless of "Type". Of course the best ones do it all!

@KC: Remember the dude and his wife who got separated? The wife was a PDF reservist and the guy worked in a warehouse or something. That's who I mean. I really liked the various Princepi, however. I think the book would have done far better to focus on them and other AdMech personalities.

Yeah, iirc she ends up leading an ad-hoc squad behind enemy lines. I didn't mind her arc. I think there was a scene were they see the Titan's fight from a footsoldiers pov and its like the world exploding.

For me I'd have to say my least favorite novel from Black Library is Fulgrim. Thats the only one that I've ha to struggle through. There are some that are pretty close to it, some of the last chancer novels come to mind, but it surpasses them. I can't even place my finger on why i dislike it honestly.

Kid_Kyoto wrote:So I've seen 2 or 3 threads on the BL lately and wondering what would people nominate as the worst BL book ever? Or at least the worst BL book you ever read (or tried to read)?

Oh, no! ANother Goto thread

battle Brother Lucifer wrote:Due to all the C.S. Goto hate on dakka, I really, REALLY want to read one of his books.

I recommend "Dawn of War: Tempest", it's the worst by Goto. 180 pages of torturing a female Eldar farseer, and Harlequins always ending in "piles of mutilated bodies" (that's a quote!)
Although I have to admit that I couldn't read more than a third of Eldar Prophecy, so it might be even worse.

On the plus side, I'm currently reading Path of the Warrior by Mr. Thorpe and it's surprisingly okay so far. At first, I thought it was going to be 400 pages describnig each character's hairstyle and outfit but it's starting to take off.

Did not like Dark Sky, Black Sun at -all-. It got the whole EoT thing very well but it just hurt my head.

C.S Goto's stuff.....meh. I doubt I could get anything accepted by BL, so I shant throw too many stones.

Liked all the different HH books. I think Abyss was the weakest, but that's just imho.

And really, trying to reply to a question that says "ever" in it, presumes that there will be no more BL books. I'm sure, out in the depths of the world, in the darkest sub-basement of an abandoned sanitarium where inhuman experiments were performed, C.S. Goto is writing more books -just- to piss a lot of you off

My first book was eldar prophesy... oh god my poor childhood self. i finished it and picked up another book: thank god it was gotrek and felix or my warhammer life may have stopped there!

Rymafyr wrote:I haven't read many...and probably because the last one I read was atrocious. I can't even remember the name of the book or author because I thought it was so bad. It was the first of the Word Bearer series... 'Dark Disciple' maybe?

Dark Apostle. I thought it was good except for one thing. Unfortunately, that one thing is the core of the story: the god-damn tower. It's practically a Mary Sue, always stealing the spotlight and single-handedly destroying all the better parts of the novel until there's nothing left except it and a handful of Word Bearers.

While I haven't read the book, one quote from Grey Knights has put me off:

'Sisters, ready! Lachryma and the Knights will lead. Steel your souls, for the Enemy will try to take you first.' Ludmilla turned to Alaric. 'I know the Grey Knights have never had a brother lose their mind to Chaos. But the Adepta Sororitas have lost Sisters to the Enemy before. It is rare, and no one will admit to it, but...'
'It is bad enough that Ghargatuloth has used you,' said Alaric. 'I would not let any of you live on with your minds violated.'

You can almost taste the paternalism. It's like something written by Karen Traviss.

It's a sad commentary when you describe a book as "surprisingly okay," Manchu.

The space wolves book by lee lightner . I can't believe it took two people to write a such s steaming pile of stool. It's the Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation of the Black Library.

albinoork wrote:The space wolves book by lee lightner . I can't believe it took two people to write a such s steaming pile of stool. It's the Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation of the Black Library.

Agreed.I think this one was the worst because there was nothing good about it. Even some novels which I disliked had some interesting background material, or some cool ideas, or some neat battle scene. This one was just a waste of paper.

Ian Watson is very difficult for me to judge objectively, because what he wrote way back THEN is so different from what is accepted about the 40K universe now. That shouldn't make it bad (as he couldn't possibly tell what direction the universe would take), but it makes it difficult for me to evaluate as a book.

With regards to the HH, Prospero Burns is very, very good... although the title has little obvious to do with the narrative until the last two chapters.

The First Heretic is the best of the series so far, AFAIC.

Battle for the Abyss is the most shoddily written in my opinion, but the void-battle scenes are challenging subject matter, and they're some of the best parts in my opinion. I, like others, think the characters were pretty trite. The first daemonic possession is one of my favourite passages in any Black Library novel so it balances out fairly well!

Redemption Corps.

Then again I have intentionally avoided anything by C.S. Goto so......