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.
2020/02/10 17:53:21
Subject: Re:If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
BrianDavion wrote: granted you can have soft-fi that pretends to explain this stuff, but just... ugh. Star trek's like that. they love to toss technobabble around but most of it is a meaningless string of buzz words
To be fair Trek (at least more traditional Trek) is still built around a pretty solid framework. They definitely fudge a lot for plot purposes, but the basics of Warp Drive, Phasers, and even their teleportation tech is all sorta reasonably explained and consistent. In particular I like the way they treat interstellar distances. They treat Space As Big for the most part.
At the end of the day I think it's telling that most book stores put sci-fi and fantasy in the same section, then they let us nerds sort it out.
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
And there you go, that is what I’d change. If eldar and dark eldar are such small fry then they really add anything other than intrigue to the setting, they aren’t enough of a presence to really affect the narrative of the galaxy, or if they do that it feels a bit unconvincing. I’d much prefer it if Orks and eldar had a dominion like the tau did, even if the eldar was split up across the craft worlds. But the great rift story line should be the start of chaos establishing a permanent foothold in the galaxy and taking control of imperial planets and chaos armies getting the same attention as imperial armies from the GW
Chaos's new foothold in the galaxy since the Great Rift opened should definitely be better represented. The Night Lords should retake Tsagualsa, for instance.
2020/02/10 19:36:51
Subject: If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
I don't think that the Ecclesiarchy should have accepted Guilliman's return. A massive Imperial schism would have been a great excuse for battles between "loyalists". It would also have given something for those not keen on the whole Primaris/Roboute plot advancement to play with lore-wise. An Imperial schism would have plunged the galaxy into truely dark times, instead of this weird "hope" thing that is going on now.
+++Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.+++
Trickstick wrote: I don't think that the Ecclesiarchy should have accepted Guilliman's return. A massive Imperial schism would have been a great excuse for battles between "loyalists". It would also have given something for those not keen on the whole Primaris/Roboute plot advancement to play with lore-wise. An Imperial schism would have plunged the galaxy into truely dark times, instead of this weird "hope" thing that is going on now.
+++Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.+++
Personally I would have altered where the Rift split the galaxy and used that as a split for the Imperium. On one side you could have Roboutes Imperium that he leads and essentially functions as is now and on the other the High Lords remain in charge, denying that Roboute is a legitimate ruler and essentially follow that with the remaining organisations. For example Space Marines largely stay neutral and focus on killing Chaos, the Ecclesiarchy goes with the Primarch and the Mechanicus goes with the High Lords.
tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam
2020/02/10 19:53:02
Subject: Re:If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
pm713 wrote: Personally I would have altered where the Rift split the galaxy and used that as a split for the Imperium.
I literally thought that is what the whole "Dark Imperium" was going to be about when I first read the chapter heading or whatever.
Plus it would really fit with the copying-from-history thing that is all over 40k. We have Ultramar as the western roman empire, lasting long after the fall of rome (Terra). Then you could cast Rouboute as Justinian, trying to reclaim what was lost. Put in overtones of the Catholic/Orthodox schism as well and the Imperium gets a lot more interesting. You can even have Ultramar be slowly eroded by Tyranids/Tau or someting, until the eventual fall of Byzantium/Macragge.
pm713 wrote: Personally I would have altered where the Rift split the galaxy and used that as a split for the Imperium.
I literally thought that is what the whole "Dark Imperium" was going to be about when I first read the chapter heading or whatever.
Plus it would really fit with the copying-from-history thing that is all over 40k. We have Ultramar as the western roman empire, lasting long after the fall of rome (Terra). Then you could cast Rouboute as Justinian, trying to reclaim what was lost. Put in overtones of the Catholic/Orthodox schism as well and the Imperium gets a lot more interesting. You can even have Ultramar be slowly eroded by Tyranids/Tau or someting, until the eventual fall of Byzantium/Macragge.
I'm now going to pretend that the matching with history bit is something I intended and not just pure coincidence.
tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam
2020/02/10 20:40:30
Subject: If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
I would make one small but vital (IMO) change to the Necron fluff.
They should have left one planet or one system of planets untouched with living Necrontyr so that they could repopulate to make more soldiers and also in case they wanted to re-transfer back into physical bodies after the war in heaven and maybe after getting some of that sweet sweet old-one genetech. Then take the story in one of two ways: Either the Eldar or the C'tan (or C'tan who try to blame the Eldar - sole dying survivor escapes and brings a message etc...) wipe out everyone on the planet while the Necrons are away finishing the war in heaven. You can have it be the final straw that shows the C'tan are evil manipulators and then the Necrons turn on them. IMO gives a logical reason why they have no backup genetic material and acts as a nice hook for their ongoing eldar hatred or for their turning on the C'tan so suddenly.
2020/02/10 21:14:31
Subject: Re:If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
I wouldn't so much change a part of the lore, but I feel that IG units could use an upgrade, like equipment harnesses, backpacks, weapons with attachments, vehicles with bits and bobbins, I'm tired of having to kitbash all the time, because sometimes things don't fit up as well as I'd like.
That or bring the Squats back or make Robust Girlyman canonically sound like a bitch.
2020/02/10 21:51:57
Subject: If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
And there you go, that is what I’d change. If eldar and dark eldar are such small fry then they really add anything other than intrigue to the setting, they aren’t enough of a presence to really affect the narrative of the galaxy, or if they do that it feels a bit unconvincing. I’d much prefer it if Orks and eldar had a dominion like the tau did, even if the eldar was split up across the craft worlds. But the great rift story line should be the start of chaos establishing a permanent foothold in the galaxy and taking control of imperial planets and chaos armies getting the same attention as imperial armies from the GW
They aren't really small fry though. DE have an almost literally unassailable fortress from which they can go where they want to do pretty much whatever they want and Craftworlders don't need territory to alter things, that's not how they work. Craftworlders shape the narrative by saving or killing important people at key moments e.g. Guilliman. If you remove the Eldar (well Ynnari) from that then there's no Guilliman, Caw or Primaris and the story would be radically different. Neither race need or really want a held dominion to affect things.
Ok but even the way you describe it it feels like they exist to be part of the imperial narrative, supporting cast.
2020/02/10 22:27:25
Subject: If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
The thing is, most of the galaxy ISN'T imperial territory. the imperium controls 1 million worlds and at best the star system those worlds are in. There are between 100 and 400 BILLION stars in the galaxy. Even if the imperium controlled 1 million stars, that's between 0.00001% of the galaxy and 0.0000025% of the galaxy in imperial control. Just because they divided the galaxy up into segmentae and sectors, doesn't mean they actually control all space within them.
they live on any planet their spores get to and they are virtually impossible to remove.
It's not about who controls the most, it's about who the narrative is focused on. There are plenty of stories where the main characters are from the tiny faction, or a minority group against the big bad empire (actually the more standard trope). In 40k they've flipped it around and made it the largest cohesive empire as the central focus. The orks aren't united so although they are everwhere, they're actually more likely to be fighting themselves than anyone else
So there's actually nothing in 40k that needs changing. It's how GW presents 40k that needs changing. If they simply did it by the numbers, all the stories would be ork stories. GW needs to dial is overwhelming bias back from the imperium as it distorts what the galaxy really looks like.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/02/10 22:29:00
maybe that’s my thing, there’s no one else presented on an equal footing to the empire so if you play as the empire your just taking part in the xenocidal massacre. Even if you play chaos your the underdog, and who doesn’t love the underdogs?
2020/02/10 22:58:13
Subject: If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
mrFickle wrote: maybe that’s my thing, there’s no one else presented on an equal footing to the empire so if you play as the empire your just taking part in the xenocidal massacre. Even if you play chaos your the underdog, and who doesn’t love the underdogs?
You are forgetting that the Imperium is also fighting the Imperium. They lose as much to themselves as to others. You could think of the Imperium as an underdog because it is simply impossible for it to hold together in the long term. It will continue to decline and fall apart, mostly due to internal corruption and strife.
mrFickle wrote: I’d make the setting less imperial centric. Not by decreasing the volume of imperial resources but upping the xenos and chaos stuff. It always feels like the galaxy is imperial territory and eldar are sort of bobbing around in there, Orks just show up for a Suicide mission, dark eldar have 1 planet? Necrons are like a land mine, chaos just spill out of the eye of terror for a laugh. Only tau have their own defined territory. I can’t believe that in the whole galaxy there aren’t more strongholds of non humans. It’s a real big place.
But most of the galaxy IS imperial territory. Craftworlds and Exodites are basically refugees, Dark Eldar can only live in the Webway and Commoragh is the only city left there because the others were either destroyed or joined into Commoragh and honestly newcrons are lucky to have what they do with their dumbass travel fluff.
I agree there should be more Orks and Chaos bases though. One has empires all over and the other can pop up whenever they please because magic.
The thing is, most of the galaxy ISN'T imperial territory. the imperium controls 1 million worlds and at best the star system those worlds are in. There are between 100 and 400 BILLION stars in the galaxy. Even if the imperium controlled 1 million stars, that's between 0.00001% of the galaxy and 0.0000025% of the galaxy in imperial control. Just because they divided the galaxy up into segmentae and sectors, doesn't mean they actually control all space within them.
they live on any planet their spores get to and they are virtually impossible to remove.
It's not about who controls the most, it's about who the narrative is focused on. There are plenty of stories where the main characters are from the tiny faction, or a minority group against the big bad empire (actually the more standard trope). In 40k they've flipped it around and made it the largest cohesive empire as the central focus. The orks aren't united so although they are everwhere, they're actually more likely to be fighting themselves than anyone else
So there's actually nothing in 40k that needs changing. It's how GW presents 40k that needs changing. If they simply did it by the numbers, all the stories would be ork stories. GW needs to dial is overwhelming bias back from the imperium as it distorts what the galaxy really looks like.
I've always taken the million worlds thing to be more of a nice sounding propaganda bit than a solid normal. The Imperium constantly wages war and loses and gains planets so to be strictly 1 million worlds they'd have to lose and gain at an equal rate at all times but that seems very unlikely.
There's also the huge difference between an ork being on a planet and controlling it.
tremere47-fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate, leads to triple riptide spam
2020/02/11 17:56:03
Subject: If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
The actual text says "over a million", so you have lots of room for the fluctuation of the actual number. Once you're over a million you can give or take a thousand worlds and you're still barely scratching the total.
So just to add perspective, even if the imperium controlled 100 million worlds and the star systems they exist in, the imperium would control 0.001% - 0.00025% of the galaxy's stars.
It doesn't matter hugely what the precise number is, because in order for the imperium to control meaningful percentages of the galaxy's stars, it would need to possess several billion of them.
Tldr the imperiym doesn't control as much of the galaxy as their maps suggest. The galaxy is massively huge, and there is far more evidence that Orks are the dominant civilisation by number and spread than humans.
This is also the reason why the Eldar empire could spread to the edge of the galaxy where the maiden worlds are, and DAoT humans still would rarely encroach on them as they spread across the galaxy
Hellebore wrote: So just to add perspective, even if the imperium controlled 100 million worlds and the star systems they exist in, the imperium would control 0.001% - 0.00025% of the galaxy's stars.
For real.
"The Milky Way contains between 100 and 400 billion stars and at least 100 billion planets. An exact figure would depend on counting the number of very-low-mass stars, which are difficult to detect, especially at distances of more than 300 ly (90 pc) from the Sun." - Wikipedia
I've got 3 big ones lol. In summary I would consolidate the minor factions (i.e. Space-Wolves) into larger factions that have conflicting interests within their major faction (i.e Space-Marines), kind of like the OP suggested but a different.
When you used to think about the 40k setting, it was a Impurium in slow decline and endless conflict, right now there seems to be a path to victory that really isn't grimdark.
Imperium
Spoiler:
Secessionists for Roboute Guilliman "Favors more regulation"
Ultramarines, Imperial Fists, Red Scorpions, Lamenters, etc.
Secessionists for Lion El'Jonson "Favours more independence"
Dark-Angels, Salamanders,Blood-Angels, etc.
Bring him back.
Unaligned White Scars, Black-Templar, etc.
Separatists?? Leman Russ returns and wants out
Cull the Ordos subfactions to squeeze them into one Ordos book.
Ordos gets Inquisition units and Stormtroopers with faction locked sub units.
Ordo Hereticus: Ecclesiarchy
Ordo Xenos: Deathwatch
Ordo Malleus: Grey-Knights
Renegades: Daemons, Chaos Undivided
Golden Boys, shouldn't really have been a thing, they're cool but, they really shouldn't be roaming the milky-way like this.
Maybe they police the rift in the cold-war between marine sub-factions as peacekeepers with the Sisters of Silence
Adeptus Mechanicus, probably the most contentious thing I'll write because they have a cool range (though I'm not a fan of recent additions), but I think they should be dropped and merged into an Imperial-Agents Codex with Rogue Traders and Assassins
Honestly I'd do the same to Space Wolves and Blood Angels.
Necrons
Spoiler:
Partially revert lore changes, some should still be slaves to the star-gods, maybe their stats change slightly so slaves are more docile.
Basically there's an civil-war between the slave-empires and the god-enslavers, but never confirmed or acknowledged outside of Necron lore and only alluded to in Eldar lore.
One deluded Necron Faction might try to return their bodies to flesh or grant sentience to their subjects.
All Star-Gods would be seeking to reunite their shards of self into one powerful whole.
A shard of the Void Dragon was stolen by Tech-Priest radicals, now slaves to its will.
The Deceiver has been fooling men into joining his ranks of Pariah.
Note, I wouldn't be against changes to their design, insect heads, snake tails, snouts, 4 arms, etc.
Eldar
Spoiler:
Get rid of this Death-God storyline, I don't think it's very interesting, I was kind of hoping they would use the Nightbringer as the alluded to god that would kill Slaanesh.
The Jesters really didn't need their own segregated Faction, they're cool, but meh.
I would instead have an Outcasts Faction, with the Corsair Princedoms, Laughing God, and Rangers rolled into one.
You could have the same models of the "weird name for death god eldar" but apply them as Leaders of Princedoms.
There could be a bit of fun with this range, you have the jesters, pirates and wood-elves. Dinosaur riders??
It puts the Space-Elves into a more classic contrast of the monk-society, adventurous daredevils, twisted sadists.
Just my opinion though.
2020/02/13 03:18:52
Subject: Re:If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
Eadartri wrote: I'd make all Primaris secretly Tyranid. How's that for a psychic awakening?
How about make Cawl a servant of the Void Dragon, and the whole Primaris project was a was to make the Necrons their new bodies?
I'll take that, and then they're made into Pariahs.
Fits nicely with the visions of the Necron endgame in the 3rd ed codex with the new masses of Pariahs herding humans like cattle to glut their C'tan masters with.
Games Workshop Delenda Est.
Users on ignore- 53.
If you break apart my or anyone else's posts line by line I will not read them.
2020/02/13 17:07:55
Subject: Re:If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
Eadartri wrote: I'd make all Primaris secretly Tyranid. How's that for a psychic awakening?
Nah, they're all orks and Cawl is a big mek in disguise.
Nah, Cawl is actually the remnants of the Gretchin Revolutionary Committee, hiding under a cape.
Ok yeah, he's totally that. The idea of a bunch of grots standing on each other's shoulders and bluffing their way through the mechanicus is pretty great.
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
2020/02/13 20:32:47
Subject: If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
I'm not up to date on necron fluff. I like alot of the suggestions for them here. It would be cool if the necrons of old transfered the souls to machines but it just ended up turning them digital and therefore their souls died. Whereas Eldar soul stones is the only way to do it properly. And Not all Necrons are former people. Some are AI that have been created. Fluff could explore dynamics between pure AI and necrontyre who used to be people. Some necron factions have more/less. Eons ago they went into a sleep protocol for some reason. ....maybe chaos gods found a way to shut them down since they like to kill all the living things that worship the chaos gods? Could have other reasons. Or just leave it mysterious reason and the necrons memory of why they shut down is gone. Maybe a galaxy wide warp storm bigger than the current one forced them to create tomb worlds and wait it out.
Expand a bit on the Men of Iron. AI that rebelled, humanity won but a few men of Iron fled.
Men of Iron could be a catch all term for any races AI. So Necrons contain rules for that kinda like genestealer cults? ....a faction with a mishh mash of AI's.
Not sure on C'tan fluff. The longest and smartest AI who go absorb energy from stars?
-------------
I would expand on the xenos fluff. Maybe modify the imperium's stance on xenos. ...like they still hate xenos and exterminate them, but its based on threat level. The current flufff reads like the Emperors crusade got every human world to comply and slaughtered every xenos except for those on the eastern fringes. Unless they are orks or hide in the webway.
--------------
Orks expand the fluff on how orks sometimes enslave other races. Orks love to fight but not wholesale slaughter a planet and hunt down every infant. So within ork territory there can be pockets of other races.
Orks love to fight so much that when the are on the verge of completely annihilating the enemy and resistance is shattered, they tend to start looking for a better fight and don't fully mop up. So there are usually survivors.
And thats part of the ork flaw, they love the biggest baddest toughest fight that they fail to fully conquer.
-------------
T'au
I think the colony fleet should have been scattered by the warp. Putting little enclaves of T'au throughtout the galaxy. The biggest chunk making it to the startide nexus areas so the current story is still happeneing. But now we got fluff reason as to why T'au can be anywhere in galaxy. One of the lost fleets/colony's.
--------------
Last but not least - expand on the chaos worshiping xenos. Tons of opportunity there.
2020/02/15 11:34:51
Subject: Re:If you could change one thing about the 40k setting what would it be?
Issac Asimov penned a novel where one character could tune the emotions of other characters, ensuring loyalty. Iirc, no chip required, just an innate ability of said character, The Mule. I forget the name of the book, but it was the second in the Foundation series, considered a classic sci-fi collection.
It's been nearly 30 years since I read it though, the details are a bit hazy.
Foundation and Empire is the book.
Ok, then whats the difference between Sci-fi and Fantasy then? Why have a distinction if there is none?
If you look up the definition you'll see that what I had written in my previous post is what the definition is. And that is based on what Asimov had said regarding the difference between Sci-fi and Fantasy.
Lasers and space ships don't make it sci-fi any more than swords and horses make it fantasy. All stories assume a certain level of technology. It's the rules of the universe in which they inhabit that define genre. Is it rooted in the rules of our world or one of the super natural?
Being as though there is no exact definition of Sci fi, only definitions of different types of Sci fi (hard and soft) you're going to have difficulty proving either that it is or isn't.
From wiki-science fiction
Science fiction elements can include, among others:
Temporal settings in the future, or in alternative histories.[278]
Spatial settings or scenes in outer space, on other worlds, in subterranean earth, or in parallel universes.[27]
Aspects of biology in fiction such as aliens, mutants, and enhanced humans.[279]
Speculative or predicted technology such as brain-computer interface, bio-engineering, superintelligent computers, robots, and ray guns and other advanced weapons.[279]
Undiscovered scientific possibilities such as teleportation, time travel, and faster-than-light travel or communication.[282]
New and different political and social systems and situations, including Utopian, dystopian, post-apocalyptic, or post-scarcity.
Future history and evolution of humans on Earth or on other planets.[284]
Paranormal abilities such as mind control, telepathy, and telekinesis.[285]
From wiki-fantasy
Most fantasy uses magic or other supernatural elements as a main plot element, theme, or setting. Magic and magical creatures are common in many of these worlds.
So, one could argue that 40k is a hybrid of Sci fi and fantasy.
I think the most commonly accepted distinction is that for it to be considered scifi it should be conceptually possible within the framework of science as we know it.
It need not be actually possible, eg FTL travel. Light has a speed, therefore the concept of something going faster exists. It's not actually possible, but conceptually it is. Or was, before SoL was proven to be the hard limit (so scifi writers went around the rules by inventing hyperspace or its myriad brothers).
Analogous reasoning can be applied to various other iffy sci-fi things like ESP etc (Asimov's the Mule was a mutant - ie his powers stemmed from a biological process rather than tapping into some font of magic power), and the lines can and do get blurred in things like Shadowrun, but on balance it's a fairly workable definition, with how closer someone sticks to the actual rules of science, the "harder" the scifi is.
Plus, of course, what is or isn't conceptually possible within science changes, so a story that was perfectly theoretically possible when it was written (say, Jules Verne stories, or HG Wells), and hence considered scifi, are no longer possible within the framework of science, but the stories are still considered to be scifi.
Heresy World Eaters/Emperors Children 
~4100
~1660
