The Greater Good is female

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.

**Insectum7**

Gert wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
Nids draw their roots from Alien/s, as well as ye olde Starship Troopers, etc. But they are also the epitome of cosmic horror. They're not humanoid at all (unlike the other factions), and they come from "elsewhere" being not-of-this-galaxy. Additionally, Genestealer Cults are arguably the most disturbing faction out there. They're bleak AF, peak grimdark, core to 40K. So not "Fantasy" or antiquity per se, but arguably very Lovecraftian horror. But maybe most importantly they're just dark, which naturally fits right in with the "future apocalypse" setting.

Tau have "darkened" a bit over the years as they've been more developed. But on release they "presented" as "bright". That was jarring for many people, especially as 3rd ed was a sorta peak grimdark era.

Ok but you've missed my point. I'm not arguing that Tyranids shouldn't be allowed because they aren't "grimdark" enough, I'm saying that if T'au aren't allowed because they don't have a fantasy equivalent, then surely the same applies to Nids. The arguments I got in return had nothing to do with the idea that 40k was a space version of Warhammer Fantasy nor did it address the notion that factions could only be present in 40k if they had a Fantasy counterpart.

If it's your opinion that T'au don't belong in 40k because they aren't as "grimdark" as the Imperium, Necrons, or Chaos then that's fine, I'll disagree but I'll have the discussion. If your opinion is that you just don't like the T'au again, fine that's your opinion. But if you argue that the T'au shouldn't be in 40k because of reason X but then can't back up reason X when challenged, then I'm not going to entertain that opinion at all especially if you also refuse to acknowledge new information.

I don't believe I missed the point at all.

First off I think Tau are fine in 40k. I've no problem with them other than an over focus on big robots, and that's just my personal taste. I'd have preferred that they leaned and supported more heavily their shoot 'n' scoot mounted infantry, rather than the big battlesuits.

I'm pointing out what I percieve are the aesthetic reasons why people disliked the inclusion of Tau in 40k. The quick notes being that much of 40k is heavily drawn from fantasy and 'old world' imagery. As you point out Nids are the exception. However, Nids hit another major 40k note, that of "grimdark". They're heavily in the cosmic horror side of things, which is also a 40k tradition.

Tau are comparatively lacking in both the 'old world' and the 'grimdark' elements. Thus, to many people they 'fit' less.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Altruizine wrote:

I'm sorry, Tony, it's impossible to engage with your level of pigheadedness.

Bad day?

**Hellebore**

Nothing wrong with the tau in 40k at all.

Every civilisation in 40k was like the tau at one point, including humanity.

People get all excited when hyper advanced human AI space ships from the past accidentally show up and get all moist over the golden age of technology, but when one non human faction is presented in its current golden age that's somehow not fitting the setting?

No, IMO a lot of the tau hate is actually just irrational, but since they never went away people have desperately tried to backwards justify it with all sorts of claims to aesthetic, theme, atmosphere etc.

40k would be a dull place if it was just human factions with human gothic aesthetic fighting each other, or aliens that only fit inside the human aesthetic.

Also, people really have a hard time with the cognitive dissonance of the tau being relatively more ethical (using modern humanity as the reference and thus ourselves) than the imperium who despite their ridiculousness are still the default protagonist. Protagonism comes with a lot of unconscious and assumed positive biases which is messed with when a non protagonist faction seems more relatable.

If they had released a non imperial human faction with tau aesthetics there'd be plenty of support for them - mostly arguing that it's justified due to the golden age of tech etc.

But doing that has no more inherent legitimacy than creating a new faction and describing it as being in its own golden age of tech with high minded ideals.

The only real concern is that their chosen path interacts with the realities of the setting in a verisimilitudinous manner.

Which they have been doing quite well by having them come up against chaos, titans and faith and learning from them.

People just mad it's not a human faction that got this role in the game.

**Insectum7**

Hellebore wrote:

40k would be a dull place if it was just human factions with human gothic aesthetic fighting each other, or aliens that only fit inside the human aesthetic.

No that's 30K. And it does kinda seem dull

**Commissar von Toussaint**

Altruizine wrote:
Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
The fact that their Force is now Female shows a want of any real sense of who or what they are.

This you?

If yeah... huuuuge surprise that some self-described "curmudgeon" blogging about Lesbian Velma and Woke Hollywood doesn't approve of a female warp entity in good old-fashioned Boyhammer 40K.

LOL, thanks for the plug!

Seriously, did you think that was a sick burn or something?

Here's a concept: why don't you address my argument?

Pointing out that I like Scooby-Doo the way it was originally written isn't the crushing refutation you think it is.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hellebore wrote:
Nothing wrong with the tau in 40k at all.

Every civilisation in 40k was like the tau at one point, including humanity.

People get all excited when hyper advanced human AI space ships from the past accidentally show up and get all moist over the golden age of technology, but when one non human faction is presented in its current golden age that's somehow not fitting the setting?

No, IMO a lot of the tau hate is actually just irrational, but since they never went away people have desperately tried to backwards justify it with all sorts of claims to aesthetic, theme, atmosphere etc. [emphasis added]

Wait, so now we're not allowed to have opinions on aesthetics, theme or atmosphere? That's all irrational?

Welp, better shut down the boards. Damn, and I just got here...

**alextroy**

Gert wrote:
The T'au dream of a united galaxy under their rule with significantly less genocide if possible but they will break some eggs to make this omelet if they don't get what they want. Peace first, then war.

Just stopped in to say I can't imagine a less grimdark statement then this. In what world could less genocide be considered to be anything other than completely aberrant?

**Just Tony**

Insectum7 wrote:
Gert wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
Nids draw their roots from Alien/s, as well as ye olde Starship Troopers, etc. But they are also the epitome of cosmic horror. They're not humanoid at all (unlike the other factions), and they come from "elsewhere" being not-of-this-galaxy. Additionally, Genestealer Cults are arguably the most disturbing faction out there. They're bleak AF, peak grimdark, core to 40K. So not "Fantasy" or antiquity per se, but arguably very Lovecraftian horror. But maybe most importantly they're just dark, which naturally fits right in with the "future apocalypse" setting.

Tau have "darkened" a bit over the years as they've been more developed. But on release they "presented" as "bright". That was jarring for many people, especially as 3rd ed was a sorta peak grimdark era.

Ok but you've missed my point. I'm not arguing that Tyranids shouldn't be allowed because they aren't "grimdark" enough, I'm saying that if T'au aren't allowed because they don't have a fantasy equivalent, then surely the same applies to Nids. The arguments I got in return had nothing to do with the idea that 40k was a space version of Warhammer Fantasy nor did it address the notion that factions could only be present in 40k if they had a Fantasy counterpart.

If it's your opinion that T'au don't belong in 40k because they aren't as "grimdark" as the Imperium, Necrons, or Chaos then that's fine, I'll disagree but I'll have the discussion. If your opinion is that you just don't like the T'au again, fine that's your opinion. But if you argue that the T'au shouldn't be in 40k because of reason X but then can't back up reason X when challenged, then I'm not going to entertain that opinion at all especially if you also refuse to acknowledge new information.
I don't believe I missed the point at all.

First off I think Tau are fine in 40k. I've no problem with them other than an over focus on big robots, and that's just my personal taste. I'd have preferred that they leaned and supported more heavily their shoot 'n' scoot mounted infantry, rather than the big battlesuits.

I'm pointing out what I percieve are the aesthetic reasons why people disliked the inclusion of Tau in 40k. The quick notes being that much of 40k is heavily drawn from fantasy and 'old world' imagery. As you point out Nids are the exception. However, Nids hit another major 40k note, that of "grimdark". They're heavily in the cosmic horror side of things, which is also a 40k tradition.

Tau are comparatively lacking in both the 'old world' and the 'grimdark' elements. Thus, to many people they 'fit' less.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Altruizine wrote:

I'm sorry, Tony, it's impossible to engage with your level of pigheadedness.
Bad day?

To be fair, I was on my phone and couldn't see the actual sig link, so I was a touch off base.

**Lord Zarkov**

alextroy wrote:
Gert wrote:
The T'au dream of a united galaxy under their rule with significantly less genocide if possible but they will break some eggs to make this omelet if they don't get what they want. Peace first, then war.
Just stopped in to say I can't imagine a less grimdark statement then this. In what world could less genocide be considered to be anything other than completely aberrant?

On the contrary I’d argue that statement is considerably grimdark when merely ‘significantly less genocide’ (but still implicitly a whole load of it) is considered some sort of golden utopia.

In a non-grimdark setting the aim would be zero genocide!

**Andykp**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Karak Norn Clansman wrote:
On Tau in general, and not the specific topic in particular:

This is contrast play, and Games Workshop has played it well since the introduction of Tau.

Take a step back and think about it: If everything is dark, then nothing is dark. If everything is mad, then nothing is mad. You need a naïve upstart to bring home the horrors of everything else there is in this galaxy of horrors.

Furthermore, the simple genius with Tau background is that they mirror humanity during its golden age, and its growing reliance on Abominable Intelligence looms in the future as a similar threat. The Tau were always meant to become jaded by struggling against a bonkers galaxy of bloodshed and horror, and the recent background additions played to fulfil this long implied road ahead.

To be clear, the Tau are by no means appetizing outside of Warhammer 40'000. They are a play on modern propaganda states (including Japan's Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere), on brainwashing and shady ops. There are themes of subversion and ignition of bloody civil strife on human colony worlds, for instance. And they utilize cannibal auxiliaries. But compared to the rest of the galaxy we are most often presented with, the Tau prior to the new background additions nevertheless manage to present a plucky naïve upstart faction.

Warhammer 40'000 needs one such major faction. Full stop. The ancient Craftworld Eldar cannot shoulder this role, however nuanced they might appear in comparison to Orks, Chaos and Imperials. Anyone who has paid close attention to the effective contrast play in JRR Tolkien's setting should realize the virtue of intelligently utilizing some of the same tools here. The Tau fill this role well, as do much more niche encounters in the background with sane Dark Age of Technology remnants (some of 40k's very best moments, by the way). They are both a mirror image held up to Imperial Man to show him what he once was, and what he could have been. The new Squats were cleverly designed to play into some of the same themes in a limited fashion (hat off), but their extreme and ruthless acquisitiveness make them as lunatic as any other faction at the end of the day. A naïve little upstart is still required, or an important point of view to tell the stories of the setting from will be missed.

The video game Fire Warrior had a simple story, nothing fancy but nothing out of wack either. For being something as simple as it was, I will never forget how it played the themes of the Tau contra larger 40k straight like an arrow through the entire simple storyline, and managed to give a strong enough impression by setting up the Tau first against the fanatic and degraded Imperium, and then against the otherworldly insanity of Chaos. And without a doubt it left a strong impression beyond the uninterestingly predictive games pitting heroic Space Marines against Orks or Chaos.

As to Old World aesthetics, Dark Angels were American prairie Indians prior to their revamp. One should think of 40k as drawing heavily upon human history, ultimately without geographical limits where the developers are learned and bold enough to stride afar for inspiration. It's of course focused on Old World aesthetics given the game's origins, but its vistas should never be expected to be constrained to such. It's a big galaxy, with plenty of room to get creative.

On this we see the same cycle played out again and again. Expansion. Complacency. Pride. Fall. Damnation.

The Old Ones did it. The Necrontyr did it. The Eldar did it. Humanity is doing it. The Tau are starting it.

Round and round and round the same tale of woe goes. Enthusiasm turns to Fanaticism. Surety of purpose turns to arrogance and ignorance. Other than Orks and Tyranids, it seems inescapable.

That makes sense actually. This actually makes the tau seem a bit more at home in the setting than they usually do for me, opened my eyes a bit. Cheers guys.

**Gue'vesa Emissary**

Manifest destiny.

The white man's burden.

Bringing democracy to ~~your oil~~ the middle east.

Anyone who thinks the Tau were ever the good guys completely missed the obvious references to real-world colonialism and propaganda slogans being used to justify atrocities. They were only ever "good" on the scale of 40k's black and very dark gray morality, where offering enemies the chance to surrender and become productive slaves instead of going straight to genocide is a height of benevolence that is inconceivable to most factions. It's just unfortunate that so many people did miss the references and think that a propaganda slogan meant that the Tau are genuinely good, resulting in GW going hard into grimderp and making Tau into cartoonish religious fanatics just like everyone else.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lord Zarkov wrote:
On the contrary I’d argue that statement is considerably grimdark when merely ‘significantly less genocide’ (but still implicitly a whole load of it) is considered some sort of golden utopia.

In a non-grimdark setting the aim would be zero genocide!

Exactly! Tau are one of the most grimdark things about the setting. The generic Evil Empire offering an ultimatum of "surrender or die" is the best hope for peace and reasonableness in the setting simply because everyone else goes straight to "die", often with "slowly and painfully for our amusement" attached.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
Pointing out that I like Scooby-Doo the way it was originally written isn't the crushing refutation you think it is.

But pointing out that your reason for disliking it is that you think it is "yet another attempt to force homosexuality (and discussions of it) on ever-younger children" (a direct quote from you) is. It's very clear that your opinions are all about parroting culture war nonsense and have nothing to do with the merits of the actual fiction.

**Iracundus**

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Manifest destiny.

The white man's burden.

Bringing democracy to ~~your oil~~ the middle east.

Anyone who thinks the Tau were ever the good guys completely missed the obvious references to real-world colonialism and propaganda slogans being used to justify atrocities. They were only ever "good" on the scale of 40k's black and very dark gray morality, where offering enemies the chance to surrender and become productive slaves instead of going straight to genocide is a height of benevolence that is inconceivable to most factions. It's just unfortunate that so many people did miss the references and think that a propaganda slogan meant that the Tau are genuinely good, resulting in GW going hard into grimderp and making Tau into cartoonish religious fanatics just like everyone else.

The T'au are also more about getting into your mind compared to the Imperium's rather straightforward jackbooted physical violence and oppression.

We know the Tau have successfully incorporated human auxiliaries, the gue'vesa, into their society and that this has been happening since the end of the Damocles Crusade. We know from stories set in more recent times like Broken Sword by Guy Haley in the Damocles anthology. It is set in the conquest of Agrellan,and told from the perspective of one such gue'vesa who even rises to gue'vesa'vre and ends up having vocal cord surgery to better pronounce the Tau language. Basically, a number of them are resettled in a settlement with fresh food, water, clean air, good housing, and education for their children. This extends even to widow benefits as the character describes how the widow of a slain gue'vesa comrade is well treated and her son wishes to join the gue'vesa auxiliaries too when he grows up. The character describes how those brought from the hive world of Agrellan felt like they had entered paradise. The Water Caste member this character sort of befriends admits that the main focus is not so much the first generation of humans (i.e. those that are captured or defect) but the 2nd generation and beyond of humans that grow up with the Greater Good. We know that for relatively small population worlds like Taros, the Tau did successfully uplift them to a higher standard of living, and the human protectorate there fought willingly and fiercely against the Imperial reconquest as they had enjoyed an objectively better standard of life under Tau rule.

The human gue'vesa character of Broken Sword admitted he kept expecting something bad to happen to their resettlement town, but nothing ever did. The food and water stayed safe and plentiful. Granted in the course of the story he finds out about T'au mental manipulation (by this I mean more like intrigue and how the T'au Ethereals use the other castes, even if it is with the other castes' consent), but he reasons this is still better than the Imperium so he still sticks with the T'au. The bonds the T'au place on their subject races is more mental conditioning rather than physical. When the Imperial standard of living was so poor that getting basic living conditions would be compared to paradise, it leaves the humans open to then accepting whatever ideology comes with the food and water.

The T'au turned the humans. They did not exterminate or sterilize them as it has now been several hundred years since the Damocles Crusade and there is a sizable subject human population. That is how they ended up with a warp entity.

**Commissar von Toussaint**

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:

But pointing out that your reason for disliking it is that you think it is "yet another attempt to force homosexuality (and discussions of it) on ever-younger children" (a direct quote from you) is. It's very clear that your opinions are all about parroting culture war nonsense and have nothing to do with the merits of the actual fiction.

Seriously? If you want to make this political discussion, I'm happy to oblige, but this is not the place for it.

Stop spamming the thread.

**Gue'vesa Emissary**

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
Seriously? If you want to make this political discussion, I'm happy to oblige, but this is not the place for it.

Stop spamming the thread.

You're the one who puts your political rants in your signature. If you don't want people pointing out that your objection to a female Greater Good warp entity comes from your culture war nonsense then don't choose culture war nonsense as the important personal statement you want to make.

**Commissar von Toussaint**

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
Seriously? If you want to make this political discussion, I'm happy to oblige, but this is not the place for it.

Stop spamming the thread.

You're the one who puts your political rants in your signature. If you don't want people pointing out that your objection to a female Greater Good warp entity comes from your culture war nonsense then don't choose culture war nonsense as the important personal statement you want to make.

I link to my writings because I'm an author and that's what I do. Some folks may be interested, because in addition to cultural commentary, I have miniatures rules and also sci-fi books.

The point is, if you want to pick a fight about my "rants," the appropriate place is where they are posted, not a Tau discussion thread.

**Gue'vesa Emissary**

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
I link to my writings because I'm an author and that's what I do. Some folks may be interested, because in addition to cultural commentary, I have miniatures rules and also sci-fi books.

The point is, if you want to pick a fight about my "rants," the appropriate place is where they are posted, not a Tau discussion thread.

Perhaps you should follow your own rules and not start off your participation in this thread with a thinly-veiled culture war complaint:

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
BTW, my immediate reaction when seeing this thread was a variation of "The Force is Female" and that worked out great for Star Wars didn't it?

**Altruizine**

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
Seriously? If you want to make this political discussion, I'm happy to oblige, but this is not the place for it.

Stop spamming the thread.

You're the one who puts your political rants in your signature. If you don't want people pointing out that your objection to a female Greater Good warp entity comes from your culture war nonsense then don't choose culture war nonsense as the important personal statement you want to make.

I link to my writings because I'm an author and that's what I do. Some folks may be interested, because in addition to cultural commentary, I have miniatures rules and also sci-fi books.

The point is, if you want to pick a fight about my "rants," the appropriate place is where they are posted, not a Tau discussion thread.

The links are relevant because you posted at least a pair of weird non-sequitur criticisms about the T'au warp entity being female meaning that T'au fluff was somehow half-baked, without showing any of your work or describing how that could possibly be a legitimate conclusion.

Beyond that, and in relation to your yelps of "address my actual arguments!!!" -- the links are relevant because nobody owes a response to a stupid/bad faith argument or arguer. Two mouse clicks reveal that your default position on seemingly everything is "it was better the way it was at first." So.... not really a shocker that you also think 40K was better before T'au. Your arguments regarding T'au are poorly reverse-engineered mental scaffolding to get you to the same place you always seem to wind up: new bad, old more gooder.

**Hellebore**

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:

Hellebore wrote:
Nothing wrong with the tau in 40k at all.

Every civilisation in 40k was like the tau at one point, including humanity.

People get all excited when hyper advanced human AI space ships from the past accidentally show up and get all moist over the golden age of technology, but when one non human faction is presented in its current golden age that's somehow not fitting the setting?

No, IMO a lot of the tau hate is actually just irrational, but since they never went away people have desperately tried to backwards justify it with all sorts of claims to aesthetic, theme, atmosphere etc. [emphasis added]

Wait, so now we're not allowed to have opinions on aesthetics, theme or atmosphere? That's all irrational?

Welp, better shut down the boards. Damn, and I just got here...

You missed the rest of the post:

Hellebore wrote:

But doing that has no more inherent legitimacy than creating a new faction and describing it as being in its own golden age of tech with high minded ideals.

The only real concern is that their chosen path interacts with the realities of the setting in a verisimilitudinous manner.

Which they have been doing quite well by having them come up against chaos, titans and faith and learning from them.

The themes the tau have, already existed in 40k and were represented by the protagonist - humanity. And there's no fundamental particle of 40k that forces grimderp onto a faction, only the consequences of their actions and those of their opponents.

Which the tau HAVE been reacting to in exactly the way you claim they don't.

THere is nothing stopping any species in 40k from acting in a peaceful and nice manner. 40k is about how your choices send you to hell. It undermines some of the core premises to argue that everyone has to suck because they intrinsically suck. Falling to chaos is a personal choice, genocide is a choice, murder and an eternity of war is a choice.

So to claim that one faction shouldn't be allowed to make choices that could have negative consequences for them misses some of the core philosophy of 40k.

The tau made a choice in how they would interact with the galaxy. The realities of the galaxy have collided with that choice. They are now trying to hold onto their ideology in the face of that collision. And many things ensure. That is entirely verisimilitudinous with 40k.

And since when did the aesthetics committee of an alien species have to get their designs approved by the ordo fashionista?

It's really reductive and flanderising to reduce 40k down to imperial gothic.

**Commissar von Toussaint**

Hellebore wrote:
verisimilitudinous with 40k.

And since when did the aesthetics committee of an alien species have to get their designs approved by the ordo fashionista?

Brilliant. Post exalted just for that. I will be using that from now on. Much respect.

It's really reductive and flanderising to reduce 40k down to imperial gothic.

The Tau aesthetic does stand out, which is probably why its fans like it so much.

**Gue'vesa Emissary**

Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
The Tau aesthetic does stand out, which is probably why its fans like it so much.

No more than Eldar, Tyranids, etc.

**Altruizine**

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
The Tau aesthetic does stand out, which is probably why its fans like it so much.

No more than Eldar, Tyranids, etc.

Literally every non-Imperial faction.

And even the Imperials host outliers, like many IG regiments.

**Insectum7**

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
The Tau aesthetic does stand out, which is probably why its fans like it so much.

No more than Eldar, Tyranids, etc.

Eldar are space elves. They draw from fantasy, incorperate crystals everywhere, and wield spears and swords in abundance. Yes they're a sci fi manipulation, but not seeing the roots in fantasy is pretty blind.

Orks? Duh.

Chaos? Duh.

Necrons? Duh.

Etc.

The fantasy/old world aesthetics are everywhere. As noted, the exception is Tyranids, which are clearly hit the "grimdark" note that 40k is also famous for.

**Gue'vesa Emissary**

Insectum7 wrote:
Eldar are space elves. They draw from fantasy, incorperate crystals everywhere, and wield spears and swords in abundance. Yes they're a sci fi manipulation, but not seeing the roots in fantasy is pretty blind.

Roots, yes, but roots that are so deeply buried they barely exist anymore. If you're an outsider looking at the Eldar range without being told they're "space elves" you'd probably struggle make that connection. They have swords, but so do a lot of other factions, and their aesthetic concept doesn't include any of the nature over technology elements we normally associate with elves. Similarly with Necrons, if nobody told you about their retcon drew on lore from an old WHFB army your first thought would be Terminator, not fantasy in space. And if you're looking at the Tau next to the rest of 40k from that outsider perspective you'd never assume that Tau are somehow different from everyone else.

**Altruizine**

Insectum7 wrote:
Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Commissar von Toussaint wrote:
The Tau aesthetic does stand out, which is probably why its fans like it so much.

No more than Eldar, Tyranids, etc.
Eldar are space elves. They draw from fantasy, incorperate crystals everywhere, and wield spears and swords in abundance. Yes they're a sci fi manipulation, but not seeing the roots in fantasy is pretty blind.

Orks? Duh.

Chaos? Duh.

Necrons? Duh.

Etc.

The fantasy/old world aesthetics are everywhere. As noted, the exception is Tyranids, which are clearly hit the "grimdark" note that 40k is also famous for.

This is sort of a bait and switch, though. You start with "roots" and leap to "aesthetic." But "elf" is not an aesthetic, neither is "orc", "undead", etc.

"Supercilious dying race in Byzantine insectoid armour," "fungoid soccer hooligans who perpetrate childlike violence from within gorilla bodies," or "soulless constructs vaguely inspired by the ancient Egyptian funereal tradition" are closer to aesthetics.

Oh, and even from the perspective of fantasy roots, they can be chalked up as fishmen.

**Insectum7**

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
Eldar are space elves. They draw from fantasy, incorperate crystals everywhere, and wield spears and swords in abundance. Yes they're a sci fi manipulation, but not seeing the roots in fantasy is pretty blind.

Roots, yes, but roots that are so deeply buried they barely exist anymore. If you're an outsider looking at the Eldar range without being told they're "space elves" you'd probably struggle make that connection. They have swords, but so do a lot of other factions, and their aesthetic concept doesn't include any of the nature over technology elements we normally associate with elves. Similarly with Necrons, if nobody told you about their retcon drew on lore from an old WHFB army your first thought would be Terminator, not fantasy in space. And if you're looking at the Tau next to the rest of 40k from that outsider perspective you'd never assume that Tau are somehow different from everyone else.

"They have swords, but so do a lot of other factions"
Right. . . And notably not Tau. Easy pickings, that one.

One of the major 40k tropes is to travel a million light years just to swing a sword at someone.

Necrons are metal skeletons like T-800s, but hunched over, wielding axes on their guns, and often depicted being covered in muck and corrosion, having risen from the ground. Their iconic vehicle is a pyramid/ziggurat. A major centerpiece model is the friggin grim reaper.

And the "outsider" perspective isn't the important one in this context. (The impression I get from most outsiders to 40k anyways is just utter bafflement) The big pushback on the Tau upon release was naturally by those already familiar with 40k and it's particular idiosyncratic juxtapositions of future/fantasy/grimdark. And even cursory familiarity makes the differences clearer. The Eldar? A dying race who spawned a chaos god from their own corruption. An empire lost. Necrons? Their 3rd ed codex is possibly the doomiest gloomiest codex evar. It's genuinely difficult to find any doom/gloom in that first Tau book. There's a bit of cannibalism by the auxilliaries, and it's frowned upon. That's small fries for 40k.

You can simply look at their first release codex cover next to it's contemporaries and compare the artwork. Bright, clear turquoise sky. Clean orange battlesuits. Blue weapons fire. It's literally the brightest cover art of the era with the exception of the Space Wolves "arctic peak" illustration. And the SW cover features the typically 40k flavored guy-in-power-armor-with-axe-killing-space-orks. With blood even.

Tau took a different direction, make no mistake. It is easy to see why one would think they don't belong in 40k.

Post 3rd book? They seem like they've emphasised some of the darker fluff bits, quite possibly because of the backlash to the first codex. But I'm unfamiliar with the lore in codexes past the first. I just fight them on the table.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Altruizine wrote:

This is sort of a bait and switch, though. You start with "roots" and leap to "aesthetic." But "elf" is not an aesthetic, neither is "orc", "undead", etc.

No bait and switch, as the roots are expressed in the aesthetics. Orks are orcs by sight. Sleek armor, pointed ears on slender figures, graceful architecture, etc speaks of elves. And if that's not enough you still get swords, spears, head crests, gems and the like. It certainly isn't utopian futurism!