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.

Just wondering what the demographic is for people if they think old lore is canon.
For instance:
Ollanius Pious fighting Horus
The origins of various units.
Mannerisms of the necrons.
Old, neglected, retconned races (hrud and saharduin, etc)

At one point back in rogue trader the imperium wasn't xenophobic likewise with the eldar.

depends if it's been retconned or not

Thing with GW lore is that they stated any contradictions could just be propaganda or the author mis-remembered something.

So everything is canon and not canon.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Thing with GW lore is that they stated any contradictions could just be propaganda or the author mis-remembered something.

So everything is canon and not canon.

Schrodinger's canon?

Schrodinger pissed himself the moment Tzeentch sent him a text.

I don't think that the idea of canon can be easily applied to 40k, beyond the names of primarchs, what legion they are attached to etc. Story wise there have been too many contributors, creating too many contradictions, with an editing team too small to maintain consistency at the publication rate they are on.

All GW lore is best viewed as propaganda, hearsay or myth.
Most stuff likely did happen, but no one knows for sure what is true or just the writer boosting about stuff.

The old lore fixes the first space within which 40k can evolve, so it's obviously canon. Then what's important is to keep this lore off good tracks, whch isn't currently the situation...

 JamesY wrote:
I don't think that the idea of canon can be easily applied to 40k, beyond the names of primarchs, what legion they are attached to etc. Story wise there have been too many contributors, creating too many contradictions, with an editing team too small to maintain consistency at the publication rate they are on.

I like to view all the contradicting fluff as representing different potential futures (or paths of the Skein, if you will). All of them could be true, depending on how events unfold.

If it's specifically overriden later then old fluff is not valid anymore. If not then it's still valid.

 oldzoggy wrote:
All GW lore is best viewed as propaganda, hearsay or myth.
Most stuff likely did happen, but no one knows for sure what is true or just the writer boosting about stuff.

Basically this. Outside of what is directly retconned I think all the old lore still applies even if it isn't mentioned in newer publications. Honestly it makes the lore more fun that way because old fluff was more tongue-in-cheek and a bit more in on the joke.

If it's good, it is.
if it's Goto lore, then it isn't.

 chromedog wrote:
If it's good, it is.
if it's Goto lore, then it isn't.

Pretty much this. But ultimately I think it depends, if the old canon helps with a cool army background, go with it.

 Madoch1 wrote:
Old, neglected, retconned races (hrud and saharduin, etc
)

'Old', 'neglected', and 'retconned' aren't synonyms.

Hrud were mentioned as recently as Death Masque (pg.29) and Codex: Deathwatch (pg.26).

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Madoch1 wrote:
Old, neglected, retconned races (hrud and saharduin, etc
)

'Old', 'neglected', and 'retconned' aren't synonyms.

Hrud were mentioned as recently as Death Masque (pg.29) and Codex: Deathwatch (pg.26).

So your saying Codex: Hrud is all but confirmed?

 Madoch1 wrote:
Just wondering what the demographic is for people if they think old lore is canon.
For instance:
Ollanius Pious fighting Horus
The origins of various units.
Mannerisms of the necrons.
Old, neglected, retconned races (hrud and saharduin, etc)

At one point back in rogue trader the imperium wasn't xenophobic likewise with the eldar.

"Older is better" is best determined on a case-by-case basis. I really like the tale of Ollanius rushing in to prove the worth of humanity, but having a Marine or Custodes do it just doesn't give the same feel.

Unit's origin stories are very difficult to get a general rule for, but some of the early origin tales were just silly or terrible. Some of the newer ones get that, too, but there do seem to at least be some standard logics that get followed now.

Necron origins... It's grown on me over time. So long as the line units are still mindless killbots, I don't really mind.

Hrud are cannon, as per BRB, iirc. Unless that's just the 6E BRB I'm thinking of...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 chromedog wrote:
If it's good, it is.
if it's Goto lore, then it isn't.

This too. I pretend Goto's works never existed. Except as an example of what not to write about 40k.

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Madoch1 wrote:
Old, neglected, retconned races (hrud and saharduin, etc
)

'Old', 'neglected', and 'retconned' aren't synonyms.

Hrud were mentioned as recently as Death Masque (pg.29) and Codex: Deathwatch (pg.26).

I was referring to the old hrud. The space skaven

I only played 2nd through the very beginning of 4th (3.5 with trial assault rules etc.). 2nd has always been my primary interest/love. The game didn't keep me interested in 3rd-4th so I bailed.

As such I'm really only interested in fluff through 2nd edition. I don't care what happened after or what's been re-imagined etc. If it's in my 2nd edition codices that's all that interests me. It was this fluff/atmosphere/aesthetic which originally got me into the game anyway.

That being said...even I can forget about Zoats.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Thing with GW lore is that they stated any contradictions could just be propaganda or the author mis-remembered something.

So everything is canon and not canon.

For real. 40k canon is like Assassin's Creed.

"Nothing is true; everything is permitted."

 Madoch1 wrote:
I was referring to the old hrud. The space skaven

The idea that Hrud were Skaven in Spaaace! was based solely upon a line drawing from the 3rd edition Rulebook which depicted a short robed vaguely humanoid with what may or may not have been a tail (or a trailing cable, or a bit of detritus, etc.).

Something which was never stated or shown to be the case can't be retconned.


Similarly, Ollanius Pius being a Guardsman as detailed in the White Dwarf Compendium was specifically an in-universe legend - ie. not [necessarily] true.
King's Imperial Fist was retconned into a Custodian by Merett, though.

40k is a collection of tales, future mythology. As such, everything published is canonical, even though quite a bit of it is contradictory. Retcons do not invalidate older fluff, they only act as more detailed versions of the same story, perhaps told by a different remembrancer.

SJ

Canon is large, contradictory, and fairly broad-strokes; I like a lot of older lore better because it was presented as in-universe documents that were probably at least somewhat inaccurate, as opposed to the new stuff that gives the same exaggerated lore in the voice of the narrator.

At some point there's a vague skeleton of well-defined and consistent lore, but the details are fuzzy and open to interpretation. You really only run into issues when you start to ask questions about why dead guys (Eldrad!) get retconned into being up and walking around so their rules can stick around.

The universe is so old that anything is believable. Very little information lasts forever. Going back on cannon is whatever you want to believe... or forced to believe in.

If all lore is true.... does this mean we can remove ultramarines as a first founding chapter and put Crimson Fists back up there?

 Baldeagle91 wrote:
If all lore is true.... does this mean we can remove ultramarines as a first founding chapter and put Crimson Fists back up there?

I second this. Modern lore would no longer make sense,and the HH series is goon be skewed, but hey.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
You really only run into issues when you start to ask questions about why dead guys (Eldrad!) get retconned into being up and walking around so their rules can stick around.

Given that there is no concrete date given for the events of , say Death Masque - beyond 'As the 41st Millennium comes to a close' (Codex: Harlequins (digital edition), 'The Final Act') and post-899.M41 (Codex: Harlequins (digital edition), 'The First Sign' on 3rd timeline page) - Eldrad's background could just have him up and about before he dies.

...which seems more logical than an argument that the background events surrounding Eldrad's death have been retconned - except for those which haven't (the Battle of Tyrok Fields, the Relictors being declared Excommunicate, the return of Altansar, the capture of Mordakka, the Third Sphere Expansion etc. etc.) - and we've never actually been told what has and hasn't been retconned but should totally know because reasons.
Like Tycho/Death Company Tycho. He's dead, but still has rules because his background is set in the past, prior to his death.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Canon is large, contradictory, and fairly broad-strokes; I like a lot of older lore better because it was presented as in-universe documents that were probably at least somewhat inaccurate, as opposed to the new stuff that gives the same exaggerated lore in the voice of the narrator.

At some point there's a vague skeleton of well-defined and consistent lore, but the details are fuzzy and open to interpretation. You really only run into issues when you start to ask questions about why dead guys (Eldrad!) get retconned into being up and walking around so their rules can stick around.

I largely agree with you, but I don't agree a character has to be alive 40,999 to deserve a codex entry (e.g. Tycho and so on).

I would hate to live in a Warhammer 40k universe where the Ultramarines never had a half-Eldar Chief Librarian.

Malal life Matters?
I don't even know if Malice/Malal ever was canon, although a God of Disbelief sounds pretty nonsensical & paradox.

 EverlastingNewb wrote:
Malal life Matters?
I don't even know if Malice/Malal ever was canon, although a God of Disbelief sounds pretty nonsensical & paradox.

You can literally go buy this right now.