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.

I saw someone on here named En Excelsis say the shaman origin was never published. Why? Is he/she too young to know about the shaman origin being from 1st Edition Rogue Trader? If En Excelsis is still then I would say you have not followed 40k since the lore of 1st Edition Rogue Trader or own stuff from 1st Edition Rogue Trader? Its alright, but do your research next time.




He hears Him, the day they met, recognising a kindred being. ‘The likes of us,’ He says to Oll, ‘the likes of us will leave our print on things down the ages. That is why we were made the way we were. The courses of our lives will not go unmarked.’

‘Mine will,’ Oll assures Him. ‘I have no stomach for the games you want to play with the world. I just want an ordinary life.’

‘My dear friend, you’ll have as many of those as you want.’ It was summer, a meadow beyond the walls of Nineveh. He had never met another Perpetual before. He would never meet another like Him.



That quote was from Mark of Calth. And this.




Oll takes out his compass, and checks the bearing as best he can. Thrascias. It still seems to be Thrascias. That used to be the word for the wind from the north-north-west, before the cardinal points of the compass rose were co-opted for other purposes and given more esoteric meanings. Thrascias. That's what the Grekans called it. That's what they called it when he sailed back across the sun-kissed waters to Thessaly in Iason's crew, with a witch and a sheep-skin to show for their efforts. The Romanii, they called it Circius. Down in the oardecks of the galleys, he hadn't much cared about the names of the winds they were rowing against. The Franks called it Nordvuestroni. - Know No Fear, pages 360 and 361.




https://www.amazon.com/Calth-Horus-Heresy-Laurie-Goulding/dp/1849705755

https://www.amazon.com/Know-No-Fear-Horus-Heresy/dp/1849701350


And the shaman origin.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/WARHAMMER-BOOK-HARDBACK-REALM-OF-CHAOS-THE-LOST-AND-THE-DAMNED-/382270144333

https://www.ebay.com/itm/LOST-and-the-DAMNED-SLAVES-to-DARKNESS-Realm-of-Chaos-Wahammer-WFRP-40k-GW/132756831637?hash=item1ee8ec7d95:gfIAAOSwtLxbgINn

http://imgur.com/dImnK6j

http://imgur.com/dImnK6j

http://imgur.com/dImnK6j

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3OjoxwOFVg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TNPoiLfNpA&t=2s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bcb45Ac1sI

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2014/06/40k-retro-corner-realm-of-chaos-lost-and-the-damned.html

https://www.scribd.com/doc/190349236/Warhammer-Realms-of-Chaos-the-Lost-and-the-Damned

https://www.scribd.com/document/259888154/Realm-of-Chaos-The-Lost-and-the-Damned

https://www.scribd.com/document/100200843/The-Lost-and-the-Damned

https://spikeybits.com/2018/01/nurgles-lost-the-damned-realms-of-chaos.html

https://spikeybits.com/2018/01/nurgles-lost-the-damned-realms-of-chaos.html

Rick Priestley's Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader from 1987.

https://www.amazon.com/Warhammer-40-000-Rogue-Trader/dp/1869893239


I checked the rules and guidelines. It does not look like this would fit into any other forum.

rogue trader also has half-eldar ultramarine astropath Space Marines.

It might shock you but a lotta people tend to be leery about accepting any lore that hasn't been restated since then.

Yea, anything that is from that far back that has not been reincorporated should be taken with a grain of salt.

BrianDavion wrote:
rogue trader also has half-eldar ultramarine astropath Space Marines.

It might shock you but a lotta people tend to be leery about accepting any lore that hasn't been restated since then.

1st Edition Rogue Trader was the best edition.

By your own logic then the Perpetuals you defend so rigorously in other topics are in fact "the worst". I never played RG so I can't comment on the rules but the fluff back then is what I would expect for a new universe, raw, kinda silly and not very thought out. 40k has come a good long way since then and has improved in a lot of ways and slide in some others. That said just because you think it was "the best" doesn't mean most of it is not really canon at this point.

Onething123456 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
rogue trader also has half-eldar ultramarine astropath Space Marines.

It might shock you but a lotta people tend to be leery about accepting any lore that hasn't been restated since then.

1st Edition Rogue Trader was the best edition.

Best is a matter of preferance, and absolutely irrelevant.

It's blatently clear, to me at least, that GW's current stance on the Emperor is one of deliberate vagueness, as such we can take for a fact that any definitive statements made about the emperor in early 40k history should at most be relegated to "a theory"

BrianDavion wrote:
rogue trader also has half-eldar ultramarine astropath Space Marines.

It might shock you but a lotta people tend to be leery about accepting any lore that hasn't been restated since then.

On that logic only latest codex is valid. That means 40k is super ligh' on fluff with no 30 year history.

No unless it's been cotradicted it's still canon

BrianDavion wrote:

Onething123456 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
rogue trader also has half-eldar ultramarine astropath Space Marines.

It might shock you but a lotta people tend to be leery about accepting any lore that hasn't been restated since then.

1st Edition Rogue Trader was the best edition.

Best is a matter of preferance, and absolutely irrelevant.

It's blatently clear, to me at least, that GW's current stance on the Emperor is one of deliberate vagueness, as such we can take for a fact that any definitive statements made about the emperor in early 40k history should at most be relegated to "a theory"

I meant to say it is considered the best.

tneva82 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
rogue trader also has half-eldar ultramarine astropath Space Marines.

It might shock you but a lotta people tend to be leery about accepting any lore that hasn't been restated since then.

On that logic only latest codex is valid. That means 40k is super ligh' on fluff with no 30 year history.

No unless it's been cotradicted it's still canon

I think there's a differance between something mentioned in 4th edition and something in rogue trader given how much has changed, I never said it's NOT cannon, I just said "I'd not accept it ask an unquestioned fact"

BrianDavion wrote:rogue trader also has half-eldar ultramarine astropath Space Marines.

You do understand that there is a fundamental difference between *stuff that's been explicitly retconned* and *stuff that just hasn't been mentioned for a while because from 3rd edition onwards GW writes all fluff from an in-universe perspective*, right?

HoundsofDemos wrote:By your own logic then the Perpetuals you defend so rigorously in other topics are in fact "the worst".

Perpetuals have been in the 40K fluff for as long as the Emperor's shaman origin story. All the recent fluff has done is combine the older sensei and living saints into a single concept and removed the bit about them necessarily being descendants/creations of the Emperor. Heck, the BL writers even tip their hats to the old fluff on occasion by giving some HH-era perpetuals Illuminati tattoos!

I never played RG so I can't comment on the rules but the fluff back then is what I would expect for a new universe, raw, kinda silly and not very thought out.

That might be true of the very earliest fluff in the RT rulebook. But by the time the Realm of Chaos books were published (where the Emperor's origin was first detailed), the fluff was about 90% the same as it is now (more like 99% for Imperial stuff). For example, the process of creating a Space Marine hasn't changed by a single detail since Rick Priestley first described it in WD a few months after RT's publication. All the special organs are there, the ages of implantation, and so on. All the silly "Obiwan Sherlock Clouseau" stuff was gone long before the Emperor's origin story was published.

BrianDavion wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
rogue trader also has half-eldar ultramarine astropath Space Marines.

It might shock you but a lotta people tend to be leery about accepting any lore that hasn't been restated since then.

On that logic only latest codex is valid. That means 40k is super ligh' on fluff with no 30 year history.

No unless it's been cotradicted it's still canon

I think there's a differance between something mentioned in 4th edition and something in rogue trader given how much has changed, I never said it's NOT cannon, I just said "I'd not accept it ask an unquestioned fact"

Absolutely this.

It doesn't have to be this extreme all or nothing stance.

GW has shown their lore to be mutable, it changes over time. They've all shown a desire to not explicitly deny anything unless they are forced to, presumably so people can interpret things however they want.

We also have to factor in that much of the lore, especially in Codexes, is likely written as propaganda for that faction rather than to be taken as outright fact in the setting.

So longer the it's been since something was last mentioned, the less canonnical it is. It's a scale.

Maybe,m maybe not, right now in the HH there's some evidance to support the shaman theory is still the answer, but there's also some hints it may be a bit more complex. I'm not comfortable saying with 100% certainly we know anything about the emperor.

No one has a problem with someone making a topic just to say "haha you're wrong"? In a very condescending way at that?

This is probably the pettiest thing I've seen in a while.

 Sim-Life wrote:
No one has a problem with someone making a topic just to say "haha you're wrong"? In a very condescending way at that?

This is probably the pettiest thing I've seen in a while.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Sim-Life wrote:
No one has a problem with someone making a topic just to say "haha you're wrong"? In a very condescending way at that?

This is probably the pettiest thing I've seen in a while.

Yeah, maybe better served in a PM or better yet silence...

Onething123456 wrote:



I meant to say it is considered the best.

by whom?

 Sim-Life wrote:
No one has a problem with someone making a topic just to say "haha you're wrong"? In a very condescending way at that?

This is probably the pettiest thing I've seen in a while.

Yeah, if "someone on here named En Excelsis [said] the shaman origin was never published" why start a whole thread about it just to say nuh-uh. Why not reply in the actual thread you're talking about? Also, why would you think this user would care about lore from Rogue Trader anyway?

What is the discussion value of this thread? You're not asking for anyone else's thoughts on the matter, you're just looking to shame some other user.

We all know what happens to the "SHAME" nun on Game of Thrones, too.

What is this.. I don't even.. Is this going somewhere? I think not.