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.

Kanluwen wrote:

Manchu wrote:We'll have to agree to disagree. There is nothing to indicate the 1ksons would not have killed children before Prospero. It's an interesting theory but it's not especially plausible.

The fact that they went out of their way, whenever possible, to preserve planet populations isn't an indicator?

"Whenever possible"? No, that's not an indicator.

Joey wrote:
If you want to see well-written carnage, look at Tolkein.
In his works, entire populations are murdered by forces of evil. But he uses the language not to shock but to empart in the reader's mind the brutal savagery of the acts, and the effects it has on the charectors.
You don't have to have charectors explicitly describing acts of violence against a child.

Except he does. Hell, Tolkien includes characters explicitly expressing their desire to eat each other; to my mind, that's just as gross. The orcs of the Lord of the Rings are NOT nice, and Tolkien did not pull many punches with them.

The passage in question was quoted earlier in the thread; go back and read it. It isn't exactly a gore-fest. All that happens is a threat. Grotesque threats and posturing have been a stock part of fantasy for a very long time.

@Manchu; Having not read the book, I can't comment on whether it was appropriate or out of place. However, I do have to say that I think there are, in fact, books where that kind of writing would not be inappropriate, and the Warhammer 40k universe is, to my mind, a prime candidate for such books.

The 40k-verse is one in which our rules of morality simply do not apply. This is a universe in which the Spanish Inquisition was not only totally correct in their assertions but objectively justified by the existence of real and literal daemons. A universe in which the Salem Witch Trials were a rational and reasonable response to an actual threat, the like of which occurs every single day. A universe in which children are not protected. When I read a Warhammer 40k book, I am always acutely aware that what I am reading is a blend of gritty fantasy and outright horror, and yes, there will be blood. Including, perhaps especially, the blood of innocents.

Were you this disturbed by Fulgrim, when the Emperor's Children turned on their Remembrancers and Daemonettes arose from the orchestra to butcher the innocent spectators? What about Word Bearer (I think that was the one) when the Chaos Space Marines built a tower from the mutilated corpses of an entire hive city? Those were both quite explicit scenes in which horrific death was not only threatened but actually occurred. Gore and brutality are hallmarks of the universe; this is the 41st millenium. Life is cheaper than iron. A child is less valuable than a lasgun. In this context, I don't find it inappropriate at all for children to die, even 'on-camera'.

Now, it could well have simply been awkward and forced, gore inserted for the sake of gore. If that was the case, then I commiserate; that kind of thing needs to serve a purpose. But the mere inclusion of children being threatened or even killed, if done well, does not ruin a 40k novel for me.

Joey wrote:
If you want to see well-written carnage, look at Tolkein.
In his works, entire populations are murdered by forces of evil. But he uses the language not to shock but to empart in the reader's mind the brutal savagery of the acts, and the effects it has on the charectors.
You don't have to have charectors explicitly describing acts of violence against a child.

There wasn't anything explicit here either. It was something a character said/thought that never actually happened.

As I understand it the kids weren't even killed. If they were then maybe that be controversial. Having kids be in danger and escaping the bad guys is pretty normal in cartoons and movies for kids and I don't see the difference here.

In almost every aspect of 40k, children exist only abstractly. Here, all of the sudden, a CSM magically stumbles across them for two potential purposes:

- Giving Wraight the benefit of the doubt, to show that on Fenris even the children are fighters.

- Not giving Wraight the benefit of the doubt, so that the 1ksons could twirl their moustaches and laugh maniacally.

Zerker raises a good point about Fulgrim, the scene is quite powerful and astonishingly gruesome, even for 40k. In almost any other story it would have been terribly unwelcome, but in Fulgrim it worked very well to show how far the Emperor's Children had fallen and was believable in the context of that story as Chaos' "Big reveal" scene, showing exactly how horrible it is when compared to the innocence of the Great Crusade.

If you put a similar scene in a story taking place outside the Horus Heresy it might just be gratuitous. We know that stuff like that happens so it doesn't need to be described in excruciating detail.

I'd give him the benefit of the doubt.
In many cases Fenris is described as a place where even children must fight every day for survival. A CSM invasion (although it is more extreme) is another instance of that.

BeRzErKeR wrote:The 40k-verse is one in which our rules of morality simply do not apply.

Fine but it only exists for the sake of our world. I mean, if GW sold a model of a couple of DE anally violating a Tau ethereal while forcing Fire Warriors to watch ... But who am I to judge the fictional morality of BDSM space elves?

That's far from true.

Many of the Gaunt's Ghosts books feature kids/teens.
"Necropolis" off the top of my head features children. Tona Criid, for example, was a teenager. So was Brin Milo, and he was fighting.

Panopticon wrote:If you put a similar scene in a story taking place outside the Horus Heresy it might just be gratuitous. We know that stuff like that happens so it doesn't need to be described in excruciating detail.

I absolutely agree with that.

I find it a little ironic that we're getting on the 1Ks for threatening children. You know who kills children? Space Wolves. All Space Msrines do. They take 12 and 13 year olds and make them fight in death pits. The victor gets implanted with gene-altering organs that they may or may not survive.

This is not behind the scenes. The aquiring and burning through of children recruits is at the forefront of SM lore.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:I find it a little ironic that we're getting on the 1Ks for threatening children. You know who kills children? Space Wolves. All Space Msrines do. They take 12 and 13 year olds and make them fight in death pits. The victor gets implanted with gene-altering organs that they may or may not survive.

This is not behind the scenes. The aquiring and burning through of children recruits is at the forefront of SM lore.

This has been said before...

Kanluwen wrote:That's far from true.

A good example of your astonishing over-exaggeration. A couple of teenagers in Gaunt's Ghost and suddenly "children" (not teenagers) proliferate in the 40k universe? Sure, Kanluwen, let me just check their stat line in my "Children Have Always Been in 40k" Codex while we're at it.

The kids you mention in Gaunt's Ghosts are never explicitly threatened or tortured, and actually go on to become fairly important characters. People are taking issue with the introduction of children for the specific purpose of being victims and nothing else I think. The argument seems to be that in the story referenced by the OP, kids are introduced and threatened, but it doesn't actually do anything to move the story along.

Ok, so it's the fact that this time it was children that's so appalling. If it had been adult serfs, it wouldn't have gotten your goat so much?

I can certainly understand and respect that. . . but I don't have the same perspective. Death is death. It isn't any better or worse depending on the age of the person involved.

Wow the Thousand Sons hit the ground like a meteor fallen.

Panopticon wrote:The kids you mention in Gaunt's Ghosts are never explicitly threatened or tortured, and actually go on to become fairly important characters. People are taking issue with the introduction of children for the specific purpose of being victims and nothing else I think. The argument seems to be that in the story referenced by the OP, kids are introduced and threatened, but it doesn't actually do anything to move the story along.

This, I can certainly agree is both poor storytelling and unnecessary. But, well, bad writing has always been endemic to BL.

Contrast with the child who the Ghosts attempt to rescue in the return to Gereon, who is described as being on the verge of death from torture and neglect. He does perform a vital service to the plot by killing a main character, the story as a whole was an attempt to look at the effects on a world conquered and used by Chaos.

TBF, BL has some great writers -- especially now. This is why unimaginative/inappropriate stuff like this tiny little scene really offend me. But it is just one page in a novel, I know that. But let's not have any more gakky pages like that.

In "Space Wolf" the Space Wolves send children out to prove their mettle in the Fenrisian wastes and many get killed iirc. One of them even gets killed by a troll: an actual WHFB troll! That was an on screen death. Any type of SM origin story will have children dying in it

Manchu wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:That's far from true.

A good example of your astonishing over-exaggeration. A couple of teenagers in Gaunt's Ghost and suddenly "children" (not teenagers) proliferate in the 40k universe? Sure, Kanluwen, let me just check their stat line in my "Children Have Always Been in 40k" Codex while we're at it.

Yeah. Let's ignore the fact that Criid was guarding a pair of orphans during the entirety of her time in Necropolis.

Let's also ignore the fact that

Aren't those "children" teenagers?

I mean, I know they say they've only seen 8 winters or whatever but a Fenrisian year is two Terran years, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:Let's also ignore the fact that ...

Children have never been, quite appropriately, combatants in 40k? Yes, let's ignore that and cherry pick a few examples that have nothing to do with Chris Wraight's lame attempt to make Chaos scary.

Manchu wrote:Aren't those "children" teenagers?

I mean, I know they say they've only seen 8 winters or whatever but a Fenrisian year is two Terran years, right?

Yes, 13 year olds are teenagers. But if kiilling teenagers is non-offensive then its likely the kids in Battle for the Fang were young teens too.

Kanluwen, the examples you gave are exactly the examples I used as good uses of children in 40k, they served a purpose to the plot and weren't just in danger to show how scary CSM are.

Even Fenrisian children are badass.

"We shall skin the children and wear their flayed skins as cloaks!"

"WTF? Where did kids get grenades from? OMG we are so dead."

Manchu wrote:Aren't those "children" teenagers?

I mean, I know they say they've only seen 8 winters or whatever but a Fenrisian year is two Terran years, right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:Let's also ignore the fact that ...

Children have never been, quite appropriately, combatants in 40k? Yes, let's ignore that and cherry pick a few examples that have nothing to do with Chris Wraight's lame attempt to make Chaos scary.

I do have to point that, while they may not get on-screen time in novels, children have always and explicitly been combatants in 40k. The Whiteshield platoons, if I remember correctly, have members as young as age 10.

Manchu wrote:Aren't those "children" teenagers?

I mean, I know they say they've only seen 8 winters or whatever but a Fenrisian year is two Terran years, right?

Which still would mean that the "children" in this context are teens as well.

Kanluwen wrote:Let's also ignore the fact that ...

Children have never been, quite appropriately, combatants in 40k? Yes, let's ignore that and cherry pick a few examples that have nothing to do with Chris Wraight's lame attempt to make Chaos scary.

The Cadian Youth Army begs to differ.

Panopticon wrote:Kanluwen, the examples you gave are exactly the examples I used as good uses of children in 40k, they served a purpose to the plot and weren't just in danger to show how scary CSM are.

That's an enitirely different argument. You're saying it's ok to endanger and kill children as long as its done well. His writing skills offend you, not the morality of it.

They're explicitly called children.

You see, the point was not really to show anything about Fenrisian life. If so, those "children" would have been described in better detail so as to show you the sort of thing that you and Kanluwen are talking about. As things stand, it takes a fair amount of outside knowledge (even reading the Codex would not be enough) to come to the conclusions you and Kan are coming to.

Thus, the point was -- as Joey said -- to substitute sensation for skill. It's a true "kick the dog" moment. "Everyone knows that only a real douchbag would want to torture kids -- so obviously my CSM will be all about that herp derp."

Well yeah, I don't think anyone here is exactly saying writing about kids dying or whatever in 40k is wrong, I think they are saying writing about it poorly only to get a cheap reaction is wrong.