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.

Hunterindarkness wrote:Actually the Eldra ruled the galaxy for some time, it was only after they became decadent that they lost the grip upon it. You can disagree, but with what is written the Necrontry in fact did rule the galaxy in the same way that the IoM currently does

Kind of. They were the most powerful species but were predominantly concentrated within the 'current' Eye of Terror. That's not most of the galaxy.

When you cover almost everything but a few spots here and there, then yeah "rule the Galaxy" fits.

Most of the bases? They weren't the most powerful faction, and that's the single most important thing.

Iracundus wrote:The problem is the utter retcon displeased those that liked the old background of the Necrons and C'tan being a Lovecraftian horror from the past.

The C'tan never struck me as particularly Lovecraftian. The Deceiver partially fit the bill, but the others didn't really seem to (to me). Their actions didn't connect with their given motivations. They wanted to conquer the galaxy and harvest the living and were capable of doing so but were instead doing pretty much nothing. That's not Lovecraftian. That's more along the lines of the villain having the power to win but choosing not to sue it.

The new Codex makes it out that he is a completely unbeatable strategist, save for when confronted with the zany illogic of Orks. It's one weakness but it seems almost a token one.

That's not Imotekhs only weakness though. He is defeated by the Black Templar fleet. He can be ambushed. He's not said, if I recall correctly, to actually be the greatest strategist of the galaxy. Even then, he has had plenty of time to work on his strategy and with Necron technology, he may well be able to know more of his enemies force than most other factions will be capable of finding out.

I always saw The eye of terror were the homeworld areas of the Eldar, the center and starting place of the empire. They held and controlled worlds over the whole of the galaxy. Eldar ruins can still be found across the entire IoM held space. However almost all of the Eldar, well over 90% we have been told died and the Eldar core worlds became the eye of Terror. You could be correct ,however they still controlled the vast majority of it if we use the maps we have been provided.



The IoM does not own every world and every system in the area's it controls, yet it 'Rules the Galaxy" even if whole xeno empires are found within its boarders.

Hunterindarkness wrote:

Iracundus wrote:The problem is the utter retcon displeased those that liked the old background of the Necrons and C'tan being a Lovecraftian horror from the past.

The easiest way to have pleased both factions of players would have been to have the rebellion against the C'tan occur, NOW in the modern 40K era, with the Necrons seeing an opportunity as the C'tan wake up, weakened as never before by their long sleep. That way, players could have played the new Tomb Kings in space rebellious Necrons, while those that liked the old background could have stuck with the loyalist Necrons aiming to serve the C'tan and being an implacable enemy of all other races and factions.

.

But you would have the very same issues. Some one would not like it. I myself do not care for that idea at all, it seems..well sloppy. If you go by the old fluff they simply could never rebel at all, and nothing would change that except..well they need to rebel except can't. The old fluff had to change, it simply had to. So you are left with two and only two real options. 1: Fresh break, all new background total reboot. 2: Kinda try to change some of the background so it still is the same, but no longer is the same. The second rout is often the messier of the two. Number two normally pisses everyone off

GW and ward went with a clean break. Total reboot. Did this upset some old players, yes. Did it please and bring in new Necron players, yes.The new fluff more or less does just what you are asking. They have given Necron players a blank check to build any kind of Necron Fluff they wish. Who is to say you can not have a Necron army that worships the C'tan shards as Gods and wishes to restore them? The new fluff allows this.

It is never actually said in the old background that they could never rebel. There wasn't much written in the old background about the Necrons in the modern 40K era other than from the view of their opponents. It was known for example that Necron Lords had initiative and autonomy. That would seemingly give the possibility of rebellion.

The issue with "C'tan loyalist Necrons" in the current background is that it says the Necrons already defeated shattered the C'tan prior to going to sleep. Presumably any loyalist Necrons would have already fought (and lost) beside their C'tan masters. Why would any of them have survived with resources left to build Tomb Worlds?

I would argue that of your 2 choices, Number two pisses LESS people off, because those that liked the old can still retain it and integrate the new instead of just wiping the board.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

Hunterindarkness wrote:Actually the Eldra ruled the galaxy for some time, it was only after they became decadent that they lost the grip upon it. You can disagree, but with what is written the Necrontry in fact did rule the galaxy in the same way that the IoM currently does

Kind of. They were the most powerful species but were predominantly concentrated within the 'current' Eye of Terror. That's not most of the galaxy.

Actually look at the BRB map of the Eldar domains. The Exodite worlds are all over the galaxy at the fringes (thus showing the Eldar empire had spread throughout the galaxy), and the portrayals in the Eldar and Dark Eldar BL novels show a galaxy spanning empire.

One thing to remember though that when it comes to interstellar empires, is that not every space or star system within the borders of an empire have to be filled and dominated. The Eldar empire was spread across the galaxy, but their worlds were connected via the Webway to form a united empire. That doesn't preclude other races having their own political entities in those areas not directly occupied and inhabited by the Eldar. Commorragh is actually a linked series of nodes and pocket spaces spread throughout the galaxy in realspace, but it appears as one location because they are all linked closely within the Webway.

The C'tan never struck me as particularly Lovecraftian. The Deceiver partially fit the bill, but the others didn't really seem to (to me). Their actions didn't connect with their given motivations. They wanted to conquer the galaxy and harvest the living and were capable of doing so but were instead doing pretty much nothing. That's not Lovecraftian. That's more along the lines of the villain having the power to win but choosing not to sue it.

GW wanted to make Lovecraftian horrors, but failed. Nightbringer was a Khorne wannabe, and the Deceiver came off as a Tzeentch wannabe.

However they did attempt to complete their Great Work of building pylons to seal off the galaxy. We saw examples of that in the 13th Black Crusade and the campaign for Medusa V (where they failed). The old Necron portrayl had them as a rising threat as more awakened, but a threat that was still potentially stoppable (as foreseen by the Eldar Farseer in the Necron Codex).

The new Codex makes it out that he is a completely unbeatable strategist, save for when confronted with the zany illogic of Orks. It's one weakness but it seems almost a token one.

That's not Imotekhs only weakness though. He is defeated by the Black Templar fleet. He can be ambushed. He's not said, if I recall correctly, to actually be the greatest strategist of the galaxy. Even then, he has had plenty of time to work on his strategy and with Necron technology, he may well be able to know more of his enemies force than most other factions will be capable of finding out.

Actually it is said that he is "a grand strategist, perhaps the most accomplished the galaxy has ever known." (p. 54, Necron Codex). It is also said that "so impeccable are the logical patterns behind the Stormlord's strategies that the only way a foe can truly gain meaningful advantage is to abandon all logic themselves." Finally it says that "if Imotekh's defeat comes, it is sure not to be at the hands of a superior strategist, but rather at the hands of a more accomplished warrior." Again all from p.54 and p.55 of the Necron Codex.

All of this shows Ward attempting to set up Imotekh as the supreme strategist, and also a bit of an immature viewpoint of saying only a warrior can defeat him. Strategists win wars, not brainless "Me Smash!" hulking barbarians.

Hunterindarkness wrote:I always saw The eye of terror were the homeworld areas of the Eldar, the center and starting place of the empire. They held and controlled worlds over the whole of the galaxy. Eldar ruins can still be found across the entire IoM held space. However almost all of the Eldar, well over 90% we have been told died and the Eldar core worlds became the eye of Terror. You could be correct ,however they still controlled the vast majority of it if we use the maps we have been provided.

If 90% was in that concentrated area then it would suggest they were not (directly, at least) ruling most of the galaxy. They could've dominated the other species' if they'd so desired but chose not to. Outside of the Eye of Terror the Eldar generally seemed to have survived. However, those that did had presumably split off to an extent from the rest of their people, meaning that they did not retain the great knowledge and power of the Eldar Empire as a whole.

The IoM does not own every world and every system in the area's it controls, yet it 'Rules the Galaxy" even if whole xeno empires are found within its boarders.

Except it doesn't really rule the galaxy. It's the single strongest force, and it can exert a fair amount of influence, but it does not rule the galaxy.

If the old C'tan were lovecraftian they were a very very poor knockoff (like alot of other concepts 40K 'borrowed' I suppose), because frankly the whole 'star vampires' thing seemed more like 'we're another sort of daemon/god, just sucking on realspace energy rather than the warp'. And the whole existence o fthe Necron were o be the mindless slaves of the Space Vampires to feed them. But they were so vague and poorly defined that they had no personalities (except for the Nightbringer, which isn't saying much, and the deceiver.) so you never really knew if they actually WERE a threat.

And this isn't even a total reboot, there's pletny of wiggle room for the 'oldcrons' - god I hate that term - in the modern age. No you can't have things the way they used to be, but how the heck is taht any different in 40K? Anytime any new piece of fluff or material is published the universe changes. It's changed steadily since the Rogue Trader 1st edition days, and I dont see how things are going ot stop changing (If it does it will stagnate even worse and probably die off.)

I am gonna disagree on if combining them would have been better., but then its a matter of taste.

On the subject of the Modern C'tan worshipers. well ya have to recall back when they rebelled they did not hav e free will. The silent king said jump, they jumped. They didn't even ask how high.

However after he destoried the protocols , they now have free will. They look at what the silent king made them do, and say 'humm those C'tan saved our asses more then once..it was the silent king that betrayed us, not them" so set about "fixing" a C'tan. The new fluff does indeed allow that kind of thing.

From what i read of the oldcons they had zero choice. They were slaves of the C'tan in much the same way the current Necron fluff made them slaves to the silent king.

Hunterindarkness wrote:I am gonna disagree on if combining them would have been better., but then its a matter of taste.

On the subject of the Modern C'tan worshipers. well ya have to recall back when they rebelled they did not hav e free will. The silent king said jump, they jumped. They didn't even ask how high.

However after he destoried the protocols , they now have free will. They look at what the silent king made them do, and say 'humm those C'tan saved our asses more then once..it was the silent king that betrayed us, not them" so set about "fixing" a C'tan. The new fluff does indeed allow that kind of thing.

From what i read of the oldcons they had zero choice. They were slaves of the C'tan in much the same way the current Necron fluff made them slaves to the silent king.

The tweaking would have been in making rebellion possible even for the oldcrons, so that the absence of free will wasn't absolute but rather more of suppressed free will. One small tweak there and moving the rebellion to the modern day 40K era allows both newcron and oldcron players to have their flavor. One as Tomb Kings in space with their own agendas, and the others as still servants of the C'tan bent on sealing off the galaxy from the warp and turning it into a farm for C'tan food.

It could have been explained as the passage of time weakening the protocols that bound the Necrons to the C'tan and then the C'tan themselves being so weakened (something present even in the oldcron background) that the thought of rebellion is awakened in Necron Lords. It could also have been explained as those Necron Lords that had their C'tan master destroyed previously as awakening and through taking the initiative on their own in the absence of their new conquering C'tan master, began to show their old personalities and desires again.

Could have worked, I do not think it would solve the issue you have. You would still have the necrons with a war going on now, which is nether the old conrs or the new ones. It still more or less invalidates all the old fluff still, at lest all that came after nap time.

I for one find it less flavorful and not as good as what we got.. I did not like the old fluff,Other then the not needing the warp for FTL anyhow.There is the key to the issue. a great many new players did not like the old fluff and would not know be interested in playing or even reading up on the necrons if those fluff changes had not happened.

You are gonna upset the old players no matter what you do. They painted themselves into a corner with the old fluff.

Hunterindarkness wrote:Could have worked, I do not think it would solve the issue you have. You would still have the necrons with a war going on now, which is nether the old conrs or the new ones. It still more or less invalidates all the old fluff still, at lest all that came after nap time.

It actually doesn't because we knew next to nothing about Necrons from the Necron POV. The actions of the Deceiver and Nightbringer can still be ascribed to them. They can then subsequently be "shattered" by rebellious Necrons, so that their use on the tabletop is a portrayal of their shards (either in the hands of rebels or loyalists).

The scattered Necrons awakening around the galaxy is the same situation in both versions. Only now, we have the old Necrons awakening still loyal servants, and we have the new Necrons re-establishing their old dynasties and pursuing their old personal goals. It achieves the same situation as the newcron codex while not completely shelving oldcron players.

The Dark Eldar reboot in their Codex for example still integrated enough of the old background to please old players while adding their own new background. In the end, both old and new came away satisfied.

I am just gonna say i disagree, what I have read of the old fluff, they were slaves. The whole "Wake up and rebel" is an odd one for me. It seems silly. The old fluff had them go to sleep to conserve power of the C'tan so when they woke up harvest would be ready.

it just seems a bit heavy handed to me and something that seems forced and does not fit, unlike the new fluff.

To each his own I guess.

Hunterindarkness wrote:I am just gonna say i disagree, what I have read of the old fluff, they were slaves. The whole "Wake up and rebel" is an odd one for me. It seems silly. The old fluff had them go to sleep to conserve power of the C'tan so when they woke up harvest would be ready.

The reasons for sleep in both old and new are not incompatible per se. In the old, they slept because the Enslavers were running rampant. In the new, they slept to avoid conflict with the rising Eldar. Both are not necessarily mutually exclusive reasons.

As some one who rewrite fluff to "Fit" what he thinks is better. I say go with what ya like man. I did not like the enslavers, I did not like the Necron went to sleep as the C'tan's bitches either. So for me I am happy with the new stuff and the old stuff can rot for all i care. I found it dull, and unimaginative. I also do not get the C'tan as great old ones. They just never had that vibe at all to me.

If you like the older stuff cool., I simply do not.

In a way the old Necrons still exist. If you only have a destroyer lord leading your army that's pretty much the same thing. However, that's probably like 5% of Necrons. The new background isn't a total waste or anything but I would prefer if the Newcron style Necrons had only been like 10% of Necrons. It was always suspected that Necron Lords had full personalities with eccentricities.
That way each player could have their own Necron force doing whatever they want but the Necrons still had that menacing doom to them.
Before this Necrons had that Apocalyptic side to them like Tyranids. Victory for them meant the destruction of all living things. They literally looked like and were death incarnate.
Now they're just wacky monarchs and I miss theat old side of them.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Before this Necrons had that Apocalyptic side to them like Tyranids. Victory for them meant the destruction of all living things. They literally looked like and were death incarnate. Now they're just wacky monarchs and I miss theat old side of them.

While having an apocalyptic end game is interesting it would make them far too similar to Tyranids; they already fill the "end all life down to the bacterial level" niche. Necrons are rather unique in that they are a lawful evil type, which doesn't really exist as an enemy archetype for the Imperium.

As for their threat and menace they are now more dangerous if anything. Oldcrons never were active much, I mean there was the incident in "Xenology" and the time the Necrons landed a few ships on Mars, other than that there were hardly any significant encounters with Necrons. It was always curious human pokes her nose in some ruins, crons wake up, crons go pew pew, then crons go to sleep. The only other active entities were the C'tan and by active I mean this one time the Deciever absorbed a Callidus assassin's phase blade...

Now they actively conquer, enslave, and experiment on the fleshier races. We also know more of their war panoply and other tools of destruction. If anything they are more threatening. People always say "yeah well they're all fragmented dynasties!" Putting aside the fact that the codex makes it explicit that dynasties and the royalty are more than willing to work together to further the Necron cause, I'd say "so what?" Did this supposed unity do anything for the crons in the old fluff? It's not like the old crons were shown to be this monolithic entitiy that was in communication with all of its Tombworlds. A Tombworld's awakening was more or less a one off event or plot device, the supposed loss of unity due to the creation of dynasties never really existed in the first place.

Well said Asimo.

The Necrons were lawful evil before. Now they are more of a neutral or perhaps a neutral evil. Pretty much whatever you consider the Imperium. There was no Necron on Necron violence before so I'd say they were a monolithic force.
The C'tan were frightening villians too and I miss them.
The Necrons were death itself before and I liked that but to each his own.

The extermination of all life forms isn't really lawful evil. You could argue it's the concept of order and staticity (that even a word?) gone extreme, but when you're at the point where you're killing everything then D&D alignments don't really mean anything since any goal besides genocide is really meaningless at this point. Lawful evil as I understand it is used to describe the evil empire types: the kinds that are oppressive and enslaving but organized, like the Empire of Star Wars. When you look over the IoM's enemies no one really fits that description, so Necrons have a unique role to play now instead of being tech based Tyranids.

There may have been no Necron-on-Necron violence before, but that wasn't the point I was making. Just because they used to not fight each other doesn't mean they worked together in the old fluff. The Oldcrons didn't really feel like an empire but more like an infestation, which is to say some planets might have some nasty robots lurking in them. But much like how the termites in your home don't conspire with the termites in your neighbor's house, the separate Tombworlds never seemed to work together.

Also it needs to be said again that the new Necron-on-Necron violence is shown to be very rare and mostly for show in the new Codex.

I liked the Old Lore better.

It seemed to me that the only criticism of it was "WHY DIDN'T THEY INSTA-WIN!" and that, to me, is a foolish question.

They didn't insta-win because:
1) They weren't completely awake yet
2) Some memory engrams were damaged and Lords forgot their functions.
3) Some entire Tombworlds are malfunctioning
4) Their Gods had not awakened yet, and so the Oldcrons are biding their time.

The new fluff isn't bad, but it makes the Necrons into robotic Eldar, with tombworlds instead of craftworlds, technology instead of psyker fuckery, and robots.

Unit1126PLL wrote:
The new fluff isn't bad, but it makes the Necrons into robotic Eldar, with tombworlds instead of craftworlds, technology instead of psyker fuckery, and robots.

I don't follow this line of thought at all. They do not share the same goals as the Eldra, they do not share the same tech, the same look or anything I can see. The only similarities I see are , they are really freaking old and used to control the galaxy. And onlike the Eldar, their numbers will only incress over time. The histories and armies as well as play style seem nothing alike.

I mean I get ya do not like them, I just do not understand this particular line of thought.

Hunterindarkness wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:
The new fluff isn't bad, but it makes the Necrons into robotic Eldar, with tombworlds instead of craftworlds, technology instead of psyker fuckery, and robots.

I don't follow this line of thought at all. They do not share the same goals as the Eldra, they do not share the same tech, the same look or anything I can see. The only similarities I see are , they are really freaking old and used to control the galaxy. And onlike the Eldar, their numbers will only incress over time. The histories and armies as well as play style seem nothing alike.

I mean I get ya do not like them, I just do not understand this particular line of thought.

I will try to list my reasons here then:

1) Each tombworld has a different "culture" from the others, just as the manner of the Eldar Craftworlds.
2) The Necrons do have a different motivation - this is granted.
3) The Necrons use the Webway to get around, just like the Eldar.
4) Necrons have Farseers (sorry, I meant Harbingers of Eternity).
5) Necrons have other magical powers (sorry, I meant technological powers that might as well be magic) such as the Chronometron.
5a) to explain better, many of the Necron powers seem like they wouldn't be out of place as a psychic power in an Eldar codex.
6) The Necrons have and use shards of their old gods on the battlefield (Avatar, anyone?)

eh so do about every other army. You could replace the name Necron on your list for IG and it reads the same way.

Hunterindarkness wrote:eh so do about every other army. You could replace the name Necron on your list for IG and it reads the same way.

Which is why I don't like it.

The Necrons used to be the only army EXEMPT from this rule.

It was less that they were exempt and more like they had little flavor. For example, it's not like they used to have a unique analogue to psychic powers, they simply didn't have any period.

Pretty much, they were more a plot device then a real faction honestly.

My favorite part is where the Necrons are able to shatter gods(and even kill one) but still have trouble fighting Spess Mehrens. I know, can't have anything all-powerful OP, but come on, that's exactly how the fluff makes them out to be. Except for some reason they lose sometimes... Because Bolter/Chainsword > All.

They still have the capacity to blow up stars, but that device is well guarded.