Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/21 21:30:28
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Banelord Titan Princeps of Khorne
Noctis Labyrinthus
|
Yes, I would prefer the Nightbringer ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL over this.
Though admittedly that might be kind of stupid mechanically, and end up like the Greater Daemons in the Chaos Marines codex.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 11:07:01
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
What I disliked about the C'tan was that there were only 2(3) left. So 1 C'tan ate all the others???
Also it didn't make much sense that the C'tan were out on the battlefield leading, but then what was the lord for? I could see the C'tan hanging out by the soul extractor waiting for lunch, but the god himself out there doing the dirty work - eh. The c'tan being a star god would care about delicious souls, but wouldn't care about territory, battle or anything else really. That and to me they don't really fit visually. Cool robots + greek statue guy or grim reaper. I only really started playing them because they filled a big gap in the old dex.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 11:38:17
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
West Midlands (UK)
|
Void__Dragon wrote:Oh don't get me wrong I agree.
The C'tan (As in the actual star gods) should never have been playable, but there was a much more dignified way to fix this rather than giving them the Khaine treatment.
It isn't even like GW would have had to have been creative. Dawn of War already made avatars of the C'tan useable, using the same principle as the newcron codex, only instead of being ripped to cosmic pieces and being compressed into different Necrodermis bodies, a C'tan lends a portion of its power to a Necron Lord to rearrange its Necrodermis to resemble the C'tan. Use this principle, make there be bodies that the C'tan's power can be imbued into (This fits with old fluff perfectly well, the Nightbringer had a ship it would often imbue with a portion of its power), and bam, C'tan units that are not the real C'tan. Basically C'tan avatars.
What also bothers me about the change is that the C'tan shards don't actually get any more fluff than what it takes to justify their existence and acknowledging that "Yeah this is a playable unit I guess here is some fluff". Basically, none of the battles mentioned them at all, which I found rather lame. I fear that the C'tan will go the route of the Avatars of Khaine, that is to say they will only be mentioned in other army codices about some big bad monster that exists to get the gak kicked out of it by the new special snowflake hero.
Honestly, that is the most idiotic thing ever. You would have A) C'Tan still in their full power, but B) not take to the battlefield as such because of, dunno, courtesy?
Makes no sense what-so-ever.
If you have C'Tan functioning and about in the fluff, I want to field them. It's a wargame after all, and fluff that "cannot be fielded" is rather besides the point. If you can only field "shards" or "aspects" in the game, than that is what should be left of them in the fluff too. Disconnecting the "what I field in the game" and "what is in the fluff" is unnecessarily convoluted, impractical and circuitous for, frankly, no sane reason at all.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/22 11:38:44
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 12:38:25
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
KingDeath wrote:
As much as i like them, everyone is strangely underwhelming compared to Spess Muhreens.
You can say that about lots of things though. Titan Legion? Who cares, the Tyranids have one creature that can destroy it and breach the fortress. Grey Knights? Who cares, a bombardment can accidently wipe out a company (or however many there were) with their naval support being unable to do anything. Tyranid splinter fleet? The Tau have Shadowsun, an expert at both naval and ground combat. Craftworld? Who cares, a single Zoanthrope can take it out (which is, in my opinion, far far worse than the Invaders Chapter taking one out. At least they suffered some sort of consequence). The battlebarge in Commorragh was a set up with Vect actively helping them.
Against normal opponents, such as rebels, the Astartes have always been shown to be vastly superior.
Void__Dragon wrote:The C'tan (As in the actual star gods) should never have been playable, but there was a much more dignified way to fix this rather than giving them the Khaine treatment.
The C'tan should never have been in the background. They broke it. Every faction that has some superpowerful being has it restricted; Khaine is shattered, the Emperor is entombed on the Golden Throne, the Chaos Gods can't enter the Materium and their greatest servants struggle to, the Daemon Primarchs generally fight for other goals than material conquest. The C'tan? They were wandering around for thousands of years and still hadn't recovered sufficiently to actually become a major opponent? By their background they should have been annihilating sectors single-handedly and using their minions to lock up survivors as cattle but instead they their only real impact was through the Deceiver's subtle machinations. They were dumb, and their concept was dumb.
Zweischneid wrote:It's a wargame after all, and fluff that "cannot be fielded" is rather besides the point.
What about the Daemon Primarchs? The Emperor? Alpha-level Psykers? Various pieces of technology that exist but there aren't models or (as far as I know, at least) rules for? Entire factions that aren't playable?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 12:46:34
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
West Midlands (UK)
|
SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:
What about the Daemon Primarchs? The Emperor? Alpha-level Psykers? Various pieces of technology that exist but there aren't models or (as far as I know, at least) rules for? Entire factions that aren't playable?
Primarchs? A pitty. I'd love to have them in 40K. Emperor.. tricky case. He's an ex-machina construct to set up the "Imperium" vs. "Chaos/Xenos" in the first place. But for a 30K expansion, he likely should have rules. Alpha-level Psykers? More a BL/ FFG invention than a 40K one strictly speaking. More toys, more technology, more factions, etc.. would always be nice (though I also understand the limited resources available to do all factions, including the existing ones, proper justice).
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 12:48:36
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Rampaging Khorne Dreadnought
Wollongong, Australia
|
I like the old fluff better, I prefer an army that is all about the eradication and destruction of all life forms. In my opinon, Matt Ward wants the Necrons to be more friendly. It has greatly impacted on how I percieve the Necrons. It has gone from: "They are awesome! Can't wait for an update" to "These are Tomb Kings in space... Meh.. Lame..."
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 15:05:50
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Yeah i think that would be pefered. The C'Tans becoming slaves also bothers me. I would perfer the Necrons still being slaves of the C'Tans and the shards were like the ME harbinger.
Man there are some searious parallels between old Necrons on the Reapers from ME lol
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 15:17:35
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot
|
rockerbikie wrote:I like the old fluff better, I prefer an army that is all about the eradication and destruction of all life forms.
Tyranids you say? Yeah, i kinda' like them too.
|
My armies:
14000 points |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 15:52:38
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Raging Ravener
|
Axlbush wrote:Hmm, isn't the point that they are implacable killers? And not supposed to have a personality? Rather than tomb kings in space its more like skavens in space, surely? Someone shoulda told Ciaphas Cain what they are really like. He coulda just charmed em like he does everyone else.
Skaven have tonnes of personality! They're a race of greedy, scheming, backstabbing bastards. Like Dark Eldar without the Hot Topic.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 16:32:25
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan
Somewhere In Time And Space
|
Personally I think the Newcrons needed a balance between the old fluff and the new one. Some parts I like while others leave me cold. I like sub factions within the race, but I don't think they needed to gain personality to do this, they could have still been cold soulless killing machines, but that have illuminated new reasons to go about different things in different ways. Independent will was something I felt unnecessary. and some of the new characters are just laughable... come on? Imhotep in space? eeeesh... my two year old nephew is more imaginative that that.
But the most unforgivable thing they have done, is what has happened to the C'tan... sorry, but that is just plain wrong.
having said all of that, the new rules are great. Just be glad you didn't get Cruddace destroyer of worlds...
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 16:34:28
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
AnUnearthlyChilde wrote:Personally I think the Newcrons needed a balance between the old fluff and the new one. Some parts I like while others leave me cold. I like sub factions within the race, but I don't think they needed to gain personality to do this, they could have still been cold soulless killing machines, but that have illuminated new reasons to go about different things in different ways. Independent will was something I felt unnecessary. and some of the new characters are just laughable... come on? Imhotep in space? eeeesh... my two year old nephew is more imaginative that that.
But the most unforgivable thing they have done, is what has happened to the C'tan... sorry, but that is just plain wrong.
having said all of that, the new rules are great. Just be glad you didn't get Cruddace destroyer of worlds...
This!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 16:54:24
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Growlin' Guntrukk Driver with Killacannon
Scotland, but nowhere near my rulebook
|
Zweischneid wrote: Having horribly dangerous things/gods on the tabletop is a Good Thing
They tried this in Warhammer with Nagash.
It didn't end well.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 16:56:58
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Towering Hierophant Bio-Titan
Somewhere In Time And Space
|
Graphite wrote:Zweischneid wrote: Having horribly dangerous things/gods on the tabletop is a Good Thing
They tried this in Warhammer with Nagash.
It didn't end well.
Nagash though was under a completely different system, then, how things are now, I think he'd work. assuming his rules were pulled out of the dark ages and brought into line.
Personally I think if all the races in 40k were represented proportionally to their fluff, the game would actually be ballanced enough to allow gods and monsters of that calibre to wander the table once more.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/03/22 16:59:21
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
West Midlands (UK)
|
Graphite wrote:Zweischneid wrote: Having horribly dangerous things/gods on the tabletop is a Good Thing
They tried this in Warhammer with Nagash.
It didn't end well.
/shrug
They have bungled Chaos in 40K. Should that mean that Chaos should be gone from the Game? Or that somewith with a bit more talent in writing rules should have a go?
Also, C'Tan in old-Crons worked quite well. No major issue I see there. You just gotta keep things in "game" perspective. Space Marines on the table ain't the far exaggerations of some fluff, and, for example, the Emperor on the table would also be closer to the Emperor who was almost strangled by an Ork, rather than some of the more comical fan-fic-like exaggerations that float about of him or hte Primarch.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 21:16:54
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Fresh-Faced New User
|
I have owned every version of every codex ever made and to say a new codex is a new codex and we should be happy with it should be punched in the face. I HATE the new necron codex. For all of you saying "Yippee my characters now have depth" are celebrating characters knocked off of other characters found in comic books and other codexes...Stormcaller is a space wolf and The Collecter will be too busy starring in movies to show any support for the cheesy knockoff character they made just like him in the new Necron Codex. Frigging cheesy tomb king ripoff with lousy back fluff. Reverted from a lovecraftian horror waiting to happen to a second rate spinnoff of The Mummy. It doesnt add depth, it adds a new layer of cheese that needs to be scraped off NOW!. From an epic error leading to damnation and madness we now have Tallarn style Necron leaders following "ancient codes of honor if thier opponent is worthy" lol next they will change the Imperial Guard codez so the commisars will be hugging cowards instead of shooting them. My Fave (NOT) is the crazy necron that thinks he is still alive. My actual Fave is the Flayed Ones. That has horror, back history, and depth. The rest, trash!
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/22 21:18:47
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 21:54:26
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
tl;dr: There's TruCron fluff, which gives you the actual story of Necrons and all background information you need. It can be found in the 3rd edition codex. There's NewCron fluff that basically is lies spread by the IoM to convey a wrong image of Necrons, portraying them as robot Space Marines. Which fluff you choose personally is up to yourself. If you just play Necrons for their flyers, AB and stuff, thus pure power to win games, then you only need to buy the 5th codex (NewCron). If you want to dive straight into the army and its lore, the tragic history of the now extinct Necrontyr and their foolish decision to give up on everything they had, becoming the Necrons, soulless automatons led by the C'tan, beings far more powerful than anything else in the entire corporeal realm, deceivers, destroyers and nemesis of all life... ..then get yourself a copy of the 3rd edition fluff part and get to know the Necrons and their history. Be a TruCron.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/22 21:58:38
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 21:54:31
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Newcrons are awful, pure unadulterated awful. They took what was a menacing unstoppable machine army of cold emotionless destruction and turned them into a feuding sproadic mess of in-fighting space Egyptians. It's not even relevant that they're machines anymore.
The "they have depth now" claim is ridiculous. If you think making machines into eccentric pharaohs with senses of honor who spare their "worthy" enemies and engage in trade with other species is depth and a step in the right direction, then I dunno what to say to you. Hell Necron kingdoms (this itself is a dumb concept) that do act like the merciless organic-slaying machines they used to be are shunned by the rest of the Necron race, who consider them too violent and dishonorable. What a joke.
Now that isnt to say you couldn't have kept what made the Oldcrons good while also making individual characters. Flesh out the C'tan, make Necron Lords have their own quirks and personalities due to needing to have a higher function in their programming, give the Necrons planets and cities akin to the machine city in the matrix. But keep it clear that they're still out to harvest life at the behest of the C'tan and that 99.9% of Necrons are simply murderous machines, not find out how to be organic again and spare worthy adversaries or whatever garbage the new fluff cooks up. They could have been like the Mass Effect Reapers. These guys did have individual characters (everybody remembers Harbringer!) while never losing their implacable cold killer machine vibe. Reapers did not "spare" worthy adversaries, engage in art, or follow codes of honor. And that made them far more effective as antagonists.
The threat is way down as well. The Necrons used to have a menacing quality to them. Now they're just a series of feuding small empires on the Eastern Fringe. The most powerful "Dynasty" is like 60 worlds, the Tau put that to shame. The threat is gone. The Imperium could muster together 10 Chapters and some IG Regiments, and the most powerful dynasties would be crushed. Part of the appeal of the Necrons was that they felt truly like an imminent threat just over the horizon, something mankind could not stop.
And does anyone really thing the C'tan are properly utilized now? Taking these guys and turning them into jokes/essentially writing them out of fluff? You had a cool concept that could have been like the Reapers in Mass Effect, and they completely squandered it. Remember the Dragon of Mars? All the fun and speculation and coolness surrounding that? Well, it's irrelevant now. He's a stupid slave to some honorable feudal lord.
Also the new fluff also makes no sense, even by 40k standards. Why did the Necrons go into the "Great Sleep" again? Because the Eldar were threatening them? They had just defeated the Old Ones, and now the fething Eldar were a big deal? What?
In short the appeal of the original Necrons was they actually felt fresh in 40k, a race of ancient eldtrich terrors and emotionless machines at the beckon of Lovecraftian space-gods. This separated them from the enigmatic Eldar, the viciously evil Chaos, the crazy Orks, the organic extra-galactic Tyranids. They had a feel of a cross between space-zombies and ancient murderous machines, separating them from even the Tyranids who seemed far more mindless and random than the cold, calculating incomprehensible minds of the machines. Now they just feel like an honorable space Egyptians ruling petty irrelevant kingdoms on the Imperium's borders who just so happen to be made of metal. Necron Lords went from feeling like Harbinger from Mass Effect to feeling like chivalrious knights and Space Marines. Hell most Necrons seem to dislike being machines in the new fluff! You do not have a supposedly threatening race of machines and have them actively dislike being machines.
TL;DR: Oldcrons were Reapers, Newcrons are metallic Space Marines
|
This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2014/05/22 22:08:31
My Armies:
5,500pts
2,700pts
2,000pts
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 22:10:16
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
If anything the latest Necrons, shown by FW, are excessively powerful in terms of background:
In FW's The Fall of Orpeus:
In the Fall of Orpheus FW book, the reinforced Imperial sector fleet was shown to comprise 7 battleships (including 1 Retribution and 1 Apocalypse class), "more than 60" cruisers and capital ships, "several hundred" escort class vessels, 4 Space Marine battle barges, and 8 Space Marine strike cruisers.
Facing them, the Necrons are described as fielding less than a quarter of the Imperial ship numbers. The breakdown was 2 Tombships, 20 harvest ships, and the rest escort class vessels, with some later confirmed to be Dirge class raiders.
Though the breakdown of Imperial losses was never completely given, the narrative showed that Imperial losses as at least 2 battleships, 1 battlecruiser, 1 heavy cruiser, 2 battle barges, 3 strike cruisers. In the end, less than 10% of the Imperial fleet was still fit for combat. Little detail was shown of Necron losses with the only definite details being 1 destroyed harvest ship and damage to 1 Tombship. The other Tombship was shown to remain fully operational at the end.
In terms of size, FW has definitely taken to upping everything to ever higher limits. The BFG supplement Warp Storm gives the Battle of Callavell in the Age of Apostacy as one of the largest "set-piece" battles in Imperial history, In that, the Imperial force fielded 8 battleships, 5 grand cruisers, 6 battlecruisers, 5 heavy cruisers, 9 cruisers, and 6 light cruisers for a total of 37 capital ships. The renegade forces in that battle fielded 6 battleships, 4 grand cruisers, 6 battlecruisers, 9 heavy cruisers, 11 cruisers, and 8 light cruisers for a total of 46 capital ships.
So in other words, a single Necron dynasty awakened and within 1 year met and virtually wiped out one of the largest Imperial fleets in the history of the Imperium with modest almost minimal losses. This single dynasty goes on to take out 60 worlds in 100 days, essentially gutting the sector, and it fights off the Imperial counterattack sufficiently that 7 years later after the initial Necron attack, the Imperium dissolves the Orpheus sector.
Abaddon fights for literally decades in the Gothic sector for the sake of acquiring Blackstone Fortresses and he doesn't actually conquer the sector, yet the Necrons essentially tear through an equivalent amount of worlds in under a year, with the remaining time really just mop up. If one Necron dynasty can do that, it really starts to raise issues for why earlier active Necron dynasties haven't torn down the Imperium already if a dynasty can take out 60 worlds in 100 days.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 22:10:17
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
Newcrons are awful, pure unadulterated awful. They took what was a menacing unstoppable machine army of cold emotionless destruction and turned them into a feuding sproadic mess of in-fighting space Egyptians. It's not even relevant that they're machines anymore.
Tyranids did it first and did it better than Old Crons.
|
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 22:14:49
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Psienesis wrote:Newcrons are awful, pure unadulterated awful. They took what was a menacing unstoppable machine army of cold emotionless destruction and turned them into a feuding sproadic mess of in-fighting space Egyptians. It's not even relevant that they're machines anymore.
Tyranids did it first and did it better than Old Crons.
A certain race's fluff being better than Oldcron fluff does not mean Newcron > Oldcrons though.
Anyway I found the Necrons more interesting then Tyranids, because they had a more complicated mythology behind them and had these Lovecraftian space-gods as their puppetmasters. There were mysteries like how they harvested souls, the Dragon of Mars, their hatred of the Warp, and what their endgame was. Tyranids had a certain force-of-nature mindless feel to them, whereas for the Necrons you knew there was a real sentient malevolence behind it all. Again, I doubt people would say the Reapers from Mass Effect are identical to the Tyranids, and the Oldcrons felt a lot like that.
Also they were capable of FTL travel, whereas the newcrons aren't. That's just stupidly hilarious.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/22 22:16:00
My Armies:
5,500pts
2,700pts
2,000pts
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 22:15:17
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
Temple Prime
|
Old thread is old. Half of the people who posted on this thread aren't even active anymore.
|
Midnightdeathblade wrote:Think of a daemon incursion like a fart you don't quite trust... you could either toot a little puff of air, bellow a great effluvium, or utterly sh*t your pants and cry as it floods down your leg.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 22:18:20
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
Kain wrote:Old thread is old. Half of the people who posted on this thread aren't even active anymore.
You are correct, sir. The most-recent four or five responses were current, so I thought we were golden. Instead, it turns out that we are Necromancer Black (available from Citadel in Summer '14!)
|
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 22:23:52
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Hangin' with Gork & Mork
The Ruins of the Boston Commonwealth
|
I was going to put up an image of the Nostalgia Critics Old vs New image. But I couldn't get the dumb link to work.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/22 22:25:26
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 22:24:58
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
Edit: Fixed now.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/22 22:25:13
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 23:08:49
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
The scent of the grave carried on the chill wind as the dead thread clawed it's way from the frozen earth to haunt the living.
I hold the " new" Necrons to be far superior. To me old Necrons very villain sues, maybe not exactly that term but I'm tired, copying from the Tyranids and led by PG13 Chaos Gods with all the charisma that entails.
While the Necrons are hardly original now, I feel they bring more and fit more organically with the setting now than they ever did in 3e.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/22 23:29:28
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
Seattle
|
... if it hasn't been made obvious, we're responding to a thread that's now several years old, with the latest post prior to the heretical action of Threadromancy being performed dated over 2 years ago.
Let's let this one die.
|
It is best to be a pessimist. You are usually right and, when you're wrong, you're pleasantly surprised. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/23 03:05:32
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Daemonic Dreadnought
|
For me, I did love a lot of the old stuff at the time. However, in hindsight, the Necrons did need some fleshing out and some others said, they were a bit stereotypical of unknown unrelenting cosmic horrors. The new fluff though... doesn't do it for me.
So I ignore the fluff in the codex and made my own, more to my liking and a bit of a compromise between the old and new fluff.
whoops, my apologies...
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/05/23 03:07:37
Gods? There are no gods. Merely existences, obstacles to overcome.
"And what if I told you the Wolves tried to bring a Legion to heel once before? What if that Legion sent Russ and his dogs running, too ashamed to write down their defeat in Imperial archives?" - ADB |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/23 19:20:38
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Kain wrote:Old thread is old. Half of the people who posted on this thread aren't even active anymore. To be fair, it's an old thread about the oldest race in the entire universe. Fitting! The C'tan at least. Necrons technically aren't a race, though, as they don't live and the Necrontyr have been extincted. I recommend the Fall of Orpheus (Imperial Armor 12) Necron fluff. It's a good read that's much closer to the actual Necron lore than the 5th codex trash.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/23 19:21:27
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/23 20:19:22
Subject: Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
Moscow, Russia
|
They're very different kinds of fluff.
Both are archetypes of undead, variations of the mummy theme. In Outer Space, of course.
Oldcrons are cosmic horror genre mummies. There are a thousand horror movies with them in it. (A lot of them seem to be Italian and low-budget!  )
Newcrons are swords and sorcery mummies, Dungeons and Dragons liches, the kind of foes that Conan would fight. Only in Outer Space.
Personally I prefer the former, but it's a matter of taste.
Incidentally, I have a sneaking suspicion that Orikan the Diviner is really a C'tan. The stars "restore to him a fraction of ancient power" at which point his stat line turns into that of a C'tan Shard.
EDIT: whoops
|
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/05/23 20:37:21
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/05/23 23:34:51
Subject: Re:Old Versus New Necron Fluff?
|
 |
Morphing Obliterator
Elsewhere
|
---> ups, old topic, thread necromancy
For me, the new fluff is good. I like it. This is probably because I see them as Tomb Kings and I like TK. But I totally LOVED the old fluff. The 3rd ed Necron Codex is one of my favs.
While there was few real information, it was clearly based on the 'Lovecraft in space' trope, so I (and many others) filled the gap with all sorts of crazy stuff taken from books, novels and movies. Terminator, The Berserker saga by Saberhagen, Cthulhu-tech or, to put a recent example, the Reapers in Mass Effect are good examples of old-necrons. It was a bottomless hole of imagination and creativity. It was deep. You only need to do a count of how many conspiracy theories the fans wrote about the old necrons to realize how exciting was the old necron fluff to some of us.
I hope they give that back to us.
Actually, I wish they merge both oldcrons and newcrons. Expand the Severed Lords (without turning them into lame 'emperor whatever', please, they are killing machines) and give us Tomb Worlds and Severed Worlds, both convinced of being the 'true' necrons, both waging an eternal war against each other.
Three specific bits I find hard to swallow in the new fluff are:
1) The Necron previous to Nyadra'zatha opening the webway: lacking FTL movement while waging a galactic war screams 'I know nothing on physics'. I find it quite embarrassing.
2) Hiding from the Eldar for 60 million years. The Eldar missing the countless tomb worlds, even if in some cases there are necron constructions vissible from space
3) The Necrons having human feelings. It is not that they have feelings, they are exactly robo-humans. They talk to humans, send them letters, find them honourable, value them... It is the less xeno-like xeno species in 40k. And it is not that most of the rest are not humanoid and human-like.
The third one can be easily solved with a pet theory of mine: Tomb World - Necrons are actually humans turned into Necrons, perhaps taken from Terra some thousand years ago.
And one thing that really piss me off: why in  we moved from four C´tan to many yet we moved from countless Chaos Gods to four?
EDIT: Wow!!! Didn´t realize this was the same old thread on Necrons.
Such necromancy.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/05/23 23:40:03
‘Your warriors will stand down and withdraw, Curze. That is an order, not a request. (…) When this campaign is won, you and I will have words’
Rogal Dorn, just before taking the beating of his life.
from The Dark King, by Graham McNeill.
|
|
 |
 |
|