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.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

We have an Eldar go from being a normal citizen to spontaneously becoming (not even being absorbed by) a Warp Spider phoenix lord. The fact that he's named "Lykhosidae" is lame and lazy, but not unforgivable if not for the rest of the book.

So that's where the warp spider phoenix lord is from.

Thanks

Coule of bits i am not sure are that out of wack

We have Craftworld Eldar who are not psykers.
Thats unlikely but on the other hand, transition from Eldar to Dark Eldar who don't use their psychic powers is now in the novels......and the reverse

We have Craftworld Eldar who worship Slaanesh. Thats possible - there is a whole Craftworld that falls in the previous Demons Codex (IIRC) due to a girl being corrupted by Chaos - plus there are references in the Eldar Codexes to those who still follow the old ways of excess - the Path system is supposed to safeguard against this but its not infaliable and one of the few ways to permanently escape Slaanesh would be to pledge yourself to one of the other Powers, or else maintain your existance by serving the Choas Lord itself.

 Psienesis wrote:
Everything. There is no such thing as canon in 40K. Actually, it's all canon..

This is such a cop-out. I'm not blaming you for it. GW likes to hold onto this idea.


The reality is that their editorial vision is so poor that they can't keep control of their own license and have given up trying, haha.

I have an order of canon.

1) Codices(newest taking priority over old)

2) Rulebook

3) Black Library

I usually accept most of codex and rulebook as well as some of the BL books though nothing HH mainly I refuse to believe Ferrus i dead plus I preferred the Heresy when it was mostly a mystery .

 Grey Templar wrote:
I have an order of canon.

1) Codices(newest taking priority over old)

2) Rulebook

3) Black Library

I agree with this order. However, I also tend to agree that if the rulebook has different fluff than the codex but the rulebook is newer I take the BRB fluff.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:*Groan* When people say Khornate Knight, they mean what 1d4chan says about the Ward GK's. Understand now?

So, what I have been saying all the time.

Did you just not understand what I wrote there? It really comes across as if you just did a complete 180 there.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Seriously? ha ha ha that is hilarious. But I think you're exaggerating.

On what grounds, specifically?
The infiltration thing (which you just posted "why not" on) is the main plot of the novel. Or were you referring to the info on how the Sisterhood recruits in GW fluff?

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Link to the THQ thing, please?

There you go.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Also different weapon patterns fixes that issue seeing as different patterns may not work in the same way. Also, it could have just been a mistake. still just because they depict weapons wrong doesn't mean that the source is wrong.

The "different patterns" excuse does not work when both sources say it's a Godwyn-pattern.

And no, it does not mean that Space Marine is wrong. I have specifically said as much in the very post you just answered:
"Which doesn't mean that either fluff is "false". It just means that we should acknowledge that there will be ... differences in interpretation, "different lenses" as Aaron Dembski-Bowden put it. And it's up to us to pick which one we want to look through."

Corporal_Reznov wrote:IIRC, the Only War rpg has it that IG can repair their vehicles. 15 hours has people who do rudimentary repairs to machines. Seriously, Lynata, do you really expect the mechanicus to fix everything mechanical on one planet when it has more important things to focus on?

That is how the IG Codex describes it.
As for Only War - funny thing that you mention it, should I put together a list on where that source clashes with GW? Female Vostroyan Firstborn, Guard Medics carrying the Marine Apothecary's geneseed helix icon, all lasguns and -pistols instead of just the Triplex having variable charges, ...


Really, all it comes down to is that there is no such thing as a definite answer for any detail in 40k. The stuff that actually is sacrosanct and even enforced by GW (such as the Emperor being a half-dead guy) probably fits on a single page or A4 paper. Considering all the material that has been put out over the years by all the different studios and licensees, this is very, very, very little. Gav Thorpe once wrote an explanation on his blog here.
I think the vast majority of the inconsistencies aren't even noticed as most people tend to be rather focused in what they read. It is only when several fans get together and exchange their experiences - such as on a forum like dakka - that conflicts arise.

 Lynata wrote:

Corporal_Reznov wrote:*Groan* When people say Khornate Knight, they mean what 1d4chan says about the Ward GK's. Understand now?

So, what I have been saying all the time.

Did you just not understand what I wrote there? It really comes across as if you just did a complete 180 there.

What the hell are you talking about? I don't even remember what the hell we were arguing about when it comes to the Khornate Knights.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Seriously? ha ha ha that is hilarious. But I think you're exaggerating.

On what grounds, specifically?
The infiltration thing (which you just posted "why not" on) is the main plot of the novel. Or were you referring to the info on how the Sisterhood recruits in GW fluff?

The killing thing, of course.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Link to the THQ thing, please?

There you go.

Okay. doesn't change the fact that the IG being able to do rudimentary repairs is now canon. Also the 15 hours novel shows what I've been saying is true.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Also different weapon patterns fixes that issue seeing as different patterns may not work in the same way. Also, it could have just been a mistake. still just because they depict weapons wrong doesn't mean that the source is wrong.

The "different patterns" excuse does not work when both sources say it's a Godwyn-pattern.

Fine.

And no, it does not mean that Space Marine is wrong. I have specifically said as much in the very post you just answered:
"Which doesn't mean that either fluff is "false". It just means that we should acknowledge that there will be ... differences in interpretation, "different lenses" as Aaron Dembski-Bowden put it. And it's up to us to pick which one we want to look through."

Then why is it that all of your posts come of as condescending towards non-GW fluff and you always lecturing people? 40k is a big place, almost anything can happen in it and almost be accepted easily.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:IIRC, the Only War rpg has it that IG can repair their vehicles. 15 hours has people who do rudimentary repairs to machines. Seriously, Lynata, do you really expect the mechanicus to fix everything mechanical on one planet when it has more important things to focus on?

That is how the IG Codex describes it.

Codexes say a lot of things. Doesn't mean that they are the full truth on the ground. according to you, the Ig shouldn't be able to even clean or maintain their lasguns! Only the tech priests can and should do it! Common sense shouldn't exist cause consistency of the holy codex.

As for Only War - funny thing that you mention it, should I put together a list on where that source clashes with GW? Female Vostroyan Firstborn, Guard Medics carrying the Marine Apothecary's geneseed helix icon, all lasguns and -pistols instead of just the Triplex having variable charges, ...

Shows up in the codex and includes Bl fluff, so canon, despite your constant complaints.

Really, all it comes down to is that there is no such thing as a definite answer for any detail in 40k. The stuff that actually is sacrosanct and even enforced by GW (such as the Emperor being a half-dead guy) probably fits on a single page or A4 paper. Considering all the material that has been put out over the years by all the different studios and licensees, this is very, very, very little. Gav Thorpe once wrote an explanation on his blog here.
I think the vast majority of the inconsistencies aren't even noticed as most people tend to be rather focused in what they read. It is only when several fans get together and exchange their experiences - such as on a forum like dakka - that conflicts arise.

Another one of your constant posting and lecturing of crap I already know. How original .

I would say that the rulebook and codicies are more cannon, in the sense that they outline how the universe works, and tell us in-universe facts like "Guardsmen are armed with lasguns, not ultra-powerful deathrays that can destroy planets". However, I do consider the stories to be about as cannon as any other source (May or may not have happened), and is just the view of the codex's race.

I swear to Gork this thread pops up once every 3 days. The only difference between this thread and the others is the poll.

Selym wrote:I would say that the rulebook and codicies are more cannon, in the sense that they outline how the universe works, and tell us in-universe facts like "Guardsmen are armed with lasguns, not ultra-powerful deathrays that can destroy planets". However, I do consider the stories to be about as cannon as any other source (May or may not have happened), and is just the view of the codex's race.

Novels have IG armed with Lasguns too. They don't change that. The stories are showing and telling us of events and how worlds are on the ground in the 40k galaxy. Codexes just give out an outline.

gpfunk wrote:I swear to Gork this thread pops up once every 3 days. The only difference between this thread and the others is the poll.

Completely agree with you! Its annoying.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:

Selym wrote:I would say that the rulebook and codicies are more cannon, in the sense that they outline how the universe works, and tell us in-universe facts like "Guardsmen are armed with lasguns, not ultra-powerful deathrays that can destroy planets". However, I do consider the stories to be about as cannon as any other source (May or may not have happened), and is just the view of the codex's race.

Novels have IG armed with Lasguns too. They don't change that. The stories are showing and telling us of events and how worlds are on the ground in the 40k galaxy. Codexes just give out an outline.

That's what I was saying.

 gpfunk wrote:
I swear to Gork this thread pops up once every 3 days. The only difference between this thread and the others is the poll.

Sorry gpfunk! I tried to use the search function and while the arguments covered in here may be in other posts, I couldn't find a definitive answer! Hopefully new threads won't pop up as often now that there is one with a fancy poll and the words "40K Canon" right in the title.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:

Codexes say a lot of things. Doesn't mean that they are the full truth on the ground. according to you, the Ig shouldn't be able to even clean or maintain their lasguns! Only the tech priests can and should do it! Common sense shouldn't exist cause consistency of the holy codex.

Surprisingly, this is a fairly accurate take on the Imperium and the Mechanicus' take on the whole matter. Sarcasm ignored, of course.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:What the hell are you talking about? I don't even remember what the hell we were arguing about when it comes to the Khornate Knights.

Okay. Recap:

Me: The internet is full of hyperbole, citing the "Khornate GKs" as an example.
You: Claiming that this does not actually refer to GKs worshipping Khorne but to GKs as written by Ward.
Me: Pointing to a post on the same page from a dakkanaut who says exactly that.
You: Suddenly claiming that "Khornate GKs" refers to the internet hyperbole.
Me: Confused. Pointing out that this is what I've been talking about all along.
You: Claiming memory loss.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Okay. doesn't change the fact that the IG being able to do rudimentary repairs is now canon. Also the 15 hours novel shows what I've been saying is true.

According to the very people who write the novels you read, there is no such thing as "canon" in 40k.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Then why is it that all of your posts come of as condescending towards non-GW fluff and you always lecturing people?

The condescending tone stems from my opinion on the material I have read, or rather a certain disappointment regarding the completely unnecessary lack of consistency between it. Either way, the tone does not change the contents of the message.

As far as the lecturing is concerned, I only do that when I deem it necessary. Like when people talk about stuff being "canon". This one thing is a personal crusade of mine, because I have come to the conclusion that the community as a whole is better off once we have everyone stopping to try and enforce their favorite book as bearing The One Truth on a given subject.

Contradictions will occur. Sometimes they can be explained, other times they should be discarded by picking your personal preference. Either way, given how GW runs the franchise, there is no such thing as a singular uniform vision of this setting. Just lots and lots of different interpretations.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Shows up in the codex and includes Bl fluff, so canon, despite your constant complaints.

The Codex specifically sets the Triplex apart for being the one lasgun that has this feature. That's why I bring it up.
Ironically, this is actually how FFG wrote it at first as well, but then the playtesters whined in the forum and demanded variable power settings for other weapons as well - until the designers caved in and made it a standard feature of all lasguns and laspistols in the book.

And no, still not canon.

 Lynata wrote:

Corporal_Reznov wrote:What the hell are you talking about? I don't even remember what the hell we were arguing about when it comes to the Khornate Knights.

Okay. Recap:

Me: The internet is full of hyperbole, citing the "Khornate GKs" as an example.
You: Claiming that this does not actually refer to GKs worshipping Khorne but to GKs as written by Ward.
Me: Pointing to a post on the same page from a dakkanaut who says exactly that.
You: Suddenly claiming that "Khornate GKs" refers to the internet hyperbole.
Me: Confused. Pointing out that this is what I've been talking about all along.
You: Claiming memory loss.

Ah! I wasn't really paying attention to that guy. I was simply pointing out that the Khornate Knights thing came from 1d4chan.

According to the very people who write the novels you read, there is no such thing as "canon" in 40k.

Canon in that they take place in the same timeline and galaxy. Happy?

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Then why is it that all of your posts come of as condescending towards non-GW fluff and you always lecturing people?

The condescending tone stems from my opinion on the material I have read, or rather a certain disappointment regarding the completely unnecessary lack of consistency between it. Either way, the tone does not change the contents of the message.

As far as the lecturing is concerned, I only do that when I deem it necessary. Like when people talk about stuff being "canon". This one thing is a personal crusade of mine, because I have come to the conclusion that the community as a whole is better off once we have everyone stopping to try and enforce their favorite book as bearing The One Truth on a given subject.

Contradictions will occur. Sometimes they can be explained, other times they should be discarded by picking your personal preference. Either way, given how GW runs the franchise, there is no such thing as a singular uniform vision of this setting. Just lots and lots of different interpretations.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Canon in that they take place in the same timeline and galaxy. Happy?

You do realise that your own usage of the term "canon" is not exactly in line with how it is generally understood?
You're going to create a lot of confusion that way...

[edit] Do you simply mean "official"? As in "has the license and bears the 40k stamp"?

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Funny. To me the ones who try and force their favorite book to become the one truth are the one's who dislike all other sources and just praise the holy codexes, like you.

I once was like that as well, actually.
The more explanations from the various authors and game designers actually working on the material I have found, however, the better I understood how GW actually handles the franchise. And at some point, I had an epiphany.

When I first joined the community of 40k players, I adopted the "stuff is canon" perspective simply because everyone else was acting like it's true, without even fact-checking it and simply believing what people said. Huge mistake, could've saved me a lot of frustration if I had seen it for what it was back then. This, coupled with my disappointment, is my chief reason for why I keep pressing this issue. I wouldn't want any other fan to fall in the same trap like me, just because others keep propagating this urban myth. They deserve to be told.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:*shrug* It doesn't matter at this point. GW has accepted FFG into the wider galaxy. We have to rationalize why all the guns have variable settings. Although I have to ask, is from what edition the Triplex from?

We don't "have" to rationalise anything, as FFG's material is just another option you are free to get inspired from. It doesn't supersede anything, not even fan-fiction, unless you want it to. And it changes from book to book, anyways. I well remember how variable power settings on lasguns being common was supposed to be a Chaos thing back when they released Black Crusade, explained with renegades not caring for AdMech regulations. Which was a lot closer to the original source material than what they ended up publishing in OW after caving in to player petitions.

The Triplex is mentioned in the 5E Guard Codex on page 38, as well as GW's Inquisitor RPG (free PDF here).

Corporal_Reznov wrote:You have just reversed your position from earlier! Thats not consistent! So you're obviously not Lynata !

Huh?

[quote=Lynata 513428 5398232 279c7d2a99de299f7684cd26bcebe4ed.jpegYou do realise that your own usage of the term "canon" is not exactly in line with how it is generally understood?
You're going to create a lot of confusion that way...

Corporal_Reznov wrote:*sigh* You know Lynata, its very frustrating talking to you.

That's because this is a frustrating topic.
I don't get much enjoyment out of doing this, either. Yet I feel as if I'd betray my position if I'd just give up and stop talking.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Maybe GW will change and go with what FFG has done.

Maybe - with some of their stuff? Who knows. Gav talked about the studio occasionally adopting cool things from outside sources in his blog, too:

"If the developers and other creative folks believe a contribution by an author fits the bill and has an appeal to the audience, why not fold it back into the ‘game’ world – such as Gaunt’s Ghosts or characters from the Gotrek and Felix series. On the other hand, if an author has a bit of a wobbly moment, there’s no pressure to feel that it has to be accepted into the worldview promulgated by the codexes and army books."

Occasionally you can find stuff from non-studio sources embedded into GW sources. The story of Ephrael Stern, for instance, was referenced in the Liber Sororitas as well as in a "Villainy & Infamy" article on the website. And the Witchhunters Codex contains a short excerpt from one of Abnett's books.
All we can do is hope that they pick the things that we as individuals like most, and discard the things we dislike.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:I was kidding you dolt and making fun of your statement that there is no canon and then later saying that its not canon.

Well, it's not canon because there is no such thing as a canon*. That's no contradiction.

*: "canon" as understood in the shape of a uniform portrayal of the setting, which I believe is the most common definition of the term amongst fans

I'll fire you both out of a cannon at this rate. :p


(actually, I agree with Lynata, but the joke was worth it).

 Furyou Miko wrote:
I'll fire you both out of a cannon at this rate. :p


(actually, I agree with Lynata, but the joke was worth it).

To me canon is essentially accepted official fluff like Codexes, BL novels and FFG rpg's, etc. Essentially anything liscensed by GW.

Other than that go wild cause 40k fluff is filled with contradiction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:

Corporal_Reznov wrote:*sigh* You know Lynata, its very frustrating talking to you.

That's because this is a frustrating topic.
I don't get much enjoyment out of doing this, either. Yet I feel as if I'd betray my position if I'd just give up and stop talking.

*sigh* I can utterly agree that discussing canon sucks.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Maybe GW will change and go with what FFG has done.

Maybe - with some of their stuff? Who knows. Gav talked about the studio occasionally adopting cool things from outside sources in his blog, too:

"If the developers and other creative folks believe a contribution by an author fits the bill and has an appeal to the audience, why not fold it back into the ‘game’ world – such as Gaunt’s Ghosts or characters from the Gotrek and Felix series. On the other hand, if an author has a bit of a wobbly moment, there’s no pressure to feel that it has to be accepted into the worldview promulgated by the codexes and army books."

Occasionally you can find stuff from non-studio sources embedded into GW sources. The story of Ephrael Stern, for instance, was referenced in the Liber Sororitas as well as in a "Villainy & Infamy" article on the website. And the Witchhunters Codex contains a short excerpt from one of Abnett's books.
All we can do is hope that they pick the things that we as individuals like most, and discard the things we dislike.

*shrug*

Corporal_Reznov wrote:I was kidding you dolt and making fun of your statement that there is no canon and then later saying that its not canon.

Well, it's not canon because there is no such thing as a canon*. That's no contradiction.

*: "canon" as understood in the shape of a uniform portrayal of the setting, which I believe is the most common definition of the term amongst fans

Canon is what is accepted as actually part of a setting and that it happened. For example, Star Trek canon is only the tv shows and movies IIRC. So for example, we don't know what happened in the time between Star Trek Insurrection and Star Trek Nemesis. The trek novels do tell us what happened but because they are not canon. They are not accepted as what actually happened in the time between the two movies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_%28fiction%29 Canon according to wikipedia

4TheG8erGood wrote:

 gpfunk wrote:
I swear to Gork this thread pops up once every 3 days. The only difference between this thread and the others is the poll.

Sorry gpfunk! I tried to use the search function and while the arguments covered in here may be in other posts, I couldn't find a definitive answer! Hopefully new threads won't pop up as often now that there is one with a fancy poll and the words "40K Canon" right in the title.

It's alright. It always ends the same in my observation. Thread goes on for a few pages, people think that GW licensed products are canon, then video games featuring 40k, then personal fluff. And then it all comes to a sudden end when one dutiful person digs up that very old GW quote where it says that you're essentially allowed to define your own canon in reference to your own hobby experience.

 gpfunk wrote:

4TheG8erGood wrote:

 gpfunk wrote:
I swear to Gork this thread pops up once every 3 days. The only difference between this thread and the others is the poll.

Sorry gpfunk! I tried to use the search function and while the arguments covered in here may be in other posts, I couldn't find a definitive answer! Hopefully new threads won't pop up as often now that there is one with a fancy poll and the words "40K Canon" right in the title.

It's alright. It always ends the same in my observation. Thread goes on for a few pages, people think that GW licensed products are canon, then video games featuring 40k, then personal fluff. And then it all comes to a sudden end when one dutiful person digs up that very old GW quote where it says that you're essentially allowed to define your own canon in reference to your own hobby experience.

I have no problem with this thinking at all. As long as people realize that their own thinking of how things are done in 40k galaxy are fanon or canon for them and aren't part of the official 40k setting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lynata, I just checked the Only War core rulebook and the Triplex pattern is the only one with a variable firing mode, unless I missed something?

Also Black Crusade has this to say:

LASGUN

[b]Produced in the trillions, the lasgun (created in hundreds of
local and Imperial patterns)[/b] varies in shape and appearance
but remains a reliable and functional infantry rifle. Though
there are more powerful weapons, few rival the lasgun’s
dependability and robustness.

Lasgun variable setting: Certain patterns of lasguns
have a variable setting option, allowing them to fi re higherpowered
bursts. This is especially true amongst the renegades
of the Screaming Vortex, who are not forced by Mechanicus
strictures to maintain their weapons to some artifi cial
standard. Lasguns may be fi red on overcharge mode, dealing
+1 Damage but using two shots worth of ammunition per
shot fi red. Additionally, they may be fi red on overload mode,
dealing +2 Damage and gaining +2 Penetration. In this case
they use four shots worth of ammunition per shot fi red, lose
Reliable, and gain Unreliable.

This makes it so that its possible that the Triplex pattern is not the only variable firing mode Lasgun in existence.

edit: Forget about it. I found it.

M36 LASGUN

Produced in a multitude of different styles and patterns, the
lasgun can be found on almost every world of the Imperium.
The M36 pattern is one of the most ubiquitous patterns.

Lasgun Variable Setting: The M36 Lasgun has a variable
setting option, allowing it to fire higher-powered bursts. It
may be changed to overcharge mode, dealing +1 Damage,
but using two shots worth of ammunition per shot fired.
Further, the lasgun may be changed to overload mode,
dealing +2 Damage and gaining +2 Penetration. In this
case, the lasgun uses four shots of ammunition per shot
fired, loses Reliable, and gains Unreliable.

It has a variable setting in relation to power/damage level of a Lasgun

whereas the Triplex pattern is versatile in that it can do a variety of things and a variety of damage:

TRIPLEX PATTERN

A highly refined variant of the standard lasgun, the triplex
offers alternative firing modes that make the weapon more
versatile on the battlefield. When fired in standard mode,
the weapon uses the Rate of Fire, Range, and Damage listed.
When fired in precision mode, the Rate of Fire is changed to
S/–/–, the Range is changed to 150m, and the weapon gains
the Accurate Quality. When fired in burst mode, the Rate of
Fire is changed to S/–/–, the Range is changed to 50m, and
the weapon gains Proven (5) and Felling (4).

Triplex Pattern Confusion
this link talks about the Triplex pattern Lasgun and a possible(probable) misprint by FFG.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Canon is what is accepted as actually part of a setting and that it happened. For example, Star Trek canon is only the tv shows and movies IIRC. So for example, we don't know what happened in the time between Star Trek Insurrection and Star Trek Nemesis. The trek novels do tell us what happened but because they are not canon. They are not accepted as what actually happened in the time between the two movies.

The difference between Star Trek and 40k being that Star Trek has an official canon, whereas with 40k it's just something that a number of fans keep wishing for - or, in the worst case, actually acting like it does exist, thus confusing newcomers to the hobby.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Triplex Pattern Confusion
this link talks about the Triplex pattern Lasgun and a possible(probable) misprint by FFG.

Not what I was referring to. I'm not sure if you were part of the Only War beta test, but originally the M36 lasgun - just like all the Imperial lasguns printed in FFG's books before - did not have any sort of power settings, and what the M36 has now was the only thing non-standard to the Triplex (with what makes it unique now not existing at all). The variable charge was a feature of the Triplex only, just like GW did it in their Inquisitor RPG. Then people complained about it on their forum for weeks on end, until they finally changed it and gave variable power settings to any lasgun and -pistol. Which obviously contradicts both GW's version as well as what FFG used to print in its other games.

Oh, and I remembered another conflict - Only War has Storm Troopers be attached as individuals to squads, rather than as squads to companies/regiments. Obviously, this is to offer players more classes to pick from (just like the female Vostroyan Firstborn) and as such many will not regard this as a bad thing even when they're aware of the contradiction.

It's not really worth it discussing all the small details at which the sources deviate from one another, though. All we need to be aware of is that they do, and what this means for us - namely that a uniform portrayal of the setting is simply not supported by this franchise, and that we are left with no other option than to cherrypick, resulting in numerous individual interpretations and lots of debates on forums like these.

 Lynata wrote:

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Canon is what is accepted as actually part of a setting and that it happened. For example, Star Trek canon is only the tv shows and movies IIRC. So for example, we don't know what happened in the time between Star Trek Insurrection and Star Trek Nemesis. The trek novels do tell us what happened but because they are not canon. They are not accepted as what actually happened in the time between the two movies.

The difference between Star Trek and 40k being that Star Trek has an official canon, whereas with 40k it's just something that a number of fans keep wishing for - or, in the worst case, actually acting like it does exist, thus confusing newcomers to the hobby.

*sigh* Lynata, I have already explained what influences my thinking here. canon pretty much doesn't exist for 40k! But for the purpose of debates we use official fluff and take it as canon. We don't use fluff people make up on their own.

Do you understand now? Or shall we just continue bitching to each other until I have to leave for summer vacation in a week's time
?

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Triplex Pattern Confusion
this link talks about the Triplex pattern Lasgun and a possible(probable) misprint by FFG.

Not what I was referring to.

I voted things I agree with, because 40k canon is unique in that it allows for different perspectives, and not even the most widely agreed upon information is safe in regard to the fact that the authors and the company itself can change the information however much they want. Assuming of course that they have sense not to change something so suddenly that it would widely and extremely outrage the fan base. For example: All Space Marine chapters can now have females in their ranks.

Went slightly off topic there...

Corporal_Reznov wrote:*sigh* Lynata, I have already explained what influences my thinking here. canon pretty much doesn't exist for 40k! But for the purpose of debates we use official fluff and take it as canon. We don't use fluff people make up on their own.
Do you understand now?

Well, I think so. Yet you still leave me confused. Why do you insist on using a term that is so misleading (and has been dismissed by GW designers and novel authors) instead of just going with "official fluff", which - as you have just proven - works just as well?

I'll try to keep your definition of the term in mind for the remainder of this thread, however...

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Also, according to FFG, the Triplex pattern has alternate firing modes whereas the M36 has variable power levels.

The Triplex has variable power levels in addition to the alternate firing modes, I think (not sure atm) - but that's besides the point. It's still in conflict with other sources (such as the Guard 'dex which mentions "variable power settings" to be a supposedly unique trait of the Triplex), which means people have to pick what they are going by.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Who knows how that happened?! Maybe GW will retcon that in or we can just put it down to the Vostroyan homeworld filling out the lacking numbers with women *shrug*

Or maybe we realise that FFG, just like numerous Black Library and Forgeworld books and GW codices, will feature ideas and interpretations of the setting that deviate from one another and move on. I can expand the list of things I noticed if you really want to debate this point further, but I don't believe that this should be necessary given how obvious the differences are and that we've had people who should know state rather explicitly that the stuff isn't even meant to tie together perfectly.

"It all stems from the assumption that there’s a binding contract between author and reader to adhere to some nonexistent subjective construct or ‘true’ representation of the setting. There is no such contract, and no such objective truth."
- Andy Hoare

It can actually be rather fun to try and excuse explain deviations between multiple sources (and I occasionally do so myself!), which is made easier by the galaxy being a damn big place and the Imperium not being very standardised - yet there's a line where I feel it should simply be dismissed as incompatible, and a single option picked by the individual gamer/reader. You really can't explain everything. And even if you do come up with an explanation, that'd be just .. well, your opinion.

Let's face it, the franchise does not lend itself well to debates concerning the level of detail fans like us seek. I think it would be beneficial if all of us keep this in mind and discuss things not by bickering over which source supposedly overrides another or establishes some sort of fact, but rather simply compare our notes and voice suggestions as a source for optional inspiration, by remembering that other people are quite free to pursue different interpretations, and by clarifying the situation to new fans who may expect something different from the franchise (like I did once, and like I think you did too). Wouldn't that be the ideal solution to the whole mess?

 Lynata wrote:

]Well, I think so. Yet you still leave me confused. Why do you insist on using a term that is so misleading (and has been dismissed by GW designers and novel authors) instead of just going with "official fluff", which - as you have just proven - works just as well?

I use the term cause thats what we use on SB. It simply means official sanctioned fluff that is part of and adds to the setting. I will just use the term "official fluff" here on dakka dakka. That make you happy?

I'll try to keep your definition of the term in mind for the remainder of this thread, however...

Thank god! Cause continuing to talk to you about this loathsome topic is getting on my nerves .


I will answer the rest of your post tomorrow. Got a lot of school(college *sigh*) work to do tonight that must be done or else I will get screwed over this sem .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Furyou Miko wrote:

Corporal_Reznov wrote:

Codexes say a lot of things. Doesn't mean that they are the full truth on the ground. according to you, the Ig shouldn't be able to even clean or maintain their lasguns! Only the tech priests can and should do it! Common sense shouldn't exist cause consistency of the holy codex.

Surprisingly, this is a fairly accurate take on the Imperium and the Mechanicus' take on the whole matter. Sarcasm ignored, of course.

Ignoring your sarcasm. Things on the ground in 40k itself don't and aren't as the codexes say. I'm sure that this post of mine will be ignored cause all that matters is the holy codex which doesn't portray the people of the Imperium as people and are instead robots.

LOL at Reznov and Lynata...

Can we al ljust get along and say that we are both right and wrong at some points?

This is 40k after all, a universe where everyone has their own PoW so it's kid of pointless to argue with that when everything is correct ( even the one that say that Dorn is not dead by missing ), except for the old fluff that was rewritten by newer one.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
I'll fire you both out of a cannon at this rate. :p

BOOM BOOM