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.

 Ashiraya wrote:
The Imperium is a myth, it's really just a dozen people sitting in a propaganda-machine.

Sooooo...Games Workshop?

 Peregrine wrote:
In the case of bolter marines vs. primarch, which is the more likely explanation: that the other primarch was an absolute ing idiot and didn't know that his bolter marines couldn't even scratch their target's paint, or that primarch durability is based primarily on myths and character shields and they can be killed by a hail of bolter fire.

What's most likely is that it was bad writing on ADB's part.

This same book outright establishes that the World Eaters were outnumbered, outgunned and outmaneuvered by the Ultramarines in the book's major battle, with the World Eaters being repeatedly routed, cut off from one another and falling into multiple traps and ambushes set by the Ultramarines. After taking several pages to establish this situation, ADB then, in the space of a page, describes how the World Eaters proceed to crush the Ultramarines and win the day because, even though they were strategically outmaneuvered on every level by the Ultramarines, they quote, "had nothing to live for", which gave them the advantage in the battle.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I'd love to see your source on this. One that you can prove is not in-universe propaganda.

Gameplay mechanics are an objective representation of the real universe since they aren't written from the perspective of any particular faction or character. Obviously there are limits to how precise you can get within the limits of a tabletop game and the D6 system, but the game tells us within a reasonable margin what is really happening. So power armor is clearly not penetrated by exactly 1/3 of all incoming lasgun shots, but we can reasonably assume that the actual effectiveness is something in that general range, not orders of magnitude better or worse.

As a bonus source, I'm too lazy to look for it, but I'm pretty sure you can find examples of marines taking cover against lasguns/bolters/etc, which is a concession that those weapons have a reasonable chance of killing a marine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
What's most likely is that it was bad writing on ADB's part.

But it's still an official source. Throwing out a source entirely because of bad writing should be the last resort, to be used only if there's no reasonable way to make it consistent with the rest of the setting.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I'd love to see your source on this. One that you can prove is not in-universe propaganda.

Gameplay mechanics are an objective representation of the real universe since they aren't written from the perspective of any particular faction or character. Obviously there are limits to how precise you can get within the limits of a tabletop game and the D6 system, but the game tells us within a reasonable margin what is really happening. So power armor is clearly not penetrated by exactly 1/3 of all incoming lasgun shots, but we can reasonably assume that the actual effectiveness is something in that general range, not orders of magnitude better or worse.

As a bonus source, I'm too lazy to look for it, but I'm pretty sure you can find examples of marines taking cover against lasguns/bolters/etc, which is a concession that those weapons have a reasonable chance of killing a marine.

Gameplay mechanics are not canon.

 Peregrine wrote:
[But it's still an official source. Throwing out a source entirely because of bad writing should be the last resort,

Indeed. And Angron physically overpowering a Titan and Lorgar tanking plasma rounds from a Warhound titan are also an official source, and throwing out a source because of myths and legends should be a last resort.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
And Angron physically overpowering a Titan and Lorgar tanking plasma rounds from a Warhound titan are also an official source, and throwing out a source because of myths and legends should be a last resort.

Except there's no plausible way for those events to be real, you have to just handwave it away as "primarchs are magic". And if it's all just magic then who knows how it works? Maybe Angron has a 2++ against titans but a special rule that bolt weapons automatically wound and inflict instant death? Alternatively, you can recognize the that role of the primarchs in the story is the same as the heroes and villains of any other religion, and that includes wildly exaggerated feats of strength.

 Peregrine wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
And Angron physically overpowering a Titan and Lorgar tanking plasma rounds from a Warhound titan are also an official source, and throwing out a source because of myths and legends should be a last resort.

Except there's no plausible way for those events to be real, you have to just handwave it away as "primarchs are magic". And if it's all just magic then who knows how it works? Maybe Angron has a 2++ against titans but a special rule that bolt weapons automatically wound and inflict instant death? Alternatively, you can recognize the that role of the primarchs in the story is the same as the heroes and villains of any other religion, and that includes wildly exaggerated feats of strength.

Primarchs are magic, is that not the whole point of Emprah sealing deals with Chaos to make them and so on?

 Peregrine wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
And Angron physically overpowering a Titan and Lorgar tanking plasma rounds from a Warhound titan are also an official source, and throwing out a source because of myths and legends should be a last resort.

Except there's no plausible way for those events to be real, you have to just handwave it away as "primarchs are magic". And if it's all just magic then who knows how it works? Maybe Angron has a 2++ against titans but a special rule that bolt weapons automatically wound and inflict instant death? Alternatively, you can recognize the that role of the primarchs in the story is the same as the heroes and villains of any other religion, and that includes wildly exaggerated feats of strength.

There's no plausible way for half of Imperial aircraft to actually fly- there's no plausible way for a few thousand to million troops to be able to fight wars that encompass entire planets and even entire solar systems.

You might not know this, but 40K is a fantasy universe. It's not even science fiction. It's explicitly a fantasy universe.

Science fiction is the improbable made possible, fantasy is the impossible made probable.


Which is more accurate to 40K?

Meditate on this.

Calm down.

Do you mean me?

I am calm. I was agreeing with you that 40K is fantasy.

yes ._.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I'd love to see your source on this. One that you can prove is not in-universe propaganda.

Gameplay mechanics are an objective representation of the real universe since they aren't written from the perspective of any particular faction or character. Obviously there are limits to how precise you can get within the limits of a tabletop game and the D6 system, but the game tells us within a reasonable margin what is really happening. So power armor is clearly not penetrated by exactly 1/3 of all incoming lasgun shots, but we can reasonably assume that the actual effectiveness is something in that general range, not orders of magnitude better or worse.

As a bonus source, I'm too lazy to look for it, but I'm pretty sure you can find examples of marines taking cover against lasguns/bolters/etc, which is a concession that those weapons have a reasonable chance of killing a marine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
What's most likely is that it was bad writing on ADB's part.

But it's still an official source. Throwing out a source entirely because of bad writing should be the last resort, to be used only if there's no reasonable way to make it consistent with the rest of the setting.

Eh, it is a safety precaution for anybody involved in a warzone to take cover from enemy fire, whether it be an autogun or a lascannon. Just because marines take cover against lasguns doesnt mean they are vulnerable to it

 Peregrine wrote:

Consider a similar situation in Star Wars: stormtrooper inaccuracy is a cliche, and the movies consistently show it. But which is the more reasonable explanation: that the empire's best troops are really that incompetent, or that they're consistently shooting at main characters who have to survive for story reasons?

The Stormtroopers have to miss or the main characters would die. With the Primarchs the enemy does not have to miss. They often hit and the Primarch survives the attack.

In Galaxy in Flames Angron survives a torrent of bolter fire that would have killed any normal Marine, seems completely unharmed and proceeds tear through the Loyalist World Eaters. The Primarchs are also established to have been infused with the Warp and as such explaining their toughness or abilities due to what is essentially magic is reasonable. The majority of relevant background shows the Primarchs as pretty much immune to bolter fire (quite possibly to explain how generals who consistently lead from the front in dozens of large battles would survive). You can decide that it's all propaganda but there's little evidence for it.

 Peregrine wrote:

No, both of those things are definitely present. Characters have their plot armor, but the various sources are often inconsistent or don't make any sense from a realism perspective. The best way to resolve those inconsistencies is to remember that the story is usually told from an imperial perspective, and the authors have explicitly stated that there is no such thing as canon in 40k and events are often wildly exaggerated to tell a better story or long-forgotten history where the story is at best an approximation of what really happened.

That's just the authors being too cowardly and stupid to make a definitive stance on what's canon or what isn't. What's explicitly stated is that it's all up to the "interpretation" of the fanbase which is just a marketing ploy. In the same statements the fluff created by players for their armies are characters is stated to be just as valid as "official" fluff. "Hey kids, your stories matter too!"

40k not having a canon doesn't help prove your point. I don't care about what yours or anyone else's personal interpretation of the fluff is. Only what is more or less the most consistent and what doesn't suck.

Oh, and realism perspective? This is a setting with giant bugs from another galaxy, fungus orcs, and the literal legions of space Hell. I don't care about realism because 40k isn't a realistic setting.

Or do you think Chaos in its entirety is just Imperial propaganda too?

It's not arbitrary, it's base on what makes the most sense. In the case of bolter marines vs. primarch, which is the more likely explanation: that the other primarch was an absolute ing idiot and didn't know that his bolter marines couldn't even scratch their target's paint, or that primarch durability is based primarily on myths and character shields and they can be killed by a hail of bolter fire.

I think Primarchs being largely incapable of being killed by small-arms fire and as such being able to survive thousands of battles filled with small-arms fire (While being a bigger target than a Space Marine) makes more sense than them being killed by small arms fire despite guys like Angron's entire style of warfare being defined as "Charge the enemy over an open field".

The Primarchs are not and will never be realistic. They aren't human beings, they owe more to mythological heroes like Hector, Achilles, Hercules, only brought to life.

What makes most sense about that instance in particular is bad, inconsistent writing, considering literally the exact same source showed a Primarch surviving being hit by a Plasma Blast Gun. Oh, but that part specifically was just a myth or a legend. The Primarch being killed by bolters wasn't though, right?

You're just picking and choosing what you like best.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
You're just picking and choosing what you like best.

Which, just to add, actually is fine and the point of the setting's canon policy.

The problem is when this selection of what one likes best is propagated as objective. It consternates me greatly.

Didn't Rogal Dorn supposedly die to a bunch of no-names in a Black Crusade? Why not Angron?

There's a huuugggee difference between the events of Betrayer and the Wolf and Red Angel going to war. In the former, Betrayer, Lorgar waz super juiced up on Chaos power and his own psychic abilities. And Angron was simply lifting a heavy object and performing resistance training. Anyone can do that to one degree or another at different pressures and resistances.
That's a hell of a lot of difference to have hundreds of large calibre explosive rounds explode inside your chest and head at close range.

 Deadshot wrote:
Didn't Rogal Dorn supposedly die to a bunch of no-names in a Black Crusade?

Did he? Do you have any evidence of that?

Last I heard, the Imp Fists merely found his hand laying around on a ship during the climax of the Crusade. The circumstances behind his death are a total mystery.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
Didn't Rogal Dorn supposedly die to a bunch of no-names in a Black Crusade?

Did he? Do you have any evidence of that?

Last I heard, the Imp Fists merely found his hand laying around on a ship during the climax of the Crusade. The circumstances behind his death are a total mystery.

That's why I said supposedly. Its the "official" story. Died on the ship, no one saw, all.they found was his hand.

Supposedly means commonly believed or assumed.

There is no common belief on how Dorn died, because the events surrounding his death are a complete mystery. For all we know, Khorne himself could have dueled him in a 1v1 and killed him. Dorn could have cut his own hand off and vented himself out an airlock. We have no idea what happened.

 Deadshot wrote:
Didn't Rogal Dorn supposedly die to a bunch of no-names in a Black Crusade? Why not Angron?

There's a huuugggee difference between the events of Betrayer and the Wolf and Red Angel going to war. In the former, Betrayer, Lorgar waz super juiced up on Chaos power and his own psychic abilities. And Angron was simply lifting a heavy object and performing resistance training. Anyone can do that to one degree or another at different pressures and resistances.
That's a hell of a lot of difference to have hundreds of large calibre explosive rounds explode inside your chest and head at close range.

Angron had a bomb blow up and bury him under hundreds of feet of rubble in Betrayer.

Lorgar also wasn't amplified when he survived the Plasma Blast Gun.

 Deadshot wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Deadshot wrote:
Didn't Rogal Dorn supposedly die to a bunch of no-names in a Black Crusade?

Did he? Do you have any evidence of that?

Last I heard, the Imp Fists merely found his hand laying around on a ship during the climax of the Crusade. The circumstances behind his death are a total mystery.

That's why I said supposedly. Its the "official" story. Died on the ship, no one saw, all.they found was his hand.

Which contradicts Angron and Lorgar and their little superman adjacent powers.

40k is science fiction, meaning its based off of technological and scientifical probabilities like time travel, warp travel, awesome plasma weaponry, ect. It is not about space magical gods like the primarchs. In a way, 40k has veered from its original sci fi universe and has become a marvel/DC universe instead and I am fairly dissapointed but oh well. Just my opinion and the rest of you can definitly choose to believe what you want.

About a squad of marines killing a primarch, I am surprised no one has brought up Unremembered Empire. A kill team of Alpha Legion put a serious hurt on Roubute with just bolters. Makes it seem plausible a number of space marines could bring down a primarch,

 Ashiraya wrote:
Primarchs are magic, is that not the whole point of Emprah sealing deals with Chaos to make them and so on?

Sure, but once you resort to "it's magic" you can no longer say things like "a primarch survived X therefore they should survive Y", since you have no idea what rules the magic works by and have conceded that it doesn't obey the usual laws of the universe. Maybe the primarch is protected from titans because they are doomed to die at the hands of an anonymous guardsman and his lasgun, and nothing can interfere with this fate. So when a random guardsman takes aim at a primarch we now have absolutely no idea what the result will be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Void__Dragon wrote:
This is a setting with giant bugs from another galaxy, fungus orcs, and the literal legions of space Hell. I don't care about realism because 40k isn't a realistic setting.

That's not how it works. Yes, 40k has things like fungus orks, but what you have to do is ask "given that fungus orks exist, what should I expect to happen", not simply throw out the entire concept of realism. And by that rule we know that primarchs exist and that there are impressive stories of the feats they performed 10,000 years ago, so the question then is how to interpret them: do we take them as literal truth, or do we consider them myths and propaganda about a long-forgotten age? The former breaks all hope of realism, the latter allows at least some degree of realism to be maintained and fits the tabletop game fairly well.

The Primarchs are not and will never be realistic. They aren't human beings, they owe more to mythological heroes like Hector, Achilles, Hercules, only brought to life.

Yes! That's exactly the point! The primarchs are the equivalent of Achilles: when we hear the stories about how he was immune to any weapon except in his foot we don't start trying to figure out how exactly that worked and what would happen if a titan shot him, we understand that his invulnerability is part of the myth and assume that the real Achilles was simply a great, but mortal, warrior. Same with the primarchs, in the 40k setting they're the mythological heroes from 10,000 years ago, and they need to be understood in that context.

Ferros wrote:
Since a by-product of the Golden Throne and the Emperor's "metabolism" is an anti-psyker material, I doubt anything Chaos-y would be too happy in the immediate vicinity.

For clarification: I forget the exact item, but I believe it's either Psycannon Ammo or those psyker grenades that are said to be full of it.

I think they put Emprah Dust in Psyker Grenades. Just a quick thought- if people snort warp dust, does anyone snort emprah dust?

 Lord Tarkin wrote:

Which contradicts Angron and Lorgar and their little superman adjacent powers.

40k is science fiction, meaning its based off of technological and scientifical probabilities like time travel, warp travel, awesome plasma weaponry, ect. It is not about space magical gods like the primarchs. In a way, 40k has veered from its original sci fi universe and has become a marvel/DC universe instead and I am fairly dissapointed but oh well. Just my opinion and the rest of you can definitly choose to believe what you want.

A. No it doesn't.

B. No it isn't. It was literally Warhammer Fantasy in space, only with sciencey terminology used to describe the magic.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 Lord Tarkin wrote:

Which contradicts Angron and Lorgar and their little superman adjacent powers.

40k is science fiction, meaning its based off of technological and scientifical probabilities like time travel, warp travel, awesome plasma weaponry, ect. It is not about space magical gods like the primarchs. In a way, 40k has veered from its original sci fi universe and has become a marvel/DC universe instead and I am fairly dissapointed but oh well. Just my opinion and the rest of you can definitly choose to believe what you want.

A. No it doesn't.

B. No it isn't. It was literally Warhammer Fantasy in space, only with sciencey terminology used to describe the magic.

Um, no, sci fi buddy.

(40K is fantasy ftr.)

 Ashiraya wrote:
(40K is fantasy ftr.)

No, it is really sci fi.

 Peregrine wrote:

Sure, but once you resort to "it's magic" you can no longer say things like "a primarch survived X therefore they should survive Y", since you have no idea what rules the magic works by and have conceded that it doesn't obey the usual laws of the universe. Maybe the primarch is protected from titans because they are doomed to die at the hands of an anonymous guardsman and his lasgun, and nothing can interfere with this fate. So when a random guardsman takes aim at a primarch we now have absolutely no idea what the result will be.

Sure, or maybe they're just supernaturally durable. The difference is my position has evidence to back it.

That's not how it works.

Yes, it is.

Yes, 40k has things like fungus orks, but what you have to do is ask "given that fungus orks exist, what should I expect to happen", not simply throw out the entire concept of realism. And by that rule we know that primarchs exist and that there are impressive stories of the feats they performed 10,000 years ago, so the question then is how to interpret them: do we take them as literal truth, or do we consider them myths and propaganda about a long-forgotten age? The former breaks all hope of realism, the latter allows at least some degree of realism to be maintained and fits the tabletop game fairly well.

I don't care if the former breaks all hope of realism, I'm not trying to make Warhammer 40,000 something it isn't.

As for it fitting the tabletop, oh yeah? Because on the tabletop the Primarchs are veritable beatsticks that slaughter the average Greater Daemon like they're made of tissue paper and take bolter rounds to the face with a smile. Sort of like the fluff.

Yes! That's exactly the point! The primarchs are the equivalent of Achilles: when we hear the stories about how he was immune to any weapon except in his foot we don't start trying to figure out how exactly that worked and what would happen if a titan shot him, we understand that his invulnerability is part of the myth and assume that the real Achilles was simply a great, but mortal, warrior. Same with the primarchs, in the 40k setting they're the mythological heroes from 10,000 years ago, and they need to be understood in that context.

The difference is that Achilles presumably didn't exist in a setting with actual planet-razing daemons nor was he expected to fight them in hand to hand combat. There's no proof the mythological creatures of antiquity existed. Bloodthirsters definitely do exist in 40k, and Sanguinius broke one of the mightiest of their number's backs over his knee.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lord Tarkin wrote:

No, it is really sci fi.

Okay let's go about this another way.

Are you aware of the concept of science fiction hardness?