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.

 SolidOakie wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 SolidOakie wrote:
I'd say Alpharius because based on what I've read the Alpha Legion always accomplishes their goals.

given how complex Alpharus' schemes are, do they really? or does he build a giant "Strategic goldberg machine" that does something completely unexpected half the time followed bhy him steepling his fingers and going "... umm just as planned yes.,.."

sides, he's had stuff go sideways on him before, Preatorian of Dorn did NOT turn out the way he intended.

I haven't read that one yet but look forward to it! It's high time he got some egg on this face

He got more than just an egg to the face

The lion was the "warmaster" Equivalent for the imperium secundus, and both Guilliman and Sanguinius choose him for that role because they both knew he was the best fit. The problem with the lion is, he is too prideful. The smallest slight can set him off, and make him take stupid actions. His battle with Leman Russ, dumb, trying to kill Konrad Cruze in front of Guilliman and Sanguinius, dumb, banishing luther, dumb, killing Nemiel, also dumb. The common thread to all of those dumb actions is a slight to his pride.

One wonders how he would handle an actual defeat, but we may never find out because he hasn't been beaten when leading an army. The closest we've seen to him losing is him not wiping out the entire force that's facing him, or sparing the man who raised him like a father.

I'd say Lorgar just for the reason that when he conquered world, he would meticulously set to making sure it would stay loyal to the imperium (the best fire is one you dont have to stamp out every ten seconds). His legion then changed to using blitz and blowthrough tactics after Monarchia (doing so very efficiantly) . And during the Horus Heresy, he went head to head with Guilliman, and won.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Saber wrote:
Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

Rogal Dorn is responsible for the massacre as Istvaan V. He is a fething idiot.

I thought that was Horus?

According to Horus in Vengeful Spirit Ferrus Manus was supposed to be the best, hard to believe after his charging in an Istvaan V and the Iron Hands style of combat. Opinions seem to change like water though. I think Guilliman would be up there, changing the outcome of the assault on the 500 worlds from a total defeat to an ish victory was pretty competent.

The Lion, afaik, is described in the fluff the best strategist and tactician, though none of them were slouches at warfare. Guilliman is a glorified secretary in comparison.

 Novelist47 wrote:
Honestly Horus. There was a very good reason he was chosen Warmaster - he had a formidable military mind. The Luna Wolves were also superbly suited for what space marine should always be doing - shock and awe, aka. breakthrough tactics.

All in all, Horus was probably the best.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
The Lion is considered the greatest tactician, and Ferrus Manus was considered the greatest at warfare.

... after Horus ofcourse!

No, he wasn't. Horus was the only one with the social skills (bar maybe Sanguinius) to be the only accepted first among equals. That's why he was chosen by the Emperor.

BrianDavion wrote:

 SolidOakie wrote:
I'd say Alpharius because based on what I've read the Alpha Legion always accomplishes their goals.

given how complex Alpharus' schemes are, do they really? or does he build a giant "Strategic goldberg machine" that does something completely unexpected half the time followed bhy him steepling his fingers and going "... umm just as planned yes.,.."

sides, he's had stuff go sideways on him before, Preatorian of Dorn did NOT turn out the way he intended.

That's the problem with the Alpha Legion. It's superficially portrayed as insidious and powerful, but they get their asses whooped in almost every single novel bar the one where they take over an AdMech ship. I mean sure, they spend most of the time just fighting themselves, but Scars, Wolf King, Praetor of Dorn etc. all have them being in a position of superiority over some other Legion before losing during some Bond-esque bad guy speech. Their nadir was honestly them being beaten at asymmetric warfare by Dorn. Queue the slow clap.

There is nothing in the fluff to suggest Alpharius was better than any other primarch at warfare; two brains aren't always better than one it would seem.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Saber wrote:
Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

Rogal Dorn is responsible for the massacre as Istvaan V. He is a fething idiot.

I thought that was Horus?

According to Horus in Vengeful Spirit Ferrus Manus was supposed to be the best, hard to believe after his charging in an Istvaan V and the Iron Hands style of combat. Opinions seem to change like water though. I think Guilliman would be up there, changing the outcome of the assault on the 500 worlds from a total defeat to an ish victory was pretty competent.

Extermination suggests it was Alpharius' plan, actually. Sending the supposed Loyalist and Loyalist Legions there was Dorn's idea, iirc.

I could belvie istavaan V being an Alpharius plan.

 ChazSexington wrote:


Extermination suggests it was Alpharius' plan, actually. Sending the supposed Loyalist and Loyalist Legions there was Dorn's idea, iirc.

It's been hinted at yes, mentions it in the IA article as well, but it was Horus that decided something had to be done about the loyalist legions, so Horus was responsible. And it was Dorn's idea true , but I'm not sure what other options there were to Dorn to put the rebellion down and guarantee a victory short of blowing up the entire planet. It wasn't the best idea, but that's why i'm not nominating Dorn as best strategist/tactician

 Wyzilla wrote:
We have never seen Horus demonstrate any tactical prowess that couldn't be replicated by a toddler.

This is what happens when you have fluff written about tactics and strategists by people who are not themselves experienced in either.

Primarch's abilities and strengths seem to fluctuate depending on the needs of the story. If the story requires Primarch X to pull off some brilliant tactic then they will. If another story requires Primarch Y to fail stupidly, they will do that too.

In a sense this is a reflection of the fact that the Horus Heresy series is being written by a dozen different authors, each with their own take on the fluff. Add to that many of the opinions expressed in the novels are from characters and hence are wholly subjective.

Horus's deathbed confession was that Sanguinius should have been Warmaster. Gulliman viewed Dorn, Sanguinius, Leman Russ, and Ferrus Manus as the greatest of his brothers (although I cannot remember if that was before or after Horus rebelled). Guilliman supposedly supported Horus's appointment as Warmaster (as did Sanguinius). According to the old fluff, the tally of victories for the legions was:

1 Lunar Wolves
2 Dark Angels
3 Space Wolves

However, the Dark Angels had a head-start as the first legion whilst Lunar Wolves benefited from being the first legion to be reunited with their Primarch. I believe Leman Russ was also an early foundling which helps explain the Space Wolves position near the top.

The other thing to remember is that strategy is different from tactics. Strategy represents the overall approach to a battle whilst tactics are the actual means to gain an objective.



In the case of Angron, don't write him off so quickly. He had virtually no interest in strategy but that did not make him a bad tactician. His favoured tactic was to run up to the target and hit it until it died. Whilst not exactly subtle, it was remarkably successful in its own blood-thirsty way.

Wasn't there a point in one of the HH books where Russ was playing chess with someone and was discussing how he's sized up the other primarchs? Was it from Vengeful Spirit? Anyway, he said that out of all of them, Horus was the only one he wasn't sure he could beat.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:


Extermination suggests it was Alpharius' plan, actually. Sending the supposed Loyalist and Loyalist Legions there was Dorn's idea, iirc.

It's been hinted at yes, mentions it in the IA article as well, but it was Horus that decided something had to be done about the loyalist legions, so Horus was responsible. And it was Dorn's idea true , but I'm not sure what other options there were to Dorn to put the rebellion down and guarantee a victory short of blowing up the entire planet. It wasn't the best idea, but that's why i'm not nominating Dorn as best strategist/tactician

It also highlights why Dorn would've made a terrible Warmaster. He didn't know his brothers' measure.

 Quarterdime wrote:
Wasn't there a point in one of the HH books where Russ was playing chess with someone and was discussing how he's sized up the other primarchs? Was it from Vengeful Spirit? Anyway, he said that out of all of them, Horus was the only one he wasn't sure he could beat.

Well, the Khan and Mortarion also had a pissing contest on Armageddon/Ullanor (Scars, I think), where both suggested they were the best in single combat. It doesn't mean either were the best in single combat, they just happened to think they were. I can think myself tactically superior to Alexander the Great, but it doesn't mean I am superior to Big Al.

 ChazSexington wrote:


It also highlights why Dorn would've made a terrible Warmaster. He didn't know his brothers' measure.

It is Dorn's flaw, that he is too straight up and narrow. But it's a tricky one, would any other Primarch had believed it could happen though. How would you deal with the greatest of your brothers falling and taking 3 others (that you knew of) at the same time. I can see the logic behind Dorns way of thinking, it probably was the only guaranteed way to resolve the problem, stopping force by even bigger force. But how could you trust anyone? Always had a big issue with the Night Lords being involved, but needs must I guess, and after Ferrus and Fulgrim fall out where Fulgrim openly admits that Lorgar is with them as well, why include the Word Bearers, even with a contingency still above Terra.

That's 2 Legions who could have been discounted. Dorn never liked the way the Alphas fought so should have supposed something might be awry with them and he didn't get on with Perturabo So he would've been down to the 3 loyalist Legions. I think it would have been prudent to just send them. But then Horus had already been in cahoots with the other 4 so who's to say that they wouldn't have been on Istvaan anyway. But then I guess the Loyalists would have knwon something was wrong.

Lots of what if and buts.

 ChazSexington wrote:
Well, the Khan and Mortarion also had a pissing contest on Armageddon/Ullanor (Scars, I think), where both suggested they were the best in single combat. It doesn't mean either were the best in single combat, they just happened to think they were. I can think myself tactically superior to Alexander the Great, but it doesn't mean I am superior to Big Al.

Was in Scars but was on Prospero, not Ullanor

In Raven's Flight Corax has a moment about how he can't beat Angron. but then in Deliverance Lost he seems to change his mind. In Angel Exterminatus Perturabo thinks that Fulgrim is the finest Swordsman but in Scars, Sanguinius says that the Khan is. All different opinions and perspectives. I don't think that without Primarch Top Trump cards you could ever put it down who is the best at what

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:


It also highlights why Dorn would've made a terrible Warmaster. He didn't know his brothers' measure.

It is Dorn's flaw, that he is too straight up and narrow. But it's a tricky one, would any other Primarch had believed it could happen though. How would you deal with the greatest of your brothers falling and taking 3 others (that you knew of) at the same time. I can see the logic behind Dorns way of thinking, it probably was the only guaranteed way to resolve the problem, stopping force by even bigger force. But how could you trust anyone? Always had a big issue with the Night Lords being involved, but needs must I guess, and after Ferrus and Fulgrim fall out where Fulgrim openly admits that Lorgar is with them as well, why include the Word Bearers, even with a contingency still above Terra.

That's 2 Legions who could have been discounted. Dorn never liked the way the Alphas fought so should have supposed something might be awry with them and he didn't get on with Perturabo So he would've been down to the 3 loyalist Legions. I think it would have been prudent to just send them. But then Horus had already been in cahoots with the other 4 so who's to say that they wouldn't have been on Istvaan anyway. But then I guess the Loyalists would have knwon something was wrong.

Lots of what if and buts.

I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

Guilliman would probably be fretting over how Horus was ruining paperclip logistics in the IoM, Sanguinius would be emotional, Vulkan would hug a human, Corax would blame the prison system on Cthonia, and the rest would do what Dorn did.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:
Well, the Khan and Mortarion also had a pissing contest on Armageddon/Ullanor (Scars, I think), where both suggested they were the best in single combat. It doesn't mean either were the best in single combat, they just happened to think they were. I can think myself tactically superior to Alexander the Great, but it doesn't mean I am superior to Big Al.

Was in Scars but was on Prospero, not Ullanor

In Raven's Flight Corax has a moment about how he can't beat Angron. but then in Deliverance Lost he seems to change his mind. In Angel Exterminatus Perturabo thinks that Fulgrim is the finest Swordsman but in Scars, Sanguinius says that the Khan is. All different opinions and perspectives. I don't think that without Primarch Top Trump cards you could ever put it down who is the best at what

I'm referring to the discussion with Magnus and Sanguinius present (may have been others too), not the actual fight on Prospero

But aye, totally agree. It all depends on whose viewpoint we're seeing things from. As it's all made up, it's a bit like debating ninjas vs vikings.

 Karhedron wrote:
Gulliman viewed Dorn, Sanguinius, Leman Russ, and Ferrus Manus as the greatest of his brothers (although I cannot remember if that was before or after Horus rebelled).

...

In the case of Angron, don't write him off so quickly. He had virtually no interest in strategy but that did not make him a bad tactician. His favoured tactic was to run up to the target and hit it until it died. Whilst not exactly subtle, it was remarkably successful in its own blood-thirsty way.

Is that the Dauntless Few? I don't think they were supposed to be the greatest of the brothers just that they were the ones he found most dependable. I imagine they simply coordinated well in their strategies and were amenable to suggestions.

As for Angron, pit him and his Legion against equal opposing forces and he'd lose pre-Heresy. Post-Heresy the completely breakdown of discipline in Legions like the Emperors Children could narrow the gap.

ChazSexington wrote:I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

I don't see why people find it so ridiculous that the Lion would give siege weapons to a Primarch who had shown nothing but ironclad loyalty and whose speciality was in the siege warfare. It was an entirely reasonable decision.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Novelist47 wrote:
Honestly Horus. There was a very good reason he was chosen Warmaster - he had a formidable military mind. The Luna Wolves were also superbly suited for what space marine should always be doing - shock and awe, aka. breakthrough tactics.

All in all, Horus was probably the best.

We have never seen Horus demonstrate any tactical prowess that couldn't be replicated by a toddler.

That goes for every single military leader in all of 40k to be honest.

 ChazSexington wrote:

I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

This is what I thought, he seemed to be more interested in setting himself up as Warmaster rather than being careful. Selfish gain over the needs of the Imperium. The problem as well is that the Heresy series has been a mish mash of ideas and another author possibly wouldn't have gone with this. Praetorian of Dorn makes Dorn out to be very capable which I believe he is, but then you have Istvaan and the Iron Cage and you have to wonder.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

I don't see why people find it so ridiculous that the Lion would give siege weapons to a Primarch who had shown nothing but ironclad loyalty and whose speciality was in the siege warfare. It was an entirely reasonable decision.

But so had the Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion. Horus had shown nothing but Loyalty to the Imperium. I think the problem is that in a time of uncertainty you shouldn't be trusting anyone with your WMDs.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

But so had the Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion. Horus had shown nothing but Loyalty to the Imperium. I think the problem is that in a time of uncertainty you shouldn't be trusting anyone with your WMDs.

None of three had been revealed as traitors yet. As far as anybody knew the Traitors had declared themselves openly. Trusting nobody would cripple you too and potentially cast aspersions on your own loyalties.

It would be interesting to see Macharius with his forces at full strength, in comparison to the primarchs.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

This is what I thought, he seemed to be more interested in setting himself up as Warmaster rather than being careful. Selfish gain over the needs of the Imperium. The problem as well is that the Heresy series has been a mish mash of ideas and another author possibly wouldn't have gone with this. Praetorian of Dorn makes Dorn out to be very capable which I believe he is, but then you have Istvaan and the Iron Cage and you have to wonder.

In fairness re the Iron Cage, that's not a good one to look at regarding Dorn given that every source has basicly noted Dorn was basicly mad with grief at the time. Keep in mind Dorn was the one who found the emperor and Sanguinis and took them from the ship. he proably had a pretty strong case of survivor's guilt, if not outright PTSD. it's possiable a part of Dorn saw the trap and just didn't care

BrianDavion wrote:

In fairness re the Iron Cage, that's not a good one to look at regarding Dorn given that every source has basicly noted Dorn was basicly mad with grief at the time. Keep in mind Dorn was the one who found the emperor and Sanguinis and took them from the ship. he proably had a pretty strong case of survivor's guilt, if not outright PTSD. it's possiable a part of Dorn saw the trap and just didn't care

While you are correct we don't really have a decent comparison point. We haven't seen his capabilities at "normal". Though he was apparently capable of unravelling Alpharius' attack plan so he's obviously intelligent.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

In fairness re the Iron Cage, that's not a good one to look at regarding Dorn given that every source has basicly noted Dorn was basicly mad with grief at the time. Keep in mind Dorn was the one who found the emperor and Sanguinis and took them from the ship. he proably had a pretty strong case of survivor's guilt, if not outright PTSD. it's possiable a part of Dorn saw the trap and just didn't care

While you are correct we don't really have a decent comparison point. We haven't seen his capabilities at "normal". Though he was apparently capable of unravelling Alpharius' attack plan so he's obviously intelligent.

honestly I hope Dorn gets a turn with the "The Primarchs" novel series sooner rather then later. as all we've seen from him in the HH books has basicly been him being all "I'm abuilding ma fort!"

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

ChazSexington wrote:I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

I don't see why people find it so ridiculous that the Lion would give siege weapons to a Primarch who had shown nothing but ironclad loyalty and whose speciality was in the siege warfare. It was an entirely reasonable decision.

Oh, I don't think it's ridiculous. It was more along the lines that he didn't spot the trap.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

I think the Lion may have spotted the trap - not based on the Legions involved, but rather how it was coming together. I would imagine him going "why would Horus put himself in such a stupid strategic position?" and then reach the inevitable conclusion: Traitors. Though I'm not sure on that - he did hand Perturabo some doomsday cannons to go off to fight Horus.

This is what I thought, he seemed to be more interested in setting himself up as Warmaster rather than being careful. Selfish gain over the needs of the Imperium. The problem as well is that the Heresy series has been a mish mash of ideas and another author possibly wouldn't have gone with this. Praetorian of Dorn makes Dorn out to be very capable which I believe he is, but then you have Istvaan and the Iron Cage and you have to wonder.

Don't forget Phall, where ironically Dorn's orders saves Perturabo and his Iron Warriors from being destroyed by the Imperial Fists under Pollux.

Don't get me wrong btw, I'm not unhappy Alpharius died; the Hydra symbology is there for a reason. The problem is how it was handled, and I would very much have preferred some ambiguity to as to his actual fate.

I think we both agree on the Lion - I've got pretty much the exact same take.

The Horus Heresy really suffers from the variety of authors and seeming lack of consistency due to this. If they'd say, given all Word Bearer and Night Lords tales to ADB, all DA to Mike Lee etc we'd have some consistency with the direction and characters.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

In fairness re the Iron Cage, that's not a good one to look at regarding Dorn given that every source has basicly noted Dorn was basicly mad with grief at the time. Keep in mind Dorn was the one who found the emperor and Sanguinis and took them from the ship. he proably had a pretty strong case of survivor's guilt, if not outright PTSD. it's possiable a part of Dorn saw the trap and just didn't care

While you are correct we don't really have a decent comparison point. We haven't seen his capabilities at "normal". Though he was apparently capable of unravelling Alpharius' attack plan so he's obviously intelligent.

Almost everyone I know that's read Praetorian hates it because it reads like terrible Imperial Fists fanfiction.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Saber wrote:
Rogal Dorn was regarded as the best 'soldier.' I'm not sure that makes him the best general but he's certainly in the conversation. He also managed to beat Horus at the Siege of Terra, which is a mark in his favor.

Rogal Dorn is responsible for the massacre as Istvaan V. He is a fething idiot.

I thought that was Horus?

According to Horus in Vengeful Spirit Ferrus Manus was supposed to be the best, hard to believe after his charging in an Istvaan V and the Iron Hands style of combat. Opinions seem to change like water though. I think Guilliman would be up there, changing the outcome of the assault on the 500 worlds from a total defeat to an ish victory was pretty competent.

That's maybe an out-of-character moment for Ferrus (given the events going on it's not too hard to understand). He's usually near the top in these sorts of list discussions, so he has consistency going for him.

Wen it comes to strategy and the Primarchs (or other 40k characters) I figured we were supposed to exercise significant amounts of suspension of disbelief and just go with things being the way the authors say they are because they say so. Kind of like how we accept that Geordi La Forge is a brilliant engineer and not some mystic quack who shouts nonsense words and then hits random buttons on a console. Or how we go along with Worf being really good at hand-to-hand, despite getting constantly knocked on his butt.

 ChazSexington wrote:

Oh, I don't think it's ridiculous. It was more along the lines that he didn't spot the trap.

Fair point. It's a very different situation with Istvaan. He could have just assumed that Horus was being arrogant or thinking he could persuade the others or the circumstances could have made him more suspicious.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Almost everyone I know that's read Praetorian hates it because it reads like terrible Imperial Fists fanfiction.

Sadly it still applies in these sorts of discussions.

That's maybe an out-of-character moment for Ferrus (given the events going on it's not too hard to understand). He's usually near the top in these sorts of list discussions, so he has consistency going for him.

I think he was supposed to have been raging at the betrayal of such a close brother but it still leads to being told and not shown that he's competent. Same with Dorn. We're told that they're really gifted and in Dorn's case calm and collected but we don't really see anything demonstrating it so it feels like it's not really the case. Especially since it's fallible in-universe sources saying it.

 Grimgold wrote:
The lion was the "warmaster" Equivalent for the imperium secundus, and both Guilliman and Sanguinius choose him for that role because they both knew he was the best fit. The problem with the lion is, he is too prideful. The smallest slight can set him off, and make him take stupid actions. His battle with Leman Russ, dumb, trying to kill Konrad Cruze in front of Guilliman and Sanguinius, dumb, banishing luther, dumb, killing Nemiel, also dumb. The common thread to all of those dumb actions is a slight to his pride.

One wonders how he would handle an actual defeat, but we may never find out because he hasn't been beaten when leading an army. The closest we've seen to him losing is him not wiping out the entire force that's facing him, or sparing the man who raised him like a father.

You realize Russ was totally responsible for that fight, right? In Russ's own words. Jonson precipitated it because he was trying to save the lives of his own Legionaries, because Russ left the battlefield, causing the fight to drag out. When Russ returned, he attacked the Lion because he felt Jonson broke his word.

There is an entire novel, "told" by Leman Russ, that covers that event now.

 djones520 wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:
The lion was the "warmaster" Equivalent for the imperium secundus, and both Guilliman and Sanguinius choose him for that role because they both knew he was the best fit. The problem with the lion is, he is too prideful. The smallest slight can set him off, and make him take stupid actions. His battle with Leman Russ, dumb, trying to kill Konrad Cruze in front of Guilliman and Sanguinius, dumb, banishing luther, dumb, killing Nemiel, also dumb. The common thread to all of those dumb actions is a slight to his pride.

One wonders how he would handle an actual defeat, but we may never find out because he hasn't been beaten when leading an army. The closest we've seen to him losing is him not wiping out the entire force that's facing him, or sparing the man who raised him like a father.

You realize Russ was totally responsible for that fight, right? In Russ's own words. Jonson precipitated it because he was trying to save the lives of his own Legionaries, because Russ left the battlefield, causing the fight to drag out. When Russ returned, he attacked the Lion because he felt Jonson broke his word.

There is an entire novel, "told" by Leman Russ, that covers that event now.

'tis true.
However.
In that same book Russ was the first one to see the stupidity of his actions, the Lion never saw his own idiocy at all and even took a sword to Russ years and a whole Heresy later to "release the bad blood between them" and even perceptive of that Russ just took it.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 ChazSexington wrote:

Oh, I don't think it's ridiculous. It was more along the lines that he didn't spot the trap.

Fair point. It's a very different situation with Istvaan. He could have just assumed that Horus was being arrogant or thinking he could persuade the others or the circumstances could have made him more suspicious.

Aye, but as Pilau suggested, he may have been blinded by the chance of being made Warmaster and wishful thinking. It fits with his ambition. However, if any of the Loyal Primarchs could've spotted it, it would've been Lion El'Johnson. If Alpharius hadn't participated in the rebellion (see how I didn't call him a Traitor?), he may have spotted it.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Pilau Rice wrote:

But so had the Word Bearers, Iron Warriors and Alpha Legion. Horus had shown nothing but Loyalty to the Imperium. I think the problem is that in a time of uncertainty you shouldn't be trusting anyone with your WMDs.

None of three had been revealed as traitors yet. As far as anybody knew the Traitors had declared themselves openly. Trusting nobody would cripple you too and potentially cast aspersions on your own loyalties.

Exactly. Dorn's plan might have sucked in hindsight. But what options did he have really. Sending in 3 Legions to battle 3 Legions could have ended up being a stalemate that dragged on and on at the cost of the Legions themselves. How was Dorn to know that 4 of the seven had sided with Horus.

 ChazSexington wrote:

The Horus Heresy really suffers from the variety of authors and seeming lack of consistency due to this. If they'd say, given all Word Bearer and Night Lords tales to ADB, all DA to Mike Lee etc we'd have some consistency with the direction and characters.

Agreed, or just let Chris Wraight write the whole thing

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Almost everyone I know that's read Praetorian hates it because it reads like terrible Imperial Fists fanfiction.

I enjoyed the book and thought it was written well, it does imho redeem the Alphas somewhat and handles them pretty well. It's more of a return to Legion showing them fight at their intended capacity. They lose again true, but I don't think the book should have been allowed such a free reign of what the Alphas had done. On another planet somewhere things might have been different. Imagine if they would have won and how the story might have had to have been changed.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's maybe an out-of-character moment for Ferrus (given the events going on it's not too hard to understand). He's usually near the top in these sorts of list discussions, so he has consistency going for him.

I agree, Primarchs aren't infallible and they are more human then they let on. Same situation for Dorn and the Iron Cage. But like Sone RandomEvilGuy says, is that a competent commander that lets his emotions get the better of him. From that angle perhaps the Lion is the best.

 Pilau Rice wrote:

Agreed, or just let Chris Wraight write the whole thing

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Almost everyone I know that's read Praetorian hates it because it reads like terrible Imperial Fists fanfiction.

I enjoyed the book and thought it was written well, it does imho redeem the Alphas somewhat and handles them pretty well. It's more of a return to Legion showing them fight at their intended capacity. They lose again true, but I don't think the book should have been allowed such a free reign of what the Alphas had done. On another planet somewhere things might have been different. Imagine if they would have won and how the story might have had to have been changed.

The Alpha Legion accomplished nothing bar losing their fleet, one Primarch, and blowing up a few statues. Their capacity for asymmetric/nonconventional warfare was shown to be poorer than the scrambled, ad hoc defences of the Imperial Fists. Dorn had them figured out from the get go. I guess it's on par with Legion, as far as the Alpha Legion's competency goes, where they almost lost both Primarchs to a feudal world's suicide bomb and decided to betray the Emperor after two pages of adjective-filled dialogue.

I enjoyed reading Praetor of Dorn more than Legion though, purely from a technical perspective. Legion's pacing was possibly the worst I've ever read.

I don't have a problem with the Alpha Legion losing, as long as it's done in a way consistent with how they're portrayed outside of the novels. At this point, their ability for subterfuge is below that of a clown villain hanging out in an abandoned amusement park, waiting for Scooby Doo.

Agreed - that books was really disappointing to read.

And outright killing Alpharius?

What a miserable way to ruin one of the cooler 'mysteries' of 40K.

Oh well!

I guess that's the way it goes when you get a book written by a big fan of the Fists - gotta up Dorn's cred somehow...