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.

 Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:
My Imperial Fists successor, the Sons of Volundr, will be suspicious of the Primaris marines at first. They were in the process of building up well beyond chapter strength, so more eyes on them wasn't what they wanted. The newcomers will be split among the companies that are under strength, and those companies will be kept apart from the main chapter until loyalty can be assured.

I like it nice and nuanced

 Melissia wrote:
Yeah which is why his "presence" almost caused a civil war after the end of the Horus Heresy.

Fulgrim's an idiot.

The Imperial Navy almost caused the Civil War by firing in the middle of the argument. During the several years after that incident, Guilliman brought stability to a bleeding out Empire. Stability which Dorn, the other side of the almost Civil War, supported.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
The Imperial Navy almost caused the Civil War by firing in the middle of the argument. During the several years after that incident, Guilliman brought stability to a bleeding out Empire. Stability which Dorn, the other side of the almost Civil War, supported.

Actually, what almost caused the civil war was Guilliman trying to force the codex astartes on everyone else-- a book which he wrote, arrogantly, without the input of any of the other primarchs, while expecting them to obey him as if they were subordinates when they considered each other equals..

The Imperial Navy vessel firing on the Imperial Fists was merely a symptom of the problem that Guilliman caused because he can't handle other people not obeying his every whim and desire.

(Indeed, the true bastion of stability wasn't Guilliman, but Dorn, who was willing to submit himself to a week of intense, agonizing
torture in order to try to force himself to accept the Codex Astartes)

The irony being even Guilliman abandoned the codex when he returned, so that he could grab more power for himself as the power-hungry tyrant he is.

The Codex put everyone on edge for the possible Civil War, but it was the Navy, acting independently that almost brought it about. Dorn and Guilliman were both wrong for different reasons leading up to that point.

But I agree Dorn is the primary source of stability, the rock which supported Guilliman's changes.

The Codex isn't what Guilliman used for stability, so him abandoning it is neither here nor there for the stabilizing of the Imperium, the reforms he (and with recent fluff Malcador) en placed were the source.

Unfortunately with out him around they became the twisted mess they are now.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
The Codex isn't what Guilliman used for stability, so him abandoning it is neither here nor there for the stabilizing of the Imperium

Never said they were. I merely said he was and is a power-hungry egomaniac.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Unfortunately with out him around they became the twisted mess they are now.

They were always a twisted mess; it's a credit to the Astartes as a whole that they lasted this long in spite of the codex's rules.

It always seemed to me that the adoption of the codex was just a dreamed up pre text to dosagree with Roboute though. I mean seriously, the original intent for the was basically just a giant guide for waging war, another tool in the box to read and consider the wisdom of- just like the works of Sun Tzu or Tacitus or myriads of others. I don't see whats disagreeable in that.

Rather the point of disagreement seems like the breaking up of the legions and the separation of force of Imperial navy and army elements- basically changing the very foundation of how the astartes had been doing what they were made to do, wage war since thier creation.

That's the change Dorn and others were resisting IMO. And while understandable, disbanding the legions and separating military branches was probably the best course of action.

Pretty sure when VVT refered to a twisted mess he wasn't nesscarily refering to the Astartes eaither. remember Gulliman laid the foundations for many of the IoMs insitutions, and it's clear that many of those insitutions have indeed become "a twisted mess"

Therefor he murdered a bunch of people and usurped their power in order to intimidate the rest.

That hardly makes me look more kindly on him.

If you use that logic the entirety of 40k is more or less equally damned (which is, or at least was kind of the point of the setting)

After all- what exactly was the alternative?

Carlovonsexron wrote:
If you use that logic the entirety of 40k is more or less equally damned (which is, or at least was kind of the point of the setting)

After all- what exactly was the alternative?

Gulliman could have politely asked them to acquiesce to his request...
yeah I laughed hard trying to type that.

yes Gulliman may well have slain several high lords (we can't be sure though it's possiable he simply marched into the council chambers, with a custodes bodyguard in tow, explained he was the voice of the emperor, and he was removing several high lords, and dared anyone to argue) but I suspect most likely he had those he wanted removed arrested on various charges. (letting them live/go free would simply be to risky)

Carlovonsexron wrote:
If you use that logic the entirety of 40k is more or less equally damned

Well... yes. That's called "the grim darkness of the far future".

That's called "Warhammer 40,000". I know this seems to upset some people, but I'm under no obligation to interpret Guilliman's actions in a positive light and make him out to be an incorruptible savior of mankind.

 Melissia wrote:

Carlovonsexron wrote:
If you use that logic the entirety of 40k is more or less equally damned

Well... yes. That's called "the grim darkness of the far future".

That's called "Warhammer 40,000". I know this seems to upset some people, but I'm under no obligation to interpret Guilliman's actions in a positive light and make him out to be an incorruptible savior of mankind.

I'm with you on that one. I understand that it's all here for people's enjoyment, and they can interpret things as more noblebright and/or grimdark as they please. However, I actually have a bit of pride in how grimdark and twisted the 40k universe is (even to the point of humourousness, which is also part of the point). It sets it apart from the vast majority of tedious hero narratives.

I'm just more puzzled by how much hate roboute gets by doing grimdark things that actually serve a logical purpose.

Like once merciless galactic warlord with a legion of genetically reengineered post humans is okay, but a different merciless galactic warlord who's willing to be both merciless and a warlord un the name of making the empire they built more sustainable... Is the bad guy?

I just don't follow the logic of the hate train, but then again I don't really find any of the primarchs in how they exist after the heresy particularly compelling.

All of this would be a perfect lead-in to "The Guilliman Heresy" with the primaris marines being planted for an Order-66 style betrayal called "The Riftsite Massacre."



But yeah, probably not.

I picture some repeat of Descent of Angels for the Dark Angels. New and improved Primaris marines marginalizing the traditions of the first legion, much in the same way that legion's arrival on Caliban marginalised knights of the Order and creating a new schism.

I want the Lion to awaken. Cypher is revealed to be a loyalist who returns his sword and perhaps causes him to awaken...

The Lion takes up the mantle of Warmaster to the regular Space Marines, who war with Gulliman.

Carlovonsexron wrote:
I'm just more puzzled by how much hate roboute gets by doing grimdark things that actually serve a logical purpose.

Like once merciless galactic warlord with a legion of genetically reengineered post humans is okay, but a different merciless galactic warlord who's willing to be both merciless and a warlord un the name of making the empire they built more sustainable... Is the bad guy?

I just don't follow the logic of the hate train, but then again I don't really find any of the primarchs in how they exist after the heresy particularly compelling.

because people still haven't forgiven the 5TH edition marine codex telling them the Ultramarines are in fact a specialier snowflake then their special snowflakes

BrianDavion wrote:

Carlovonsexron wrote:
I'm just more puzzled by how much hate roboute gets by doing grimdark things that actually serve a logical purpose.

Like once merciless galactic warlord with a legion of genetically reengineered post humans is okay, but a different merciless galactic warlord who's willing to be both merciless and a warlord un the name of making the empire they built more sustainable... Is the bad guy?

I just don't follow the logic of the hate train, but then again I don't really find any of the primarchs in how they exist after the heresy particularly compelling.

because people still haven't forgiven the 5TH edition marine codex telling them the Ultramarines are in fact a specialier snowflake then their special snowflakes

To be fair that was the narrative in 6th and 7th as well. Having said that...

The Flesh is weak and Guilliman has entirely too much flesh. However, if Cawl can use some of his new Emperor level super science to create us a clone of Ferrus Manus we might turn down the mistrust on our heresy circuits.

BrianDavion wrote:
because people still haven't forgiven the 5TH edition marine codex telling them the Ultramarines are in fact a specialier snowflake then their special snowflakes

For my part, that has nothing to do with it.

I simply see this as a blatant power grab, and unlike a lot of people who are apparently huge fans of Guilliman, I don't see him as an unbreakable, infallible saint.

Guilliman is just continuing the work of his Father. That genocidical tyrant.

The Imperium is the Great Devourer of the Galaxy. Not the Tyranids, not the Orks or even Chaos.

Many people call the return of Guilliman as erasing the grimdark of W40K.
For me and my Tau's is the beginning of our more dire time.

On the other way I have always liked the Ultramarines. But in my mind I ignore all the "spiritual liedge" fluff (That really having in acount that like 50% of the SPace Marines are Ultramarines succesors isn't as absurd) and see them as the "good intentional guys" in theory that in practice are totally inflexible and really authoritarian. So a case of "You can have a good live in Ultramar as long as you follow this very restrictive rules".
Plus, I really, really like the roman/greek aesthetic and vibe.

That's the point... None of the Primarchs are supposed to be...

It's also what makes for an interesting story.

The Primarch who is probably best suited to put the Imperium back in order rises and proceeds to begin overturning 9000 years of entrenched Dogma, a great deal of it based around his own person and to do it this primarch must essentially play a game of thrones the same way as needed after the heresy which is making others (even out of story players and fan!) begin taking a hard line for and against.

The Imperium is too big, the forces to contend with too powerful, and Roboute known to be too Machiavellian to have a “benevolent ruler” aura on all the time, and underneath it all is his nature as a gene forged, perhaps even warp forged demi god of war. I think it's kind of naive to expect him to not be occasionally grimdark in going about accomplishing his plans in a grimdark setting. And in that context at leadt he accomplishes things, unlikenmost other primarchs who often seem self defeating in any endeavors not directly relating to war.

But at the same time, I think the grimness amd darkness of the setting might be changing.

I do understand the lasting wardian resentment though!

Carlovonsexron wrote:
I'm just more puzzled by how much hate roboute gets by doing grimdark things that actually serve a logical purpose ...I just don't follow the logic of the hate train

For what it's worth, Ultramarines were hated in my local stores to the point that everyone modeled dead blue marines on their bases, and that was in the middle of 2nd edition. So, I think Roboute Rage predates the primarch's awakening.

I really think it's just "everyone wants to be Batman, no one wants to be Superman", or "everyone wants to be Wolverine, no one wants to be Cyclops." The strait law-abiding cop who follows the rules is almost never the hero in our culture, it's the gritty anti-hero who runs on a mix of vengeance and apathy that gets our collective juices flowing.

From my perspective here in the states, children are reared on the idea that anyone in authority who proclaims to want to help you only wants to manipulate you for some reason. If an outsider is telling you what's best for you, it's because they secretly look down on you and don't think you know what's best for yourself. "Question everything" is about the only thing every persuasion believes here.

So, The Ultramarines roll up, and are like "I'm from the Imperium and I'm here to help." And all these Chapter masters in this thread are collectively like "You fancy Primaris just want to take our bolters and put a tax on our soda!"

Not really a good comparison in my mind-- Guilliman fits neither superman (that's Sanguinius) nor Batman (that's Corax).

Amusingly, I like both Sanguinius and Corax better than Guilliman. But that's another topic entirely.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thing is, Guilliman never was a selfless savior of the galaxy. He's a bureaucrat willing to get his hands dirty and bloody in order to accomplish the job. He was never the greatest inspirational leader (IMO both Horus and Sanguinius had him beat in that regard), nor its greatest fighter (Russ and Vulkan have him beat there, even just among loyalists, and I'm pretty sure Fulgrim has him beat on the pre-daemon-prince traitor side), nor its most shining moral character (again, Sanguinius), nor its greatest psyker (Magnus) nor its best military leader (Horus, IMO). He's a bureaucrat. A bureaucrat with blood on his hands, a shady streak of "good luck", and a desires for power over others. He's good at what he does, no one's really denying that. But asserting that his character is somehow flawless, like has been asserted in this thread many times, and that anyone who isn't perfectly loyal to him without question is violating the lore, is utterly ridiculous.

I agree with your assessment, Melissia (mostly - I think you're probably underestimating his actual leadership abilities which are pretty well established as being in the same league as Horus and the Lion- so very much top tier.)

But you miss the most important part of Guilliman, and that is compared to nost of the other primarchs... He's actually profoundly more useful. There were definitely some issues Malcador and the Emperor seemed to have with him in terms of hos ego and his soft establishment of Ultramar ad a Sub Empire within the Imperium- but compare him to basically everyone other than Horus and Guilliman is way more useful because he's a bureaucrat.

And the interesting part is what lengths he's willin to go to not merely to rule, but to rule well.

In that respect he's a character that maybe fits better in game ofnthrones than 40k, but that in and of itself is interesting. He's basically one of the few windows we actually have into world of 40k beyond just the fighting. I can see why other people wouldn't care about it, but I don't see whats worth hating in that lol.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
@Oggthrok: Im actually American myself I just happen to live and work out in Taiwan

 Melissia wrote:
Not really a good comparison in my mind-- Guilliman fits neither superman (that's Sanguinius) nor Batman (that's Corax).

Amusingly, I like both Sanguinius and Corax better than Guilliman. But that's another topic entirely.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Thing is, Guilliman never was a selfless savior of the galaxy. He's a bureaucrat willing to get his hands dirty and bloody in order to accomplish the job. He was never the greatest inspirational leader (IMO both Horus and Sanguinius had him beat in that regard), nor its greatest fighter (Russ and Vulkan have him beat there, even just among loyalists, and I'm pretty sure Fulgrim has him beat on the pre-daemon-prince traitor side), nor its most shining moral character (again, Sanguinius), nor its greatest psyker (Magnus) nor its best military leader (Horus, IMO). He's a bureaucrat. A bureaucrat with blood on his hands, a shady streak of "good luck", and a desires for power over others. He's good at what he does, no one's really denying that. But asserting that his character is somehow flawless, like has been asserted in this thread many times, and that anyone who isn't perfectly loyal to him without question is violating the lore, is utterly ridiculous.

I think you're missing what he means when he says superman vs Batman. Gulliman is pretty by the book (hell he wrote the book) he doesn't have a hidden edgey bit (like Sanguinis) he's just good at what he does, and follows the rules etc. Culutrally, especially in America, I've founds there's more intreast in the "rebel" then the "by the book" guy. and in that regsrd yeah, Batman vs Superman, or Wolverine vs Cyclops.

I fail to see how he doesn't have a "hidden edgy bit". His actions after his awakening have often been pretty brutal or dark, even for 40k-- from the slaughter of anyone who disagrees with his edicts, to the incessant voices in his head that would make an unsanctioned psyker feel like home, he's pretty much a tinpot dictator. You can argue "he did what had to be done"... except all tinpot dictators claim that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Carlovonsexron wrote:
He's basically one of the few windows we actually have into world of 40k beyond just the fighting.

No he's... really not. Hell, Ciaphas Cain is better at that than he is, and Ciaphas Cain is basically a joke character. Guilliman is just as war-driven, war-focused, and war-obsessed as the other primarchs. He just happens to organize his marines more efficiently than most of them. He is just as disconnected from humanity, as well, as most of the primarchs are.

I really don't see why all of the DA players are assuming that they would turn the Primaris away.

The rank and file DA have absolutely no idea about their true history, they'd just treat the new Primaris the same. If they earned trust over time just as a newly minted "normal" marine would they'll slowly start inducting them into the Inner Circle. DA Primaris captains are easy enough to explain away as "normal" marines that went through the upgrade process.

The DA are *extremely* pragmatic, they won't turn away resources like the Primaris. The worst case scenario I can see is assigning them near suicidal work to wittle the original batch down to nothing so that the chapter itself can create new ones, because you have to remember not every primaris you field is one that was sent by Guilliman, the chapters themselves will be making Primaris marines out of their new applicants.

@Melissia: Ciaphus Cain doesn't have a model, Roboute does. So while Ciaphus Cain the black library character is a great window into the non martial world of 40k, for actual game characyers Roboute is it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm also not saying the roboute isnt a war driven warlord of posthuman, re-engineered warriors who are disconnected from humanity. Indeed, thats a lynchpin of why hes interesting in that he is exactly that but chooses to meddle in the affairs of mortals far more than others of his ilk really want or even like to.

You earlier called the character just a burecrat. Now hes no longer a burecrat, but just the same as all the pthet primarchs except better at organizing his soldiers? What does that even mean?

The character is consistently portrayed as having an interest in governance, in estbalishing and then maintaining societies. He's also a gene forged warlord. That he uses his nature as the latter to enforce his aptitude and interest in the former shouldn't exactly be surprising, and neither of them need to be sacrificed so the other can exist. The Primarchs, even Roboute are interesting because of these nuances, not despite them.

Carlovonsexron wrote:
@Melissia: Ciaphus Cain doesn't have a model, Roboute does

Yes, it's quite unfortunate. The primarchs should never have been force-fed down 40k's throat, and the game is worse for their introduction.

Carlovonsexron wrote:
So while Ciaphus Cain the black library character is a great window into the non martial world of 40k, for actual game characyers Roboute is it.

No, he isn't. In game, he kills things and makes other people kill things better, and nothing more.

Funnily enough, that's also what he does in the lore.

Carlovonsexron wrote:
You earlier called the character just a burecrat. Now hes no longer a burecrat, but just the same as all the pthet primarchs except better at organizing his soldiers?

Nice strawman argument there.

I was comparing him to the other primarchs, and it was blatantly obvious that I was doing so.

Guilliman is Caesar... hes a Tyrant. Yes, he destroyed the "corrupt republic" and appointed himself as the leader of the Imperium. He is a statist, a very good one, but at the end of the day he is still a ruthless warmongering ruler.
Of course, like he should be. The Primarchs aren't any superheroes or good guys. They are monsters created for War.

I agree with Melissia that what Guilliman has in his favour over all of his brothers is that he actually knows how to rule things. Obviously, this makes him "boring" for many people. Personally my favourite kind of character are the legal ones so I really like him (Yes, I ignore the Matt Ward Ultramarine masturbation fantasies)

I don't see what Guilliman's doing as a power grab.

He was put in his position when other Primarchs were still alive, and is just returning to his prior position. He is acting as a figurehead for the Imperium, which was in desperate need of one.

Has he done questionable stuff? Yeah, absolutely. Was it the right thing to do? We've yet to see the full effects, but as it's looking, yeah, it looks like it needed to be done.

He's by the book, orderly, logical and rational. These are traits that a lot of people don't like in their characters - the edgy, the damaged, the loose cannons are far more popular. Guilliman is a creature of war, but he is a very good statsman - in fact, no other Primarch, arguably barring Sanguinius or Horus was his match in governance. He is the best qualified for this job, and I'd trust him on this.