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.

 Crimson wrote:

But isn't he technically 'just' one of the High Lords? At least in theory the other High Lords have authority to overrule him.

If recall correctly he's referred to as Regent. He's in command.

 Crimson wrote:

pm713 wrote:
I'm still not seeing WHY we have a leader of the Imperium. Seeing as the Eldar resurrected a dead man to do it it makes no sense to pick Roboute.

But isn't he technically 'just' one of the High Lords? At least in theory the other High Lords have authority to overrule him.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
I'm sure there are Inquisitors and tech-priests who disagree with what's going on. What are they going to do about it, though? The Imperium is in bits, the military might is gladly following a resurrected demigod (who met the Emperor, remember - that's a massive boost to his legitimacy right there) and the more outlandish bits are likely secret; I seriously doubt anyone who wasn't in the room when he woke up knows that Guilliman was resurrected by Eldar.

I'm sure there would be a ways to arrange him to die as a martyr. Sooner the Inquisition assassinates him and we can forget this embarrassing chapter the better.

In theory they could over rule him but Guliman has loyalty of most of the space marines, the backing of Custodoes and had a expanded ultramarine sector of 10,000 +marines and to be 500 worlds.

In theory he could command the loyalty of over one million space marines.

He casually deploys a space Marine assault of 4000+ marines, has a Gloriana class battleship as his flagship unmatched by anything but the rock and phalanx.

The combined fleet of marines warships and status as a living saint.

Over ruling Guliman would not be very easy.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

But isn't he technically 'just' one of the High Lords? At least in theory the other High Lords have authority to overrule him.

If recall correctly he's referred to as Regent. He's in command.

Not in the BRB he isn't (I think.) BL of course are again doing their own thing, so I don't know about that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jhe90 wrote:

In theory they could over rule him but Guliman has loyalty of most of the space marines, the backing of Custodoes and had a expanded ultramarine sector of 10,000 +marines and to be 500 worlds.

In theory he could command the loyalty of over one million space marines.

He casually deploys a space Marine assault of 4000+ marines, has a Gloriana class battleship as his flagship unmatched by anything but the rock and phalanx.

The combined fleet of marines warships and status as a living saint.

Over ruling Guliman would not be very easy.

So he has basically succeeded in where Horus failed, and achieved the thing he tried to prevent anyone from doing by shattering the legions. Damn, I hate this pompous hypocritical bastard; he would be an an absolutely great villain though, if GW just had balls to take the storyline in that direction.

So he has basically succeeded in where Horus failed, and achieved the thing he tried to prevent anyone from doing by shattering the legions. Damn, I hate this pompous hypocritical bastard; he would be an an absolutely great villain though, if GW just had balls to take the storyline in that direction

And the fluff talks of him hating what he and the Imperium have become - if it helps see it as RG in a Living Hell that he and his father helped to make.

I have much more of an issue with how much of a dick the Lion is - I can't recall any part of the fluff where he is not a dick. He is the one Primarch i really don;t want to see return.

has a Gloriana class battleship as his flagship unmatched by anything but the rock and phalanx.

Where did the ship come from out of interest?

 Crimson wrote:

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

But isn't he technically 'just' one of the High Lords? At least in theory the other High Lords have authority to overrule him.

If recall correctly he's referred to as Regent. He's in command.

Not in the BRB he isn't (I think.) BL of course are again doing their own thing, so I don't know about that.

He's LORD COMMANDER of the Imperium. Second to the Emperor himself. He was even before he was incapacitated by Fulgrim, he's never been like one of the normal HLOT. Even if he was, his authority is higher than all the others pretty much combined.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jhe90 wrote:

In theory they could over rule him but Guliman has loyalty of most of the space marines, the backing of Custodoes and had a expanded ultramarine sector of 10,000 +marines and to be 500 worlds.

In theory he could command the loyalty of over one million space marines.

He casually deploys a space Marine assault of 4000+ marines, has a Gloriana class battleship as his flagship unmatched by anything but the rock and phalanx.

The combined fleet of marines warships and status as a living saint.

Over ruling Guliman would not be very easy.

So he has basically succeeded in where Horus failed, and achieved the thing he tried to prevent anyone from doing by shattering the legions. Damn, I hate this pompous hypocritical bastard; he would be an an absolutely great villain though, if GW just had balls to take the storyline in that direction.

Except that he hates (and not just tells people he does, his internal narrative supports this) the position he's in. He can't turn his back on the Imperium, to do so would be to admit defeat, but he doesn't want to be venerated and worshipped. He only visited the sick and dying during the War of Ultramar because his presence helped the sick (a trick from Nurgle). He tolerates the Ecclesiarchy because they keep the Imperium generally unified.

He doesn't want this outcome - in many cases, he wishes he was dead. However, he still has his duty.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
He's LORD COMMANDER of the Imperium.

That is just a title of the top military commander of the Imperium, there have been other Lord Commanders than him. He is 'just' the boss of all the Astra Militarum and the Navy, he is not even de jure boss of the Space Marines, let alone Ad Mech or Ecclesiarchy.

Except that he hates (and not just tells people he does, his internal narrative supports this) the position he's in. He can't turn his back on the Imperium, to do so would be to admit defeat, but he doesn't want to be venerated and worshipped. He only visited the sick and dying during the War of Ultramar because his presence helped the sick (a trick from Nurgle). He tolerates the Ecclesiarchy because they keep the Imperium generally unified.

He doesn't want this outcome - in many cases, he wishes he was dead. However, he still has his duty.

Oh poor tortured Sue! He can commit seppuku if it is so horrible to be a venerated hero with godly powers and massive authority; Imperium did just fine* several millennia without him.

* (Yes citizen, everything is FINE! Cadia was just a minor setback.)

 Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
He's LORD COMMANDER of the Imperium.

That is just a title of the top military commander of the Imperium, there have been other Lord Commanders than him. He is 'just' the boss of all the Astra Militarum and the Navy, he is not even de jure boss of the Space Marines, let alone Ad Mech or Ecclesiarchy.

"Primarch Roboute Guilliman, after the Horus Heresy, took command of the entirety of the Imperial armed forces and took the title Lord Commander of the Imperium in order to stabilise the Imperium and begin the reforms for which he is famous. He was the only person in the history of the Imperium to control all of the Imperial armed forces (before this, the Imperial war machine was administered by the War Council). The Lord Commander of the Imperium was one of the High Lords of Terra during its use." From the 2nd Edition Codex: Ultramarines, Rick Priestley.

He controlled the ENTIRE military of the Imperium. That's a massive deal. And yes, Lord Commanders have existed, but only as the chairman of the HLOT, as one of them. And not only is Guilliman returning to that role again, but he is now Imperial Regent, according to Dark Imperium - the second to the Emperor.

Sorry, but he really is a cut above the rest, however you spin it, unless you want to ignore lore.

Except that he hates (and not just tells people he does, his internal narrative supports this) the position he's in. He can't turn his back on the Imperium, to do so would be to admit defeat, but he doesn't want to be venerated and worshipped. He only visited the sick and dying during the War of Ultramar because his presence helped the sick (a trick from Nurgle). He tolerates the Ecclesiarchy because they keep the Imperium generally unified.

He doesn't want this outcome - in many cases, he wishes he was dead. However, he still has his duty.

Oh poor tortured Sue! He can commit seppuku if it is so horrible to be a venerated hero with godly powers and massive authority; Imperium did just fine* several millennia without him.

* (Yes citizen, everything is FINE! Cadia was just a minor setback.)

Not just Cadia - the entire north-east of the galaxy. The Imperium was HORRIFICALLY stagnating, more and more daemonic incursions, Ork Waaaghs!, Tyranid Hive Fleets and Necron awakenings were occurring, and the Imperium had been forced to set the Damocles Gulf alight to stop the Tau.
I don't know how you can say that the Imperium was doing just fine. Now, at least they have more hope than before. They have a figurehead who's actually doing something - they have new reinforcements, a better tactical commander.

I don't really know how you can call it Sue-dom. He's a conflicted character, who's realised that he was never more than a tool to his "father", giving him a crisis of faith. There's still only one of him, and he can't be everywhere. He hasn't immediately solved all the Imperium's problems straight away, and had to be rescued when he ran for Terra.

He knows that if he dies now, the Imperium will go into mourning, so that's obviously not a smart move. He really has no choice but to fight on for a situation he wished he was never in, for the good of the Imperium.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
"Primarch Roboute Guilliman, after the Horus Heresy, took command of the entirety of the Imperial armed forces and took the title Lord Commander of the Imperium in order to stabilise the Imperium and begin the reforms for which he is famous. He was the only person in the history of the Imperium to control all of the Imperial armed forces (before this, the Imperial war machine was administered by the War Council). The Lord Commander of the Imperium was one of the High Lords of Terra during its use." From the 2nd Edition Codex: Ultramarines, Rick Priestley.

One of the High Lords! Not the boss of them.

He controlled the ENTIRE military of the Imperium. That's a massive deal. And yes, Lord Commanders have existed, but only as the chairman of the HLOT, as one of them. And not only is Guilliman returning to that role again, but he is now Imperial Regent, according to Dark Imperium - the second to the Emperor.

Sorry, but he really is a cut above the rest, however you spin it, unless you want to ignore lore.

The Regent thing is not mentioned in BRB, and until it appears in studio fluff, I regard it as typical BL nonsense. So yes, I will ignore BL lore.

Not just Cadia - the entire north-east of the galaxy. The Imperium was HORRIFICALLY stagnating, more and more daemonic incursions, Ork Waaaghs!, Tyranid Hive Fleets and Necron awakenings were occurring, and the Imperium had been forced to set the Damocles Gulf alight to stop the Tau.
I don't know how you can say that the Imperium was doing just fine. Now, at least they have more hope than before. They have a figurehead who's actually doing something - they have new reinforcements, a better tactical commander.

"This is a dark and terrible era where you will find little comfort or hope. If you want to take part in the adventure, then prepare yourself now."

"Hope is the beginning of unhappiness."

"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment."

What the hell is this hopey bs you keep talking about, there is no place for hope in 40K!

I don't really know how you can call it Sue-dom. He's a conflicted character, who's realised that he was never more than a tool to his "father", giving him a crisis of faith. There's still only one of him, and he can't be everywhere. He hasn't immediately solved all the Imperium's problems straight away, and had to be rescued when he ran for Terra.

He knows that if he dies now, the Imperium will go into mourning, so that's obviously not a smart move. He really has no choice but to fight on for a situation he wished he was never in, for the good of the Imperium.

He is literally a demigod who is angsting about people worshipping him, who has personally stopped the (amazing and cool) stagnation of the Imperium.


But we have talked about this before, and you don't get it, so I'm not exactly sure why I am doing it again.

 jhe90 wrote:


Over ruling Guliman would not be very easy.

11 Alpha Legion Marines could do it if they caught him without a weapon. He was damned near killed by 10. 11 would do him in. A baker's dozen? Girlyman'd be fethed like Jenna Jameson in a Miramax studio.

 Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
"Primarch Roboute Guilliman, after the Horus Heresy, took command of the entirety of the Imperial armed forces and took the title Lord Commander of the Imperium in order to stabilise the Imperium and begin the reforms for which he is famous. He was the only person in the history of the Imperium to control all of the Imperial armed forces (before this, the Imperial war machine was administered by the War Council). The Lord Commander of the Imperium was one of the High Lords of Terra during its use." From the 2nd Edition Codex: Ultramarines, Rick Priestley.

One of the High Lords! Not the boss of them.

He controlled the ENTIRE military of the Imperium. That's a massive deal. And yes, Lord Commanders have existed, but only as the chairman of the HLOT, as one of them. And not only is Guilliman returning to that role again, but he is now Imperial Regent, according to Dark Imperium - the second to the Emperor.

Sorry, but he really is a cut above the rest, however you spin it, unless you want to ignore lore.

The Regent thing is not mentioned in BRB, and until it appears in studio fluff, I regard it as typical BL nonsense. So yes, I will ignore BL lore.

So the ONLY source of lore for you is the BRB?

Feel free to narrow your exposure to the background of 40k, but I think I should remind you, you are in the 40k BACKGROUND section - and Dark Imperium is canon background.
I'm not wrong in saying that Guilliman is Imperial Regent - ignore it if you want, but it doesn't make it any less true.

Not just Cadia - the entire north-east of the galaxy. The Imperium was HORRIFICALLY stagnating, more and more daemonic incursions, Ork Waaaghs!, Tyranid Hive Fleets and Necron awakenings were occurring, and the Imperium had been forced to set the Damocles Gulf alight to stop the Tau.
I don't know how you can say that the Imperium was doing just fine. Now, at least they have more hope than before. They have a figurehead who's actually doing something - they have new reinforcements, a better tactical commander.

"This is a dark and terrible era where you will find little comfort or hope. If you want to take part in the adventure, then prepare yourself now."

"Hope is the beginning of unhappiness."

"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment."

What the hell is this hopey bs you keep talking about, there is no place for hope in 40K!

Welcome to the exaggeration of 40k.
Grimdark doesn't mean "THERE'S NO GOOD OR HOPE OR ANYTHING EVERYONE'S A TERRIBLE PERSON NOTHING CAN EVER BE GOOD EVERRRRRR". Grimdark means that the setting is generally pessimistic, and that, despite there being hope, the methods by which to achieve it are flawed. In fact, Guilliman shows that PERFECTLY.
His own wants and morals have to be pushed aside in order for humanity to expand. He needs to put aside his own despair and hatred of his father's creation if he wants to see humanity fight back - that includes embracing the church, fighting for a decaying empire, and serving a father who regards him as nothing more than a tool.

Also, emphasis, on "little" on the first sentence. Not absence. Little. Implying some - which is what I suggested. They have a little more hope (plus, canon now supports that VULKAN is the one giving that whole little monologue, so even that is a character's perception.)

I don't really know how you can call it Sue-dom. He's a conflicted character, who's realised that he was never more than a tool to his "father", giving him a crisis of faith. There's still only one of him, and he can't be everywhere. He hasn't immediately solved all the Imperium's problems straight away, and had to be rescued when he ran for Terra.

He knows that if he dies now, the Imperium will go into mourning, so that's obviously not a smart move. He really has no choice but to fight on for a situation he wished he was never in, for the good of the Imperium.

He is literally a demigod who is angsting about people worshipping him, who has personally stopped the (amazing and cool) stagnation of the Imperium.

So if, essentially, little children ran around worshipping you and actively harming themselves and your ideals doing it, you wouldn't be "angsty" about it?

The idea of worship runs HARD against Guilliman. He turned one of his brothers to Chaos because of religion, and he knows that the Emperor HATED it. Of course he'll be opposed to it, especially that worship doesn't seem to be a thing in Macragge so much.

Again, amazing and cool are your personal opinions - you're entitled to them, but it doesn't make it universal. I think changing the nature of the setting with the Imperium losing yet more territory, but growing into a crusading, retaliatory force instead is a welcome change to them constantly defending.

But we have talked about this before, and you don't get it, so I'm not exactly sure why I am doing it again.

I beg to differ, but I can't see what part I'm not getting (beyond disagreeing with your opinion).

 EmpNortonII wrote:

11 Alpha Legion Marines could do it if they caught him without a weapon. He was damned near killed by 10. 11 would do him in. A baker's dozen? Girlyman'd be fethed like Jenna Jameson in a Miramax studio.

They caught him off-guard, without weapons or armour in his study and he still butchered them with his bare hands. Also, Guilliman is noted for learning from his mistakes he even when "off duty" later in the HH he wore ceremonial plate and carried a sword and sidearm at all times. I am sure he is well aware of conservative elements who might wish him ill and will make sure they do not get a chance.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
So the ONLY source of lore for you is the BRB?

No codexes and such are obviosly fine too.

Feel free to narrow your exposure to the background of 40k, but I think I should remind you, you are in the 40k BACKGROUND section - and Dark Imperium is canon background.
I'm not wrong in saying that Guilliman is Imperial Regent - ignore it if you want, but it doesn't make it any less true.

I regard studio fluff and BL fluff like two similar but still different versions of the same franchise. Like Marvel Comic Universe and Marvel Cinematic Universe. Same characters, some same stories, but they don't match 100%. And it is certainly interesting that not the BRB nor the Space Marine codex say anything about this Regent thing. Both have quite a bit stuff about Guilliman, so you'd imagine such an important thing would at least be mentioned.

I beg to differ, but I can't see what part I'm not getting (beyond disagreeing with your opinion).

It is just that we fundametally disagree about what makes 40K cool and waht it should be about.

 Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
So the ONLY source of lore for you is the BRB?

No codexes and such are obviosly fine too.

Would the Gathering Storm:Rise of the Primarch book be suitable?
In it, it describes Guilliman kicking out 5 High Lords of Terra and replacing them. No other High Lord has that power - only Guilliman.

Feel free to narrow your exposure to the background of 40k, but I think I should remind you, you are in the 40k BACKGROUND section - and Dark Imperium is canon background.
I'm not wrong in saying that Guilliman is Imperial Regent - ignore it if you want, but it doesn't make it any less true.

I regard studio fluff and BL fluff like two similar but still different versions of the same franchise. Like Marvel Comic Universe and Marvel Cinematic Universe. Same characters, some same stories, but they don't match 100%. And it is certainly interesting that not the BRB nor the Space Marine codex say anything about this Regent thing. Both have quite a bit stuff about Guilliman, so you'd imagine such an important thing would at least be mentioned.

I don't actually have the BRB or the current SM Codex (still working from my Index), but I think it's disengenuous to ignore the fact that Guilliman has outright been said in the main book describing the current state of 40k to be the Imperial Regent.

Hell, if we're ignoring anything that's NOT Codex or BRB, then it would logically stand that the Lord Commander of the Imperium WOULD be the single ruler (without any Black Library texts to show otherwise). I'd say that Lord Commander of the Imperium ALONE should say enough that he is the head of the Imperium right now.

However, I can't say I agree with your point - especially in the 40k BACKGROUND section. It's mentioned in a recent, fairly detailed book - I think it has good reason to be considered canon.

I beg to differ, but I can't see what part I'm not getting (beyond disagreeing with your opinion).

It is just that we fundametally disagree about what makes 40K cool and waht it should be about.

There's nothing inherently wrong about that.

Neither of us are wrong - just different opinions.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Would the Gathering Storm:Rise of the Primarch book be suitable?

Sure.

In it, it describes Guilliman kicking out 5 High Lords of Terra and replacing them. No other High Lord has that power - only Guilliman.

It doesn't necessarily mean he has legal power to do so, just that no one had balls to oppose him.

I don't actually have the BRB or the current SM Codex (still working from my Index), but I think it's disengenuous to ignore the fact that Guilliman has outright been said in the main book describing the current state of 40k to be the Imperial Regent.

See, this shows exactly why it is wise to consider the studio fluff and BL fluff as separate entities. You have read Dark Imperium novel and I haven't, I have read BRB and the Marine Codex and you haven't, and we have pretty different perception about what's going on. This is really common on thing on this forum and it is caused by BL team and studio team having somewhat different take on the fluff.

Hell, if we're ignoring anything that's NOT Codex or BRB, then it would logically stand that the Lord Commander of the Imperium WOULD be the single ruler (without any Black Library texts to show otherwise). I'd say that Lord Commander of the Imperium ALONE should say enough that he is the head of the Imperium right now.

It is military title. It has never denoted authority outside the military. It is the title of Imprerium's Chief of Defence.

However, I can't say I agree with your point - especially in the 40k BACKGROUND section. It's mentioned in a recent, fairly detailed book - I think it has good reason to be considered canon.

There really is not canon in 40K, just stories that may or may no be true.

There's nothing inherently wrong about that.

Neither of us are wrong - just different opinions.

Sure.

Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
In it, it describes Guilliman kicking out 5 High Lords of Terra and replacing them. No other High Lord has that power - only Guilliman.

It doesn't necessarily mean he has legal power to do so, just that no one had balls to oppose him.

So you basically admit that he DOES have authority by right of power then? By being Lord Commander of the Imperium, we at least know he's on a higher tier than the others.

Plus, Imperial Regent would give him the legal power, but you're choosing to ignore that.

I don't actually have the BRB or the current SM Codex (still working from my Index), but I think it's disengenuous to ignore the fact that Guilliman has outright been said in the main book describing the current state of 40k to be the Imperial Regent.

See, this shows exactly why it is wise to consider the studio fluff and BL fluff as separate entities. You have read Dark Imperium novel and I haven't, I have read BRB and the Marine Codex and you haven't, and we have pretty different perception about what's going on. This is really common on thing on this forum and it is caused by BL team and studio team having somewhat different take on the fluff.

That's no different to someone reading about the Battle of Macragge in the Space Marine codex and not in the Tyranid codex, and someone else vice versa, or the Damocles Gulf in the SM codex vs the Tau codex.

It's not just between BL and the game books - it's between ANY book. Therefore, I see no reason why the BL saying Guilliman is Imperial Regent shouldn't be canon. After all, I have the Index here, and nowhere does it say Dante is the oldest non-Dreadnought Space Marine. I guess that now he isn't that any more, according to your logic.

Hell, if we're ignoring anything that's NOT Codex or BRB, then it would logically stand that the Lord Commander of the Imperium WOULD be the single ruler (without any Black Library texts to show otherwise). I'd say that Lord Commander of the Imperium ALONE should say enough that he is the head of the Imperium right now.

It is military title. It has never denoted authority outside the military. It is the title of Imprerium's Chief of Defence.

What I'm reading here says it's "both chairman of the High Lords and commander-in-chief of the Imperium's disparate military forces". So, military AND head High Lord. With one of the Imperium's biggest factors being it's military, and then essentially having control over the High Lords, how ISN'T Guilliman the strongest ruler? Especially since no-one took the position after Vangorich, after his control over the Imperium became too unstable.

Plus, you know, Imperial Regent.

However, I can't say I agree with your point - especially in the 40k BACKGROUND section. It's mentioned in a recent, fairly detailed book - I think it has good reason to be considered canon.

There really is not canon in 40K, just stories that may or may no be true.

Which really just destroys any chance of a lore discussion. No, canon exists - it's just some work is put in to make it generally fit together. For example, we KNOW that the Horus Heresy occurred. We KNOW that Guilliman came back from his stasis. We KNOW that Space Marines exist. Or is that all fake?

There is a canon, or else this board is worthless.

It's like this:

"With Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. [...] Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong."
-- Gav Thorpe

"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

"There is no canon. There's a variety of sources, many of which conflict, but every single one is a lens through which we can see the 40K setting."
-- Aaron Dembski-Bowden

So that's what the people who actually write this stuff thing. So if you don't like it, too bad.

In this specific case I certainly find it interesting the the Regent stuff is absent in all the studio fluff. It seems almost intentional, it is just too big thing to accidentally leave off.

 Crimson wrote:
It's like this:

"With Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. [...] Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong."
-- Gav Thorpe

"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

"There is no canon. There's a variety of sources, many of which conflict, but every single one is a lens through which we can see the 40K setting."
-- Aaron Dembski-Bowden

So that's what the people who actually write this stuff thing. So if you don't like it, too bad.

In this specific case I certainly find it interesting the the Regent stuff is absent in all the studio fluff. It seems almost intentional, it is just too big thing to accidentally leave off.

So you believe that there's NO canon at all? Or that there's no one thing that HAS to be present?

I disagree. There's no FIXED canon, as in there are as many interpretations as there are players, but there IS a canon. It's just a canon which disagrees with itself. If there were no canon, I could say anything, and be right and wrong simultaneously, making any discussion on the lore null and void.

I think it's not mentioned because "Lord Commander of the Imperium" is usually enough to show Guilliman's rule, but possibly also that Dark Imperium was written after the BRB. The Codex, I could chalk up to GW already having written it (especially given the rapid release of it), only tweaking the points costs or stats of units.

You can disagree, but then you're also disagreeing with people who write this stuff.

In any case, over the years I have come to the conclusion that the many studio writers probably do not read BL books, or if they do, they do not care about them. BL people can and do write pretty much anything they want, as long as they keep the big and obvious things straight (Ultramarines are blue, Orks are green.) BL books often contradict studio fluff and even each other. Studio seems to mostly ignore BL stuff.

Ultimately it is like trying to reconcile events of Miller's the Dark Knight Returns, with Burton's Batman Returns or Adam West Batman TV show. Sure, they are all about Batman, his real name is Bruce Wayne and he fights crime in a goofy costume with pointy bat ears, but attempting to pretend that it is all a part of some coherent whole is futile.

 Crimson wrote:
You can disagree, but then you're also disagreeing with people who write this stuff.

Who, as you say, disagree with enough too.
Plus, sure, these people write it, but they're not in charge: it's not an executive statement, no more so than a GW store manager's opinion.

In any case, over the years I have come to the conclusion that the many studio writers probably do not read BL books, or if they do, they do not care about them. BL people can and do write pretty much anything they want, as long as they keep the big and obvious things straight (Ultramarines are blue, Orks are green.) BL books often contradict studio fluff and even each other. Studio seems to mostly ignore BL stuff.

I think it's more the studio team wants to keep things as concise as possible in their books, and leave the more detailed stuff for the BL books.
Plus, the studio books ALSO contradict eachother too.

Ultimately it is like trying to reconcile events of Miller's the Dark Knight Returns, with Burton's Batman Returns or Adam West Batman TV show. Sure, they are all about Batman, his real name is Bruce Wayne and he fights crime in a goofy costume with pointy bat ears, but attempting to pretend that it is all a part of some coherent whole is futile.

The Lego Batman Movie did, funnily enough - but that's probably because Lego.

 Crimson wrote:
It's like this:

"With Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. [...] Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong."
-- Gav Thorpe

"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

"There is no canon. There's a variety of sources, many of which conflict, but every single one is a lens through which we can see the 40K setting."
-- Aaron Dembski-Bowden

So that's what the people who actually write this stuff thing. So if you don't like it, too bad.

In this specific case I certainly find it interesting the the Regent stuff is absent in all the studio fluff. It seems almost intentional, it is just too big thing to accidentally leave off.

To be fair they may have left it out simply because the studio stuff was done before they decided to make RG regent, so it may just be a matter of time but I guess we'll find out.

The problem with this approach is that I think you are taking it too literally of "if a book doesn't coincide with an expected world opinion then it can be safely ignored", which isn't necessarily true. Firstly I kinda disagree how Mr. Hoare uses the words "objective truth", because there are certain objective truths from the universe that form a framework. Certain things must be virtually objective otherwise the setting as a living universe ceases to exist. For example the Horus Heresy happened, there were 20 primarchs, etc. essential items and events in the universe MUST be objectively true because they are the bedrock for the world building. There comes a point where a story ceases to be 40k and becomes a different sci-fi setting, and that point will invariably use certain markers that makes it required to have certain objective truths. I personally would use subjective truth in regards to the stories, and that is what Mr. Thorpe and Mr. Dembski-Bowden I think are getting at, it's not that each story isn't canon, it's just that when seeing the universe from a single pair of eyes or a few in a single book is never the entire story, and possibly even a misinterpreted one (hence the "lens" and "none of these interpretations are wrong" bits). A story may be wrong, but in a literal sense it's the canon representation of what that person sees and perceives in the 40k universe. Is it accurate? Maybe, maybe not, but you can extrapolate certain things and verify events if you see them happen in real time in front the eyes of the character, assuming they're sane XD. This really gets to the "everything is canon, but not everything is true" heart of 40k which makes it so wonderful, it's really more emulative of the real world when we get several vastly different takes on the same object, we can assume x object exists but we can't come to a decision on what it truly is unless we see it first hand, but even then we as an audience may also disagree. Basically, see the The Master of Mankind for possibly the best example of this idea put into book form.

 Crimson wrote:
But isn't he technically 'just' one of the High Lords? At least in theory the other High Lords have authority to overrule him.

Except, of course, he'll murder them for disagreeing with him, because he's a tinpot dictator-- as he already demonstrated by his murder of numerous High Lords. If GW was interested in writing a believable story, they'd have them work against him to discredit and endanger him, because that's how people in power threatened by a newcomer actually behave.

 Melissia wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
But isn't he technically 'just' one of the High Lords? At least in theory the other High Lords have authority to overrule him.

Except, of course, he'll murder them for disagreeing with him, because he's a tinpot dictator-- as he already demonstrated by his murder of numerous High Lords. If GW was interested in writing a believable story, they'd have them work against him to discredit and endanger him, because that's how people in power threatened by a newcomer actually behave.

I've not finished the book yet, but in The Emperor's Legion a number of the High Lords were plotting against him when he first arrived. The Chancellor is quietly opposed to the conspirators, for now, and the Captain-General of the Custodes stands with Guilliman. I'm sure by the end of the book those members of the High Lords who conspire against Guilliman and those that conspire to control the Custodes will be killed.

You see to the Imperium Guilliman himself is akin to a God. Some think his time has past and the Imperium is theirs, and other Lords welcome Guilliman to take responsibility.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
You see to the Imperium Guilliman himself is akin to a God.

Nah, seen no evidence of this. To have someone suddenly show up and everyone loves them and obeys them completely would literally take an uprooting of every single theme upon and around which 40k is built, as well as a rewriting of the personalities of numerous people and organizations within the Imperium. And there's no evidence GW has done or intends to do this.

 Melissia wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
You see to the Imperium Guilliman himself is akin to a God.

Nah, seen no evidence of this. To have someone suddenly show up and everyone loves them and obeys them completely would literally take an uprooting of every single theme upon and around which 40k is built, as well as a rewriting of the personalities of numerous people and organizations within the Imperium. And there's no evidence GW has done or intends to do this.

Its literally in the book I mentioned in the same post. Guilliman is seen with reverence and awe by many. And the man who should take the reigns. Some dont share the opinion and believe that his time, and the time of all Primarchs is over.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Its literally in the book I mentioned in the same post. Guilliman is seen with reverence and awe by many.

That's not what you just said.

To give a real world example; Steve Jobs was seen with reverence and held the awe of many people, and they believed he should take the reigns and lead the tech industry to the future. He was not, however, akin to a god, and he had very strong opposition including within his own company. The two are not the same.

 Melissia wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Its literally in the book I mentioned in the same post. Guilliman is seen with reverence and awe by many.

That's not what you just said.

So I guess you've missed all the descriptions of him as a Demigod, reveared by all. A Demigod is akin to a god.

akin - of similar character, related by blood

So I'd say seen with reverence and awe, is exactly what I said, in different words.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
reveared by all

He can't exactly be "revered by all" when there's many who "believe that his time, and the time of all Primarchs is over"-- an irreverent belief.

Which is it? Is he a god worshiped by all, or is he not? You're contradicting yourself.

 Melissia wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
You see to the Imperium Guilliman himself is akin to a God.

Nah, seen no evidence of this. To have someone suddenly show up and everyone loves them and obeys them completely would literally take an uprooting of every single theme upon and around which 40k is built, as well as a rewriting of the personalities of numerous people and organizations within the Imperium. And there's no evidence GW has done or intends to do this.

The Shrine of the Primarch? Where millions of pilgrims (a RELIGIOUS term) went to visit Guilliman's frozen body on Macragge?

That's evidence that he was seen as "godly", at the very least, demigodly (which the Primarchs are repeatedly described as), so him coming out of stasis (well, his potential healing is described in the 5th ed book as a "miracle"), so it's not out of the question for that to happen.

Plus, we have examples of people in the Imperium being loved and obeyed instantly - Celestine and Saint Sabbat come to mind. They're largely worshipped and adored across the entire Imperium.

Given how Guilliman is now Imperial Regent, I think there's PLENTY of evidence that GW intends to do just what you claim GW can't.

I am not, there will be exemptions to rules. People claim their gods revered by all. Yet I don't revere their gods.

You see, there are these things right. These things are called figures of speech. They make language more colorful.

Keep being deliberately obtuse though, and chosing only one part of a topic to attack because its the only part that could possibly be construed to support your opinion on the matter. Also, you can still revere someone yet stand against them. The High Lords opposing him do, he is revered, they just think his time is done.

 Melissia wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
reveared by all

He can't exactly be "revered by all" when there's many who "believe that his time, and the time of all Primarchs is over"-- an irreverent belief.

Which is it? Is he a god worshiped by all, or is he not? You're contradicting yourself.

You're going to be THAT pendantic?

Victor clearly states that many don't worship Guilliman, but that's not his point (aside from ONE single statement, which is clearly expressive language. If you want to claim you've never used expressive language and hyperbole, I call lies on that.)

Victor's initial claim was that Guilliman is worshipped as a god within the Imperium. This, according to many sources, is true.