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.

 Earth127 wrote:
We don't know the timeline of the Emperor during the dark age of technology. He mentions to Ra:

"Only 2 of them ever asked why I choose to reveal myself when I did." Wich is a question we don't know the answer too. He had to wait for the fall too launch the great crusade because it calmed the warp/destroyed the Eldar. but by that point he had already conquered earth and built the space marine legions.

We know how long ago the Dark Age was though, it ended at M18. So he did, I think the Luna Wolves helped take Luna. I think the Emperor needing Luna to create the Astartes is old lore.

sorry I misspoke I meant both dark age of technology and old night/ age of strife

Only two of who? Direct quote please for reference.

Mellow wrote:
Only two of who? Direct quote please for reference.

Two Primarchs. But it was three

"‘For glory,’ the Emperor replied. ‘To honour the creatures that call themselves my sons. My necessary
tools. They feed on glory as if it were a palpable sustenance. Their own glory, of course, no different
from the kings and emperors of old. It scarcely crosses their mind that glory matters nothing to me. I could
have had a planet’s worth of glory any time I wished it when I walked in the species’ shadow throughout
prehistory. Only three of them ever thought to ask why I timed my emergence as I did.’

Andykp wrote:
I always thought they were just scattered. Just blind luck.

I don't think so, they all ended up on human-inhabited worlds which make up only a tiny percentage of the planets in the galaxy. Most are gas giants or frozen chunks of ice. And many of the inhabitable ones would have been teeming with Orks. Something more than blind like was at play but we don't know what.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
We know how long ago the Dark Age was though, it ended at M18. So he did, I think the Luna Wolves helped take Luna. I think the Emperor needing Luna to create the Astartes is old lore.

I thought the DAOT ended around M25. The age of strife lasted about 5000 years and the Emperor launched the GC around M30.

 Karhedron wrote:

Andykp wrote:
I always thought they were just scattered. Just blind luck.

I don't think so, they all ended up on human-inhabited worlds which make up only a tiny percentage of the planets in the galaxy. Most are gas giants or frozen chunks of ice. And many of the inhabitable ones would have been teeming with Orks. Something more than blind like was at play but we don't know what.

Well we do know Chaos had their sights on more Primarchs. Sanguinius for instance, Khorne thought they could take him, so its nature or nurture or a combination of the two. Was where they ended up the main catalyst or was it their character. The Lion for instance, that was the perfect place for Chaos to influence him, he spent the vast majority of his life living feral with animals and chaos daemons. You could say the knights honour code saved him but , then look at Magnus, he lived in a world of scepticism and rationalism, but he turned.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:
We know the Emperor got a big power-up on Molech. Chaos claim he made some sort of deal and welched on it but they are not exactly the most trustworthy source.

Again Chaos being untrustworthy is completely irrelevant.

Irrelevant to what? Given that this is a fictional universe, character motivation matters a great deal. Are the Chaos Gods telling the truth here, are they outright lying? Did the Emperor steal some of their power? If so, how? Did he make a bargain and then break it?

My point is that without some more insights into the Emperor's character, he remains a frustrating enigma which makes it harder to sympathise with the loyalist cause.

The honesty of Chaos when it comes to the Emperor's deeds and motivations is not only relevant, it is crucial.

 Karhedron wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:
We know the Emperor got a big power-up on Molech. Chaos claim he made some sort of deal and welched on it but they are not exactly the most trustworthy source.

Again Chaos being untrustworthy is completely irrelevant.

Irrelevant to what? Given that this is a fictional universe, character motivation matters a great deal. Are the Chaos Gods telling the truth here, are they outright lying? Did the Emperor steal some of their power? If so, how? Did he make a bargain and then break it?

My point is that without some more insights into the Emperor's character, he remains a frustrating enigma which makes it harder to sympathise with the loyalist cause.

The honesty of Chaos when it comes to the Emperor's deeds and motivations is not only relevant, it is crucial.

Chaos has hardly anything to say on the matter in the novel. Its irrelevant because most of the evidence we have is not from chaos, in the book apart from the red angel, who didn't go into that much detail, he just showed Horus how to get to the obsidian gate and how to get to the pantheon, there is no evidence from chaos. Only in First Heretic is it relevant. As for Sureka she was risking her life and her family to protect the gate from Horus opening it, so to say she was influenced in any way just doesn't make sense.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Chaos has hardly anything to say on the matter in the novel. Its irrelevant because most of the evidence we have is not from chaos, in the book apart from the red angel, who didn't go into that much detail, he just showed Horus how to get to the obsidian gate and how to get to the pantheon, there is no evidence from chaos. Only in First Heretic is it relevant. As for Sureka she was risking her life and her family to protect the gate from Horus opening it, so to say she was influenced in any way just doesn't make sense.

I think you are mixing up two different lines of conversation on this thread, I never mentioned Sureka at all.

My point is that in the absence of anything from the Emperor's POV, the honesty (or not) of Chaos is vitally important. Sureka recounts what she saw and we have no reason to doubt her. But she did not go through the gate. She did not witness what transpired between the Emperor and the Chaos gods. The Emperor did not confide his reasons or means to her.

We have only had glimpses of what the Emperor was planning to do and how he planned to achieve it. From the fragments we have been given, many of his actions seem counter-productive to the success of that plan. That is why any hint as to the Emperor's actions or motivations is important. The Emperor is a contradictory figure in the books. I would like some more exploration of how and what he was planning. The meager scraps in MoM are not sufficient for me.

Without some way to understand and empathise with the Emperor's actions, it is very hard to care about the outcome of the Heresy. We don't have to agree with the Emperor's motives or actions but we do at least need to understand them in order engage with the story.

 Karhedron wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Chaos has hardly anything to say on the matter in the novel. Its irrelevant because most of the evidence we have is not from chaos, in the book apart from the red angel, who didn't go into that much detail, he just showed Horus how to get to the obsidian gate and how to get to the pantheon, there is no evidence from chaos. Only in First Heretic is it relevant. As for Sureka she was risking her life and her family to protect the gate from Horus opening it, so to say she was influenced in any way just doesn't make sense.

I think you are mixing up two different lines of conversation on this thread, I never mentioned Sureka at all.

My point is that in the absence of anything from the Emperor's POV, the honesty (or not) of Chaos is vitally important. Sureka recounts what she saw and we have no reason to doubt her. But she did not go through the gate. She did not witness what transpired between the Emperor and the Chaos gods. The Emperor did not confide his reasons or means to her.

We have only had glimpses of what the Emperor was planning to do and how he planned to achieve it. From the fragments we have been given, many of his actions seem counter-productive to the success of that plan. That is why any hint as to the Emperor's actions or motivations is important. The Emperor is a contradictory figure in the books. I would like some more exploration of how and what he was planning. The meager scraps in MoM are not sufficient for me.

Without some way to understand and empathise with the Emperor's actions, it is very hard to care about the outcome of the Heresy. We don't have to agree with the Emperor's motives or actions but we do at least need to understand them in order engage with the story.

"The Emperor did not confide his reasons or means to us." We don't know that and what we do know suggests he did otherwise how would she know he got powers from there. Chaos is not vitally important at all in this matter, all the evidence comes from other elements other than Chaos. You can't just say chaos is important as its chaos and everything in the HH has something to do with chaos. The facts in this book are completely have nothing to do with chaos, so how can chaos be relevant. They aren't meagre scraps, you only believe that because it involves the Emperor, the only evidence you would accept is it coming straight from the Emperor, but you do not use the same criteria for facts in any other way in the series. Explained to me how Sureka knows the Emperor went in and came out with powers, explain in what way that isn't a fact.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Chaos has hardly anything to say on the matter in the novel. Its irrelevant because most of the evidence we have is not from chaos, in the book apart from the red angel, who didn't go into that much detail, he just showed Horus how to get to the obsidian gate and how to get to the pantheon, there is no evidence from chaos. Only in First Heretic is it relevant. As for Sureka she was risking her life and her family to protect the gate from Horus opening it, so to say she was influenced in any way just doesn't make sense.

I think you are mixing up two different lines of conversation on this thread, I never mentioned Sureka at all.

My point is that in the absence of anything from the Emperor's POV, the honesty (or not) of Chaos is vitally important. Sureka recounts what she saw and we have no reason to doubt her. But she did not go through the gate. She did not witness what transpired between the Emperor and the Chaos gods. The Emperor did not confide his reasons or means to her.

We have only had glimpses of what the Emperor was planning to do and how he planned to achieve it. From the fragments we have been given, many of his actions seem counter-productive to the success of that plan. That is why any hint as to the Emperor's actions or motivations is important. The Emperor is a contradictory figure in the books. I would like some more exploration of how and what he was planning. The meager scraps in MoM are not sufficient for me.

Without some way to understand and empathise with the Emperor's actions, it is very hard to care about the outcome of the Heresy. We don't have to agree with the Emperor's motives or actions but we do at least need to understand them in order engage with the story.

"The Emperor did not confide his reasons or means to us." We don't know that and what we do know suggests he did otherwise how would she know he got powers from there. Chaos is not vitally important at all in this matter, all the evidence comes from other elements other than Chaos. You can't just say chaos is important as its chaos and everything in the HH has something to do with chaos. The facts in this book are completely have nothing to do with chaos, so how can chaos be relevant. They aren't meagre scraps, you only believe that because it involves the Emperor, the only evidence you would accept is it coming straight from the Emperor, but you do not use the same criteria for facts in any other way in the series. Explained to me how Sureka knows the Emperor went in and came out with powers, explain in what way that isn't a fact.

You’ve had it explained to you several times, but once again.

Sureka has experience with chaos, that much is known, she knows the emperor went through the door, she knows the emperor came out again, she knows NOTHING of what transpired after he went through the door.

She knows Horus went through the door, she knows he came out again, she knows NOTHING of what transpired while he was in there.

She ASSUMES based on her personal bias (experiences) that Horus got the same power as the Emperor, which in itself is an ASSUMPTION.

We do not know if the Emperor got power, made a deal or anything with certainty, as we are not shown or told, we only have a 3rd party (Sureka) who does not know for certain and another (Horus) who is totally corrupted and blinded by chaos, neither is a reliable source.

So all we can do is theorise what happened, you try to pass your theory as fact with no facts to back it up.

Unless you have a quote that states EXPLICITLY what happened to both the emperor and Horus, it’s just a theory.

 Formosa wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Karhedron wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Chaos has hardly anything to say on the matter in the novel. Its irrelevant because most of the evidence we have is not from chaos, in the book apart from the red angel, who didn't go into that much detail, he just showed Horus how to get to the obsidian gate and how to get to the pantheon, there is no evidence from chaos. Only in First Heretic is it relevant. As for Sureka she was risking her life and her family to protect the gate from Horus opening it, so to say she was influenced in any way just doesn't make sense.

I think you are mixing up two different lines of conversation on this thread, I never mentioned Sureka at all.

My point is that in the absence of anything from the Emperor's POV, the honesty (or not) of Chaos is vitally important. Sureka recounts what she saw and we have no reason to doubt her. But she did not go through the gate. She did not witness what transpired between the Emperor and the Chaos gods. The Emperor did not confide his reasons or means to her.

We have only had glimpses of what the Emperor was planning to do and how he planned to achieve it. From the fragments we have been given, many of his actions seem counter-productive to the success of that plan. That is why any hint as to the Emperor's actions or motivations is important. The Emperor is a contradictory figure in the books. I would like some more exploration of how and what he was planning. The meager scraps in MoM are not sufficient for me.

Without some way to understand and empathise with the Emperor's actions, it is very hard to care about the outcome of the Heresy. We don't have to agree with the Emperor's motives or actions but we do at least need to understand them in order engage with the story.

"The Emperor did not confide his reasons or means to us." We don't know that and what we do know suggests he did otherwise how would she know he got powers from there. Chaos is not vitally important at all in this matter, all the evidence comes from other elements other than Chaos. You can't just say chaos is important as its chaos and everything in the HH has something to do with chaos. The facts in this book are completely have nothing to do with chaos, so how can chaos be relevant. They aren't meagre scraps, you only believe that because it involves the Emperor, the only evidence you would accept is it coming straight from the Emperor, but you do not use the same criteria for facts in any other way in the series. Explained to me how Sureka knows the Emperor went in and came out with powers, explain in what way that isn't a fact.

You’ve had it explained to you several times, but once again.

Sureka has experience with chaos, that much is known, she knows the emperor went through the door, she knows the emperor came out again, she knows NOTHING of what transpired after he went through the door.

She knows Horus went through the door, she knows he came out again, she knows NOTHING of what transpired while he was in there.

She ASSUMES based on her personal bias (experiences) that Horus got the same power as the Emperor, which in itself is an ASSUMPTION.

We do not know if the Emperor got power, made a deal or anything with certainty, as we are not shown or told, we only have a 3rd party (Sureka) who does not know for certain and another (Horus) who is totally corrupted and blinded by chaos, neither is a reliable source.

So all we can do is theorise what happened, you try to pass your theory as fact with no facts to back it up.

Unless you have a quote that states EXPLICITLY what happened to both the emperor and Horus, it’s just a theory.

"She knows Horus went through the door, she knows he came out again, she knows NOTHING of what transpired while he was in there." - exactly how would she know that he got powers,

"She ASSUMES based on her personal bias (experiences) that Horus got the same power as the Emperor, which in itself is an ASSUMPTION" her bias lol no she knows what the Emperor got there, either the Emperor told her or she knows by her emphatic abilities, why would her being biased make her say she knows what the Emperor got in the gateway, there is no bias because she knew that before she even knew who Horus was.

"She ASSUMES based on her personal bias (experiences) that Horus got the same power as the Emperor, which in itself is an ASSUMPTION. " - No she knows, she explicitly says she know, as she states but because the Emperor isn't saying that himself, you are saying she is assuming that.

"We do not know if the Emperor got power, made a deal or anything with certainty, as we are not shown or told, we only have a 3rd party (Sureka) who does not know for certain and another (Horus) who is totally corrupted and blinded by chaos, neither is a reliable source. " no we know he got power because Sureka knows, exactly what power is the only thing we don't know, though if she knows what Horus got, then she assumes that he got what the Emperor got, as she knows what the Emperor got. Sureka is a reliable source, you just don't want her to be a reliable source. She is an agent of the Emperor, she knew of Molech and the powers the Emperor got for at least over 20 millennium before Horus even existed, Horus was told by the Emperor (chaos didn't tell him) what transpired on Molech backing up her story and Chaos said what the Emperor got also backing up both of their stories. So all three accounts are lying and making up an account and they all accidentally came up with the same very specific account. And then you'll say Sureka is chaos tainted, yeah then why did she risk her life and her families life to stop Horus, wouldn't she in-fact help him if she was chaos influenced.

Also the gateway is a direct link to the pantheon, There is so much evidence, the only evidence we don't have is the Emperor himself telling what transpired in the House of eyes. So the 'we don't know what happened in there' is ridiculous, unless you are saying we don't know exactly what powers he got. Abaddon said that Erebus created the lodge on the Luna Wolves fleet, even though he shouldn't of told Loken that, Do you accept that bit of evidence are are you also going to say, Abaddon is biased, Erebus himself never said it, so I don't believe that. I mean this we can't know because we didn't see what transpired is so ridiculous, the writer doesn't make any attempt to show that she isn't trust-worthy but you all imply she is, he writes her story as fact just as the other characters but you think that her story isn't factual, I mean you are arguing based on not wanting to be proven wrong, there is so much evidence and all you can say is, bias, the Emperor never said etc.

I have a quote where she explicitly says she knows what the Emperor got from the gateway.

How would Sureka ever know that the Emperor got power there. Horus also got power there, so how would she say she knew (though in what you say she doesn't or is biased) and be so right in saying that the Emperor got power there, and Horus also getting power there. She knows the reason for the gate, again was the Emperor just playing jenga with the gods.

All bluster and no substance, post the quote that EXPLICITLY states

A: what happened while the emperor was in there

B: the emperor told her EXACTLY what happened

C: EXACTLY what power Horus got

D: EXACTLY the “deal” or “power” the emperor got.

Otherwise your just engaging in conjecture like the rest of us, and you should stop passing it off as fact.

 Formosa wrote:
All bluster and no substance, post the quote that EXPLICITLY states

A: what happened while the emperor was in there

B: the emperor told her EXACTLY what happened

C: EXACTLY what power Horus got

D: EXACTLY the “deal” or “power” the emperor got.

Otherwise your just engaging in conjecture like the rest of us, and you should stop passing it off as fact.

I don't need to. That's what you need for it to be true. We don't know what happened when the Emperor was in there, we know he got powers. You have had an ever receding expectation of evidence. First you asked 'show me Sureka saying exactly that she knew' etc. and now we have narrowed it down and you are still giving the ridiculous, show me exactly what transpired in the gate.

This is what you said early on "Sureka knows the emperor got power, really, citation required, and it will have to be SPECIFIC, not a general "he dun got mer powah!" and will have to SPECIFICALLY state EXACTLY what that power is, or you are just engaging in conjecture like the rest of us"

You have taken up a position without knowing any of the lore and after I keep showing you evidence you keep narrowing down the possibility of it being a fact, to the point now where its 'we don't know what transpired in the Emperors point of view.'

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
All bluster and no substance, post the quote that EXPLICITLY states

A: what happened while the emperor was in there

B: the emperor told her EXACTLY what happened

C: EXACTLY what power Horus got

D: EXACTLY the “deal” or “power” the emperor got.

Otherwise your just engaging in conjecture like the rest of us, and you should stop passing it off as fact.

I don't need to. That's what you need for it to be true. We don't know what happened when the Emperor was in there, we know he got powers. You have had an ever receding expectation of evidence. First you asked 'show me Sureka saying exactly that she knew' etc. and now we have narrowed it down and you are still giving the ridiculous, show me exactly what transpired in the gate.

You have made the claim, you must provide the evidence, the above is the same question rephrased notning more, thus far you have comprehensably failed to provide any answer that it not based on conjecture and your personal take on the events.

So, for the last time, prove what you are stating.

 Formosa wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
All bluster and no substance, post the quote that EXPLICITLY states

A: what happened while the emperor was in there

B: the emperor told her EXACTLY what happened

C: EXACTLY what power Horus got

D: EXACTLY the “deal” or “power” the emperor got.

Otherwise your just engaging in conjecture like the rest of us, and you should stop passing it off as fact.

I don't need to. That's what you need for it to be true. We don't know what happened when the Emperor was in there, we know he got powers. You have had an ever receding expectation of evidence. First you asked 'show me Sureka saying exactly that she knew' etc. and now we have narrowed it down and you are still giving the ridiculous, show me exactly what transpired in the gate.

You have made the claim, you must provide the evidence, the above is the same question rephrased notning more, thus far you have changed comprehensably failed to provide any answer that it not based on conjecture and your personal take on the events.

So, for the last time, prove what you are stating.

address my points then, explain in what world could this happen " She is an agent of the Emperor, she knew of Molech and the powers the Emperor got for at least over 20 millennium before Horus even existed, Horus was told by the Emperor (chaos didn't tell him) what transpired on Molech backing up her story and Chaos said what the Emperor got also backing up both of their stories. So all three accounts are lying and making up an account and they all accidentally came up with the same very specific account." How could they all come up with the same answer. An agent of the Emperor, Horus' memory and Chaos all coming up with the same answer,how did that happen.

The evidence is all there. You just choose not to see it, unless the Emperor said it it isn't true. That's the only burden of proof you'll accept. You just ignore all the rest.

Deflection won’t work on me Delvarus, your central premise needs to be clarified first, you have made the original assertion and based your conjecture on that, you prove your basic premise and we can happily work from there, until that happens everything else is flawed.

 Formosa wrote:
Deflection won’t work on me Delvarus, your central premise needs to be clarified first, you have made the original assertion and based your conjecture on that, you prove your basic premise and we can happily work from there, until that happens everything else is flawed.

You can't, answer that. you know you can't. Its not deflection, I've proved everything I need to, you just refuse to accept all the massive amounts of evidence I've given you. You've asked for evidence to prove this happened and you continue to ask for more. Your premise is actually flawed, you took up a position, without even reading the book. You've gotten the lore so wrong on this thread and you couldn't even answer questions on the book and I gave you a lot, you couldn't answer a single one. So there is no point debating with you, unless you answer my question. My premise comes from reading the book and the book saying this happened.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Deflection won’t work on me Delvarus, your central premise needs to be clarified first, you have made the original assertion and based your conjecture on that, you prove your basic premise and we can happily work from there, until that happens everything else is flawed.

You can't, answer that. you know you can't. Its not deflection, I've proved everything I need to, you just refuse to accept all the massive amounts of evidence I've given you. You've asked for evidence to prove this happened and you continue to ask for more. Your premise is actually flawed, you took up a position, without even reading the book. You've gotten the lore so wrong on this thread and you couldn't even answer questions on the book and I gave you a lot, you couldn't answer a single one. So there is no point debating with you, unless you answer my question.

And there we have it, back to form, your so predictable

Long story short you have no proof and continue to pass your head cannon off as fact, you have been called out by several on this very thread and still play the victim.

 Formosa wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Deflection won’t work on me Delvarus, your central premise needs to be clarified first, you have made the original assertion and based your conjecture on that, you prove your basic premise and we can happily work from there, until that happens everything else is flawed.

You can't, answer that. you know you can't. Its not deflection, I've proved everything I need to, you just refuse to accept all the massive amounts of evidence I've given you. You've asked for evidence to prove this happened and you continue to ask for more. Your premise is actually flawed, you took up a position, without even reading the book. You've gotten the lore so wrong on this thread and you couldn't even answer questions on the book and I gave you a lot, you couldn't answer a single one. So there is no point debating with you, unless you answer my question.

And there we have it, back to form, your so predictable

Long story short you have no proof and continue to pass your head cannon off as fact, you have been called out by several on this very thread and still play the victim.

You couldn't answer a single one of these before, lets see if you've actually read the book now: "If you've read the book, what did Malcador and the Emperor talk about? What daemon reared its head again from early on in HH. What did Horus say to Loken? What did Mortarion and Fulgrim talk about? What were Russ and Malcador doing?"

How is the novel saying something happened head cannon. You just don't like accounts of the characters who said it happened.

Playing the victim, when. You lot banding together to stroke your egos doesn't bother me, but you are obviously all wrong, so like I said you people will do anything to prove me wrong because I've done so to you's in the past and you hate my arrogance, plus I proved you never read this novel, that makes you even more mad lol

Yeah thought you couldn't answer them again lol So predictable or just right?

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Deflection won’t work on me Delvarus, your central premise needs to be clarified first, you have made the original assertion and based your conjecture on that, you prove your basic premise and we can happily work from there, until that happens everything else is flawed.

You can't, answer that. you know you can't. Its not deflection, I've proved everything I need to, you just refuse to accept all the massive amounts of evidence I've given you. You've asked for evidence to prove this happened and you continue to ask for more. Your premise is actually flawed, you took up a position, without even reading the book. You've gotten the lore so wrong on this thread and you couldn't even answer questions on the book and I gave you a lot, you couldn't answer a single one. So there is no point debating with you, unless you answer my question.

And there we have it, back to form, your so predictable

Long story short you have no proof and continue to pass your head cannon off as fact, you have been called out by several on this very thread and still play the victim.

You couldn't answer a single one of these before, lets see if you've actually read the book now: "If you've read the book, what did Malcador and the Emperor talk about? What daemon reared its head again from early on in HH. What did Horus say to Loken? What did Mortarion and Fulgrim talk about? What were Russ and Malcador doing?"

How is the novel saying something happened head cannon. You just don't like accounts of the characters who said it happened.

Playing the victim, when. You lot banding together to stroke your egos doesn't bother me, but you are obviously all wrong, so like I said you people will do anything to prove me wrong because I've done so to you's in the past and you hate my arrogance, plus I proved you never read this novel, that makes you even more mad lol

Yeah thought you couldn't answer them again lol So predictable or just right?

The only one stroking ego is you. Has it not occured to you that if the BL writing team has been so bloody careful not to give us easy direct answers from the Emperor that maybe JUST MAYBE it's because they're going out of their way to avoid direct statements of things? that the INTENT is to avoid giving us the "utter truth"?

BrianDavion wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Deflection won’t work on me Delvarus, your central premise needs to be clarified first, you have made the original assertion and based your conjecture on that, you prove your basic premise and we can happily work from there, until that happens everything else is flawed.

You can't, answer that. you know you can't. Its not deflection, I've proved everything I need to, you just refuse to accept all the massive amounts of evidence I've given you. You've asked for evidence to prove this happened and you continue to ask for more. Your premise is actually flawed, you took up a position, without even reading the book. You've gotten the lore so wrong on this thread and you couldn't even answer questions on the book and I gave you a lot, you couldn't answer a single one. So there is no point debating with you, unless you answer my question.

And there we have it, back to form, your so predictable

Long story short you have no proof and continue to pass your head cannon off as fact, you have been called out by several on this very thread and still play the victim.

You couldn't answer a single one of these before, lets see if you've actually read the book now: "If you've read the book, what did Malcador and the Emperor talk about? What daemon reared its head again from early on in HH. What did Horus say to Loken? What did Mortarion and Fulgrim talk about? What were Russ and Malcador doing?"

How is the novel saying something happened head cannon. You just don't like accounts of the characters who said it happened.

Playing the victim, when. You lot banding together to stroke your egos doesn't bother me, but you are obviously all wrong, so like I said you people will do anything to prove me wrong because I've done so to you's in the past and you hate my arrogance, plus I proved you never read this novel, that makes you even more mad lol

Yeah thought you couldn't answer them again lol So predictable or just right?

The only one stroking ego is you. Has it not occured to you that if the BL writing team has been so bloody careful not to give us easy direct answers from the Emperor that maybe JUST MAYBE it's because they're going out of their way to avoid direct statements of things? that the INTENT is to avoid giving us the "utter truth"?

Well I can at least admit I'm wrong and concede points so I doubt I'm stroking my ego. It is true though multiple people took a stance on this without knowing the lore. But they are jumped at the chance of proving me wrong lol I mean read the beginning of the thread, I wasn't being an arse, I was merely stating people were wrong on points. But for some reason you's all took all this personally. The only contentious thing I said was that captain picard didn't read the book and that's because he hadn't actually read it. People get pissed off when you correct them on the lore, doesn't bother me in the slightest. Because we all do.

If the writer was implicit about it then I'd agree, when he said x did this multiple times in multiple different ways and across two novels that's enough for me.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Deflection won’t work on me Delvarus, your central premise needs to be clarified first, you have made the original assertion and based your conjecture on that, you prove your basic premise and we can happily work from there, until that happens everything else is flawed.

You can't, answer that. you know you can't. Its not deflection, I've proved everything I need to, you just refuse to accept all the massive amounts of evidence I've given you. You've asked for evidence to prove this happened and you continue to ask for more. Your premise is actually flawed, you took up a position, without even reading the book. You've gotten the lore so wrong on this thread and you couldn't even answer questions on the book and I gave you a lot, you couldn't answer a single one. So there is no point debating with you, unless you answer my question.

And there we have it, back to form, your so predictable

Long story short you have no proof and continue to pass your head cannon off as fact, you have been called out by several on this very thread and still play the victim.

You couldn't answer a single one of these before, lets see if you've actually read the book now: "If you've read the book, what did Malcador and the Emperor talk about? What daemon reared its head again from early on in HH. What did Horus say to Loken? What did Mortarion and Fulgrim talk about? What were Russ and Malcador doing?"

How is the novel saying something happened head cannon. You just don't like accounts of the characters who said it happened.

Playing the victim, when. You lot banding together to stroke your egos doesn't bother me, but you are obviously all wrong, so like I said you people will do anything to prove me wrong because I've done so to you's in the past and you hate my arrogance, plus I proved you never read this novel, that makes you even more mad lol

Yeah thought you couldn't answer them again lol So predictable or just right?

Blah blah blah blah, still waiting for that “proof” you have.

Due to all the arguing I'm going to go right back to the original post.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Its pretty much cannon that the Emperor made a deal with Chaos in order to gain more power and create the Primarch's, I wonder how he hasn't fallen to chaos (I know he's the melon-fething Emperor) but even he said to Magnus that you can't deal with the powers of the warp and stay whole, I wonder what he lost, or maybe he was saying what normal mortals lose to chaos. I think that maybe he lost the ability to reincarnate. Maybe he retains autonomy but when he 'really' dies, Drach'nyen will absorb him, keeping him prisoner so he can't reincarnate like a faustian bargain.

I agree that it's "pretty much cannon that the Emperor made a deal" ... to gain more power.

I feel He (The Emperor) is literally one of the very few characters in universe that is able to resist Chaos almost entirely.

I don't believe He lost the ability to reincarnate ... in fact no one specifically in lore knows that He even can, most of us assume He can because He is immortal and in universe immortals are perpetuals and perpetuals can regenerate.

How about this random idea.

The Emperor went into the Warp and met with the Eldar Gods. Gained knowledge and power from them in order to come up with a plan to defeat Chaos and then left ... he then used knowledge of the Webway (gained from the Eldard Gods) to safely return to Terra without a star ship.

Horus went in afterwards but he actually went to the Chaos Gods. Performed whatever tests they wanted and "won" the power. Got twisted into thinking that he was the "master of chaos" (Horus quote from original lore) and then went after The Emperor.

Mellow wrote:
Due to all the arguing I'm going to go right back to the original post.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Its pretty much cannon that the Emperor made a deal with Chaos in order to gain more power and create the Primarch's, I wonder how he hasn't fallen to chaos (I know he's the melon-fething Emperor) but even he said to Magnus that you can't deal with the powers of the warp and stay whole, I wonder what he lost, or maybe he was saying what normal mortals lose to chaos. I think that maybe he lost the ability to reincarnate. Maybe he retains autonomy but when he 'really' dies, Drach'nyen will absorb him, keeping him prisoner so he can't reincarnate like a faustian bargain.

I agree that it's "pretty much cannon that the Emperor made a deal" ... to gain more power.

I feel He (The Emperor) is literally one of the very few characters in universe that is able to resist Chaos almost entirely.

I don't believe He lost the ability to reincarnate ... in fact no one specifically in lore knows that He even can, most of us assume He can because He is immortal and in universe immortals are perpetuals and perpetuals can regenerate.

How about this random idea.

The Emperor went into the Warp and met with the Eldar Gods. Gained knowledge and power from them in order to come up with a plan to defeat Chaos and then left ... he then used knowledge of the Webway (gained from the Eldard Gods) to safely return to Terra without a star ship.

Horus went in afterwards but he actually went to the Chaos Gods. Performed whatever tests they wanted and "won" the power. Got twisted into thinking that he was the "master of chaos" (Horus quote from original lore) and then went after The Emperor.

It's certainly possiable. that's the thing, we know the emperor used the gateway at Molech, we know after he emerged from it again at least one person THINKS he was more powerful. We know that Chaos (who lie like a Carpet) claims that the Emperor renaged on deals made with them. And we know that Horus thinks he aquired a measure of the same power (there is in MY opinion considerable evidance to suggest Horus may be wrong about that BTW) we don't know for sure a deal was struck, nor if one was made, what each party got out of it. I do think the idea that it was "the power to create the primarchs" has a few holes in it, namely if chaos was the gatekeepers of that knowlledge surely fabius bile would have struck a bargin.

I kinda wonder if maybe the creation of the Primarchs was intended to be a partnership. with the emperor providing the physical science and chaos providing the "warp power" with the idea of creating perfect beings that would straddle the two universes. it would explain why exactly HALF of the primarchs fell.

Mellow wrote:
Due to all the arguing I'm going to go right back to the original post.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Its pretty much cannon that the Emperor made a deal with Chaos in order to gain more power and create the Primarch's, I wonder how he hasn't fallen to chaos (I know he's the melon-fething Emperor) but even he said to Magnus that you can't deal with the powers of the warp and stay whole, I wonder what he lost, or maybe he was saying what normal mortals lose to chaos. I think that maybe he lost the ability to reincarnate. Maybe he retains autonomy but when he 'really' dies, Drach'nyen will absorb him, keeping him prisoner so he can't reincarnate like a faustian bargain.

I agree that it's "pretty much cannon that the Emperor made a deal" ... to gain more power.

I feel He (The Emperor) is literally one of the very few characters in universe that is able to resist Chaos almost entirely.

I don't believe He lost the ability to reincarnate ... in fact no one specifically in lore knows that He even can, most of us assume He can because He is immortal and in universe immortals are perpetuals and perpetuals can regenerate.

How about this random idea.

The Emperor went into the Warp and met with the Eldar Gods. Gained knowledge and power from them in order to come up with a plan to defeat Chaos and then left ... he then used knowledge of the Webway (gained from the Eldard Gods) to safely return to Terra without a star ship.

Horus went in afterwards but he actually went to the Chaos Gods. Performed whatever tests they wanted and "won" the power. Got twisted into thinking that he was the "master of chaos" (Horus quote from original lore) and then went after The Emperor.

It fits the description, and his actions afterwards. And getting knowledge of the webway and the ‘truth’ of what chaos and the warp IS would allow him to one day (after his own experimentation) create Primarchs (using some ‘stuff of the warp’) without just directly gaining the Secret of Primarch-making from Chaos, which would explain why he doesn’t do it for 5000 years!

In that situation, Chaos could be pissed off because he used ‘their’ gateway to get in, or tricked them into letting him in.

That is very interesting. I like the idea of that. It explains the webway side of things and puts another twist on the emperor. It doesn’t make him a goody still because of all the genocides against all xenos (including eldar).

Where the eldar gods still around though. I thought they were dead. I get confused timing wise on that side of things.

Mellow wrote:
Due to all the arguing I'm going to go right back to the original post.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:
Its pretty much cannon that the Emperor made a deal with Chaos in order to gain more power and create the Primarch's, I wonder how he hasn't fallen to chaos (I know he's the melon-fething Emperor) but even he said to Magnus that you can't deal with the powers of the warp and stay whole, I wonder what he lost, or maybe he was saying what normal mortals lose to chaos. I think that maybe he lost the ability to reincarnate. Maybe he retains autonomy but when he 'really' dies, Drach'nyen will absorb him, keeping him prisoner so he can't reincarnate like a faustian bargain.

I agree that it's "pretty much cannon that the Emperor made a deal" ... to gain more power.

I feel He (The Emperor) is literally one of the very few characters in universe that is able to resist Chaos almost entirely.

I don't believe He lost the ability to reincarnate ... in fact no one specifically in lore knows that He even can, most of us assume He can because He is immortal and in universe immortals are perpetuals and perpetuals can regenerate.

How about this random idea.

The Emperor went into the Warp and met with the Eldar Gods. Gained knowledge and power from them in order to come up with a plan to defeat Chaos and then left ... he then used knowledge of the Webway (gained from the Eldard Gods) to safely return to Terra without a star ship.

Horus went in afterwards but he actually went to the Chaos Gods. Performed whatever tests they wanted and "won" the power. Got twisted into thinking that he was the "master of chaos" (Horus quote from original lore) and then went after The Emperor.

That's a pretty interesting idea. The only issue I see with it is none of the current Eldar knowing about it like the Phoenix Lords.

I think the Emperor can definitely reincarnate somehow but he can't until he's 100% dead which would cause a lot of problems in the Imperium.

I agree there’s holes in it but it does kind of fit with the whole Eldar hate Chaos mantra. Also I think it’s only really the harlequins that deal with any form of Eldar God (correct me if I’m wrong I’m not up to speed on Eldar lore)

Mellow wrote:
I agree there’s holes in it but it does kind of fit with the whole Eldar hate Chaos mantra. Also I think it’s only really the harlequins that deal with any form of Eldar God (correct me if I’m wrong I’m not up to speed on Eldar lore)

Harlequins deal directly with Cegorach as he's the only Eldar God who's in a decent condition. More recently you have people interacting with Ynnead via the Ynnari and I believe the Phoenix Lords are following a plan of Asuryan based on the Phoenix Lord novels. But Asuryan supposedly foresaw things so he could easily use the Emperor.