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.

 Ishagu wrote:
In 5 years Cawl will be established, old lore.

Community needs more patience.

I doubt that. Centurions have been around long enough for me to call them old but the way they were introduced was and will always be rubbish and lazy in my view and the same is true of Primaris.

pm713 wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
In 5 years Cawl will be established, old lore.

Community needs more patience.

I doubt that. Centurions have been around long enough for me to call them old but the way they were introduced was and will always be rubbish and lazy in my view and the same is true of Primaris.

Put my thoughts perfectly into letters.

You're right, Elesians don't have fins (don't know why I remembered fins), but I hardly think fins are 'anime like' just because their fins (especially since anime is a medium not a genre so you're probably talking about something like Gundam which does have some Mech designs with fins, but not like 40k uses them).

And you're right, Inceptors are rather round (my brain went to the tank because I-word confusion) but they aren't that similar to Tau suits which are more boxy than the Inceptor which looks like an Centurion crossed with a Terminator and an Assault Marine.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

Spoiler:

 Vankraken wrote:
The Primaris tanks don't look very Tau like but it does break away from the IoM's crude design by slapping sci fi grav tech on it. That said the plasma cannon on the Primaris Dread is immersion breaking with how much it looks like Tau tech.

So the Grav tech is based on the STCs created by Lamd in M30 based on anti-grav tech he recovered, making it the same grav tech used for all Land Speeder type vehicles. It's existing tech slapped onto a tank chassis that is likely based on the same STCs that were used to create the Land Raider.

And Tau plasma doesn't have massive exposed coils, but rather looks like this:


And before someone points at the plasma bottles (or whatever you want to call those small power cell looking things), Mechanicus plasma has those too (albeit less shielded but that comes down to how you paint it):


So yeah, not that similar.

It looks more like the CIB than Tau plasma.



Funny enough it looks even more like the somewhat commonly used 3rd party CIBs.


The shape of the CIB and the shape of the Primaris Dread plasma are very similar. (Thus why I said it looks like Tau tech).

Also I get that the IoM had grav tech but the fluff until Cawl showed up was that Grav tech is becoming increasingly rare which fits the whole technological regression theme of the IoM. It's the rapid inclusion of mass produced grav tanks for the IoM that are in contrast to the established setting of 40k.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
You're right, Elesians don't have fins (don't know why I remembered fins), but I hardly think fins are 'anime like' just because their fins (especially since anime is a medium not a genre so you're probably talking about something like Gundam which does have some Mech designs with fins, but not like 40k uses them).

And you're right, Inceptors are rather round (my brain went to the tank because I-word confusion) but they aren't that similar to Tau suits which are more boxy than the Inceptor which looks like an Centurion crossed with a Terminator and an Assault Marine.

Stealth Suits are quite un-boxy.

'Anime fins' are just common in many designs. I'm not a big anime guy, but Robotech/Macross, Gundam, Appleseed(?) come to mind.

The takeaway is that Tau is often thought to be anime-inspired design. One of the elements that give that impression are the little fins, now Space Marines have similar fins. It doesn't really matter what the function is. One could call it a silhouette issue.

Actually I think they show up a lot in Infinity, too.

 Vankraken wrote:

Spoiler:

It looks more like the CIB than Tau plasma.



Funny enough it looks even more like the somewhat commonly used 3rd party CIBs.


The shape of the CIB and the shape of the Primaris Dread plasma are very similar. (Thus why I said it looks like Tau tech).

Also I get that the IoM had grav tech but the fluff until Cawl showed up was that Grav tech is becoming increasingly rare which fits the whole technological regression theme of the IoM. It's the rapid inclusion of mass produced grav tanks for the IoM that are in contrast to the established setting of 40k.

It's wider, lacks the tri-fin design and has exposed coils.

Besides, there are only so many ways to shape a gun like object. Next thing people will be saying that Bolt Rifle looks like a Pusle Rifle just because they're both long and gun shaped.

I'd need to double check but Cawl wasn't given credit for the Grav tanks in the latest codex, but Land was for his STC.

@ Insectum

I suppose Primaris share some aesthetics with Tau and Eldar. I do think they are several standard deviations away though. I honestly think Phobos armor is more similar to AoS Blood Warriors in aesthetics than pretty much anything you have described. I mean Phobos armor does have bucket boot like feet and is stripped down from heavier armor.

I kinda think the fins or plasma or whatever similarity between factions is more to sell what the unit does within the universe than being something that treading on anther faction's look. I personally think adding fins is a fine way to indicate, 'This unit is swift and probably has a jump/flight element to it.' I guess you could call it lazy, I would call it not reinventing the wheel each time. I mean even with these elements I doubt anyone, including someone that had never seen a 40k model would confuse anything Primaris for any other faction definitely within 40k and very likely even with other IPs. So long as the models don't stray so far from that that they very much could be confused for another faction, I don't really see the issue.

As for the specifics of the tracks on the repulsors. I think they would look very out of place if done over the hull like the land raider. At the same time, going for a more modern track layout means there can't be side doors which one could argue is even more of a space marine aesthetic. For me, I think I would have preferred modern tracks and no side doors. Of course, I guess then we would have to weather jokes about the snow cat marine tank. Get it weather? Snow cat. At the same time, I am okay with the grav setup. The lore description keep the brutality of space marines even if it is difficult to create that on the actual model. I think the repulsor is a fair compromise keeping as much of the old space marine design choices while updating them to give the Primaris line something of their own to define them. Of course, I think allow marine players to make use of any marine transport to transport any marine would have made this go over much better.

It is what it is. We can coulda, woulda, shoulda this all year long, but that doesn't change what is.

Tiberias wrote:GW has said Primaris won't replace the old marines and they'll still support them, but let's not kid ourselves...the primaris model line was made to replace the old marines eventually. Why do you think established characters like marneus calgar and kor'sarro khan got the primaris treatment?

Because GW like to release new models, and upgrading old ones to Primaris a great way to do that?

Until it happens, I don't think it's exactly solid ground to base an argument upon.

Regarding your point about the new tech I think we just have to agree to disagree. 3 new versions of power armor goes against the theme of scarcity in power armor and terminator armor that was prevalent in the old chapters.

So we didn't have 8 marks of power armour and three marks of vastly rarer Terminator armour?
I mean, even discounting the Mark 1 Thunder Armour, that's still 7 marks of power armour. Primaris introduce three very similar and modular designs all on the Mark X pattern. It's *technically* only one pattern of armour, with various upgrades and attachments. I don't think that takes away from the scarcity of the 9+ types of power armour and terminator armour we had before.

Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I don't remember all this commotion when Vulkan and Corax returned in books after their stint in the Heresy.

They did? When?

War of the Beast and an undisclosed time after Corax abandoned his legion, respectively.

It doesn't matter that it didn't happen in M41, if the whole point is "Primarchs coming back is against the theme of the setting", then why haven't I seen the same uproar?

Insectum7 wrote:Many Primaris have more Tau-like qualities than classic marines. Flying tanks

Custodes, Admech, Sisters of Silence, Dark Angels heavy skimmers

jump pack troopers with guns instead of cc weapons

Vanguard Vets with dual pistols, Legion Destroyers, Assault Marines with flamers and suchlike, Seraphim, Venetarii

suits of armor with dual-weilded guns

As above, barring the Assault Marines and Venetarii, and including Devastators Centurions too.

more techy details, etc.

Admech, Legion Recon and Signals, etc etc

These are observations, not opinions.

And I'm observing that those exact traits you call "Tau-like" qualities are also present in some very obviously Imperial units. Considering that no-one was complaining about Seraphim having dual pistols on a jump pack power armoured unit or calling them "Tau-like", I only wish to point out inconsistencies with the whole "they're more like Tau" argument, which you claim to be an observation - unfortunately, it's an accurate "observation" that only holds if you ignore the other Imperial and even standard Marine units that share the same designs.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

It doesn't matter that it didn't happen in M41, if the whole point is "Primarchs coming back is against the theme of the setting", then why haven't I seen the same uproar?

Of course it matters. The Imperium of 32nd millennium was quite different, the era of legends was not so far behind. And the game is not set in that era, so the main setting is not affected regardless. Furthermore, it happens in some obscure BL book.

 Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

It doesn't matter that it didn't happen in M41, if the whole point is "Primarchs coming back is against the theme of the setting", then why haven't I seen the same uproar?

Of course it matters. The Imperium of 32nd millennium was quite different, the era of legends was not so far behind.

And Corax? Plus, it's still a Primarch returning - on a simple level of "Primarchs ruin the setting", I don't see anywhere near the same commotion.

And the game is not set in that era, so the main setting is not affected regardless.

The game can be set in whatever era you want. Badab War, War of the Beast, 1st Tyrannic War, Indomitus Crusade, you name it - you can play any of them.

Furthermore, it happens in some obscure BL book.

It's really not that obscure. Unless you're calling all BL books obscure, in which case, you can't really complain about things "not being true to the setting" when you're ignoring it.

Now, if you don't like BL books or simply prefer to only see the setting as you've grown up/experienced it, good for you, genuinely. But that doesn't change that your version of the setting is based on one that ignores significant sections of it, and simply saying "ah well anything that's not XYZ is obscure and is irrelevant to me" isn't exactly a great foundation if you want to make a wider argument beyond your personal opinions.

Honestly?
I stick to the rulebooks and codecies/supplements for my lore.

This is a game, the main books should (and do) provide wonderful amounts of lore, especially across many editions. Reading just the rulebook lore between 4th and now shows so much, let alone the Codex lore!

The Black Library stuff is nice, but, to me, it's more akin to really popular theories and lore ideas, as things vary wildily between authors and their perceptions of the 40k universe, the factions and abilities of various units and individuals.

 Blndmage wrote:
Honestly?
I stick to the rulebooks and codecies/supplements for my lore.

This is a game, the main books should (and do) provide wonderful amounts of lore, especially across many editions. Reading just the rulebook lore between 4th and now shows so much, let alone the Codex lore!

The Black Library stuff is nice, but, to me, it's more akin to really popular theories and lore ideas, as things vary wildily between authors and their perceptions of the 40k universe, the factions and abilities of various units and individuals.

Fair enough, you enjoy the universe how you like! As long as you're not claiming that anything you've not read is "obscure" or claiming facts from the lore which are simply untrue, I honestly don't have an issue how you enjoy 40k!

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
And Corax? Plus, it's still a Primarch returning - on a simple level of "Primarchs ruin the setting", I don't see anywhere near the same commotion.

Because it happens at unspecified time in a manner that doesn't affect the main setting, and most people in the setting and indeed in the real world do not even know about it. It is completely different thing than Guilliman's return being the focal point the game's metaplot.

The game can be set in whatever era you want. Badab War, War of the Beast, 1st Tyrannic War, Indomitus Crusade, you name it - you can play any of them.

That is utterly disingenous on an absurd level. The setting of the game is 41st millennium, it is called Warhammer 40 000, that is where all the focus is. I agree with you on many matters (though not on this one,) but your method of arguing is quite dishonest.

FIt's really not that obscure. Unless you're calling all BL books obscure, in which case, you can't really complain about things "not being true to the setting" when you're ignoring it.

Now, if you don't like BL books or simply prefer to only see the setting as you've grown up/experienced it, good for you, genuinely. But that doesn't change that your version of the setting is based on one that ignores significant sections of it, and simply saying "ah well anything that's not XYZ is obscure and is irrelevant to me" isn't exactly a great foundation if you want to make a wider argument beyond your personal opinions.

Most people who play this game don't read BL books, and people who do are mostly fine with Primarchs, as the main focus of BL for a decade has been catering to Primarch fan boys.

They're nice models, but for the love of the God Emperor, enough with the damned Space Marines, I am so sick and tired of hearing about them. On top of that new superer Space Marines just means more awful superhero fluff regarding Marines, which I personally hate.

BL is an expansion of the codex canon and sometimes feeds back into the codexes ad well.

 Crimson wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

In real life it's a bad jpke, but stories operate on a different logic. I mean the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe is all about the Lion retutning to Narnia. The mobie Hooknwas all about Peter Pan going back to Neverland.

40k operates on the same sort of narrative causality where.myths and legemds can be real.

Yes those stories were about that. 40K on the other hand was about a rotten, declining empire, its glory days in the distant past and the heroes of old mere barely remembered distorted legends. How fething hard can it be to understand that one of those mythical heroes returning and starting to fix things utterly changes what the setting is about?

This pretty much sums up perfectly why I don't like any of the newer books or releases. The return of Bobby G ( something I'm not entirely opposed to) and Cawl suddenly having better marines, wargear and tanks including hovering superheavies changes the setting.

No longer is the IOM an ignorant dying empire holding on mostly due to inertia, size and numbers. No longer is it taking a step backward in social structures and tech, most of which is centuries if not older. Instead it now has an enlighten leader who is slowly but surely putting forward reforms, effecting good governance and now has an updated super army cooked up by a tech heretic.

The main appeal to me was that humanity missed it's shot at having a good future and rather than dying out almost all at once like the elder, we are doomed to a slow decay. 8th edition doesn't have that feel.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
BL is an expansion of the codex canon and sometimes feeds back into the codexes ad well.

both the space marine codex, and the white scars and ultramarines supplements explictly refer to events in the BL novels. Waay back in the day BL was basicly stand alone stories that didn't filter into the codices but that has since changed. Fans respond to a more interlinked universe by getting more invested and spending more money so...

HoundsofDemos wrote:

This pretty much sums up perfectly why I don't like any of the newer books or releases. The return of Bobby G ( something I'm not entirely opposed to) and Cawl suddenly having better marines, wargear and tanks including hovering superheavies changes the setting.

No longer is the IOM an ignorant dying empire holding on mostly due to inertia, size and numbers. No longer is it taking a step backward in social structures and tech, most of which is centuries if not older. Instead it now has an enlighten leader who is slowly but surely putting forward reforms, effecting good governance and now has an updated super army cooked up by a tech heretic.

The main appeal to me was that humanity missed it's shot at having a good future and rather than dying out almost all at once like the elder, we are doomed to a slow decay. 8th edition doesn't have that feel.

And yet he can't shut down the Ecclesiarchy, he's starting to lose his hair to stress (and his temples have greyed), he had to threaten people in order to make any change (and they're likely undoing his work as he does it), his Indomitus Crusade was a victory in name only and the Imperium is still broken in half and nearly lost Vigilus (which is basically the new Cadia) if it wasn't for Eldar getting involved.

Guilliman isn't truly turning humanity around as much as he gives a light of hope that only makes how bad everything is getting look even worse. Humanity is still on a path towards damnation.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

both the space marine codex, and the white scars and ultramarines supplements explictly refer to events in the BL novels. Waay back in the day BL was basicly stand alone stories that didn't filter into the codices but that has since changed. Fans respond to a more interlinked universe by getting more invested and spending more money so...

Mother Gullet is a bit of lore from BL (also 40k vore, ew) from Ian Watson's books that has been around as Assassin codex lore, and Witch Hunters had bits of the Eisenhorn books in it for lore.

It is not about winning or losing. The Imperium is now run by a living, breathing, mythic, noblebright demigod. Whether he succeeds or not doesn't change the fact that this already changes the setting immensely.

 Crimson wrote:
It is not about winning or losing. The Imperium is now run by a living, breathing, mythic, noblebright demigod. Whether he succeeds or not doesn't change the fact that this already changes the setting immensely.

It creates a comforting lie, but doesn't do much else.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It creates a comforting lie, but doesn't do much else.

That's Ecclesiarchy's job.

 Crimson wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It creates a comforting lie, but doesn't do much else.

That's Ecclesiarchy's job.

Who do you think is pushing his divinity and claiming he'll save the Imperium?

He even butts heads with them in the 40k novels.

He represents a huge change though in prior to 8th edition 40k was more of a setting were stories took place, rather than an ongoing evolving narrative. Bobby G's return changed all that as we now have a central story with a main character.

That combined with the fact that the entire idea and background of primaris marines don't really add anything to the setting but IMO definitely take something away some of what made it unique we end up with a setting that many of us, particularly older players don't really like.

As an older player, a lot of people built stories around characters. Uriel Ventris, Dante, Pedro Kantor, ECT, ECT.

Guilliman is a big central figure, but he's not the protagonist of the setting.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

It creates a comforting lie, but doesn't do much else.

That's Ecclesiarchy's job.

Who do you think is pushing his divinity and claiming he'll save the Imperium?

He even butts heads with them in the 40k novels.

Further proof that it isn't the Ultramarine Primarch, but one of the Twins...

 Ishagu wrote:
People have a protectionist attitude of 40k that needs to change. There is nothing objectively wrong with the story. The dislike comes from people scared that their armies might be replaces - the same people wanting some sort of lifetime guarantee of support. That is not something you can demand. As a result of this attitude they look for things to complain and pick apart.

Oh. I didn't realize that. Here I was thinking GW just generally pens inferior fiction.

 Ishagu wrote:
To criticise Primaris is to reveal your own personal bias and fears.

Yes. I admit it.
I have a bias against reading poorly written gak.

 Ishagu wrote:
As I said earlier, people have already had 24 months to get on board or to reject 40k. Make your mind up, don't just sit on the fence whinging like angry nerd.

40k as a whole/concept? I accept that.
And I accept that all I can do about GWs fiction is to read as little of it as I have to learn the game.

 Ishagu wrote:
You don't have to like them, but if you don't you've had two years of complaining and angst. Move on

What about me? I only rejoined the 41stM last year. I WANT MY FULL TWO YEARS OF COMPLAINING!
And what about the new guy who joins tomorrow?

The new guy who joins tomorrow has no reason to complain because he doesn't have some misguided loyalty to older lore.

If you don't like the setting now why are you returning to it?

Brand new guy who.joins tomorrow? He won't have as much emotional baggage about the old linenas a grognard.

As for the quality of writing for 40k: that comes down to expectations. If you go into every bit of lore expecting Macbeth or [insert your own high bar of fiction here] then you're probably not going to enjoy yourself. Codex lore is written to cliffnote things, and even the slightly longer bits in campaign books can't make get you as emotionally invested as the full story. That's a large part of why we have Black Library: to give us those larger stories that draw us in while fleshing out the setting.

I rarely pick up any book expecting the next generation defining masterpiece though so maybe having less inflated expectations lets me enjoy the lore we get more. I don't know.

I do know that we have a lot of "old loe good, new lore bad" tossed around like that's a valid means of critic. I mean the Astral Knights novel is new lore and is one of the best Space Marine books out there. Perdition's Flame is a very new audiodrama that sells the horror of Poxwalkers quite well and presents a line that requires a massive set of brass ones to utter: "Ready to go pick a fight with an Inquisitor?"

Sorry, but that whole bit was friggin' great.

Sure there are stinkers (Descent of Angels anyone?), but for the most part the lore has a decent standard that holds fairly well and with some real great works mixed in.

The Primaris aren't the setting, not liking them doesn't mean you dislike 40k as a whole.

If you don't like Primaris, the Great Rift or Guilliman, simply play 41st K instead of 42nd K. Nothing changes for your Minis.

I wonder if the people that argue that much about the new background mostly play narrative missions and therefore feel forced to use the new developments in the fluff. Because if you don't, it's simply not very important. And even if you do... well, I'd say 49.9 % of the Imperium didn't change at all, 50% are more desperate than before and are under seige by Chaos and 0.1% are about Guilliman and Primaris. As before you have enough Space in the fluff to care about what's happening at the top of the Imperium - or simply don't. For your homemade Chapter / planet / even sector nothing has to change.