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.

I laugh at this, given that Chaos disagrees with the idea that it's not evil.

[Citation Needed]

 Excommunicatus wrote:
[Citation Needed]

Pfft, citation request from a guy who hasn't cited a single damn thing in support of his rather lazy arguments this entire thread.

Chaos is where the quote "Let no good deed go unpunished. Let no evil deed go unrewarded." comes from within the context of 40k. Their champions-- those chosen by their gods as the voice of Chaos-- are constantly on and on about destruction for the sole sake of destruction and killing for the sole sake of killing. Killing, despoiling, destroying, enslaving, all for the sake of scrabbling for a few scraps of power handed down from the chaos gods, whom reward the pain, suffering, and death they cause to others.

The culture that the Chaos Gods push through their servants is a celebration of evil, corruption, destruction, and suffering.

 Melissia wrote:
Pfft, citation request from a guy who hasn't cited a single damn thing in support of his rather lazy arguments this entire thread.

Word of advice: It's not worth your time. Trust me.

A scorpion stings a person because intended or not the person has threatened the scorpion, it wasn't because "That's what scorpions do" it was a defensive response. When they hunt and sting something it is a self preservation response to hunger.

That aside once an entity gets to the level of using imagination, being creative and commanding others they are sentient and no longer bound completely to responsive behaviour.
Orks in command can imagine how both their troops and the enemy will respond and react which makes them capable of empathy. They are beyond it's just what they do.
In the same way I'll allow a baby or toddler being destructive but not a child, teenager or adult I'll wave off the scorpion, squib, snotling and maybe even the gretchin as being underdeveloped creatures of instinct, by the time they're recognised as Orks they're responsibility for their actions is equal to and even exceeding their instinctive behaviours.

 Melissia wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
[Citation Needed]

Pfft, citation request from a guy who hasn't cited a single damn thing in support of his rather lazy arguments this entire thread.

Chaos is where the quote "Let no good deed go unpunished. Let no evil deed go unrewarded." comes from within the context of 40k. Their champions-- those chosen by their gods as the voice of Chaos-- are constantly on and on about destruction for the sole sake of destruction and killing for the sole sake of killing. Killing, despoiling, destroying, enslaving, all for the sake of scrabbling for a few scraps of power handed down from the chaos gods, whom reward the pain, suffering, and death they cause to others.

The culture that the Chaos Gods push through their servants is a celebration of evil, corruption, destruction, and suffering.

What am I missing citations for? My personal proclivities? Misquoting Nietzsche? A Kevin Smith movie? Do you not know who Azrael and Belial are in Judeo-Christian culture without being walked through it? That's the sum total of my posts in this thread. None have citations because none require a citation. Get down off the cross.

Nothing that you recited provides any support whatsoever to your previous contention. "[G]ood", "unpunished", "evil", "unrewarded" are all ambiguous, subjective terms that you're pretending have one definition. You're pretending there's such a thing as objective morality and that everyone and everything necessarily shares your POV of what that is. It isn't true and you haven't come close to establishing that it is true.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
"[G]ood", "unpunished", "evil", "unrewarded" are all ambiguous, subjective terms that you're pretending have one definition.

Aka "blah blah blah I don't want to feel like chaos marines are evil even as they gleefully rape, torture, destroy, slaughter, and burn their way across the galaxy for laughs and power".

Please, as if I haven't seen that tired old argument before. Moral relativism is not "there is no morality". The servants of Chaos acknowledge that they are evil, they own it and embrace it, and use it for power. That quote about good and evil is directly from more than one Chaos Marines codex. To embrace cruelty and sacrifice others for your own selfish gain is the very essence of Chaos, and they are not shy about saying it. By saying they aren't evil you're actually contradicting how the servants of Chaos describe themselves.

You see, Alpha Legion isn't evil.

They mess with everyone.

Now, if you wanted to understand their moral position, you'd have to question their motivations behind doing so.

...and they probably have no real idea, either.

 Melissia wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
"[G]ood", "unpunished", "evil", "unrewarded" are all ambiguous, subjective terms that you're pretending have one definition.

Aka "blah blah blah I don't want to feel like chaos marines are evil even as they gleefully rape, torture, destroy, slaughter, and burn their way across the galaxy for laughs and power".

Please, as if I haven't seen that tired old argument before. Moral relativism is not "there is no morality". The servants of Chaos acknowledge that they are evil, they own it and embrace it, and use it for power. That quote about good and evil is directly from more than one Chaos Marines codex. To embrace cruelty and sacrifice others for your own selfish gain is the very essence of Chaos, and they are not shy about saying it. By saying they aren't evil you're actually contradicting how the servants of Chaos describe themselves.

You keep saying this, but it isn't true and you haven't shown it to be true. You just stated it was true and moved on.

I have literally never once said that there is no such thing as morality. Morality is subjective. Some people think whipping someone else is immoral. Some don't. Some people think being whipped is a punishment. Some don't. Who are you to say who is right and who is wrong?

From the subjective morality of the IoM, Chaos is "evil". From the subjective morality of Chaos, it isn't.

EDIT - FWIW, I don't care if the prevailing opinion is that Heretic Astartes and Chaos is/are "evil", 'cause - get this, right - the models I paint and put on a table are not a direct representation of me as a person; they're just toy soldiers.

Weird, eh?

I think the problem comes from perspective. Evil from whose point of view? Just because a Chaos marine uses the word evil doesn’t mean he is, doesn’t mean he means evil from his perspective so much as an act his enemies would consider evil. We have that kind of discrepancy here on Earth, and we’re only one planet. Imagine a million Earths with a million times our different cultures. One cultural word for evil might not be the sameness in another. That’s even before you toss in Xenos and Chaos.

 Melissia wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
In other words "40k Twilight ".

Yawn. Grow up and stop being a memechild.

Please, grow a sense of humor.

As well as the ability to see the question of good and evil beyond simple Saturday morning cartoon logic.

Heretic astartes choose their leaders based on their abilities to lead and win battles just like any other military force. Not on how "evil" they are. Are they often subjectively evil? Yes, but that's not why they lead.

It must also be understood that most traitors don't see themselves as fighting for "evil" but instead fighting the hypocrisy of an Imperium they helped build and which they feel failed and abandoned them.

There is also the question of whether the traitor legions can be blamed for what they are. Many, like the Night Lords and World Eaters were created, by the Imperium's own Emperor, to be just the monsters that they are. Can you blame a tool for doing what it was designed for?

Of course they are more often than not the villains. Sometimes, however, the Imperium is portrayed as the villain. In either case understanding the villains for their logic and reasons for the things they do, however flawed, makes for better stories.

Or you can stick with He Man and Skeletor.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
In other words "40k Twilight ".

Yawn. Grow up and stop being a memechild.

Please, grow a sense of humor.

As well as the ability to see the question of good and evil beyond simple Saturday morning cartoon logic.

Heretic astartes choose their leaders based on their abilities to lead and win battles just like any other military force. Not on how "evil" they are. Are they often objectively evil? Yes, but that's not why they lead.

It must also be understood that most traitors don't see themselves as fighting for "evil" but instead fighting the hypocrisy of an Imperium they helped build and which they feel failed and abandoned them.

There is also the question of whether the traitor legions can be blamed for what they are. Many, like the Night Lords and World Eaters were created, by the Imperium's own Emperor, to be just the monsters that they are. Can you blame a tool for doing what it was designed for?

Of course they are more often than not the villains. Sometimes, however, the Imperium is portrayed as the villain. In either case understanding the villains for their logic and reasons for the things they do, however flawed, makes for better stories.

Or you can stick with He Man and Skeletor.

What even is “objectively evil”? How do you define evil objectively? I’m not being snide, I want to know.

 Octopoid wrote:
What even is “objectively evil”? How do you define evil objectively? I’m not being snide, I want to know.

Taking a Fruit Roll-Up and biting into the side of it like it's a cookie, instead of unrolling it and eating it like a proper civilized human being.

 Octopoid wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
In other words "40k Twilight ".

Yawn. Grow up and stop being a memechild.

Please, grow a sense of humor.

As well as the ability to see the question of good and evil beyond simple Saturday morning cartoon logic.

Heretic astartes choose their leaders based on their abilities to lead and win battles just like any other military force. Not on how "evil" they are. Are they often objectively evil? Yes, but that's not why they lead.

It must also be understood that most traitors don't see themselves as fighting for "evil" but instead fighting the hypocrisy of an Imperium they helped build and which they feel failed and abandoned them.

There is also the question of whether the traitor legions can be blamed for what they are. Many, like the Night Lords and World Eaters were created, by the Imperium's own Emperor, to be just the monsters that they are. Can you blame a tool for doing what it was designed for?

Of course they are more often than not the villains. Sometimes, however, the Imperium is portrayed as the villain. In either case understanding the villains for their logic and reasons for the things they do, however flawed, makes for better stories.

Or you can stick with He Man and Skeletor.

What even is “objectively evil”? How do you define evil objectively? I’m not being snide, I want to know.

Sorry should have said "subjectively ". Will edit post. Please accept the apology of a poorly educated piece of Kentucky holler trash.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Even the idea that they're all evil is debatable. For example I would argue Orks aren't evil.

Are they immoral and wicked?

Well that depends on whose morality you use.

Plus they're literally engineered to need to fight all the time. Accusing an Ork of being evil is like saying a bee is evil for stinging you or that a dog that bites out of fear is evil.

Tyranids definitely aren't evil. They're a mind that feels almost nothing but horrible hunger instinctively seeking out food.

Every faction in the setting is evil, often to absurd levels. The point is that no one can really claim moral superiority when everyone casually does stuff that would make cartoon villains go "dude, that's too much." No one has to feel bad for playing the bad guys faction in this game because there are no good guys, so it's not like you had a choice.

Which one of the bad guy is the worse guy? Does it even matter? When everyone is awful, who cares who's the least or the most horrible? The best you can do is forget about morals and pick which flavor of horribleness you prefer:
- the imperium is the last, best and only chance for humanity! If you're a human, you have to root for them, obviously!
- chaos are the only ones who enjoy true freedom (or that's what they think anyways).
- the orks have simple minds and don't do things out of malice, they just like to fight. That's their excuse and they're sticking to it.
- the eldar are an ancient, noble race who know better than everyone else because they're so ancient and noble.
- dark eldars are true individualists, they're the ultimate hedonists and just want to have fun. What's not to like about that? (Don't answer that question.)
- the tau are the only ones who care about you, citizen. As long as you help the Greater Good, of course. You wouldn't do something that isn't for the Greater Good, right?
- tyranids are beyond concepts of good and evil, so they're not evil. Q.E.D.
- necrons see anything that isn't necron as a pest. And there's nothing wrong with doing pest control, after all.

Amoral defaults to immoral for deontologists, as it lacks the good will that makes something objectively good.

It's also immoral for the ethics of care as amoral things don't care about ethical agents or subjects, and likewise moral agents care about their subjects and other agents - an amoral action shows an absence of care.

It's also virtually synonymous with evil for virtue ethicists as it is neither moral behaviour, nor a comfortable habit between extremes.

In theory it depends for consequentialists, but as the Trolley Problem is supposed to show, it's impossible to factor into any calculation of utility.

There is a massive misunderstanding of W40k lore by a community. Largely because GW didn't tried to push more reasonable Chaos and allowed their lazy writers use Chaos for their bolter porn media.

The simple thing is, Chaos somehow manages to fight Imperium on equal terms. Imperium is known to put heavy emphasis on production and servitude. They are essentially slaves, from lowest worker upwards to managers. They have little in terms of luxury or disposable income. Their lives are often solely focused on servitude either in toiling as machine in Adeptus Mechanicus manufactoriums or being recruited as cannon fodder for indifferent and cruel Imperium which sees field executions as a proper way to raise morale or to just instill fear for a sake of instilling fear. Such system might not be most efficient, intelligent, adaptable and many other things. What it is good for is making slaves (servants) who are amazing at being ruled and suffering all the hardships. In addition, it allows simply indecent amount of supplies being produced. This is actually how Imperium fights all its wars. It doesn't care about its loses. All it cares is about achieving at least a stalemate, because a stalemate is as good as won campaign for Imperium. Its obscene resources will always see that there is an army or two coming as mere reinforcements for attackers/defenders. So how Chaos can fight this if they can't function as society? How they can fight off determined, fanatical force with endless resources where even their demons do not exist (realspace)?


See? It is only logical that there should be a lot more subtlety to Chaos than most people know. Most lore at least hints at this. Demon world with civilian population? How it wasn't yet butchered by demons? Oh look, Grey knight mary sue. I wonder how realistically this time it will save the day! What I was thinking about? Oh, how Chaos had managed to research and construct new technologies? Like constructing entirely new types of weapons and class of ships which nothing in entire Imperium or pretty much galaxy can rival one on one? How Chaos posses technology to create craftworld level ships? Uhm? Look, Abaddon's arms just fell off! He is such a loser!

Chaos doesn't fight the Imperium on equal terms at all though. There's a large and obvious disparity in their abilities.

During Black Crusades they fly out of Eye of Terra, usually through most fortified areas in the galaxy and wages total war on galactic scale against Imperium.

 Ernestas wrote:
During Black Crusades they fly out of Eye of Terra, usually through most fortified areas in the galaxy and wages total war on galactic scale against Imperium.

The same Imperium that simultaneously fights Chaos, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Orks, Tyranids, Tau, rebels, Necrons and who knows how many minor Xenos. Chaos fights nowhere near as much and has vastly inferior resources.

 Ernestas wrote:
During Black Crusades they fly out of Eye of Terra, usually through most fortified areas in the galaxy and wages total war on galactic scale against Imperium.

And during each one Chaos eventually loses. They basically lash out and deal a bloody nasty blow to the Imperium, but they can't sustain a long term campaign.

This Chaos seems to work by a steady method of building up to a mass and then dealing a hard strike, aiming to cripple some part of the Imperium, not the whole beast. They then get beaten back, with the hope/expectation that their main target was destroyed beyond restoration; or at least to a point where restoration is expensive for the Imperium. The Imperiums resources are mindbogglingly huge, heck the Tau don't even believe that the Imperium is as big as the Imperials claim it to be. Chaos could never take it all on; so they whittle away at it.

Basically they are playing a super long game. Each Crusade deals harm and damage; this latest one is dealing perhaps some of the most powerful since its aim is to boldly try and slice the Imperium in half by taking a key travel location from them that links up two primary halves of the Imperium. Again they can't take it all on; so they are trying to cut it in half and create enough instability and, well, chaos that it might fragment or at least that some core areas have to deviate resources to fringe regions to maintain them.



Chaos are impressive and powerful, but they aren't as powerful as the whole Imperium. Of course the Imperium, by its very nature, also can't bring all of its power to one spot. Not only would it be an insane risk; but they also lack the organisational structure and they've other threats. As noted there's Tyranids sending huge fleets that smash tehir way to Space Marine homeworlds; there's Orks causing trouble on any world they see; there's Eldar doing sneaky stuff; there's the continual and steady expansion of Tau space and of Necrons waking up. There's Dark Eldar doing dark sneaky things. All this ontop of the Imperiums own internal power struggles and problems all layered atop Chaos and Genestealers all causing uprisings and turmoil on worlds.

It's almost as if chaos is waging some kind of "long war".

Gadzilla666 wrote:
It's almost as if chaos is waging some kind of "long war".

Galactic wide guerilla warfare.

Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
In other words "40k Twilight ".

Yawn. Grow up and stop being a memechild.

Please, grow a sense of humor.

As well as the ability to see the question of good and evil beyond simple Saturday morning cartoon logic.

Heretic astartes choose their leaders based on their abilities to lead and win battles just like any other military force. Not on how "evil" they are. Are they often subjectively evil? Yes, but that's not why they lead.

It must also be understood that most traitors don't see themselves as fighting for "evil" but instead fighting the hypocrisy of an Imperium they helped build and which they feel failed and abandoned them.

There is also the question of whether the traitor legions can be blamed for what they are. Many, like the Night Lords and World Eaters were created, by the Imperium's own Emperor, to be just the monsters that they are. Can you blame a tool for doing what it was designed for?

Of course they are more often than not the villains. Sometimes, however, the Imperium is portrayed as the villain. In either case understanding the villains for their logic and reasons for the things they do, however flawed, makes for better stories.

Or you can stick with He Man and Skeletor.

Disillusioned evil is still evil. Nor are sentient beings let off the hook for being 'tools'. ("I was just following orders!").

At some point, each Chaos Marine broke away from all pro-human-civilization institutions and decided that self-aggrandizement at the expense of othersis more important, aspecially if it came at the expense of human civilization.

Assuming, without deciding, that what you're saying is true when in fact it really only applies to *maybe* four or five established Legions/Renegade Chapters...

so what?

You're using a subjective POV to make that determination. It is necessarily subjective.

Objective morality is a myth. Aquinas is full of gak.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
Assuming, without deciding, that what you're saying is true when in fact it really only applies to *maybe* four or five established Legions/Renegade Chapters...

so what?

You're using a subjective POV to make that determination. It is necessarily subjective.

Objective morality is a myth. Aquinas is full of gak.

In 40k terms its easy. Daemons are minions of evil, and all Chaos legions feature posession, daemonic mutation, and desire to ascend to Daemon Prince immortality. Daemons being a direct result of corruption of purpose, they're all on the wrong side of the coin regardless of what they think or how they reason it.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
Assuming, without deciding, that what you're saying is true when in fact it really only applies to *maybe* four or five established Legions/Renegade Chapters...

so what?

You're using a subjective POV to make that determination. It is necessarily subjective.

Objective morality is a myth. Aquinas is full of gak.

In 40k terms its easy. Daemons are minions of evil, and all Chaos legions feature posession, daemonic mutation, and desire to ascend to Daemon Prince immortality. Daemons being a direct result of corruption of purpose, they're all on the wrong side of the coin regardless of what they think or how they reason it.

Most Night Lords reject or look down upon all the things you listed. So that kills your simplistic view of the legions with just one example. What about loyalists who use daemonic possession?(*cough*cough * Exorcists chapter).

My point is that this simplistic view of good and evil is booorrriiinnggg. Complicated villains are better than one note, "bwahahaha evil!" ones. Jared Leto's Joker? One note. Boring. Joaquin Phoenix or Heath Ledger's Joker? Complicated and interesting. The same is true for heroes. Would you prefer an interesting, well written hero, or a Mary Sue ?

Good lore portrays chaos as more multi faceted than simple mustache twirling evil.

You apparently haven't been getting good gak.

^I didn't say they were simple evil. I just said they were evil.

And Night Lords can have Possessed, Daemon Princes, Marked marines, etc. So maybe they're not as simple as YOU say.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^I didn't say they were simple evil. I just said they were evil.

And Night Lords can have Possessed, Daemon Princes, Marked marines, etc. So maybe they're not as simple as YOU say.

Yes in the rules but we're talking lore. In the rules a plague marine becomes less of a plague marine as he advances in rank. In the rules a single guardsman can stop a land raider.

And evil is subjective. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.