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.
Racerguy180 wrote: I would like to interject, if you think 10000yrs is unprecedented advancement....I'd hate to hear your definition of slow and precedented.
So what's your other example of a factions worth of advancements, troops and materiel sitting idle in stasis and just waiting for a primarch to return and give the go ahead to launch a crusade across the galaxy?
That's how stupid the mechanicum is, it was literally genelocked to a specific dude, who per happenstance was Columbian necktied by his brother and put in stasis for 10k yrs....can't get more stagnant that that. It's called irony, Cawl was under orders and was following them in a algorithmic fashion. 3rd founding douchebag Guliliman told him he was answerable only to him and said, make this better using my father's work and be sure to....cut to throat slice and bam 10kyrs go by. How useful would primaris have been in m32? Tyrannic wars, black crusades????
That's the entire point, you can't really get more grimdark than that. Now they're basically too little(even tho they're numerous) and they're too late(could shoulda woulda). once again the imperium had a glimmer of hope but in the 42nd(?) Millennium, hope is the first step on the road to damnation and for how ever important you may be....you will not be missed.
Racerguy180 wrote: That's how stupid the mechanicum is, it was literally genelocked to a specific dude, who per happenstance was Columbian necktied by his brother and put in stasis for 10k yrs....can't get more stagnant that that. It's called irony, Cawl was under orders and was following them in a algorithmic fashion. 3rd founding douchebag Guliliman told him he was answerable only to him and said, make this better using my father's work and be sure to....cut to throat slice and bam 10kyrs go by. How useful would primaris have been in m32? Tyrannic wars, black crusades????
That's the entire point, you can't really get more grimdark than that. Now they're basically too little(even tho they're numerous) and they're too late(could shoulda woulda). once again the imperium had a glimmer of hope but in the 42nd(?) Millennium, hope is the first step on the road to damnation and for how ever important you may be....you will not be missed.
So "unprecedented" still appears to be applicable.
As for "that's the entire point" . . . I'd say the entire point of Primaris is $$$$.
Point of order - this is 40k, you definitely can make it more grimdark. Just have it be something like a Cursed Founding or the Raven Guard geneseed post-Heresy, where Primaris briefly turn the tide and gives the Imperium hope, but the hope is snuffed as the Primaris begin mutating or falling to Chaos en masse. Or, Morty/Abaddon/Fabulous Bill manage to snag a sample of the Primaris geneseed and twist it to their own ends, unleashing new horrors that would not have happened had Cawl never let the Primaris out of the freezer.
As for "that's the entire point" . . . I'd say the entire point of Primaris is $$$$.
No gak, but when you actually read the stuff it makes sense, therefore it's a valid viewpoint and no more invalid than yours.b
If you think GW does stuff out of the goodness of their heart.....I feel bad for you. The entire point is to get you to buy minis, if they give a fluff justification for said minis, and it jives with what people want, then GW is doing something right. Stop buying minis for rules(which wax and wane) and it will all become clear.
Point of order - this is 40k, you definitely can make it more grimdark. Just have it be something like a Cursed Founding or the Raven Guard geneseed post-Heresy, where Primaris briefly turn the tide and gives the Imperium hope, but the hope is snuffed as the Primaris begin mutating or falling to Chaos en masse. Or, Morty/Abaddon/Fabulous Bill manage to snag a sample of the Primaris geneseed and twist it to their own ends, unleashing new horrors that would not have happened had Cawl never let the Primaris out of the freezer.
Which would be dope.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/28 04:56:10
As for "that's the entire point" . . . I'd say the entire point of Primaris is $$$$.
No gak, but when you actually read the stuff it makes sense, therefore it's a valid viewpoint and no more invalid than yours.b
If you think GW does stuff out of the goodness of their heart.....I feel bad for you. The entire point is to get you to buy minis, if they give a fluff justification for said minis, and it jives with what people want, then GW is doing something right. Stop buying minis for rules(which wax and wane) and it will all become clear.
Point of order - this is 40k, you definitely can make it more grimdark. Just have it be something like a Cursed Founding or the Raven Guard geneseed post-Heresy, where Primaris briefly turn the tide and gives the Imperium hope, but the hope is snuffed as the Primaris begin mutating or falling to Chaos en masse. Or, Morty/Abaddon/Fabulous Bill manage to snag a sample of the Primaris geneseed and twist it to their own ends, unleashing new horrors that would not have happened had Cawl never let the Primaris out of the freezer.
Which would be dope.
And said minis are objectively better. I'd start my whole army over in a heart beat if they redid Mk3-5 to Primaris scale.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Point of order - this is 40k, you definitely can make it more grimdark. Just have it be something like a Cursed Founding or the Raven Guard geneseed post-Heresy, where Primaris briefly turn the tide and gives the Imperium hope, but the hope is snuffed as the Primaris begin mutating or falling to Chaos en masse. Or, Morty/Abaddon/Fabulous Bill manage to snag a sample of the Primaris geneseed and twist it to their own ends, unleashing new horrors that would not have happened had Cawl never let the Primaris out of the freezer.
Which would be dope.
No, it wouldn't. Keep your primaris out of my Chaos Space Marines!
Insectum7 wrote: How many Primaris releases have there been in the last three years since their inception?
Probably 40-ish, counting pauldron packs but also counting dual kits as one kit independent of how many datasheets it has.
Imagine if instead of numarines, that 40+ kit love was spread around other factions. Of all that could have been. . .
I mean, with 40+ kits you could redo a lot of 30k in plastic. Auxilia, SA command squad, Veletarii, Malcador/Dracosan/Valdor, Mars-Alpha Russ, Secutarii, Thallax/Ursarax, Castellax, Vorax, Domitar, Triaros, Adsecularii, Krios, Thanatar, Tech-Priest/Myrmidons kit, Macrocarid, Lightning, Thunderbolt, Deimos Rhino, Deimos Predator/Whirlwind, SA/Legion artillery tank, plastic Sicaran, IC Land Raider, Spartan/Cerberus/Typhon, Javelin Land Speeder, Storm Eagle, Breachers, Legion Assault, Legion Recon, Legion Heavy Support, Legion command squad, Outrider bikes, jetbikes, SA/Legion Rapiers, full plastic Contemptor kit, Leviathan, Deredeo, fancy Questoris knight sprues, Cerastus Knight, plastic Thunderhawk, Fellblade kit?
(I know, I know, still too many Space Marines, but much better-looking. And better-looking vehicles, and two more factions.)
Why would you spend all of those resources converting perfectly fine resin kits to plastic instead of, I dunno, converting everything finecast? Giving Dark Eldar some of their characters back? New Guard infantry? Maybe some actual support for R&H so they didn't get sent to Legends?
Gadzilla666 wrote: ...Why would you spend all of those resources converting perfectly fine resin kits to plastic instead of, I dunno, converting everything finecast? Giving Dark Eldar some of their characters back? New Guard infantry? Maybe some actual support for R&H so they didn't get sent to Legends?
Perspective. Not saying that's what I'd do given the power, or what GW should do, just saying that with all the energy they dumped into Primaris they could do a plastic range for an entire new game. Forty GW-style plastic kits could get you most of four factions for a big game like Infinity or Warmachine, or eight factions for something smaller like BFG.
(BFG's easy, you get common hulls by class in a lot of factions, so you just need a multi-kit each for a battleship, grand cruiser, cruiser/battlecruiser, light cruiser, and escort for each faction. Escort/torpedo tokens would be on the frame in your cruiser kits. Eight factions gets you Navy, Chaos, SM, Corsairs, DE, Tau Warfleet, Necrons, and Tyranids, and then you can use the holes in that lineup to make defenses, a Planet Killer, a Star Fort, and a Blackstone Fortress.)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/28 06:37:09
Racerguy180 wrote: I would like to interject, if you think 10000yrs is unprecedented advancement....I'd hate to hear your definition of slow and precedented.
Racerguy180 wrote: I would like to interject, if you think 10000yrs is unprecedented advancement....I'd hate to hear your definition of slow and precedented.
It's not really 10,000 years, though, it's massive technological and institutional change all at once, despite Caul's supposed longevity. Otherwise you're left with the idea that the Imperium's technological stagnation is a lie... because Caul's been constantly innovating the whole time.
Racerguy180 wrote: I would like to interject, if you think 10000yrs is unprecedented advancement....I'd hate to hear your definition of slow and precedented.
I don't, but it's kinda the whole point of the Imperium. That's why all this sudden advancement is so jarring for many people. It's completely antithetical to the way technology is treated in 40k.
Racerguy, instead of me quoting everything, just know I agree with what you've put. You seem to understand the point I'm making.
Hecaton wrote:No, there are certain things that just make for bad storytelling. Breaking the established rules of the setting - like Primaris do, being the product of unprecedented innovation on the IoM's part - is considered a bad move. But you know that, I'm sure; your lies and general bad faith argumentation give the truth of that.
Tell me, who made you arbiter of objectively "good" and "bad" storytelling?
Because, uh, otherwise, that's just your opinion. You're more than entitled to it, but I wouldn't go waving it around like fact. Talk about bad faith arguing, yikes.
If it weren't for Primaris the issue would be tolerable, so it's a Primaris issue.
A Primaris issue to you, yes. However, I would have the same issue if it were Primaris or not - because the core issue is Marine hegemony in GW releases. Therefore, for me, it's not a Primaris issue. For someone so critical of GW (which you're welcome to be), I'm shocked that you would find the Marine dominance even "tolerable".
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:And said minis are objectively better. I'd start my whole army over in a heart beat if they redid Mk3-5 to Primaris scale.
I'm afraid I have to say that's still not "objectively" the case, however much I may like the look of Primaris.
jeff white wrote:
Racerguy180 wrote: I would like to interject, if you think 10000yrs is unprecedented advancement....I'd hate to hear your definition of slow and precedented.
Unprecedented for a civilization in decline.
Being a civilisation in decline doesn't mean you're incapable of innovating. It just means you do it very slowly - say, 10,000 years slowly.
Hecaton wrote:It's not really 10,000 years, though
It really is.
it's massive technological and institutional change all at once, despite Caul's supposed longevity.
That's when you look at it in terms of how it was released, which is frankly myopic.
Yes, all the Primaris stuff and gear was released into the galaxy (and our stores) practically all at once, but within the context of the lore, we found out that this had been a massive hording and stockpiling of resources over 10,000 years. Hell, for all we know, Cawl could have figured out the Primaris "formula" and been developing anti-grav tech in M35, and the other 6k years were spent purely on creating more. It's a blank space, but, at least for me, 10,000 years to acheive what Cawl did sounds fair conservative.
Otherwise you're left with the idea that the Imperium's technological stagnation is a lie... because Caul's been constantly innovating the whole time.
Slipspace wrote:I don't, but it's kinda the whole point of the Imperium. That's why all this sudden advancement is so jarring for many people. It's completely antithetical to the way technology is treated in 40k.
I'll address these together, as they're largely the same point.
Just because *Cawl* was innovating (even albeit slowly) doesn't change the wider picture. The Imperium as a whole *is* stagnant, and even if Cawl was working on his project in the background, the foreground was still in decline. As I've pointed out, the Imperium has innovated plenty of times, in seemingly fairly short notice too, so it's not like innovation was unheard of - perhaps, for a long time, perhaps the idea of "technological stagnation" was a lie, after all: civilians have anti-grav transports in some corners of the setting, and Marines seem able to develop new Land Raider variants every other campaign they're in. It all depends on the context how you view things happening in 40k. And I think that kind of context is important when looking at the Primaris, because it seems that a lot of people overlook just how bad a shape the Imperium is in when the Primaris are released: the galaxy split in two, Terra itself besieged, and many of the Imperium's most vital worlds under attack or destroyed. Sure, they get some long-awaited aid in the form of brand new shiny Primaris, but they've also lost unbelievable amounts of control on the galactic stage.
However, the thing people latch onto are the physical IRL changes they see - the unfamiliar faces in their stores, on their models, hence why the context gets overlooked.
End of the day, if you like them or not, I'm not fussed, people will give whatever reasons they give - just know that they're reasons built out of subjective tastes, preferences, interpretations.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/01/28 11:54:00
Tell me, who made you arbiter of objectively "good" and "bad" storytelling?
Breaking an established setting, just for the sake of selling more merch and invalidating the models made by 3ed party companies, is definitly bad though. You don't need to have a major in literature or be an established critique to know that.
Yes, all the Primaris stuff and gear was released into the galaxy (and our stores) practically all at once, but within the context of the lore, we found out that this had been a massive hording and stockpiling of resources over 10,000 years. Hell, for all we know, Cawl could have figured out the Primaris "formula" and been developing anti-grav tech in M35, and the other 6k years were spent purely on creating more. It's a blank space, but, at least for me, 10,000 years to acheive what Cawl did sounds fair conservative.
But that is just implanting new stuff in to already existing lore, and changing it just to prove a point. Considering how paranoid and besieged the imperium of man it, he should have been found out and exectuted as a tech heretic. And the whole inventing edge with mechanicus makes no sense to begin with, even if one of them does something "revolutionary" like mounting an already existing cable in to an already existing plug, but on a different kind of a machine, they still don't implement it widely until an STC is found that proves that in the past it existed and was used.
Plus some stuff is impossible to hide. Tanks and man, maybe when spread over multiple planets. But he either had to build enough ships to transport a whole legion of marines, or commandered it from other imperial organisations.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/28 12:08:55
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Why would you spend all of those resources converting perfectly fine resin kits to plastic instead of, I dunno, converting everything finecast? Giving Dark Eldar some of their characters back? New Guard infantry? Maybe some actual support for R&H so they didn't get sent to Legends?
My thoughts exactly. It's plastic that could have been much better spent on Guard, Eldar, etc.
it's massive technological and institutional change all at once, despite Caul's supposed longevity.
That's when you look at it in terms of how it was released, which is frankly myopic.
Yes, all the Primaris stuff and gear was released into the galaxy (and our stores) practically all at once, but within the context of the lore, we found out that this had been a massive hording and stockpiling of resources over 10,000 years. Hell, for all we know, Cawl could have figured out the Primaris "formula" and been developing anti-grav tech in M35, and the other 6k years were spent purely on creating more. It's a blank space, but, at least for me, 10,000 years to acheive what Cawl did sounds fair conservative.
Ham-fisted cramming of fluff for galactic-deus-ex-for-dollars is ham-fisted cramming of fluff for galactic-deus-ex-for-dollars.
As for "that's the entire point" . . . I'd say the entire point of Primaris is $$$$.
No gak, but when you actually read the stuff it makes sense, therefore it's a valid viewpoint and no more invalid than yours.b
If you think GW does stuff out of the goodness of their heart.....I feel bad for you. The entire point is to get you to buy minis, if they give a fluff justification for said minis, and it jives with what people want, then GW is doing something right. Stop buying minis for rules(which wax and wane) and it will all become clear.
Obviously GW doesn't operate out of the goodness of their heart, but there's multiple ways to make money. Some of them will be more faithful to their setting/lore than others.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/01/28 12:23:21
Tell me, who made you arbiter of objectively "good" and "bad" storytelling?
Breaking an established setting, just for the sake of selling more merch and invalidating the models made by 3ed party companies, is definitly bad though. You don't need to have a major in literature or be an established critique to know that.
That's got nothing to do with bad literature, and you know it. Give me actual *objective* proof that it's bad storytelling - I doubt you can, because art criticism is notoriously subjective. You can say as much as you like how you don't like it, but that's just on you.
Also, the setting "breaks" itself and re-establishes it's lore practically every new edition - but even then, it's ultimately down to the individual if the lore is even broken.
Some people think that Grey Knights being as powerful as they are in lore is "breaking the setting to sell more merch". It's all a matter of perspective.
But that is just implanting new stuff in to already existing lore, and changing it just to prove a point.
But that's now the lore. If you're complaining how you don't like what the lore says, maybe your argument isn't coming from what the lore says, but what you want the lore to say.
The lore has never remained constant in 40k, and never will. It's down to you what you choose to accept.
Considering how paranoid and besieged the imperium of man it, he should have been found out and exectuted as a tech heretic.
Like the Grey Knights are executed for tech heresy by retro-fitting xenotech? Like the creators of the Razorback and Land Raider Crusader and Redeemer were executed?
I thought not.
And the whole inventing edge with mechanicus makes no sense to begin with, even if one of them does something "revolutionary" like mounting an already existing cable in to an already existing plug, but on a different kind of a machine, they still don't implement it widely until an STC is found that proves that in the past it existed and was used.
That's not what happens at all. Things like the Redeemer, Ares, and Razorback are explicitly *new* creations, developed as a response to battlefield situations, and tacitly accepted by the AdMech if politically expedient.
Otherwise, how could you justify things like xenophase blades or tesseract labyrinths used by Imperial forces, which are explicitly xenotech, and therefore have no STC?
Plus some stuff is impossible to hide. Tanks and man, maybe when spread over multiple planets. But he either had to build enough ships to transport a whole legion of marines, or commandered it from other imperial organisations.
Likely, both - and due to Cawl's political immunity he had due to his rank and blessing from Guilliman, he could get away with it.
Plus, you know Cawl has his own Ark Mechanicus, which housed most of the Primaris Marines in stasis, right?
Why would you spend all of those resources converting perfectly fine resin kits to plastic instead of, I dunno, converting everything finecast? Giving Dark Eldar some of their characters back? New Guard infantry? Maybe some actual support for R&H so they didn't get sent to Legends?
My thoughts exactly. It's plastic that could have been much better spent on Guard, Eldar, etc.
Oh, agreed. But I feel that, even if Primaris hadn't existed, that plastic would still be going on Space Marines.
It's more of a "Space Marines get too much attention" thing than a "Primaris bad" thing - Primaris existing being a symptom of the overall Marine-centrism.
it's massive technological and institutional change all at once, despite Caul's supposed longevity.
That's when you look at it in terms of how it was released, which is frankly myopic.
Yes, all the Primaris stuff and gear was released into the galaxy (and our stores) practically all at once, but within the context of the lore, we found out that this had been a massive hording and stockpiling of resources over 10,000 years. Hell, for all we know, Cawl could have figured out the Primaris "formula" and been developing anti-grav tech in M35, and the other 6k years were spent purely on creating more. It's a blank space, but, at least for me, 10,000 years to acheive what Cawl did sounds fair conservative.
Ham-fisted cramming of fluff for galactic-deus-ex-for-dollars is ham-fisted cramming of fluff for galactic-deus-ex-for-dollars.
Basically, you're telling me that it's not the lore that you have an objection to, but that it differed from what you expected.
Exactly what I claimed - and as I've told you, that's totally fine. Everyone has their own vision of the setting. Yours differs from mine. But both our views are subjective. You say ham-fisted, I say perfectly acceptable. I hate to be snappy, but deal with it. Your opinion isn't the only one.
Some of them will be more faithful to theirmy interpretation of the setting/lore than others.
Fixed for you.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/28 13:58:29
That's not what happens at all. Things like the Redeemer, Ares, and Razorback are explicitly *new* creations, developed as a response to battlefield situations, and tacitly accepted by the AdMech if politically expedient.
no those are battlefield modifications, which then wait for a long time for Mars to approve that there is in deed an STC design that allows you to put a stormbolter on the right hatch of the rhino too. When mars can't find the STC for a specific design, and those are marine things which is already very indepenended as far as imperium goes, you get the BA situation. Where Baals and different type of engines are considered heretical by the adeptus.
Give me actual *objective* proof that it's bad storytelling - I doubt you can, because art criticism is notoriously subjective.
Intreducing Cawl, and spinning a story about how he build a whole legion of new marines, and weapons for them, and ships to fare them around, and that he somehow took part in every big project ever done by the empire, makes as much sense storytelling wise, as the changes done to SW or dr Who lore. With the difference that SW and dr Who are a bit older then w40k lore.
Could stuff like primaris be intreduced and make sense? Of course. Lets say Constantine Valdor returns, and opens the gene vaults that exist under the imperial palace. The primaris aren't space marines, but are a stop gap between a custodes and a human. The project is something the gene smiths of the custodes know, and the custodes themselfs are one of the few organisations(probably only, aside for the admecha) that could commander a legion size fleet.
Normal marines die out after 200 years of fighting, and the new primaris take over their place. Which then explains why their "fathers" have to leave Terra.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
Cawl is perfectly fine despite what whiners say. Only introduction by name at first (so the lack of characterization doesn't make him a Mary Sue, sorry whiners) but fluff with him afterwards was excellent.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
That's not what happens at all. Things like the Redeemer, Ares, and Razorback are explicitly *new* creations, developed as a response to battlefield situations, and tacitly accepted by the AdMech if politically expedient.
no those are battlefield modifications, which then wait for a long time for Mars to approve that there is in deed an STC design that allows you to put a stormbolter on the right hatch of the rhino too. When mars can't find the STC for a specific design, and those are marine things which is already very indepenended as far as imperium goes, you get the BA situation. Where Baals and different type of engines are considered heretical by the adeptus...
Like many things about Warhammer the degree to which the Adeptus Mechanicus is a monolithic entity with no clue what's going on chanting religious ritual, shouting "heresy!" at people, and going on crusades over trivial crap fluctuates wildly from writer to writer. In-setting you've got the really forbidden stuff (xeno-genetic-engineering, xenotech, daemon engines, AI, synthetic organic beings, that kind of thing), "forbidden innovation" (which, depending on the writer, may be "producing anything different!" or "producing anything that hasn't gone through a rigorous thousand-year QA procedure where every last little bit is stress-tested and it's ensured it won't explode or turn into a daemon under any circumstances at all!"), and people who don't give their blueprints/manufacturing data (STC or otherwise) to the Mechanicum, which isn't technically heresy but still pisses the Mechanicum off (ex. any Custodes equipment, which is manufactured by the descendants of the Terawatt Clan on Earth). At the moment I think the canon status of the Baal engine is "STC hoarded by the BA" rather than "forbidden innovation."
no those are battlefield modifications, which then wait for a long time for Mars to approve that there is in deed an STC design that allows you to put a stormbolter on the right hatch of the rhino too. When mars can't find the STC for a specific design, and those are marine things which is already very indepenended as far as imperium goes, you get the BA situation. Where Baals and different type of engines are considered heretical by the adeptus.
It depends on a lot if things, including expediency. Plus, again, cawl.is from the 31st millennium, not the 41st. A lot of the regression belongs elsewhere.
Intreducing Cawl, and spinning a story about how he build a whole legion of new marines, and weapons for them, and ships to fare them around, and that he somehow took part in every big project ever done by the empire, makes as much sense storytelling wise, as the changes done to SW or dr Who lore. With the difference that SW and dr Who are a bit older then w40k lore.
I dunno, individual characters can do a lot, both playable and lire based and can shake the whole galaxy.
Look at abaddon or fabius bile. Hell, look at eldrad!
To a lesser extent and in the modern era, Look at characters like guliman, calgar, azrael, or Dante. Seemingly everywhere, doing everything, leading the charge.
In terms of lore, look at characters like Sebastian thor. One single person who ignited a rebellion that reshaped the whole imperium.
Cawl? OK granted it would have been better to have had a build up over five or ten years, but that kind of future proofing is extremely difficult. As one person doing lots of things though? Yeah, not unprecedented.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Exactly what I claimed - and as I've told you, that's totally fine. Everyone has their own vision of the setting. Yours differs from mine. But both our views are subjective.
You say ham-fisted, I say perfectly acceptable. I hate to be snappy, but deal with it. Your opinion isn't the only one.
Opinions can be shallow and misinformed, short-sighted, lacking perspective and biased. They can simply be kool-aid induced or towing the company line. I reserve the right to express why I believe my opinion is better than yours, and provide argument/evidence as to why this is the case. I hate to be snappy, but deal with it.
Your continued cries about subjectivity aren't bringing any substance, just a deflection for a lack of argument with merit.
Tell me, who made you arbiter of objectively "good" and "bad" storytelling?
Breaking an established setting, just for the sake of selling more merch and invalidating the models made by 3ed party companies, is definitly bad though. You don't need to have a major in literature or be an established critique to know that.
That's got nothing to do with bad literature, and you know it. Give me actual *objective* proof that it's bad storytelling -
You'll find that a hallmark of good writing is the setup and payoff. Primaris is definitely not that. The fact that their lore is so contentious is good evidence for the storytelling being lackluster.
Why would you spend all of those resources converting perfectly fine resin kits to plastic instead of, I dunno, converting everything finecast? Giving Dark Eldar some of their characters back? New Guard infantry? Maybe some actual support for R&H so they didn't get sent to Legends?
My thoughts exactly. It's plastic that could have been much better spent on Guard, Eldar, etc.
Oh, agreed. But I feel that, even if Primaris hadn't existed, that plastic would still be going on Space Marines.
It's more of a "Space Marines get too much attention" thing than a "Primaris bad" thing - Primaris existing being a symptom of the overall Marine-centrism.
"Oh well they just would have made more Space marines anyways." is a fundamentally lazy argument. GW isn't fated to concentrate on Space Marines to the degree it has been, they can make different decisions.
I dunno, individual characters can do a lot, both playable and lire based and can shake the whole galaxy.
Look at abaddon or fabius bile. Hell, look at eldrad!
To a lesser extent and in the modern era, Look at characters like guliman, calgar, azrael, or Dante. Seemingly everywhere, doing everything, leading the charge.
In terms of lore, look at characters like Sebastian thor. One single person who ignited a rebellion that reshaped the whole imperium.
Cawl? OK granted it would have been better to have had a build up over five or ten years, but that kind of future proofing is extremely difficult. As one person doing lots of things though? Yeah, not unprecedented.
There is a huge difference, between person X is established in lore and history for decades, and just in lore, sometimes litteraly established decades ago, and someone deciding that they are going to invent a new character, put it inside already existing lore. Write the new lore in a such a way that the new character is better at everything then old characters, to point when other characters important to the main story become overshadowed, and then write stuff out of character for old lore and old way of writing, and you get a recipe for disaster.
No one would have had problems with lore about Sebastian Thor. But if GW in their wisdom decided that Sebastian Thor wasn't infact the saint everyone knows, and the inspirational figure that led the imperium in a time of strife, but let say some mind slave of an eldar witch, or front for a female cabal of navigators, people would very much be in the right to consider such lore as bad. Now the lore belongs to GW, and they can make with it what ever they want. But just because someone can do stuff, it doesn't mean that first they should and second that what they do is good, or at worse so vogue that it shouldn't be judged.
There were ways to implement primaris in to the w40k. With a reset, with we scaled up marine models, with lore that makes etc I mean GW could have made it worse. Just make cawl a clone of the emperor or malcador, or their long lost brother, or replace him with that real Mother of Marines Ishtar.
What realy makes it bad, is that this was done for monetary gain and out of fewer how people would react to a potential reset, after what happened to AoS. And it maybe even isn't the money. GW is a company and they should be making money on stuff they make, as long as they aren't doing it in a predatory way. The problem is that the monatery thing is somehow being smoke and mirrored with some it was like that all along explanation. Making it even more funny when after one edition the 200y time jump is changed to 2 or 4 years, because now the lore from 8th ed really doesn't make sense.
If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain.
There is a huge difference, between person X is established in lore and history for decades, and just in lore, sometimes litteraly established decades ago, and someone deciding that they are going to invent a new character, put it inside already existing lore. Write the new lore in a such a way that the new character is better at everything then old characters, to point when other characters important to the main story become overshadowed, and then write stuff out of character for old lore and old way of writing, and you get a recipe for disaster.
.
'Established' lore changes all the time, shouldnt get a free pass, and anything 'established was once, also 'new', just like cawl. Old characters are also rewritten being handed more and more stuff. Look at 2nd ed marneus calgar vs 9th ed marneus.
New lore is written rewriting old things or creating characters that did all that too - look at the ctan for an example.
I remember when tau were new and all the things said about cael were said about them - too new, too good, too different, didn't fit thr themes if 40k etc. 20 years later and they're just as much part of 40k as anything else. Same will happen with primaris.
I do agree that a more gradual introduction would have been better, or if hints were placed I the lore going back years pointing to this. That said i also think there are other ways that primaris could have been introduced and I'm pretty sure every single one of them would have had the exact same people apoplectic with rage. Some people just don't like change. Some people just like to hate. With some people there is no compromise or middle ground. You can only do do much, and as said, sometimes decisions have to be made.
I don't think it was bad because of monetary gain. Theyre a business. Not a charity. Frankly classic marines as a line were mined out. They needed to reinvent the space. This was a decision gw had to make, no ifs ands or buts.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/28 19:51:22
The main problem with Primaris is that they have lore in the first place. They're just resculpts. The lore isn't really supposed to matter; its just a patch to help people reconcile old models they haven't replaced yet.
Insectum7 wrote: The lore has followed distinct trends. Primaris diverge from many of those trends. They also diverge from game design trends.
So maybe they're starting new trends.
Insectum7 wrote: "Oh well they just would have made more Space marines anyways." is a fundamentally lazy argument. GW isn't fated to concentrate on Space Marines to the degree it has been, they can make different decisions.
Cawl? OK granted it would have been better to have had a build up over five or ten years, but that kind of future proofing is extremely difficult.
It isn't though. GW has even demonstrated a fair amount of proficiency at it, though they absolutely flubbed the payoff of the decades long build up of the Ynnead.
But they did that build up properly. There are lots of seeds in the 40k background for quite a few armies, factions and changes.
No one would think they 'did the lore wrong' if they were to introduce new kits for 'Hive World' Imperial Guard regiments. The 'hyper violent barghesi,' hrud and various things from the Halo stars could come roaring out of the dark and people wouldn't complain.
'Even more better' space marines is an inherently problematic concept, even if you like the models (and mostly I do. Mostly).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/01/28 20:59:12
That's not what happens at all. Things like the Redeemer, Ares, and Razorback are explicitly *new* creations, developed as a response to battlefield situations, and tacitly accepted by the AdMech if politically expedient.
no those are battlefield modifications, which then wait for a long time for Mars to approve that there is in deed an STC design that allows you to put a stormbolter on the right hatch of the rhino too. When mars can't find the STC for a specific design, and those are marine things which is already very indepenended as far as imperium goes, you get the BA situation. Where Baals and different type of engines are considered heretical by the adeptus.
That's simply not the case though, is it?
No STC was found that "approved" the Redeemer, Crusader, and Ares, and yet those tanks are widespread. The reason that Baal Predators are considered "heretical" is because the Blood Angels don't share their secrets. It's as simple as that - a political game.
The Blood Angels horde their own creation, and because they don't disseminate it, the Mechanicum cry "heresy" over it. However, good luck accusing a First Founding Chapter, especially one as well loved as the Blood Angels, of heresy.
As I've said - where's this STC that approve the various xenotech the Grey Knights use?
Give me actual *objective* proof that it's bad storytelling - I doubt you can, because art criticism is notoriously subjective.
Intreducing Cawl, and spinning a story about how he build a whole legion of new marines, and weapons for them, and ships to fare them around, and that he somehow took part in every big project ever done by the empire, makes as much sense storytelling wise, as the changes done to SW or dr Who lore. With the difference that SW and dr Who are a bit older then w40k lore.
Absolutely none of that was objectively *bad* though. You say it's bad, sure, but that's not a fact.
Also, you point to SW and Doctor Who like they're not massively popular/influential pieces of pop culture. Tell how they're "objectively bad", please?
Could stuff like primaris be intreduced and make sense? Of course. Lets say Constantine Valdor returns, and opens the gene vaults that exist under the imperial palace. The primaris aren't space marines, but are a stop gap between a custodes and a human. The project is something the gene smiths of the custodes know, and the custodes themselfs are one of the few organisations(probably only, aside for the admecha) that could commander a legion size fleet.
Normal marines die out after 200 years of fighting, and the new primaris take over their place. Which then explains why their "fathers" have to leave Terra.
Valdor returning and just HAPPENING to have Marines in the gene vaults? OBJECTIVELY BAD WRITING ALERT!!!
Sorry, but I don't see how that's any better than "secret scientist entrusted by the highest Imperial authority who personally worked on the Space Marine project toils for 10,000 years to make them slightly taller and with slightly better gear". Of course, that's my subjective taste, but I hope you see my point - just because you think that your Valdor idea is better doesn't make it objectively so, and I think it makes even less sense than Cawl.
Insectum7 wrote:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Exactly what I claimed - and as I've told you, that's totally fine. Everyone has their own vision of the setting. Yours differs from mine. But both our views are subjective.
You say ham-fisted, I say perfectly acceptable. I hate to be snappy, but deal with it. Your opinion isn't the only one.
Opinions can be shallow and misinformed, short-sighted, lacking perspective and biased.
Yes, they can. Perhaps yours fit that just as much as mine.
They can simply be kool-aid induced or towing the company line.
They can also be based from a fear of seeing anything new and clinging to your own perceived values and notions of what "should" be.
I reserve the right to express why I believe my opinion is better than yours, and provide argument/evidence as to why this is the case.
Excellent - you admit it's your opinion!
I don't care if you think it's better than mine, it's frankly got nothing to do with me - but I'm glad you've said it - it's just your opinion.
The more troubling thing is why you feel the compulsive need to batter down someone else's opinion - like, seriously? Is your own opinion so fragile you feel the *need* to slap others down?
Seriously, let it go. I don't care that you dislike Primaris. I care that you seem unable to let anyone like them.
Your continued cries about subjectivity aren't bringing any substance, just a deflection for a lack of argument with merit.
Lying about subjective opinions being "objective facts" is equally insubstanial.
Your arguments can been summed up as "this doesn't fit my perceived notion of how things should be". That's literally all you've brought to the table. Let people enjoy things.
You'll find that a hallmark of good writing is the setup and payoff. Primaris is definitely not that. The fact that their lore is so contentious is good evidence for the storytelling being lackluster.
Throwing away a story before the payoff isn't good reading either. Primaris existing currently *is* the setup.
And again, I'd disagree that the only "good" writing is in the setup and payoff - in fact, that's such an incredibly reductive view of literature I'm not sure where to start.
The magnitude of the break is greater than ever.
If that bothers you, that's got nothing to do with me.
The lore has followed distinct trends. Primaris diverge from many of those trends. They also diverge from game design trends.
"Many" - you mean the trends that you choose to hold most important?
As I re-iterate, you have chosen what things you feel should be sacrosanct, and to what degree. You aren't the only person making those choices though.
"Oh well they just would have made more Space marines anyways." is a fundamentally lazy argument.
Before Primaris were made, what army was GW's flagship faction again?
GW isn't fated to concentrate on Space Marines to the degree it has been, they can make different decisions.
Oh, sure, they *can*. But do you honestly believe they would?
Hell, according to your logic, GW love Space Marines so much they created the Primaris. I guess that answered that question.
TL;DR - Other people have different opinions than you. Get over it.
That's not what happens at all. Things like the Redeemer, Ares, and Razorback are explicitly *new* creations, developed as a response to battlefield situations, and tacitly accepted by the AdMech if politically expedient.
no those are battlefield modifications, which then wait for a long time for Mars to approve that there is in deed an STC design that allows you to put a stormbolter on the right hatch of the rhino too. When mars can't find the STC for a specific design, and those are marine things which is already very indepenended as far as imperium goes, you get the BA situation. Where Baals and different type of engines are considered heretical by the adeptus.
That's simply not the case though, is it?
No STC was found that "approved" the Redeemer, Crusader, and Ares, and yet those tanks are widespread. The reason that Baal Predators are considered "heretical" is because the Blood Angels don't share their secrets. It's as simple as that - a political game.
The Blood Angels horde their own creation, and because they don't disseminate it, the Mechanicum cry "heresy" over it. However, good luck accusing a First Founding Chapter, especially one as well loved as the Blood Angels, of heresy.
As I've said - where's this STC that approve the various xenotech the Grey Knights use?
Give me actual *objective* proof that it's bad storytelling - I doubt you can, because art criticism is notoriously subjective.
Intreducing Cawl, and spinning a story about how he build a whole legion of new marines, and weapons for them, and ships to fare them around, and that he somehow took part in every big project ever done by the empire, makes as much sense storytelling wise, as the changes done to SW or dr Who lore. With the difference that SW and dr Who are a bit older then w40k lore.
Absolutely none of that was objectively *bad* though. You say it's bad, sure, but that's not a fact.
Also, you point to SW and Doctor Who like they're not massively popular/influential pieces of pop culture. Tell how they're "objectively bad", please?
Could stuff like primaris be intreduced and make sense? Of course. Lets say Constantine Valdor returns, and opens the gene vaults that exist under the imperial palace. The primaris aren't space marines, but are a stop gap between a custodes and a human. The project is something the gene smiths of the custodes know, and the custodes themselfs are one of the few organisations(probably only, aside for the admecha) that could commander a legion size fleet.
Normal marines die out after 200 years of fighting, and the new primaris take over their place. Which then explains why their "fathers" have to leave Terra.
Valdor returning and just HAPPENING to have Marines in the gene vaults? OBJECTIVELY BAD WRITING ALERT!!!
Sorry, but I don't see how that's any better than "secret scientist entrusted by the highest Imperial authority who personally worked on the Space Marine project toils for 10,000 years to make them slightly taller and with slightly better gear". Of course, that's my subjective taste, but I hope you see my point - just because you think that your Valdor idea is better doesn't make it objectively so, and I think it makes even less sense than Cawl.
Insectum7 wrote:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Exactly what I claimed - and as I've told you, that's totally fine. Everyone has their own vision of the setting. Yours differs from mine. But both our views are subjective.
You say ham-fisted, I say perfectly acceptable. I hate to be snappy, but deal with it. Your opinion isn't the only one.
Opinions can be shallow and misinformed, short-sighted, lacking perspective and biased.
Yes, they can. Perhaps yours fit that just as much as mine.
They can simply be kool-aid induced or towing the company line.
They can also be based from a fear of seeing anything new and clinging to your own perceived values and notions of what "should" be.
I reserve the right to express why I believe my opinion is better than yours, and provide argument/evidence as to why this is the case.
Excellent - you admit it's your opinion!
I don't care if you think it's better than mine, it's frankly got nothing to do with me - but I'm glad you've said it - it's just your opinion.
The more troubling thing is why you feel the compulsive need to batter down someone else's opinion - like, seriously? Is your own opinion so fragile you feel the *need* to slap others down?
Seriously, let it go. I don't care that you dislike Primaris. I care that you seem unable to let anyone like them.
Your continued cries about subjectivity aren't bringing any substance, just a deflection for a lack of argument with merit.
Lying about subjective opinions being "objective facts" is equally insubstanial.
Your arguments can been summed up as "this doesn't fit my perceived notion of how things should be". That's literally all you've brought to the table. Let people enjoy things.
You'll find that a hallmark of good writing is the setup and payoff. Primaris is definitely not that. The fact that their lore is so contentious is good evidence for the storytelling being lackluster.
Throwing away a story before the payoff isn't good reading either. Primaris existing currently *is* the setup.
And again, I'd disagree that the only "good" writing is in the setup and payoff - in fact, that's such an incredibly reductive view of literature I'm not sure where to start.
The magnitude of the break is greater than ever.
If that bothers you, that's got nothing to do with me.
The lore has followed distinct trends. Primaris diverge from many of those trends. They also diverge from game design trends.
"Many" - you mean the trends that you choose to hold most important?
As I re-iterate, you have chosen what things you feel should be sacrosanct, and to what degree. You aren't the only person making those choices though.
"Oh well they just would have made more Space marines anyways." is a fundamentally lazy argument.
Before Primaris were made, what army was GW's flagship faction again?
GW isn't fated to concentrate on Space Marines to the degree it has been, they can make different decisions.
Oh, sure, they *can*. But do you honestly believe they would?
Hell, according to your logic, GW love Space Marines so much they created the Primaris. I guess that answered that question.
TL;DR - Other people have different opinions than you. Get over it.
^A long post spending a lot of effort to tell me I shouldn't express an opinion backed by observable facts on a forum about the subject. Perhaps internet forums are not the place for you.
Insectum7 wrote: The lore has followed distinct trends. Primaris diverge from many of those trends. They also diverge from game design trends.
So maybe they're starting new trends.
Aye. I fully recognize that GW is a private company and it's perfectly within their right to start new trends. That doesn't mean I have to like it or that old trends didn't exist.
Insectum7 wrote: "Oh well they just would have made more Space marines anyways." is a fundamentally lazy argument. GW isn't fated to concentrate on Space Marines to the degree it has been, they can make different decisions.
We presume....
Heh. Recent history notwithstanding, it is at least physically possible to make different decisions. There's more than one way to skin a cat, and I'm pretty certain profitability could have been achieved without Primaris. I'd argue that the overall health of the game would have been better if they'd done more significant releases for other factions. If we took the 40ish-kit-count that Primaris has thrown on the heap, and instead spread those kits around exciting releases for certain other factions things would be better.
That's not what happens at all. Things like the Redeemer, Ares, and Razorback are explicitly *new* creations, developed as a response to battlefield situations, and tacitly accepted by the AdMech if politically expedient.
no those are battlefield modifications, which then wait for a long time for Mars to approve that there is in deed an STC design that allows you to put a stormbolter on the right hatch of the rhino too. When mars can't find the STC for a specific design, and those are marine things which is already very indepenended as far as imperium goes, you get the BA situation. Where Baals and different type of engines are considered heretical by the adeptus.
That's simply not the case though, is it?
No STC was found that "approved" the Redeemer, Crusader, and Ares, and yet those tanks are widespread. The reason that Baal Predators are considered "heretical" is because the Blood Angels don't share their secrets. It's as simple as that - a political game.
The Blood Angels horde their own creation, and because they don't disseminate it, the Mechanicum cry "heresy" over it. However, good luck accusing a First Founding Chapter, especially one as well loved as the Blood Angels, of heresy.
As I've said - where's this STC that approve the various xenotech the Grey Knights use?
Give me actual *objective* proof that it's bad storytelling - I doubt you can, because art criticism is notoriously subjective.
Intreducing Cawl, and spinning a story about how he build a whole legion of new marines, and weapons for them, and ships to fare them around, and that he somehow took part in every big project ever done by the empire, makes as much sense storytelling wise, as the changes done to SW or dr Who lore. With the difference that SW and dr Who are a bit older then w40k lore.
Absolutely none of that was objectively *bad* though. You say it's bad, sure, but that's not a fact.
Also, you point to SW and Doctor Who like they're not massively popular/influential pieces of pop culture. Tell how they're "objectively bad", please?
Could stuff like primaris be intreduced and make sense? Of course. Lets say Constantine Valdor returns, and opens the gene vaults that exist under the imperial palace. The primaris aren't space marines, but are a stop gap between a custodes and a human. The project is something the gene smiths of the custodes know, and the custodes themselfs are one of the few organisations(probably only, aside for the admecha) that could commander a legion size fleet.
Normal marines die out after 200 years of fighting, and the new primaris take over their place. Which then explains why their "fathers" have to leave Terra.
Valdor returning and just HAPPENING to have Marines in the gene vaults? OBJECTIVELY BAD WRITING ALERT!!!
Sorry, but I don't see how that's any better than "secret scientist entrusted by the highest Imperial authority who personally worked on the Space Marine project toils for 10,000 years to make them slightly taller and with slightly better gear". Of course, that's my subjective taste, but I hope you see my point - just because you think that your Valdor idea is better doesn't make it objectively so, and I think it makes even less sense than Cawl.
Insectum7 wrote:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Exactly what I claimed - and as I've told you, that's totally fine. Everyone has their own vision of the setting. Yours differs from mine. But both our views are subjective.
You say ham-fisted, I say perfectly acceptable. I hate to be snappy, but deal with it. Your opinion isn't the only one.
Opinions can be shallow and misinformed, short-sighted, lacking perspective and biased.
Yes, they can. Perhaps yours fit that just as much as mine.
They can simply be kool-aid induced or towing the company line.
They can also be based from a fear of seeing anything new and clinging to your own perceived values and notions of what "should" be.
I reserve the right to express why I believe my opinion is better than yours, and provide argument/evidence as to why this is the case.
Excellent - you admit it's your opinion!
I don't care if you think it's better than mine, it's frankly got nothing to do with me - but I'm glad you've said it - it's just your opinion.
The more troubling thing is why you feel the compulsive need to batter down someone else's opinion - like, seriously? Is your own opinion so fragile you feel the *need* to slap others down?
Seriously, let it go. I don't care that you dislike Primaris. I care that you seem unable to let anyone like them.
Your continued cries about subjectivity aren't bringing any substance, just a deflection for a lack of argument with merit.
Lying about subjective opinions being "objective facts" is equally insubstanial.
Your arguments can been summed up as "this doesn't fit my perceived notion of how things should be". That's literally all you've brought to the table. Let people enjoy things.
You'll find that a hallmark of good writing is the setup and payoff. Primaris is definitely not that. The fact that their lore is so contentious is good evidence for the storytelling being lackluster.
Throwing away a story before the payoff isn't good reading either. Primaris existing currently *is* the setup.
And again, I'd disagree that the only "good" writing is in the setup and payoff - in fact, that's such an incredibly reductive view of literature I'm not sure where to start.
The magnitude of the break is greater than ever.
If that bothers you, that's got nothing to do with me.
The lore has followed distinct trends. Primaris diverge from many of those trends. They also diverge from game design trends.
"Many" - you mean the trends that you choose to hold most important?
As I re-iterate, you have chosen what things you feel should be sacrosanct, and to what degree. You aren't the only person making those choices though.
"Oh well they just would have made more Space marines anyways." is a fundamentally lazy argument.
Before Primaris were made, what army was GW's flagship faction again?
GW isn't fated to concentrate on Space Marines to the degree it has been, they can make different decisions.
Oh, sure, they *can*. But do you honestly believe they would?
Hell, according to your logic, GW love Space Marines so much they created the Primaris. I guess that answered that question.
TL;DR - Other people have different opinions than you. Get over it.
^A long post spending a lot of effort to tell me I shouldn't express an opinion backed by observable facts on a forum about the subject. Perhaps internet forums are not the place for you.
A long post which never once said you shouldn't express an opinion. Only that, when you claim your opinion to be fact, in order to attempt to discredit and belittle the opinions of others, that's more than a bit problematic.
If you can't respect other people's opinions without needing to imply that they're "shallow and misinformed, short-sighted, lacking perspective and biased", perhaps you need a take a break. Because honestly, it sounds like me liking Primaris is winding you up all the wrong ways, as if you can't accept that someone has different tastes than you.
I'm not asking at all that you change your opinion, it doesn't affect me. What I'm saying is that you've claimed that your opinions are fact, and that's just not cool.
If we took the 40ish-kit-count that Primaris has thrown on the heap, and instead spread those kits around exciting releases for certain other factions things would be better.
Oh, absolutely agreed. As someone who's bought a ton of Primaris stuff, if it had been that or GW making other kits for other factions, I'd let other factions have their releases.
I just don't exactly have faith that, had Primaris not come out, GW wouldn't have just pumped more Marines out anyways.
