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.

Given that the franchise blurb emblazoned on virtually everything not bolted down has parroted the "master of a million worlds" party-line since the 90's, my question is, any particular reason why post-2010 BL publications have started falling into vague lockstep by disregarding the blurb on the front of their very own books and started added a whole bunch of zeros to the setting?


The Immortal Emperor’s Legiones Astartes, His Angels of Death – no, that wasn’t right – his Angels of Death, created to protect mankind from threats beyond the stars. A billion, billion worlds; a million, million cultures all compliant – now at war. - Age of Darkness

You see, Jaghatai, here’s the problem – we were made too well. Nothing in the galaxy could stand against us. We learned that we, and only we, held the destiny of a billion worlds in our own hands. - Scars

War was fading away in the Imperium of Mankind. The purposes for which the likes of the Adeptus Astartes had been engineered were dying out. They had done their job. Peace prevailed across a billion worlds. - I Am Slaughter

Nearly all of the souls inhabiting the billion worlds of the Imperium of Man are reliant on the blessings of the Omnissiah in their daily lives. - Rogue Trader: Hostile Acquisitions

The Imperium is vast and amongst it's billions of inhabited worlds there are countless forge worlds, factories[...] - Dark Heresy

'So the Emperor trod these lands, did He?' 'So they claim. 'A billion worlds, and each one says that the Emperor came to them. I guess the Emperor must have been a Navy man, just like us.' - Relentless

I was reassured by Salus’ presence. It was a reminder that the Imperium spanned countless stars, and the world below was but one in the billion, the ork horde nothing more than a terrestrial threat. - Outgunned

Within the chapel, one might have thought they stood inside a church upon any one of billions of hive-worlds across the Imperium. -Heart of Rage


For the record, I in-universed those quotes in chronological order, ie, Age of Darkness and Scars is late GC/early HH, I am Slaughter is M32, Relentless is M40/M41, etc

Inflation is a bummer my feeling is it’s the same reason the 1 Million Dollars joke in Austen Powers is so good 6 zeroes just isn’t enough these days.

Because science has moved on since the 90s and our understanding of the universe with it.

"Master of a Million Worlds" is also more poetic so there's that.

 Gert wrote:
Because science has moved on since the 90s and our understanding of the universe with it.

"Master of a Million Worlds" is also more poetic so there's that.

Source required on your claim that BL changed the fundamentals of the setting due to scientic innovation.

More importantly, this would be biggest exercise of warhammer 40k double-think if we're to believe that the IoM rules billions of worlds but only a million of those are under the Emperor's direct rule.

Oh my god, my dude.
You do not need to get a page number or hyperlink for every single thing ever.

This is not an academic exercise, it's a discussion about background for toy soldiers.

Our understanding of the number of planets in the galaxy has changed since the 90s thanks to the advance in technology and scientific research.
It's billions because that's a more realistic estimate of what's in the Milky Way.

 Gert wrote:
Oh my god, my dude.
You do not need to get a page number or hyperlink for every single thing ever.

This is not an academic exercise, it's a discussion about background for toy soldiers.

Our understanding of the number of planets in the galaxy has changed since the 90s thanks to the advance in technology and scientific research.
It's billions because that's a more realistic estimate of what's in the Milky Way.

I don't make comments without being able to back it up so people like you can't winge and moan about head-canons. More importantly, if i made up rules and strats on the spot ill get roasted by my opponent (or kicked out)


So my hypothesis still stands, does this BL-verse stance represent the biggest double-think in out-of-universe warhammer 40k history?

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:

 Gert wrote:
Oh my god, my dude.
You do not need to get a page number or hyperlink for every single thing ever.

This is not an academic exercise, it's a discussion about background for toy soldiers.

Our understanding of the number of planets in the galaxy has changed since the 90s thanks to the advance in technology and scientific research.
It's billions because that's a more realistic estimate of what's in the Milky Way.

I don't make comments without being able to back it up so people like you can't winge and moan about head-canons. More importantly, if i made up rules and strats on the spot ill get roasted by my opponent (or kicked out)


So my hypothesis still stands, does this BL-verse stance represent the biggest double-think in out-of-universe warhammer 40k history?

Well this thread is pointless then because nobody at GW is ever, ever going to publish any internal discussions where they talk about changing the number of worlds in the Imperium, we can only infer the reasoning based on GW's known propensity to have a poor regard for scale and numbering, the increased understanding we have of the size and density of worlds in the galaxy since the late 80s, and the fact that the numbers have changed.

But if you want citations regarding GW's internal processes, good luck

The 10th ed rulebook still mentions a million worlds, so either the most recent core rulebook is wrong or BL authors are wrong.

This is certainly not a coordinated corporate level change, but BL authors doing whatever they want regarding numbers, based on their individual interpretation of the setting.

Everything is canon, not everything is true is still the official canon policy of GW.

And we've heard the term "billions upon billions" of stars since 1997 from Carl Sagan's final book (of a similar title).

So I don't think science has anything to do with the changes. A writer just thought it sounded cooler to be billions of worlds and ran with it.

Charax wrote:

the-gentleman-ranker wrote:

 Gert wrote:
Oh my god, my dude.
You do not need to get a page number or hyperlink for every single thing ever.

This is not an academic exercise, it's a discussion about background for toy soldiers.

Our understanding of the number of planets in the galaxy has changed since the 90s thanks to the advance in technology and scientific research.
It's billions because that's a more realistic estimate of what's in the Milky Way.

I don't make comments without being able to back it up so people like you can't winge and moan about head-canons. More importantly, if i made up rules and strats on the spot ill get roasted by my opponent (or kicked out)


So my hypothesis still stands, does this BL-verse stance represent the biggest double-think in out-of-universe warhammer 40k history?

Well this thread is pointless then because nobody at GW is ever, ever going to publish any internal discussions where they talk about changing the number of worlds in the Imperium, we can only infer the reasoning based on GW's known propensity to have a poor regard for scale and numbering, the increased understanding we have of the size and density of worlds in the galaxy since the late 80s, and the fact that the numbers have changed.

But if you want citations regarding GW's internal processes, good luck

I will accept not getting a direct-from-corporate answer and chalking it down to the BL-verse if it means i won't be blamed for 'making things up'.

40K has always been bad with numbers. Thats all there really is to it

Another factor is that the number don't matter, what matters the mental image and the impression they create within the reader.

A million worlds is already honestly beyond the comprehension of most people; a billion even more so. At some point those numbers are just so huge that for most people they are meaningless - a billion; a trillion it doesn't actually matter which it is because you're never ever going to explore all of them. Nor are you going to sit there adding up and taking away worlds each time there's a new war and so forth in the setting.


The numbers are there to convey a size to give you a rough mental picture in your mind of a vast empire spanning across the galaxy.

It's similar to how news outlets will say things like "A blue whale is the size of X double decker busses" The exact measurements aren't as important because most people can't grasp them mentally - however they can imagine a doubledecker bus and they can imagine several and thus get an impression of the size.


GW uses numbers rather than doubledecker buses, but the core reason is still the same.





And yes the numbers get wonky because time marches on and a million isn't as big a number as it was in the 90s. Different writers interpret parts of the setting and lore in different ways as they adapt them into their own stories and then you layer on top the readers doing the very same thing.


And yep unless you do the legwork yourself you won't get a fully referenced and citation discussion on this. Most of us have not READ all the BL books. In fact most of us have only read a few here and there; heck most haven't read every codex or every BRB. We don't test ourselves; cross reference or do any of that funky stuff. Out impression of hte setting a muddled jumble of head-canon; codex; rulebook; bl novels; GW news articles; summary websites; discussions; impressions; artwork and more.

Could someone sit down and get all the material published in order of publication; tease out all the specific details and note their evolution over time. Honestly you probably could do that fairly well. There'd still be gaps - rare publications that are forgotten and not in active printing; news articles on the GW website lost to time of updates to the site. The fact that some of it wouldn't be specific values but impressions or ideas generated by artwork or in-world statements of characters that appear to contradict the hard-numbers presented elsewhere.
There's also a time-factor in the setting itself - the Dating system GW uses isn't always stated for each article or such; the dates themselves are not always set in stone and have shifted around here and there. So you can well end up with a bunch of articles and books that you'll have a real world publication date for when they enter the lore ;but you won't know where they reference within the actual timeline of the setting itself.

"Master of a Million Worlds" sounds cooler as a title, while billions of planets sounds better as a number. there's no grand conspiracy, just choosing whichever sounds best at a given moment. the actual number doesn't matter and in terms of comprehension, a million and a billion are both so big that it's hard to understand it besides "big number". it's an inconsequential difference, especially in this context

The numbers matter because the galaxy isn't just the IoM, but countless other alien civilizations.

A bigger IoM means less space for aliens. It also means a more territorial dense and continuous IoM and thus a more safe IoM as human worlds would be closer together. That matters to how we understand the setting.

Also the small Space Marine numbers become even more ridiculous the bigger the IoM is.

 Tyran wrote:
The numbers matter because the galaxy isn't just the IoM, but countless other alien civilizations.

A bigger IoM means less space for aliens. It also means a more territorial dense and continuous IoM and thus a more safe IoM as human worlds would be closer together. That matters to how we understand the setting.

Also the small Space Marine numbers become even more ridiculous the bigger the IoM is.

I wasssss about to say, i'm surprised the non-IoM players haven't thrown a fit. This would, theoratically, consitute a massive buff for the IoM and a theoretical nerf for all the non-IoM players. Unless the BL narrative is going to be 'more extra-galactic threats'?

Although, there was that one line in a BL book which implied there were around 11 million Primaris.

Not at all.

Us mere smelly real life hoomans don’t really handle big numbers that well. Our minds aren’t evolved for it, as, well, there’s been no reason for them to.

But even with a Billion worlds? There’s still plenty left in the Galaxy. Because our Galaxy is pretty much incomprehensively vast. Sure, we can say “it’s X light years edge to edge” and put a number on it. Apparently, 120,000 Light Years. But what’s that in mile or kilometres? Too Zoggin’ Many.


And that just on one plane. The Galaxy, whilst reliable studies show it’s reliably wider than it is deep? Is still *really deep*, and the solar systems don’t align across a single plane. The sods are everywhere. Indeed it’s the relative density and locality of those which let us see the boundaries of the Galaxy.

So, a Billion worlds is definitely impressive. But not on galactic terms. Like. At all.

And the Imperium is far flung, and importantly scattered. It does has some concentrated holdings, but many systems are just little blips of what I suppose we can call civilisation among massive “buggered if I know” expanses of….well…..buggered if I know, or if the Imperium knows, because nobodies been there, given they rely on stable and semi-stable warp routes.


So there’s absolutely no need for Xenos players to feel squeeze out.

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
"Master of a Million Worlds" sounds cooler as a title, while billions of planets sounds better as a number. there's no grand conspiracy, just choosing whichever sounds best at a given moment. the actual number doesn't matter and in terms of comprehension, a million and a billion are both so big that it's hard to understand it besides "big number". it's an inconsequential difference, especially in this context

Yeah, “Buster of a Billion Balls” doesn’t quite have the same ring

 Flinty wrote:

 StudentOfEtherium wrote:
"Master of a Million Worlds" sounds cooler as a title, while billions of planets sounds better as a number. there's no grand conspiracy, just choosing whichever sounds best at a given moment. the actual number doesn't matter and in terms of comprehension, a million and a billion are both so big that it's hard to understand it besides "big number". it's an inconsequential difference, especially in this context

Yeah, “Buster of a Billion Balls” doesn’t quite have the same ring

Depends on your line of work.

While we all know GW can't do math this isn't necessarily a big discrepancy. I'd just interpret it as a million fully-developed and well-populated worlds with their own planetary governors and spacefleets. Then a billion or two other worlds claimed by the Imperium that have some Imperial presence, even just a mining colony or observation outpost. That sounds very realistic, and either number could be accurate depending on the context.

But also...

A billion, billion worlds

That would be 1000000000000000000 worlds, which is more than a million planets for every star in the galaxy. GW pls.

I've generally believed that when it comes to these kinds of things, it's usually best to just use terms like 'countless' or 'innumerable,' instead of trying to come up with some kind of number.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
.
But even with a Billion worlds? There’s still plenty left in the Galaxy. Because our Galaxy is pretty much incomprehensively vast. Sure, we can say “it’s X light years edge to edge” and put a number on it. Apparently, 120,000 Light Years. But what’s that in mile or kilometres? Too Zoggin’ Many.

In terms of space? Sure.

In terms of potentially habitable Earth-like planets? Those are estimated to be in the few billions, maybe tens of billions for the more optimistic estimates.

 Tyran wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
.
But even with a Billion worlds? There’s still plenty left in the Galaxy. Because our Galaxy is pretty much incomprehensively vast. Sure, we can say “it’s X light years edge to edge” and put a number on it. Apparently, 120,000 Light Years. But what’s that in mile or kilometres? Too Zoggin’ Many.

In terms of space? Sure.

In terms of potentially habitable Earth-like planets? Those are estimated to be in the few billions, maybe tens of billions for the more optimistic estimates.

Aliens don't all need human-habitable planets. Also terraforming.

Indeed. Many factions in 40K could colonize an non-Earth type planet/planetoid with relative ease. We dont count Mars as being one either, yet the AdMech dont mind such places in the slightest

Or Luna. Or the moons of Jupiter.

On the billion billion? Easily treated as simple hyperbole.

Basically 'million' and 'billion' or 'master of a hundred gajillion-tillion worlds', all just mean 'enough that there's more where those came from'. It's intended to say that anyone can make up as many planets as they need for a story and there will still be room left for them all to exist in the fictional galaxy.

I would guess some authors think that the numbers ought to be bigger because the real world number of stars is so big. Some people don't, though. I agree with Games Workshop that 'Master of a Million Worlds' sounds better and more evocative than 'Master of a Billion Worlds' and 'A billion billion worlds' is appropriate if you're doing a funny bit about how the Administratum or whoever likes to inflate their numbers since it is obviously silly (upper estimates for stars in our galaxy is 400,000,000,000 so that would still need 25 million planets per star.)

 JNAProductions wrote:
Aliens don't all need human-habitable planets. Also terraforming.

Maybe, but 40k is also about "eternal war" all the time, with a special focus on "ground" warfare. You don't get that against aliens with completely foreign biology, no one invades worlds they don't need nor can use.

 Tyran wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Aliens don't all need human-habitable planets. Also terraforming.

Maybe, but 40k is also about "eternal war" all the time, with a special focus on "ground" warfare. You don't get that against aliens with completely foreign biology, no one invades worlds they don't need nor can use.

Ahh but they do all the time.

The Imperium will 100% invade worlds they "don't need" to drive out a Xeno force.
Xenos would 100% invade human worlds to push the Imperium back from their territory.


Denial is a powerful tool in warfare; and the Imperium is also fanatically xenophobic. There are groups within it that would consider it their duty to purge the worlds of anything that isn't human just because its inhuman.

 Overread wrote:

Ahh but they do all the time.

The Imperium will 100% invade worlds they "don't need" to drive out a Xeno force.
Xenos would 100% invade human worlds to push the Imperium back from their territory.


Denial is a powerful tool in warfare; and the Imperium is also fanatically xenophobic. There are groups within it that would consider it their duty to purge the worlds of anything that isn't human just because its inhuman.

Let me be more specific, you don't invade enemy worlds you don't need, you bombard them from space until the planet shatters, permanently denying it to the enemy.

Specially if you are rabidly xenophobic and xenocidal.

 Tyran wrote:

 Overread wrote:

Ahh but they do all the time.

The Imperium will 100% invade worlds they "don't need" to drive out a Xeno force.
Xenos would 100% invade human worlds to push the Imperium back from their territory.


Denial is a powerful tool in warfare; and the Imperium is also fanatically xenophobic. There are groups within it that would consider it their duty to purge the worlds of anything that isn't human just because its inhuman.

Let me be more specific, you don't invade enemy worlds you don't need, you bombard them from space until the planet shatters, permanently denying it to the enemy.

Specially if you are rabidly xenophobic and xenocidal.

At some point you have to go down there to make very sure they are dead and not hiding in bunkers and such. Sure you can use Exterminatus but in general thats a rare thing; costs a LOT of resources and so on. It also assumes that they don't have ground defences that can threaten spacefleets.

There's still ample reason for the Imperium to conduct ground assaults on worlds they don't want. I'm not denying that it would be far more resource and life efficient to use other means; but the Imperium doesn't operate to that kind of logic. Heck you might conduct a ground campaign because the person in charge is Imperial Guard not an Admiral and thus you want all the glory of conquest for yourself and that means ground action

 Overread wrote:
At some point you have to go down there to make very sure they are dead and not hiding in bunkers and such. Sure you can use Exterminatus but in general thats a rare thing; costs a LOT of resources and so on. It also assumes that they don't have ground defences that can threaten spacefleets.

The thing is that a planetary assault, sending troops down there?, is more expensive than exterminatus.

Every gram of every guardsman you send has to fist be accelerated beyond the gravity well of their homeworld (which very likely has a near 1G gravity), make a long trip to their home system's Mandeville point, make an even longer trip through the warp, make the long trip form the enemy system's Mandeville point to the enemy world, and then decacelerate like crazy to make it to the ground in one piece.

All this takes absurds amount of oxygen, of water, of food, of the logistics support needed to maintain and distribute that water and food, that further exponentially increase the mass needed to be transported.

The total amount of energy needed to do of all of the above, with the many millions of troops needed to occupy a whole planet? Literally easier and cheaper to blow up the planet.

There is a reason we have enough nuclear weapons to annihilate ourselves into extinction yet we have only visited the moon a handful of times and barely can send drones into Mars after years of long travel. Space travel is expensive to the point nukes look cheap.

The only way a planetary invasion makes even remote sense is if you are planning to develop the planet so it can pay back all of the above, an investment that will take thousands of years to pay off.