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.

So from the Scars novel I'm getting the distinct impression that he was a better swordsman than Fulgrim.

Nothing to back that up, but it would make my day if it were true. Even if it was just to prove that Fulgrim was a giant self inflated wind bag.

It'll vary wildly from novel to novel, so believe what you wish.

All primarchs can beat all other primarchs given the right context. No exceptions.

That part of the novel was clearly meant to be a jab at the pointlessness of "which primarch is stronger" discussions.

Well Konrad took on Guillilliillilililililiman and the Lion at the same time.

The writing is varied and inconsistent at the best of times, Curze was beaten into a coma by the lion. but when he escapes he fools probably the two most tactically minded primarch's in a level of moustache twirling bad guyness not seen yet.

I really wish the writers would sit down and at least try to make the story resemble some sort of balance

As the guy above stated its down to the circumstances, lion beat curze in a fair fight, but beat lion and guiliman in an unfair fight by bringing down the house so to speak, also bear in mind that he was fighting defensively and taking opportunities to hit back where he could, it's all down to the circumstances.

 Formosa wrote:
As the guy above stated its down to the circumstances, lion beat curze in a fair fight, but beat lion and guiliman in an unfair fight by bringing down the house so to speak, also bear in mind that he was fighting defensively and taking opportunities to hit back where he could, it's all down to the circumstances.

We also like to assume that someone who is flat better will always win. But chance and circumstance mean so much. We dont have instances of 2 combatants fighting clean and fair 100 times to see which one is better. We have one match, and it is certainly possible on a sample size of one for the lesser opponent to be victorious.