Topic: 40K Fluff: Some questions

[phillyt]

Hello all,

I have a couple questions about the GW 40K timeline.

1.  When did space marines begin retaking planets?  I was reading the Lexicanium the other day and it mentioned that the Ravenguard retook some planet in M29.  The only issue is, I thought no Space Marine legion went forth until the Great Crusade which was in either the M30 or M31.  Confusion...

2.  Why does GW make warp travel seem so oppressively dangerous?  The entire system would have collapsed long ago were it so nasty as they imply.

Phil

[Sig]

1. I think the timelines are simply at the whim of whoever happens to be writing at the time.

2. There are so many humans that I guess warp travel, while dangerous, only claims a small percentage of the people who utilize it. It's GW's way to make everything over the top oppressive. You never hear about the Empire being a peaceful, stable realm. It's always about the enemies without, and the enemies within.

[Blauer Nebel]

I believe the Emperor set forth to reclaim planets on his own, and in the process handed over Space Marine Legions to his sons (the Primarchs) as he went along. Thus, some may have been helping "the Dad" before the Great Crusade was really "on its way".

Also, the IG Codex talks about how the only reason Imperial Guard reinforcements can help relieve a planet is by sending untold billions through the Warp and hope that a couple million come through without ending up in a different part of the universe, or sent backwards/forwards in time, or just sucked into the maw of the DAWK GAWDZ themselves.

[phillyt]

The warp travel thing drives me nuts.  I too read the IG codex and saw that junk.  It only strengthens the argument that troops should remain on their own planet since they would at least be able to die in battle and thus contribute.

That is exactly why I think the warp travel thing is goofy beyond what is necessary.

Phil

[GamesPoet]

Sounds like total garbage fluff to me.  Don't know much about the 40K sci-fi world yet, but not sure I could put much emphasis on poorly written warp fluff, and might just pretend that it isn't as bad as they say it is.

[patsy02]

Of course warp travel is just another terrifying way of killing yourself - it's 40k! But really, I think it's supposed to be "risky" in the same way air travel is risky. Sure you can crash and burn, sure you hear about it all the time on the news, but it's safer than driving a car. It might also depend on the talent of the navigator.

[Michael W]

Of course warp travel is just another terrifying way of killing yourself - it's 40k! But really, I think it's supposed to be "risky" in the same way air travel is risky. Sure you can crash and burn, sure you hear about it all the time on the news, but it's safer than driving a car. It might also depend on the talent of the navigator.

I'm in general agreement on this.  Warp travel isn't so risky because it has a high percentage of incidents, but rather because it has such disastrous consequences when something does go wrong.  Remember, there are not only the Imperial military forces, but Rogue Traders, pirates, and others who gallivant around the galaxy doing what they will.  If the incident rates were oh-so-bad, then those folks wouldn't risk life-and-limb by doing so, and there certainly wouldn't be any veterans amongst them...

[phillyt]

Thats sort of my thinking too, but the IG book clearly implies a large number of ships being sent to a war zone never make it.  Sounds idiotic to me.

How about orks?  Does the latent psyker ability of orks guide them to where they want to go?  It never really says...

Phil

[MrDWhitey]

I thought orks just drifted along, in the vague direction they wish to go.

I do agree though, if the hazards of the warp were as common as alot of the time described, the imperium would've fallen apart in moments.

[patsy02]

On what page do they mention suicidal warp travel in the IG book?

[phillyt]

In the fluff section where they are talking about the expanding system of response to threats and how they must send overwhelming force because they lose so many men to the warp.

Phil

[Blauer Nebel]

Even if you don't agree with billions being lost in the warp, a single transport ship could mean hundreds of millions of Men being lost. They aren't carrying a few hundred troops; they're carrying millions. If they send out 10 million troops, and half of them are lost because of one or two ships being caught in the warp, then it starts to make sense even from a modern airplane crash analogy.

[Uryens de Crux]

40k  Fluff, is at times, utter garbage.

Other times its sublime genius. The IG stuff this time round is not good...

The other point to mind about it is that for each piece of fluff saying one thing, there are a dozen that contradict it elsewhere.

Fantasy players think their stuff is confusing and lacking contunuity, 40k is even worse, I sometimes the writers havent even read anything else before on the subject.

And then dont even try to compare the novels with the TT stuff...(We are looking at you Dan Abnett...)...they often bare no relationship to each other.

As someone who was reading 40k stuff since Rogue Trader, and now runs Dark Heresy, its a little bit frustrating...

[phillyt]

What is your preference?  Book fluff or TT fluff?

And why?

Everything I have seen in the books is amature virtual fanfic.  Its like the designers get it in their heads that they are actual authors and decide to concentrate on their "writing" (Manslug Gav Thorpe anyone?).

Phil

[MrDWhitey]

Reading my old white dwarves, you catch glimpses of Gav back when he was pure human. And you notice the change to manslug slowly over the years.

40k fluff is just nuts, and the books are trashy novels. I generally go by fluff in the Dark Heresy books and the army books.

Even then a lot of it is silly.

[Uryens de Crux]

PhillyT - It depends on the Author...

Dan Abnett has done a nice job of a 40k lite world, where it isnt quite so horrid, plus he is an ok writer, but it is far from the fluff written in the army books and such like.

The other authors are more like the army books, being a full on case of the "mary sue" in many cases.

Much of the best stuff is actually from a much earlier period, when it had a dark, baroque feeling (Ian Watson's early stuff, fluff from the two "Realms of Chaos" books) and it only tends to be in the later period that fluff has utterly contradicted each other

The recent Horus Heresy novels have been hit and miss, when I get chance I will look at who has written the good ones and the bad ones...

[Mogsam]

They shouldn't have written the heresy books. It will ruin the only bit of 40K story that I ever really liked. The vagueness of the primarches was the best bit. Although like a fair few people I think the most interesting characters were the ones that rebelled and would have been better staying loyal.

I love Magnus and Word Bearer man.

Mogsam

[Inarticulate]

I love Magnus and Word Bearer man.

Mogsam

Magnus and Word-Bearer-Man, fighting crime on the dark streets of Terra!

[Uryens de Crux]

Some of the HH stuff is brilliant, others are fkin terrible (The stuff on Alpha Legion is utterly pointless)

[Blauer Nebel]

In the 41st Millennium, there is no Alpharius - only Zuul.

[Nicholas Bies]

I just got my copy where they hint that it was Lion El'Jonson who turned to chaos not just Luther. Was okish.

I enjoy the series as it give a view into what the Imperium was "meant" to be like with these massive sentinels expanding humanity instead of merely supporting it.