# Prospero Burns not pleasing me too much...



## Commissar Ploss

Don't get me wrong, the writing from the Wolves point of view is great, the dialogue superb, but it's these flashbacks and unnecessary lengthly insight into Hawser's past that are really bogging me down. To keep track, i've dog-eared a page every time i've put the book down, and each dog-ear falls on a flashback section... not good... i'm finding it hard to finish...ugh...

anyone else have this problem?

CP


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Yep, said as much in my review.  It was a decent enough book, but it did take me a significant portion of the book until I actually started to enjoy it.


----------



## Angel of Blood

I liked it, and finished it very fast. I was quite fascinated by the Wolves way of operating and wasn't in too much of a hurry to get to the burning. I will admit the Kasper flashbacks did get a bit tiresome after a while, but they held relevance in the end. Legion still remains top as a result


----------



## Azkaellon

Commissar Ploss said:


> Don't get me wrong, the writing from the Wolves point of view is great, the dialogue superb, but it's these flashbacks and unnecessary lengthly insight into Hawser's past that are really bogging me down. To keep track, i've dog-eared a page every time i've put the book down, and each dog-ear falls on a flashback section... not good... i'm finding it hard to finish...ugh...
> 
> anyone else have this problem?
> 
> CP


YA i have the same problem, The only parts that seemed interesting to me where the bits on the different roles legions were made for. Also the part with the council of Nikea was interesting! But i found the book does prove that the Thousand Suns Well slightly mis-guided where loyal!

But all in all....i think this is the worst book out of the whole series so far, And the only one i found my self able to put down and ignore....


----------



## Baron Spikey

Witch King of Angmar said:


> YA i have the same problem, The only parts that seemed interesting to me where the bits on the different roles legions were made for. Also the part with the council of Nikea was interesting! But i found the book does prove that the Thousand Suns Well slightly mis-guided where loyal!
> 
> But all in all....i think this is the worst book out of the whole series so far, And the only one i found my self able to put down and ignore....


Really? I wouldn't go that far myself, in fact I'd say it was still one of the better novels in the series, it's certainly no BftA after all.

Unlike with _The First Heretic_ and_ Nemesis _(definitely _Nemesis_, mediocre book if ever there was one) I couldn't put it down


----------



## raider1987

I have just started it and having the same problems with the flashbacks  Hopefully it will pick up.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Baron Spikey said:


> Really? I wouldn't go that far myself, in fact I'd say it was still one of the better novels in the series, it's certainly no BftA after all.
> 
> Unlike with _The First Heretic_ and_ Nemesis _(definitely _Nemesis_, mediocre book if ever there was one) I couldn't put it down


You could put down _The First Heretic_ aswell eh? Thought i was the only one, struggled may way through alot of the chapters


----------



## Azkaellon

Baron Spikey said:


> Really? I wouldn't go that far myself, in fact I'd say it was still one of the better novels in the series, it's certainly no BftA after all.
> 
> Unlike with _The First Heretic_ and_ Nemesis _(definitely _Nemesis_, mediocre book if ever there was one) I couldn't put it down



Really i LOVED the First heretic i thought it was amazing to see the fall to chaos in a chapter! (not to mention The Night Lords Kicking ass) As for nemisis i would rate it 6\10 well Prosparo burns is a solid 3\10.


----------



## RudeAwakening79

Really loved this book, although it wasn't AT ALL what I had expected. 

Dan delivered an excellent HH book about sixth legion in an unusual way. It gives you great insight in the world of the Space Wolves and what they're about. The title is the burning of prospero, but that is done in the last 20 or so pages, not what you would expect from the title...but rewarding nevertheless. :victory:


----------



## Chaosveteran

Angel of Blood said:


> You could put down _The First Heretic_ aswell eh? Thought i was the only one, struggled may way through alot of the chapters


I'm really having a hard time with the First Heretic. I've never spent this long reading a HH book. legion I read cover to cover and after I finished it I wanted to reread it again. With TFH i'm 180 pages in and so far it's been boring boring boring...the only thing that keeps me going is the prospect of seeing other Primarchs in action further on (or so the reviews say), plus a certain Primarch getting is a** whoopped.


----------



## Malcador

I found the first few chapters a bit disorientating but after the pace picked up I really enjoyed it.


----------



## Pyroriffic

I'm about halfway through and must admit that I've drifted off onto another book in the hope that when I come back to _Prospero Burns_ it'll engage me a bit more.

Just goes to show that everything is subjective, I guess!


----------



## Barnster

Its no where near as good as a thousand sons. But I personally think the main problem is the title, its not really to do with the book.

The book does improve the more you get through it, but its not exactly "lite" reading (deliberate sp)


----------



## mal310

I'm up to page 77 and its been a total slog so far. I'm hoping it improves soon.


----------



## Lord of the Night

Problem with Abnett novels is they are not what you expect, or what they are advertised as. _Prospero Burns_ isn't about the Burning of Prospero, its about the Vlka Fenryka as a legion and game between the Fenryka and Thousand Sons consisting of them one-upping each other. And _Legion_ isn't an Alpha Legion novel, its about the Imperial Army. I personally think he doesn't enjoy writing about the Astartes, Abnett would rather write about the Inquisition or the Imperial Guard despite that Astartes are cooler then both put together.

I do agree that _A Thousand Sons_ is vastly superior to Prospero Burns. The former had very likeable characters, a great plot teeming with betrayal, surprises and moral dilemmas, and visceral battle scenes that are a joy to imagine in your head. The Razing of Tizca is likely one of the most incredible battles in 30k. While _Prospero Burns_ introduced distant characters that we never really got to see a great deal of, showed the bare minimum of the actual battle and yet again was not about the faction that it had been advertised as. 

Abnett's next Heresy novel will be in 2012 or 2013 I would imagine, lets just hope that its actually what its advertised as and not just another story about viewing the events from the eyes of someone dragged along for the ride like his last two have been.


Edit: In light of all the conversing about this novel I have updated my review a bit to reflect some later thoughts and musings on the novel.

http://www.thefoundingfields.com/2010/12/lotn-reviews-prospero-burns-by-dan.html




Witch King of Angmar said:


> Really I LOVED _The First Heretic_, I thought it was amazing to see the fall to chaos in a legion!, (not to mention The Night Lords Kicking ass). As for _Nemesis_ I would rate it 610 well _Prospero Burns_ is a solid 310.


Good to see someone else who loved The First Heretic. Though I think _Nemesis_ is either a 7.5 or 8/10, and _Prospero Burns_ is an 8 or 9 if your being generous, frankly though i'd give _Nemesis_ a 9 before I gave _Prospero Burns_ one.


----------



## Zondarian

I always read reviews and whatnot and then suffer for it  at this point I haven't even read the book but it sounds rubbish,I hate flashbacks.and even if Boone else will say it I will,I enjoyed the battle for the abyss!


----------



## Lord of the Night

Zondarian said:


> I always read reviews and whatnot and then suffer for it  at this point I haven't even read the book but it sounds rubbish,I hate flashbacks.and even if Boone else will say it I will,I enjoyed the battle for the abyss!


Well my review contains no spoilers beyond what people are complaining about in this thread and others, so it may be worth a read.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Malcador said:


> I found the first few chapters a bit disorientating but after the pace picked up I really enjoyed it.


first of all, welcome to Heresy.  second, i haven't started to pick up yet, where did it turn around for you?


Pyroriffic said:


> I'm about halfway through and must admit that I've drifted off onto another book in the hope that when I come back to _Prospero Burns_ it'll engage me a bit more.
> 
> Just goes to show that everything is subjective, I guess!


quite so. I was just about to ask what you thought about it. 

CP


----------



## Mob

Oh. I didn't think the flashbacks/dreams were a problem at all, in fact I love the structure of this book and how it reflects the main character.

It's laid out the same way a rambling story-teller tells a story, with allusions, diversions and repetitions being brought in as they organically crop up as the teller moves the main thrust of his story along. Think of someone like Billy Connolly, or anyone in your family who tells great stories that can go on for hours unless someone makes them shut up. They flit around in the story, switching from tangent to tangent as they come up, only to return to the main point of the tale, but perhaps repeating bits of it to make sure you're still following them.

And it's all important! This isn't some half-drunk uncle remembering random stuff at you, this is a guy telling a story, a mystery!

Of course, if this technique does not float one's boat, you're pretty much screwed, sure.
---
Interestingly, while I adore A Thousand Sons, I would level the accusation at it that has been made at Prospero Burns here; it took an age to get started! The Aghoru section went on for way too long IMHO.

I'd posit that they are companion books in more ways than one; ATS can be said to be Ahriman's tale, and as a result it's structured like a text written by him (reflecting his Legion's tropes) concerning the circumstances; slow, measured and full of import, coming to a tragic yet arrogant conclusion.
In turn, PB is Hawser's story and is structured like an oral tale (again reflecting the Legion's tropes) that flits quickly from subject to subject and never stays in the same place, concerned with brutality and mystery...and of course it just winds down naturally, as the speaker concludes his tale.

This duology works on a deeper level than just seeing Nikea and Prospero from differing viewpoints, McNeil and Abnett used their strengths as writers to create books styled after the spirit of the Legions/Primarchs they were writing about.


----------



## bobss

Just loving _The First Heretic _at the moment. I was very wary of it at first, and have had a wealth of positive and negative reviews. Although perhaps a little... shakey at first, it really picks up and in my honest, bias-free opinion, is only bettered by _A Thousand Sons_; rivalling _Fulgrim_ - and_ Fulgrim _-sadly- holds a special place in my heart. 

I want _Prospero Burns _to link the Space Wolf Legion into the Great Crusade/Heresy well. I couldn't care less about the Sacking of Prospero, as, to be honest, _A Thousand Sons _did that perfectly.


----------



## Khorne's Fist

I started to get really annoyed with all the flashbacks, and the constant retelling of Hawser's dream. While the reason for them is all made clear by the end, I think Abnett could have got the point across with a lot less of either. 

I found the story picking up when Hawser goes to war with his new companions, when you start seeing how they operate, delibaretley cultivating their barabaric image despite being capable of so much more than people give them credit for.

The more I think about it though, the more I realise how disappointed I was by the end of the book. After ATS I wanted to see a decent counterpoint to the slavering horde the SWs are depicted as on Prospero itself, but that doesn't happen. It seemed like the battle on Prospero got in the way of his story, and he tried to squeeze it in at the end. 

I also wanted to see more of Russ, one of the more interesting of primarchs, and considering every other HH novel featuring a legion as exclusively as this revolves around their primarch, I don't think this was an unrealistic expectation.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Mob said:


> I'd posit that they are companion books in more ways than one; ATS can be said to be Ahriman's tale, and as a result it's structured like a text written by him (reflecting his Legion's tropes) concerning the circumstances; slow, measured and full of import, coming to a tragic yet arrogant conclusion.
> In turn, PB is Hawser's story and is structured like an oral tale (again reflecting the Legion's tropes) that flits quickly from subject to subject and never stays in the same place, concerned with brutality and mystery...and of course it just winds down naturally, as the speaker concludes his tale.
> 
> This duology works on a deeper level than just seeing Nikea and Prospero from differing viewpoints, McNeil and Abnett used their strengths as writers to create books styled after the spirit of the Legions/Primarchs they were writing about.


That is probably the best summary of the general theme of the books ive seen someone make and i think you've got it spot on.

I realise what some people say about the flashbacks, but they had to be drawn out to a degree (and i liked them anyway) because if they didn't the revelation at the end would have felt more rushed and less established.

When reading A Thousand Sons and the battle of Prospero i didn't see the Wolves as a slavering horde or think negatively of them, they just seemed like an elemental wave, akin to a tidal wave sweeping through Tizca, but it all seemed very co-ordinated, controlled and tactical, not savage, barbaric and random. They understood their battleground completely and showed that they were probably one of the most dangerous Legions. And the battle was described so beatuifully in A Thousand Sons and quite fully, that if it was told almost like a mirror image from the Space Wolves view it would have felt a little diminished. The downfall was A Thousand Sons described the battle too well, and their wasn't much left Abnett could do with it apart from what he did and i liked it. It helps that i wasn't going into the book expecting to see loads about Prospero, i just wanted to see more about the Wolves during the heresy, how they operated and see if Abnett could dispel their savage barbarian image, which imo he did perfectly.


----------



## Khorne's Fist

Angel of Blood said:


> i just wanted to see more about the Wolves during the heresy, how they operated and see if Abnett could dispel their savage barbarian image, which imo he did perfectly.


I agree completely on this point, but that's all he did. He could have done that in a novel set in any period in 40k history. Instead he completely ignored the title of his own novel.

He didn't explore the fact that the Wolves completely ignored the ruling at Nikaea and continued to use their psykers at will. He didn't go into the character of Russ enough. He relied too heavily on telling the story from Hawser's point of view, and he really tried to ignore the seeming purpose of the novel, which, considering the title of the book, was telling the story of the fall of Prospero from the SW point of view.

Why give the book a title like that while only shoe horning that very act into the last 20 pages?

I think I'm going to have to reread it immediately, because the more we discuss the negatives, the more I'm forgetting the positives, of which there were many.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

seems quite evident now that BL authors must be told not to write from a direct point of view of the main characters we want to see. its happened in every book and for me this series should be about the main charcters of the heresy and to hell with all the underlings who seem to get all the face time. 

do you think they are too scared to tackle characterisation of the main characters or is it a case of GW still wanting to keep people wanting more, even after this series as finished. i just cant work it out to be honest.

oh and can someone inbox me the end revelation and who hawser is as i cant be bothered to wait until ive read it to find out. by the sounds of it AoD will be out by the time ive done PB.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Unknown Primarch said:


> seems quite evident now that BL authors must be told not to write from a direct point of view of the main characters we want to see. its happened in every book and for me this series should be about the main charcters of the heresy and to hell with all the underlings who seem to get all the face time.
> 
> do you think they are too scared to tackle characterisation of the main characters or is it a case of GW still wanting to keep people wanting more, even after this series as finished. i just cant work it out to be honest.
> 
> oh and can someone inbox me the end revelation and who hawser is as i cant be bothered to wait until ive read it to find out. by the sounds of it AoD will be out by the time ive done PB.


i don't really agree with you. I like the fact that authors are fleshing out much more minor characters in the various series, that's what makes a good book and good series. The issue is, i was sorely misled by the title of the Book. I'm on page 318 of 444, and still not even a hint of the word "Prospero" has been read. It would really suck if after reading all that, the last line of the book reads. "And the Prospero Burned." fuck that. that would really suck. and i would be extremely hurt...

CP


----------



## Azkaellon

Commissar Ploss said:


> i don't really agree with you. I like the fact that authors are fleshing out much more minor characters in the various series, that's what makes a good book and good series. The issue is, i was sorely misled by the title of the Book. I'm on page 318 of 444, and still not even a hint of the word "Prospero" has been read. It would really suck if after reading all that, the last line of the book reads. "And the Prospero Burned." fuck that. that would really suck. and i would be extremely hurt...
> 
> CP


Ploss you are going to be really pissed off soon then lol.....Thats basic what happens theres not even any parts with russ fighting!:shok:


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Witch King of Angmar said:


> Ploss you are going to be really pissed off soon then lol.....Thats basic what happens theres not even any parts with russ fighting!:shok:


oh god. no. :suicide: fml...

CP


----------



## shaantitus

I finished this one last night also. I think the point is not the sacking of prospero by the wolves but what led to that event. How it was engineered and who by. I will admit I was a little disappointed by this book as I worked through it but I think the end result is pretty good. I won't spoil it for everyone but I think you will be pleasantly surprised Ploss. Besides, this way it eliminates any un-necessary duplication between this and A Thousand Sons.


----------



## Insurance

i just finished prospero burns and i am glad it is over. this is the first horus heresy book i considered putting down out of boredom. this reading experience has been such a disappointment that i feel the need to vent my frustrations. what i state below is pure opinion. feel free to disagree. 

1. the first 200 pages should have been scrapped and rewritten. the protagonist's background could have easily been developed in 50-100 pages. furthermore, even with 200 or so pages used to develop kasper hawser, i still found him two dimensional and boring. i felt dan abnett was trying to provide the reader with another john grammaticus to latch onto. if that is the case, he failed miserably. 

2. there was little to no character development for any of the space wolves. when a space wolf died in the story, i didn't care. i did not know enough about them aside from the color of their beard and their dyed leather. for example, where was the background story explaining why jormungndr got the name two-blade? for a novel based around a character meant to collect the space wolves stories, i learned very little about them. 

3. with that in mind, fith godsmote should have been the protagonist of this novel. i would have much rather learned about his experiences becoming a space wolf. was he hazed, etc?

4. this novel required far more russ. 440 some pages and all we get are three very brief conversations involving the wolf king. magnus may have lost the fight, but he certainly won the better novel.

5. what a poor choice for a title. i think the title should have been "there are no wolves in this novel".


i could certainly continue venting here, but i'd rather toss back some mjod....even if it cripples me. also, does this need to be posted under reviews? i don't think i gave away any spoilers.


----------



## raider1987

Ok it has gotten a lot better for me, I am around half way through the book now and enjoying it a lot more. The main character does become a lot more interesting. I still don't give a shit about ANY of the flashbacks and I really don't see there point. Also, wet leopard growl. Stop saying it on every damb page. Good book but so far at least, I still prefer horus rising and legion from abnett. But A thousand sons and first heretic were better. And so was Nemesis, I know that book isn't that popular round here but hey I liked it!


----------



## Lord of the Night

Khorne's Fist said:


> Why give the book a title like that while only shoe horning that very act into the last 20 pages?
> 
> I think I'm going to have to reread it immediately, because the more we discuss the negatives, the more I'm forgetting the positives, of which there were many.


Thats my problem with Abnett recently. His books aren't what they are put across as. _Legion_ isn't an Alpha Legion novel, its an Imperial Army novel with the Alpha Legion as supporting cast. And _Prospero Burns_ is not about the Burning of Prospero, its about the Vlka Fenryka and how they operate. In that sense its not that different from _Descent of Angels_. Abnett's best Heresy work was his first, _Horus Rising_, now that was great. 

Abnett writes some great Astartes characters, shame he doesn't seem to enjoy doing it otherwise he'd get back to Loken already. We already know he isn't dead thanks to the Black Library interviews, once he writes another Loken novel Abnett will have a hit on his hands. As long as its actually about Loken and not, what seems to be becoming a favourite of his, about an innocent bystander who gets dragged along for the ride by forces beyond his comprehension and by the end loses his innocence and becomes a warrior. Abnett's last two Heresy novels were both around that concept with the Alpha Legion spies in _Legion_ and Kasper Hawser in _Prospero Burns_, he may be favouring it too much.

There was a time when though he wasn't my favourite I felt that Abnett was the only one who could write the Siege of Terra, now I don't think that anymore. Graham McNeill is the only one who can do it in my view now, and do it right with great Astartes characters and the Primarchs in all their glory. Because if we see a Siege of Terra novel from a civilian perspective or from some random Imperial Army soldier it will be a black mark on the most epic battle in Warhammer, and none of us want that.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Lord of the Night said:


> _Legion_ isn't an Alpha Legion novel, its an Imperial Army novel with the Alpha Legion as supporting cast.
> 
> Abnett's last two Heresy novels were both around that concept with the Alpha Legion spies in _Legion_


The difference is that it actually worked in _Legion_. The most effective way of actually successfully portraying the Alpha Legion's secrecy and mystery was through the eyes of an outsider.

Where as with _Prospero Burns_, it is meant to be dealing with such an important event that it's just not as effective. _Prospero Burns_ is the tale of Kasper Hawser not the Vlka Fenryka or the Burning. Apart from 1 or 2 cross-overs, you can barely even tell its part of a duology either.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

got to agree on you there LotN and disagree with ploss from earlier. 

the heresy should be about fleshing out the main characters and giving us a insight into their action in the heresy. while i do think their is need for some minor character fleshing out to keep the story flowing at the end of it, it should be mainly driven by the main characters like primarch and their inner circles. 

e.g. the first heretic failed to give us any real reason for lorgar turning to be honest. yes there was him being told off etc etc but we didnt see his trip into the eye and what was told to him or shown him, we didnt get anything about how/why erebus and kor phaeron turned to chaos or their relationship with chaos and to me they were the first heretics, not that possessed marine the story was about. 

for me the heresy novels should be about this kind of thing which we got from the davin trilogy and eisenstein. fulgrim and legion kept to this as well. the DA novels will work out because they show what we want to see and thats what went off on caliban and the lion doesnt need to be in it just yet but if they fail to show his side of things then it will fail. BotA will have a point but its more of a minor book even if i thought it was good. once they get to calth and they show how much losing that ship effected the battle there then it might be appreciated more in the sense of what those marines did, not just for ultramar but the whole future of the imperium.

i think only really nemesis was actually really pointless and didnt really give us anything about anyone. the bit with malcador as the head assassin was rubbish to be fair and not quite beliveable in my opinion. why would he be the head and why would he keep such a thing from his close friend the emperor. just dont add up to me.

sorry for going off abit there but my main point still is that its starting to be evident that either BL is losing the plot ie not sure the best way to take HH or they have no intension of sorting out any of the backstory from the main characters and at the end of HH we still have a heap of questions as to what really went on behind the scenes and we are left no closer to the truth of things.

added: totally agree with you there CotE. legion worked excellent in that format and couldnt have been done any better in my opinion. one of my favourite HH novels.


----------



## Svartmetall

Lord of the Night said:


> I felt that Abnett was the only one who could write the Siege of Terra, now I don't think that anymore. Graham McNeill is the only one who can do it in my view now...


But 'False Gods' was very poor - Horus changed overnight from sympathetic noble warrior-lord to self-centred megalomaniac with no explanation at all, it was a massive let-down after the excellent scene-setter that was 'Horus Rising'. I would be gutted if I saw McNeill had been given the jewel in the crown of the Heresy when he's produced such a turkey already in the series. Abnett, James Swallow or Aaron Dembski-Bowden would be my choices (the latter two because 'Eisenstein' and 'Heretic' absolutely rocked) to write the Siege itself. 

I know what you mean about 'Legion' feeling like less of an Alpha Legion novel than a Guard novel where the Alphas make some guest appearances, and I would like to see Abnett shift focus a _little_ more towards the Astartes and the Primarchs, but then even during the Heresy humans outnumbered Astartes by a factor of...lots...so if the series is intended to show the impact of the Heresy across the whole Imperium, it actually makes sense for it to focus the way it did in 'Legion' and so forth. Since we know the HH authors get together on a regular basis to work things out, I have a feeling there was a decision to try and avoid the HH series being 'just another bunch of Space Marine books' if you see what I mean - every part of the Imperium of Man was involved, not just the Astartes, and the books are trying to reflect that.


----------



## Lord of the Night

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> The difference is that it actually worked in _Legion_. The most effective way of actually successfully portraying the Alpha Legion's secrecy and mystery was through the eyes of an outsider.


Eh im willing to admit your right about that. I still would have liked to see more Alpha Legion though, not just two captains and two Primarchs.



Unknown Primarch said:


> e.g. the first heretic failed to give us any real reason for lorgar turning to be honest. yes there was him being told off etc etc but we didnt see his trip into the eye and what was told to him or shown him, we didnt get anything about how/why erebus and kor phaeron turned to chaos or their relationship with chaos and to me they were the first heretics, not that possessed marine the story was about.


What are you talking about, it gave us plenty of reasons. Lorgar wanted gods to worship, he wanted the unity that belief in a higher power can bring, and of course we wouldn't see his trip into the eye. Its one of those events we will never see like the Emperor in 40k, its something that cannot be described in words and thus only our imaginations are sufficient to convey what is happening. Erebus and Kor Phaeron turned into heretics for the same reasons as Lorgar, and they each turned in their own way. But Argel Tal was the perfect protagonist for the story, he could impart the horrors of the Warp and make them believable in that they could terrify Astartes and we could see what happened during the exile of the Word Bearers, and it would have been impossible with Erebus because he had appeared in the other HH books while Lorgar was away.



Unknown Primarch said:


> i think only really nemesis was actually really pointless and didnt really give us anything about anyone. the bit with malcador as the head assassin was rubbish to be fair and not quite beliveable in my opinion. why would he be the head and why would he keep such a thing from his close friend the emperor. just dont add up to me.


The reason is simple, deniability. Assassins are a harsh but necessary tool in maintaining an empire but any leader who uses them is instantly feared, the Emperor couldn't have that. Malcador became the Head Assassin so that he could wield the Assassins and use them to do the things that must be done, and if he was ever found out the Emperor could deny he even knew about it and he wouldn't lose face. Malcador did it so that the Emperor wouldn't have too.



Unknown Primarch said:


> sorry for going off abit there but my main point still is that its starting to be evident that either BL is losing the plot ie not sure the best way to take HH or they have no intension of sorting out any of the backstory from the main characters and at the end of HH we still have a heap of questions as to what really went on behind the scenes and we are left no closer to the truth of things.


I disagree, the HH series is going very well still, the problem is that we are starting to proceed into uncharted territory. All of the previous novels have had some lore in background, such as Prospero or the Fall of the Emperor's Children or the Istvaan Massacre. We knew what would happen in those because it was set down long ago, everything up until now we already knew was destined to happen. Several things in the future are planned as well such as Calth and Signus, we know that the Ultramarines and Blood Angels triumph respectively. However right now we are entering the Age of Darkness, the period when Horus marches to Terra and the Traitor Legions wreck havoc on the galaxy, unlike the rest very little lore has been laid down on what happened during this period and so new things will be cropping up that we have never heard of before.

We will learn more about the events behind the scenes in coming novels, such as Graham McNeill's upcoming _The Outcast Dead_ which will be about the Astronomicon crisis on Terra and a jail-break of loyalist Astartes from the Traitor Legions escaping Terra. And the recent novels have illuminated a lot. _A Thousand Sons_ showed us the real reasons behind the fall of the XV Legion and revealed the truth behind the Golden Throne. _The First Heretic_ showed us how the heresy began and how the Primarchs were scattered across the galaxy, and revealed some interesting hints about the Missing Primarchs and the nature of the Emperor. And despite lacking in areas _Prospero Burns_ did show us the Vlka Fenryka in a whole new light, and revealed the machinations of Chaos that led to the Burning of Prospero.


----------



## M3N0N26

Unknown Primarch said:


> got to agree on you there LotN and disagree with ploss from earlier.
> 
> e.g. the first heretic failed to give us any real reason for lorgar turning to be honest. yes there was him being told off etc etc but we didnt see his trip into the eye and what was told to him or shown him, we didnt get anything about how/why erebus and kor phaeron turned to chaos or their relationship with chaos and to me they were the first heretics, not that possessed marine the story was about. =


Things like this really irritate me. You haven't read the novel properly if you think this. Its obvious to see that the reason why Lorgar turned is because he was chastisied by the emperor, and forced to accept there are no gods. His entirely life revolved around the existence of god, he grew up on a world where they worshipped gods and he fought a religious genocide in the emperors name on his homeworld to prove that his god was the real one...Only to find he wasnt. Only to find out that the gods that he dismissed as fiction, and killed many for believing, were real. Its an ugly truth but the truth and Lorgar felt like he had to deliver this truth to the Imperium to show them that gods to exist, and the emperor was lying.

Now does that sound like someone who turned for no reason?

Just to add, McNeill would be perfect for writing the siege of terra, although I imagine itll be a multi book plotline and all authors will get a bite of the pie. To be honest Mcneills Thousand Sons and Fulgrim were mindblowing, and far surpass anything Abnetts written in my opinion.


----------



## Lord of the Night

Svartmetall said:


> But 'False Gods' was very poor - Horus changed overnight from sympathetic noble warrior-lord to self-centred megalomaniac with no explanation at all, it was a massive let-down after the excellent scene-setter that was 'Horus Rising'. I would be gutted if I saw McNeill had been given the jewel in the crown of the Heresy when he's produced such a turkey already in the series. Abnett, James Swallow or Aaron Dembski-Bowden would be my choices (the latter two because 'Eisenstein' and 'Heretic' absolutely rocked) to write the Siege itself.
> 
> I know what you mean about 'Legion' feeling like less of an Alpha Legion novel than a Guard novel where the Alphas make some guest appearances, and I would like to see Abnett shift focus a _little_ more towards the Astartes and the Primarchs, but then even during the Heresy humans outnumbered Astartes by a factor of...lots...so if the series is intended to show the impact of the Heresy across the whole Imperium, it actually makes sense for it to focus the way it did in 'Legion' and so forth. Since we know the HH authors get together on a regular basis to work things out, I have a feeling there was a decision to try and avoid the HH series being 'just another bunch of Space Marine books' if you see what I mean - every part of the Imperium of Man was involved, not just the Astartes, and the books are trying to reflect that.


Dunno about that. I liked _False Gods_ myself, and the change was because Horus was slowly being corrupted by Chaos and his own doubts about his ability to lead and confusion about the unexplained absence of the Emperor, plus the growing bitterness towards the Emperor for what Horus perceives as abandonment and cowardice. And even if you don't like False Gods what about _Mechanicum_ and _A Thousand Sons_, McNeill wrote both of those and _Mechanicum_ is quite good, but _A Thousand Sons_ is a diamond in the crown that is Horus Heresy.

Also nice to see someone else who likes James Swallow, very underrated author. And I would love to see ADB writing for the Siege of Terra but thats a while away, maybe he will maybe he wont. I hope he does though, I want to see what happens to Argel Tal at Terra, well we already know what his fate is but I want to see it.

I am willing to admit that _Legion_ was a good novel, not the best, and I do see how it was important to show events from a non-Astartes perspective. My problem is that Abnett seems to be relying on that now, having done the exact same thing to a much lesser quality in _Prospero Burns_. I would welcome some future stories about humans, but important ones. I don't want to see another nobody who gets inexplicably caught up in events and becomes a true warrior. McNeill's next novel will be about Astropaths, that I am looking forward too because its not just another nobody human, psykers are far more important and Astropaths are very underused. While humans may outnumber them the Astartes are far more important, its not civilians fighting on the front lines to save mankind, its the Astartes Legions and while im not going to write him off, if Abnett's next novel is about nobodies becoming important again, I will have to say that he has forgotten that the core of the Heresy is the Astartes.


----------



## Angel of Blood

After the way McNeill decribed the Burning of Prospero, i have no doubt he could do the Seige of Terra justice. His description of Tizca being razed is one of the best battle i have ever read. It perfectly captured the awsome and unrelenting force that was the Vlka Fenryka, whilst at the same time showing the Thousand Sons fully embracing(and succumbing) to their powers in a desperate attempt to protect their world. He would do the Seige brilliantly.

And agree with the others regarding Legion. There is no other way the Alpha Legion could have been wrote about, to write it from their perspective would have eliminated all the mystery and intrigue about them. It worked perfectly, which is why it's come out tops in the poll


----------



## bobss

After a series as vast as the Horus Heresy, why should be confine ourselves to 1 novel that is the Siege of Terra? All books, to some extent or another have been underpinned by the notion of Horus and his father, the Emperor, meeting and deciding this conflict in single combat. 

Back to the topic, I agree with Lord of the Night. As interesting (and overplayed) as the idea of Remembrancers was, as... 'different' as Nemesis was and revealing as Mechanicum and Legion were, this is the Horus Heresy. Not the Age of Apostasy. This is the 31st millenium, the age of Astartes and Primarchs and Legions. It irritates me no-end when Astartes are turned into supporting characters. Of course, it's a nice change to see things from the perspectives of humans. It adds contrast, depth and a greater understanding. But fundamentally, I believe the Astartes should always come first.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

well to answer other peoples arguements. its quite simple. if lorgar had always forseen the emperor as a god and always believed in him as a god and when he met him he showed such divineness but also seemed humble with being able to concieve such a thing as the imperium of man but then to be turned from seeing the emperor in this just by being told off for this, was it a case of possibly not always believing what he thought of his father. when he is shown new gods why wouldnt he think to challenge what he was told by his father, why wouldnt he say 'you say your not a god and there is no gods, but ive seen gods so you must be a god also' it just doesnt add up to me why he would always venerate Him as a god and be so easily swayed to worship others. which brings me to my other point of maybe we could understand that thinking more if it was shown to us. to me its a pivotal plot point seeing what was shown to loragr on his trip to the eye. to the person who said we shouldnt see this, its like saying we shouldnt have seen horus's visions on davin. we had to see that to understand why horus turned or more at what point horus turned and the same should have been done with lorgar. the same could have been done with erebus and kor phaeron too or at least have been from say a convo between the two as to where it all started for them and what they aimed to do. this is a obvious addition to the fluff as this is perhaps the keys to how HH got started. weither it was always their aim to twist lorgar or just something they found workable after the chistisment from the emperor.

as to the other thing about new frontiers with HH fluff. that is all well and good when its stuff that we dont know about as its reveals stuff we want to know about stuff we havent heard of but when its stuff we do know about and want to know more and dont get it then its missing a subject that we can never go back to when HH is finished. better to give it us so we know what the hell is going on than keep us guessing. i always thought HH was all about revealing what actually happened not just keeping us guessing even when we have a account of certain events.

lastly on the assassin thing. that is a very lame idea to think that by having someone else deciding who to assassinate instead of the emperor it keeps the emperors hands free of blood. the guy unleashed astartes and all other manner of forces on thre galaxy and whole planets and cultures where destroyed for the emperors goals. the guy had actually removed some of his own sons from power, princes of his empire. im sure sending a few assassins out to end enemies of the state is not something that would beyond the will of the emperor. it just doesnt add up does it.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Unknown Primarch said:


> e.g. the first heretic failed to give us any real reason for lorgar turning to be honest. yes there was him being told off etc etc but we didnt see his trip into the eye and what was told to him or shown him, we didnt get anything about how/why erebus and kor phaeron turned to chaos or their relationship with chaos and to me they were the first heretics, not that possessed marine the story was about.





Lord of the Night said:


> What are you talking about, it gave us plenty of reasons.





M3N0N26 said:


> Things like this really irritate me. You haven't read the novel properly if you think this.


I agree with _M3N0N26_, you must have missed the entire point of the novel if thats the conclusion you came to.



Lord of the Night said:


> and of course we wouldn't see his trip into the eye. Its one of those events we will never see like the Emperor in 40k, its something that cannot be described in words and thus only our imaginations are sufficient to convey what is happening.


Totally agree with that as well.



Svartmetall said:


> But 'False Gods' was very poor - Horus changed overnight from sympathetic noble warrior-lord to self-centred megalomaniac with no explanation at all, it was a massive let-down after the excellent scene-setter that was 'Horus Rising'.


I agree to an extent. One thing that _False Gods_ failed to do, and why _Galaxy in Flames_ as a whole failed was because of Horus' portrayal as he fell from grace. _Horus Rising_ set the scene for Horus' fall, _False Gods_ didn't capitalise fully on it and _Galaxy in Flames_ just avoided it completely.

_False Gods_ didn't do enough to emphasise the many reasons and events leading upto Horus' fall. Without tweezing out the reasons, it made it seem like a simple chaos vision was the reason why he fell.



Lord of the Night said:


> My problem is that Abnett seems to be relying on that now, having done the exact same thing to a much lesser quality in _Prospero Burns_. I would welcome some future stories about humans, but important ones. I don't want to see another nobody who gets inexplicably caught up in events and becomes a true warrior... if Abnett's next novel is about nobodies becoming important again, I will have to say that he has forgotten that the core of the Heresy is the Astartes.


I wouldn't go as far as to say he is relying on such techniques now. It really worked with _Legion_ because it was the most effective way of portraying the Alpha Legion's methods. It worked to an strict extent with _Prospero Burns_, I can see his reasoning for why he chose Kasper Hawser as the main character - but it really wasn't sufficient enough for what was supposed to be the climax of the duology; the Burning.



Unknown Primarch said:


> when he is shown new gods why wouldnt he think to challenge what he was told by his father, why wouldnt he say 'you say your not a god and there is no gods, but ive seen gods so you must be a god also'


Because the Emperor had lied, not only to the Primarchs but to the whole Imperium. He had portrayed Lorgar and his Legion as a failure to the entire Imperium, the only Primarch to have been told he had failed in his purpose. The Emperor (with his _Imperial 'Truth'_) had wrapped the human race in a blanket of lies and falsehoods. Lorgar's entire purpose was to bring enlightenment to humanity, how could he do that being subordinated to an individual who was spreading lies and misinformation?

Why would Lorgar go back and declare the Emperor a god again given the above?



Unknown Primarch said:


> the same could have been done with erebus and kor phaeron too or at least have been from say a convo between the two as to where it all started for them and what they aimed to do. this is a obvious addition to the fluff as this is perhaps the keys to how HH got started. weither it was always their aim to twist lorgar or just something they found workable after the chistisment from the emperor.


So basically you want everything spelt out for you rather than having a decent plotline and intrigue within a novel? 



Unknown Primarch said:


> better to give it us so we know what the hell is going on than keep us guessing. i always thought HH was all about revealing what actually happened not just keeping us guessing even when we have a account of certain events.


Warhammer lore has never been black and white. It's all shades of grey, which is one of the primary appeals to the whole background. The Heresy series cannot spell everything out and reveal everything, it would ruin it if it did.


----------



## M3N0N26

Unknown Primarch, its not about Lorgar finding new gods, its about him finding the REAL gods, the gods that he KILLED people in his homeland over. How would you feel if you murdered your people and then was told the reason why you did it, was a complete lie?


----------



## Unknown Primarch

i like how you guys actually believe in the dogma of the pantheon actually being gods so the emperor saying there isnt gods is false and that justifies lorgar turning, that doesnt really ring true to me. what if the emperor is right, what if the pantheon arent gods just highly powerful beings in their own realm, they dont seem to be able to take out the emperor by themselves so how godly is that. but if they are gods so must the emperor as he can do things no other being can do. how do you define who is right and who is wrong. who has the best arguement for what they are telling people, who has the best reasons for their ideas of how the galaxy should be ran and whos is the right way to run things. if any of the answers are the emperor then what he said is the right way.

then you gotta look at lorgar himself, he believed in his father but was easily swayed from his vision and as soon as he had to change his way of life he turned but was quite happy to conquer other human ways of life because the emperor wanted them to live a certain way but when the emperor wanted him to change he wouldnt and turned against him.

and now back to my original point. this is such a key point in the HH that is warrants more than anything what was done and said to lorgar for him to turn. it is something that SHOULD be written and told to us and there isnt a reason for it to be kept a secret. it doesnt serve any purpose. there is no purpose keeping any lore secret, it just makes things frustrating and after a while makes the story stagnant.

how many people complain about seeing the same stuff written in every novel, how invincible characters can be against crazy odds and how every book will be near enough the same thing. obviously not every book is the same but you get my point. the more we get the juicey stuff and stuff that intrigues use the better. no point keeping things secret and in another 10 years be none the wiser. there just isnt any pay off for being a fan of 40k then.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Unknown Primarch said:


> i like how you guys actually believe in the dogma of the pantheon actually being gods so the emperor saying there isnt gods is false


It doesn't matter if they are truly gods are not, such a term is utterly ambiguous anyway. The point is that the Emperor denied them one way or another. He didn't even recognise their existence in the sense that he didn't inform any of his generals or Primarchs about their existence, nor of the true danger the warp posed. 

Lorgar was a philosopher, he was trying to enlighten the species. You cannot do that by founding an Imperium based on a lie.



Unknown Primarch said:


> and that justifies lorgar turning


I think you should read through the reasons again. Starting with the First Purge of the Brotherhood for reasons why Lorgar turned.



Unknown Primarch said:


> how godly is that.


How do you justify the term _'godly'_? As I said it's totally ambiguous.



Unknown Primarch said:


> then you gotta look at lorgar himself, he believed in his father but was easily swayed from his vision


I wouldn't label his ideals as _'easily'_ turning away from the Emperor. 



Unknown Primarch said:


> there is no purpose keeping any lore secret


Yeah lets just reveal everything. There would be no point in the fluff section of this forum then.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

if you missed how Lorgar was swayed, or in your words "what was done and said to lorgar for him to turn" then you clearly skipped over a huge part of TFH. and i'm sorely disappointed in you. Guilliman was involved in that scene. as was the Emperor. and here at page 161, Lorgar speaks to Magnus about some reasons: 

'Do not patronize me.' Lorgar snapped. 'With the greatest respect, Magnus, you cannot imagine this. Did the lord of all human life descend upon you, burn your greatest achievements to ash and dust, and then tell you that you - and you alone - were a failure? Did he throw your precious Thousand Sons to the ground and tell your entire Legion that every soul wearing their armour was a wasted life?'

'Lorgar-'

'What? _What?_ I spent decades on Colchis dreaming of the day god himself would arrive and lead humanity to the empyrean. I raised a religion in his honour. For over a hundred years, I have spread that faith in his name, believing he matched every dream, every prophecy, every mythic poem about the ascension of the human race. _Now_ i am told my life was a lie; that i have ruined countless civilizations with false faith; that every one of my brothers who laughed at me for seeking a greater purpose in life was _right to laugh_ at our bloodline's only fool.' 


it was pretty clear to the rest of us...

CP


----------



## Unknown Primarch

so because the emperor didnt tell his sons about the so called gods in the warp he is a liar. i seem to recall they knew of the denizens of the warp and this would be the admission of sentient beings in that dimension of the universe. why would the emperor tell them anything different than there being denizens of that realm. he wouldnt. he didnt say there was nothing there, he said that there was, but he just didnt describe them as gods. which is quite fair to be honest, why give them any recognition for being gods when there is no need to do so.

as for lorgar i still dont see the reason why he turned. yes i understand the description but what im saying is why turn against your father? why not follow what he is saying, why not do what he wants and let that be the form of worship he wants. you dont need to be praying in a church to venerate him. do as he asks and do it well and he will appreciate that more. this gets me back to my point of what he saw in the eye. yes we know his feelings about what his father did but what happened in the eye to sway him from the emperors side. was the need to worship something more than the need to follow his father, the guy he had been having divine visions of all his life, how could the shaming of his legion be such that he would turn his back on his father so easily. 

thats the bit that needs the visit to the eye. its like having horus on davin and he goes into that place and comes out all evil and we see nothing of his visions with erebus. how would you view that book if that section was missing from it. it helped us understand abit more on why/how horus did turn and the same thing would be beneficial with lorgar. us just seeing him being told off by daddy seems ultra lame when you think loragr turning is the start of everything. if lorgar never turned then the heresy would never have happened and the galaxy would be a hell of alot different.

and yes CotE, why not reveal everything about the heresy. what would be the point of keeping it secret. there is 10000 years of other fluff to play with after that and even more fluff to make up after the 42nd millenium. there is so much more that could be done with 40k fluff without even having to bring back the emperor and the primarchs so why not ride with some new stuff instead of being as stagnant as the imperium. 

if you look at alot of the boards on here they always seem to be people asking the same old questions all the time instaed of people asking about new stuff. get it out in the open, get people thinking about how 30k things effected or could effect 40k stuff. we have all manner of threats to the imperium and all people wanted to know about is when the primarchs are returning and what happened to them. thats why i think things should be kept fresh and it can be done without moving the story on too much that it might spoil the fluff.


----------



## seb2351

The first time I read PB, I hated it. I wanted to burn it and never see it again because in my opinion it was boring, and structurally annoying to read.
However, (out of boredom) decided to re-read the book and I am surprised at how much I actually enjoyed it when I finished it again.

I found it gives a point of view into a Legion that other writers choose not engage with. Once I had an idea of what the plot was, the second time around was much more enjoyable as I could focus more on what was, not what had happened. (The first time around I had to keep going back to see if I had jumped a page or something).

One thing I didnt like however was the twist at the end, and how it was tied together simply because 

he didnt pronounce the name correctly


Did anyone notice another tantalising hint towards the missing legions at the end?




'The Unprecedented. Like... Astartes fighting Astartes? Like the Rout being called to sanction another Legion?"
"That?" He answers. He laughs, but it is a sad sound. "Hjolda. No. Thats not unprecedented".


I am glad I ended up reading it again, I actually dont hate the Space Wolves anymore.


----------



## M3N0N26

Unknown Primarch said:


> as for lorgar i still dont see the reason why he turned. yes i understand the description but what im saying is why turn against your father? why not follow what he is saying, why not do what he wants and let that be the form of worship he wants. you dont need to be praying in a church to venerate him. do as he asks and do it well and he will appreciate that more. this gets me back to my point of what he saw in the eye. yes we know his feelings about what his father did but what happened in the eye to sway him from the emperors side. was the need to worship something more than the need to follow his father, the guy he had been having divine visions of all his life, how could the shaming of his legion be such that he would turn his back on his father so easily.


This is my last reply as you just dont seem to be getting it, despite everyone else on the board understanding. Its not as clear clut as well dad told me off so ill just go listen to him and stuff. In Lorgars eyes, he was the most loyal son to his father, and for 100 years served with the utmost loyalty. Then out of nowhere his greatest achievement was razed, countless civilians killed unnecessarily, and then forced to kneel in front of his brother primarch and labelled a failure in front of his entire legion. Then he is castigated, and informed that there are no such thing as gods, even though the emperor was happy for the first 100 years. all of a sudden he's pissed. So Lorgar feels it right to investigate the claims of the old faith on his homeworld...and so journeys to the eye. Only to find out the old faith DID exist despite his fathers insistence on the opposite, and hence Lorgar feels griefstricken, knowing he's committed millions of murders based on a religion that wasn't true, when the old ways, the reason behind the first purge of the brotherhood, WAS correct. Hes feeling thoroughly victimized but STILL decides he must go into the eye and confirm for himself. And he comes out a changed man, broken, hurt by the betrayal of his father, hurt that his father forced him to kill countless innocents in his name, only to retcon himself ultimately anyway. Lorgar was the only primarch who didnt want to be a soldier, its time to enlighten the imperium.


----------



## Lord of the Night

Unknown Primarch said:


> so because the emperor didnt tell his sons about the so called gods in the warp he is a liar. i seem to recall they knew of the denizens of the warp and this would be the admission of sentient beings in that dimension of the universe. why would the emperor tell them anything different than there being denizens of that realm. he wouldnt. he didnt say there was nothing there, he said that there was, but he just didnt describe them as gods. which is quite fair to be honest, why give them any recognition for being gods when there is no need to do so.


The Primarchs knew that sentient beings did exist in the Warp but they were completely unaware of what they actually represented, they saw them as just another type of alien rather then the personification of Chaos. And he lied to try and keep any knowledge of Chaos from them which was a stupid move because when Chaos did start to appear the Primarchs were unable to recognize it for the danger it was. But what is a God is a key question in some circles, is it an omniscient being?, is it an all-powerful being?, is it a creator being?. The Chaos Gods fit the description of Gods perfectly, they just didn't always exist.



Unknown Primarch said:


> as for lorgar i still dont see the reason why he turned. yes i understand the description but what im saying is why turn against your father? why not follow what he is saying, why not do what he wants and let that be the form of worship he wants. you dont need to be praying in a church to venerate him. do as he asks and do it well and he will appreciate that more. this gets me back to my point of what he saw in the eye. yes we know his feelings about what his father did but what happened in the eye to sway him from the emperors side. was the need to worship something more than the need to follow his father, the guy he had been having divine visions of all his life, how could the shaming of his legion be such that he would turn his back on his father so easily.


Because the Emperor didn't rebuke Lorgar, he practically tore him down in front of hundreds of thousands of people. He waited one-hundred years to tell Lorgar what he was doing was wrong, he massacred innocent people who had committed no real crime to drive his point home. And appreciation was not something the Emperor did, Horus was his most favoured son and he abandoned him to lead the crusade and he planned to have Magnus the Red rot in the Golden Throne for eternity. Lorgar turned because he saw the lies of the Emperor that kept the galaxy in ignorance, and because he was shown that Gods did exist and that they had plans and he shown how the Primarchs were really created. What happened in the Eye is simple, Lorgar was converted, but the utter fantastic nature of such a meeting between a demi-god and the four True Gods would be so indescribable that only our imaginations suffice for it.



Unknown Primarch said:


> thats the bit that needs the visit to the eye. its like having horus on davin and he goes into that place and comes out all evil and we see nothing of his visions with erebus. how would you view that book if that section was missing from it. it helped us understand abit more on why/how horus did turn and the same thing would be beneficial with lorgar. us just seeing him being told off by daddy seems ultra lame when you think loragr turning is the start of everything. if lorgar never turned then the heresy would never have happened and the galaxy would be a hell of alot different.


Because with Horus that part was completely, totally, one hundred percent required for our understanding of the story. And it was just Horus, Erebus and perhaps a few Daemons. Not hard to do, but Lorgar's meeting at the Eye with the Chaos Gods is so much more then that. To describe the pivotal point of Lorgar's story, the meeting with Gods, isn't possible because its just sheerly epic in nature that to describe it would just undermine it and make it less impressive. Imagination is just as important as the written word, the writers aren't going to note down every single moment, sometimes you've got to picture it yourself, and you just might find its better then any written paragraph.



Unknown Primarch said:


> and yes CotE, why not reveal everything about the heresy. what would be the point of keeping it secret. there is 10000 years of other fluff to play with after that and even more fluff to make up after the 42nd millenium. there is so much more that could be done with 40k fluff without even having to bring back the emperor and the primarchs so why not ride with some new stuff instead of being as stagnant as the imperium.
> 
> if you look at alot of the boards on here they always seem to be people asking the same old questions all the time instaed of people asking about new stuff. get it out in the open, get people thinking about how 30k things effected or could effect 40k stuff. we have all manner of threats to the imperium and all people wanted to know about is when the primarchs are returning and what happened to them. thats why i think things should be kept fresh and it can be done without moving the story on too much that it might spoil the fluff.


Because the mystery is cool. There are a lot of things in the Heresy that quite frankly, I don't want to know. I don't want to know what happened to the Missing Primarchs, I don't want to know what happened to Vulkan and Corax and Leman Russ when they disappeared, I don't want to know how far back the Chaos Gods plotted the Heresy. A lot of cool things have been revealed such as Magnus being the first choice for the Chaos Gods and Horus second, Argel Tal sending the Primarchs into space by sabotaging the Emperor's Lab, hints that the Missing Primarchs may have been corrupted, how the Emperor's Children fell from grace and became the hedonists we know today, the birth of the Dark Mechanicum and much more. All of these things are great but if everything is revealed when whats the point?, it just leaves less to the imagination and the wonder that the Horus Heresy embodies.

And people will ask those questions because they are good, and they should remain that way. They should come up with their own answers to them because thats what Black Library intends for many things, we need to stop begging authors to tell us what they think happened and we need to start trying to form our own opinions. For example, the Missing Primarchs are one of the biggest mysteries of 30k. It clearly states the 2nd and 11th Primarchs are "lost" and their Legions with them, I think they were corrupted by Chaos and destroyed. Now an author may have a different opinion and some people may think that if an author thinks its then its true. I don't, Aaron Demnski-Bowden's, James Swallow's or Dan Abnett's opinion on the Missing Primarchs is no more valid then mine because for the simple fact, nobody knows because there is nothing to know. The Missing Primarchs has no answer because the point of it isn't an answer but the mystery that allows so many questions to be raised, unique opinions to be formed and discussions to be had.

Its not always about the answer. Sometimes its just about the question.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

we seem to be going over the same thing after each post and getting nowhere. the fact that i already get what happened in TFH hasnt got through to you guys. the whole point of my arguement is that, yes the shaming by the emperor was the start of lorgar having doubts about the him, but what happened to actually finally turn him away for good. what i want to know is how they finally broke him and i wanted to see the scheming of erebus and kor phareon. after reading dark creed? i like the end bit on the relationship between the two and was hoping to touch on that more in TFH. i was hoping to see juicey bits that caught my interest and made me ask more new questions about things, not just keep asking the same old ones. if you guys want to keep going over the same stuff for decades to come then fine but for me i would like to know the answers and those answers lead me to new questions. pretty much how legion gave us answers about those primarchs and made us ask a whole lot more and sort of refresh the fluff at the same time. why keep things stale and boring. 

but at this point i think we are gonna have to agree to disagree. some of you guys have you ideas on 40k and i have mine. but then there we have on one hand me having my opinion and you guys shotting it down then you go on to say we should all have our own ideas on things and shouldnt be told by others what to think. work that one out.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Unknown Primarch said:


> so because the emperor didnt tell his sons about the so called gods in the warp he is a liar. i seem to recall they knew of the denizens of the warp and this would be the admission of sentient beings in that dimension of the universe. why would the emperor tell them anything different than there being denizens of that realm. he wouldnt. he didnt say there was nothing there, he said that there was, but he just didnt describe them as gods. which is quite fair to be honest, why give them any recognition for being gods when there is no need to do so.


The Primarchs (apart from Magnus) were aware of the barest minimum in regards to the warp. They weren't aware of chaos, and that it is indivisible from the warp. They weren't aware that entities within the warp were more powerful than their father. They were essentially clueless about the warp.

Now in regards to the chaos gods. I've said before it doesn't matter if the Emperor labelled them as gods or not, the term is ambiguous. The point is that they are so unbelievably powerful that you can only apply such a term as _'god'_ in order to just begin to conceive them. I'll quote Argel Tal here:




'Why did you believe all of this? Hell-worlds. Souls. Humanity's slow extinction, and these... monsters... that call themselves daemons. What convinced you that it was more than some alien trick?'

'Such creatures are no different from the gods of countless faiths that have risen and fallen over the millennia. Few gods were benevolent creators to any culture.'

'But what if we're being lied to?'

It would have been easy to say that faith was its own sustenance and that humanity always reached for religion; that almost every rediscovered human culture clung to their own belief in the infinite and the divine; and that here was a realm of prophecy - where beings with the power of gods had proved beyond doubt that they'd summoned the Lord of the Seventeenth Legion, shaping fate to make these events unfold. Whether they were benevolent creator gods from mythology or mere manifestations of mortal emotion was irrelevant. Here was the divine force in a galaxy of lost souls. On the edge of the physical universe, gods and mortals had finally met, and mankind would fall without their masters. But Argel Tal said none of this. He was weary of such explanation. 

'I remember your words after Monarchia died in the Emperor's fire. You told me it was the day you truly began to believe that gods were real, once you had seen such power unleashed. I felt the same when I saw the power at work in this storm. Can you understand that, Cyrene?' 

'I understand.'


The Emperor professed his _'Imperial Truth'_ shunning all religions and gods. Why? To starve chaos of energy. He knew that if mankind was aware of the Four they would automatically label such entities as _'gods'_ because of their sheer amount of power and influence. The Emperor covered his Imperium in a (seemingly protective) blanket of lies in an attempt to prevent chaos taking a hold on humanity. Now where this ties in with Lorgar is covered in _The First Heretic_. The Emperor (despite spreading the _'Imperial Truth'_) didn't chastise Lorgar or Colchis upon their rediscovery, they were allowed to throw religious festivals and honours in the Emperor's name, even in his presence. The Emperor's silence and inaction was taken as consent or even as approval. This continued for 100 years. For an entire century of the Great Crusade Lorgar and the Word Bearers spread their faith and doctrine throughout the Imperium, did the Emperor intervene as Lorgar's faith clashed with his own _'Imperial Truth'_? No. I don't think you are truly grasping this concept. At Monarchia, the Emperor told Lorgar he had lived his life by a lie and that he alone was a failure. But most importantly, he had enacted the First Purge of the Brotherhood upon Colchis in the *God*-Emperor's name. To be informed he had slaughtered a third (IIRC) of his homeworld's innocent population for absolutley nothing was a burden Lorgar struggled to bear.



Unknown Primarch said:


> as for lorgar i still dont see the reason why he turned. yes i understand the description but what im saying is why turn against your father? why not follow what he is saying, why not do what he wants and let that be the form of worship he wants. you dont need to be praying in a church to venerate him. do as he asks and do it well and he will appreciate that more.


The Primarchs are products of their homeworlds and upbringings. Lorgar was a philosopher, a thinker. He always held that faith was central to the human race and that it was the sole path to enlightenment. After 150+ years of solidly bearing this mindset he couldn't just suddenly revert his ways, especially after the method by which the Emperor had chastised him. Silence and inaction for 100 years, then suddenly out of no where; Monarchia.

Lorgar searched for the truth, and nothing more. He realised that most human cultures/faiths across the known galaxy bore similar origins and concepts, thus the Pilgrimage was taken. He discovered this underlying concept, this truth, within the Eye of Terror. Chaos is an infinitely older and more powerful source than the Emperor could ever be, it had provided the foundations for faith and cultures across the galaxy. It validated Lorgar's deepest fears; that the Emperor had lied to everyone. And beyond that it displayed it's sheer power within the warp rift. Lorgar was searching for the underlying truth of the universe, he found it in chaos. It may not have been what he hoped for, it was a ruthless and terrifying concept, but it was the truth nonetheless.



Unknown Primarch said:


> this gets me back to my point of what he saw in the eye. yes we know his feelings about what his father did but what happened in the eye to sway him from the emperors side. was the need to worship something more than the need to follow his father, the guy he had been having divine visions of all his life, how could the shaming of his legion be such that he would turn his back on his father so easily.


We didn't need to see what Lorgar witnessed. We already knew the reasons for why he and how he turned. Argel Tel's experiances in the Eye culminated that. And as _LotN_ said, imagination for such a scene is much more powerful than the written word, regardless of the author.



Unknown Primarch said:


> thats the bit that needs the visit to the eye. its like having horus on davin and he goes into that place and comes out all evil and we see nothing of his visions with erebus. how would you view that book if that section was missing from it. it helped us understand abit more on why/how horus did turn and the same thing would be beneficial with lorgar.


I disagree entirely. Horus' downfall was not handled anywhere near as well as Lorgar's in my opinion. We have all the reasons given throughout _The First Heretic_ as to why Lorgar turned, Horus' reasons were a lot more subtle (and spread across at least 2 novels by different authors). Horus needed a catalyst, something which turned out to be his vision to tip him over the edge. Lorgar had the discovery of _the place where gods and mortals meet_ and the truth as his catalyst - we have everything we needed to know in regards to why Lorgar fell from _The First Heretic_.

Just think about it for a second, Horus' vision in _False Gods_ was vital to begin to understand why Horus fell - a catalyst was needed. It simply wouldn't have made sense otherwise. _The First Heretic_ is different, it didn't depend on us witnessing what Lorgar experienced within the Eye - such things are best left to implication and imagination.



Unknown Primarch said:


> us just seeing him being told off by daddy seems ultra lame when you think loragr turning is the start of everything. if lorgar never turned then the heresy would never have happened and the galaxy would be a hell of alot different.


I think your outrageously deluded if all you got from _The First Heretic_ was Lorgar 'being told off by daddy' was the reason for him turning to chaos. 



Unknown Primarch said:


> and yes CotE, why not reveal everything about the heresy. what would be the point of keeping it secret.


Hmmm let me think. Oh yeah thats right, because otherwise it would be a massive pile of wank. Let's just know absolutley everything about the heresy and remove all notions of interest and intrigue(!) 

The heresy lore (and 40k as a whole) is based on perception, misinformation, and secrecy. Revealing everything about the Heresy would be pointless and wouldn't be well recieved by the fanbase at all. It would remove all notions of debate that rage across countless forums, even the heresy novels themselves would turn to drivel, in fact they may as well just be bullet-pointed if you don't want a plot just a source which reveals everything.

EDIT: woops, looks like im a bit late in replying.


----------



## Dead.Blue.Clown

I have to say, it's immensely gratifying to see so many people absolutely _get_ the core precepts behind TFH. Thanks for the feedback on that score, guys.

On the other hand:



Unknown Primarch said:


> seems quite evident now that BL authors must be told not to write from a direct point of view of the main characters we want to see.


Who is "we"? You mean you?

We're not told to do anything. I suspect I can speak for the whole gang when I say we enjoy writing from the POV of established characters sometimes; other times a new character is more refreshing or necessary for the storyline; and other times we recognise the narrative need for more characters in a galactic war spanning a decade and _bajillions_ of souls. 



Unknown Primarch said:


> do you think they are too scared to tackle characterisation of the main characters or is it a case of GW still wanting to keep people wanting more, even after this series as finished. i just cant work it out to be honest.


Why so cynical? Especially when they're obviously the least-likely answers. Your issues arises from an inability to realise and accept the following factors:

1. That the "underling" characters you describe aren't underlings; they're now established major characters with a lot to do with the Heresy. Hawser reveals a grave wedge in the heart of the Imperium, that Chaos itself was able to manipulate two of the Legions unto near destruction. John Grammaticus showed that the alien races of the galaxy were desperate to stop humanity by any means necessary. Argel Tal is on the way to becoming the first Daemon Prince of the Chaos Marines, and is joint-leading the attack on Calth. Garro is looking like part of the fledgling proto-Inquisition. These characters complement the previously established ones, to present a much wider, more realistic _dramatis personnae_ for a galactic civil war.

2. That just because a character has been major in the past doesn't necessarily make them interesting or well-designed.

3. That not every single scene and conversation needs to be presented; most people find that awkward, and something that steals the mythological scope of the whole thing. It's about what revelations matter, and which are evocative, in the narrative sense. It's not a codex to list every single event in plain detail. The series would be 800,000,000 novels long if it was. The trick is not to blind yourself to nuance and subtlety. With the greatest respect, some of these novels really do reward a little thought; they're researched and written that way, just like any good novel. Plain, exposition-tastic action movi-- uh, books are still around, but the HH series often (not always) rises a little above it.

4. That the "underling" characters are just as interesting in many stories as the power-players. It's a common theme in fiction. There's a difference between what's necessarily interesting and what's powerful. 

5. That sometimes the "underlings" are the reason the power-players do X, Y and Z, and we need to see that.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

ok i wasnt gonna carry on with this but its good to directly interact with a author.

so when i say 'we' i mean all the people ive seen comment on wanting to see more primarch action instead of it all focusing on just a normal marine. like ive said before this is the time when we actually get to see the primarchs in action. i wouldnt go so far as to say the primarchs should return in 40k so being able to see them in detail in 30k shouldnt be overlooked and unless you are planning on going into more detail about what happened from lorgar going into the eye before HH then up until the seige of terra then all that important pieces of the puzzle will be missed. for me TFH sort of teased you with some answers but didnt give you the juiceist bits. his trip into the eye and more of erebus and kor phareon slowly twisting lorgar to chaos are known key points in the lore and the road to a marine becoming a daemon prince doesnt seem quite as big in comparison.

i wouldnt say im cynical, its just a observation and one ive see many others comment on. the part between lorgar and magnus was excellent in TFH and i actually didnt want it to end and for it to develope further. the bit when the primarchs are all fighting too was quality too. this is the sort of stuff that HH needs more of. i understand the need for secondary characters to help things along but if we just got abit more big charcter action it can only be a good thing. when im reading HH novels its always the interactions between primarchs and other main characters that gets everyones interest how ever much these guys want to go on about how great the 'underlings' are. yes they have been good but they are nothing compared to seeing for example angron and kharn in that chamber having a proper interaction on a pivotal part of the story.
how many of you felt like you were in that chamber, could see and smell the blood in the air and see every single emotion in angrons face as he was having his crazytime with kharn. 

that type of writing gets peoples attention and how ever some of you guys deny it, that is what people like the most when ready HH novels.
you have said as much when commenting on PB, how you found it hard to read all the stuff about a underling charcter and only really got excited when it got to the bits about prospero. plus you also moaned there was hardly any russ in it either.

so for me this just props up my point that after all is said and done (and written) you just cant satisfy the masses unless you give them exactly what matters and thats key characters at key points in the lore.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

I love debates, but this one sucks. especially when all the sense in the world clearly cannot turn a person. Unknown Primarch, you should have been Lorgar. With your strong and unwavering presence behind the wheel, the Imperium of Man may have been spared the whole bloody ordeal of the Heresy. 

Time to cut our losses guys, and i would love it ever so much if we could *get back to the topic of Prospero Burns* and how annoyed i am that the word "Prospero" hasn't even been mentioned and i'm at page 362!

CP


----------



## Azkaellon

Commissar Ploss said:


> I love debates, but this one sucks. especially when all the sense in the world clearly cannot turn a person. Unknown Primarch, you should have been Lorgar. With your strong and unwavering presence behind the wheel, the Imperium of Man may have been spared the whole bloody ordeal of the Heresy.
> 
> Time to cut our losses guys, and i would love it ever so much if we could *get back to the topic of Prospero Burns* and how annoyed i am that the word "Prospero" hasn't even been mentioned and i'm at page 362!
> 
> CP


Dont worry it is mentioned...i think twice......There is very little burning though....and lots of guardsman and like two thousand sons....And no primarch action....:wild:


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Witch King of Angmar said:


> Dont worry it is mentioned...i think twice......There is very little burning though....and lots of guardsman and like two thousand sons....And no primarch action....:wild:


you're just trying to irritate me with that aren't you... :angry:

CP


----------



## Azkaellon

Commissar Ploss said:


> you're just trying to irritate me with that aren't you... :angry:
> 
> CP


For Once no.:shok:


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Witch King of Angmar said:


> For Once no.:shok:


Either way... it's working... :angry:

CP


----------



## Azkaellon

Commissar Ploss said:


> Either way... it's working... :angry:
> 
> CP


ya i would rather re-read battle for the abyss 10 times then have to go through prospero burns again.....:wild:

Its only up side is Raldron is there  (I want the damn HH blood angels book already!)


----------



## AK74Bob

I wonder why the Ultramarines were chosen to destroy the imperial world in _The First Heretic_. It doesn't seem very Ultramarine like...in fact the World Eaters should have done it because they like that kind of stuff. I mean that is the reason why the World Eaters and Night Lords existed, to do dirty work that nobler souls would be more reluctant to do.

Back OT however, all of your criticism of _Prospero Burns_ is making me reluctant to get it...


----------



## Commissar Ploss

AK74Bob said:


> Back OT however, all of your criticism of _Prospero Burns_ is making me reluctant to get it...


i do hesitate to say don't buy it, especially if you've read the series thus far. There are interesting insights which i would be remiss if i didn't mention. specifically Nikea. i don't think you should pass it up... But just don't go into it expecting too much. accept that there will be new surprises, but do not fret about the title. 

CP


----------



## Lord of the Night

AK74Bob said:


> I wonder why the Ultramarines were chosen to destroy the imperial world in _The First Heretic_. It doesn't seem very Ultramarine like...in fact the World Eaters should have done it because they like that kind of stuff. I mean that is the reason why the World Eaters and Night Lords existed, to do dirty work that nobler souls would be more reluctant to do.
> 
> Back OT however, all of your criticism of _Prospero Burns_ is making me reluctant to get it...


Probably because they were closest to Terra and could ferry the Emperor there, rather then recall a Legion out in the depths of space for a simple assignment.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

AK74Bob said:


> I wonder why the Ultramarines were chosen to destroy the imperial world in _The First Heretic_. It doesn't seem very Ultramarine like...


Firstly because the Word Bearers' hatred of the Ultramarines has to stem from somewhere (especially in the build up to Calth). And secondly because they were the example Legion. The Emperor pointed to them and instructed Lorgar to be like them, that is why is what they who destroyed Monarchia. 



AK74Bob said:


> I mean that is the reason why the World Eaters and Night Lords existed, to do dirty work that nobler souls would be more reluctant to do.


All the civilians were evacuated though, there were likely to have been only very few casualties. So from their perspective pretty much all they did was destroy a city, which is the kind of thing Astartes do on a daily basis. 



AK74Bob said:


> Back OT however, all of your criticism of _Prospero Burns_ is making me reluctant to get it...


As Ploss said I would still get it, it is a good book despite it's many flaws. It's just not what it should have been.


----------



## AK74Bob

Ah I had forgotten that most of the civvies were evacuated, that does make me feel better. But I would disagree that it is "daily business" to destroy loyal imperial citizens and their infrastructure. Daily business involves killing xenos or humans outside the fold of the Imperium.

_Prospero Burns_ can't be all that bad, I mean I did like Legion and Horus Rising so...


----------



## Angel of Blood

Propero Burns isn't a bad book by any means, i for one still thoroughly enjoyed it. The gripe people have and i understand why is that is doesn't really deal with Prospero itself and doesn't have much of Russ. But really the entire novel is setting up the burning of Prospeo and why it happened. And Thousand Sons gave me more than enough of the actual battle. Still would have been nice to see alot more of Russ admitedly though


----------



## raider1987

Upon finishing the book it did get a lot better. I didn't see as much of the burning of prospero as I would have liked, but Graham McNeill did the battle so flawlessly Abnett or any other writer couldn't have topped. But what the hell was with his 'wet leopard growl' being one every other page. I just got the feeling that someone bet him he couldn't fit the same line 100 times in a novel and get away with it. 

I am confused about certain elements of the book, and also want to know why Magnus is listed as a character in the book when he does not have a single line of dialog. 

But overall enjoyed the book more and more as it went on, but at the start it just wasn't as good as it should have been and we all know Dan is more than capable of. I believe that Abnett is just a victim of his own success. He has written some of the best characters into existence, and depicted some of the most outstanding battles. It was a great book, but he's done better. 

I just wish he had involved Russ more, and we had gotten to see at least a little more than a glimpse of Magnus. Other major characters from the series and 40k do pop up, but I couldn't help wanting to see more of the wolf king.


----------



## Mob

To those thinking of skipping it: if you can afford it, consider getting it. The book itself is a good book; the construction of it is masterful. Only think against it if you don't think you'll enjoy it because of the structure or you are super-dead-set against reading a book about Space Wolves where the viewpoint character is not a Space Wolf. 
If you choose to avoid it you are missing out on some good fluff (admittedly almost entirely Space Wolf related, though there is some Terran stuff and the whole Nikea section is solid gold) and what I consider to be a hell of a story.

The problem (though I have no problem with it all) is that it does not present the story people were expecting from the concept of 'two sides to the events' and even the title. Which is a very legitimate complaint. As is just not liking it because of the way it is written, obv.

As to 'wet leopard growl', yes it's irksome, and I can only imagine it's an attempt at a repetition, which is a standard technique of oral storytelling; consider the number of times 'dawn comes early, with rosy fingers' appears in the Illiad. Also, Abnett uses this technique loads and loads: "The Emperor protects", "illuminate", "It is critical that you pay attention at this time", "Hello hero, are you for hire?"...and the ever-present marks of aversion. 
His reps are usually very effective and can even become fairly iconic due to his ability to turn a phrase. I wouldn't be surprised if "Until next winter" starts appearing in every Space Wolf story from now on.

Magnus is in the book; his physical absence is itself a role. Russ attempts to directly speak to him at one point...

Anyway, my point is that Prospero Burns does not appear to have ever been intended to show off Magnus or the battle of Prospero or even the Thousand Sons particularly. To include any of that would unbalance the entire book.
So the sin, if it is one, is leading everyone to believe that the book would be about something...which, while it *is*...it isn't. 

The last time there was backlash about that sort of thing was Battle for the Abyss, but in that case (while the book was mostly godawful) I think the expectation of seeing the battle of Calth in it was faulty. In this case, we were totally told to expect the flipside of A Thousand Sons and everyone expected a duology in a literal fashion rather than a metaphoric one. So I'm certainly not going to moan at the people moaning about that, even though I enjoyed the book very much.


----------



## ckcrawford

I thought the book was interesting. I really dislike the title though. I think thats the major problem with the book. I got the book expecting that the book would deal with primarly Russ and how he was dealing with Magnus. But that really only got in more than 3/4s of the book. It was more about the legion, much like his last novel in the heresy, _Legion_. Otherwise, I liked it much like Legion. Except I prefer the secrets and mystery of the Wolves a bit more now.


----------



## jasonbob

Zondarian said:


> I always read reviews and whatnot and then suffer for it  at this point I haven't even read the book but it sounds rubbish,I hate flashbacks.and even if Boone else will say it I will,I enjoyed the battle for the abyss!


I actually agree with you on bfta. While I realize it was not an amazing book. I got what I expected out of it and was entertained.

As for Prospero Burns, I found it interesting and enjoyed it but that fact that it didnt really feel like an astartes book mad it inferior to A Thousand Sons.


----------



## Words_of_Truth

I just got to Nikea and I'm hoping it really gets into the actual story more. Although the incident before hand with the old Rune Priest did bring a tear to my eye


----------



## Azkaellon

Words_of_Truth said:


> I just got to Nikea and I'm hoping it really gets into the actual story more. Although the incident before hand with the old Rune Priest did bring a tear to my eye


Well that Won't last


----------



## Good Minton

I finished reading it last night. While it has taken me longer than any other HH series book to read, it certainly has it's own merits and it certainly wasn't the most dreary read (that will always be reserved for BftA). Initially, I thought it appeared to be a different approach to telling the story. However, upon reflection, it wasn't entirely, when considering Mr Abnett's previous works, which I must admit I have enjoyed.

Anyway, sorry, ramble over! 

Not the best read thus far, but certainly not the worst. Well done Mr Abnett, I wouldn't even know where to start writing a novel!


----------



## Phil73805

No, not at all. The flashbacks are part and parcel of the whole story, as will become clear. The book is more a psychological thriller than the usual 30k stuff.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

i think some of my feelings have been amended. I've just finished the book last night, and i must say, i was pleased how the ending came about. What really misguided my feelings was the title. i know you aren't supposed to take to much from a title. but when it says Prospero Burns, with a picture of Russ plastered on the cover, i'd turned the cover, hoping to see some major Russ-itude... On that front i was somewhat disappointed... 

While the flashbacks did throw me for some time. it became pleasantly clear why they were being used, and exactly how important they were. I'm quite in love with Dan's writing style. I'm not kidding, it's probably the last 15-20 pages where everything gets sorted, and somehow he's still able to turn my feelings of perturbation into jubilation. 

And then knowing that there are tie-ins with Battle of the Fang. and learning/discovering exactly what those tie-ins were was quite cool as well.

a review for this book, by me is forthcoming.

CP


----------



## Unknown Primarch

maybe what happened was the core of the story got re-written a few times and DID actually have alot of russ in and maybe was a view of the SW side of things but say after his illness when prospero burns got put back he thought of a whole new idea for the novel and went with that. dont forget he started out by doing a thousand sons but didnt like it so changed to prospero burns. its quite logical he may have had a few rewrites seeing as it was a long time between the first pubishing date and the eventual one and being that the title was already out in the open he couldnt have actually changed it. 

agree/disagree?


----------



## Mob

Sure, why not? It was delayed by what, a year? So changing its focus between concept and execution is about as plausible as anything else.

Reminds me of his Honour Guard story, where he said he had to rewrite the whole thing on the fly after a data-crash and it came out as a different book.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

ive done that before when trying to write something. one small addition or re-write and the whole thing goes to pot and turns into something else then you try and adjust things to make what you already put in fit properly. haha


----------



## Words_of_Truth

The title definitely threw me, but as stated the last 15 pages make everything you thought was boring etc worth it. If the battle of the fang includes more of the central character of this book then I'll definitely be reading it.

What struck me though was how over the top they seem to make the Space Wolves, in every other novel they are never as "awesome" as they are in this, they are nothing like the stereotypical Space Wolves you see in the Ragnar Blackmane novels.

Did anyone notice that the part where the central character is saved by a wolf was never fully cleared up?


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Words_of_Truth said:


> The title definitely threw me, but as stated the last 15 pages make everything you thought was boring etc worth it. If the battle of the fang includes more of the central character of this book then I'll definitely be reading it.
> 
> What struck me though was how over the top they seem to make the Space Wolves, in every other novel they are never as "awesome" as they are in this, they are nothing like the stereotypical Space Wolves you see in the Ragnar Blackmane novels.
> 
> Did anyone notice that the part where the central character is saved by a wolf was never fully cleared up?


it's clear that there are wolves on fenris. they're on the cover... although the cover is set on Prospero...

CP


----------



## Azkaellon

Words_of_Truth said:


> The title definitely threw me, but as stated the last 15 pages make everything you thought was boring etc worth it. If the battle of the fang includes more of the central character of this book then I'll definitely be reading it.
> 
> What struck me though was how over the top they seem to make the Space Wolves, in every other novel they are never as "awesome" as they are in this, they are nothing like the stereotypical Space Wolves you see in the Ragnar Blackmane novels.
> 
> Did anyone notice that the part where the central character is saved by a wolf was never fully cleared up?


From my understanding the "wolfs" are what happens when the geneseed doesn't take properly in a new recruit......


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Witch King of Angmar said:


> From my understanding the "wolfs" are what happens when the geneseed doesn't take properly in a new recruit......


that's the widely accepted canon, yes. It's an interesting concept. those recruits who lack the force of will to fight the "feral" genetic coding, turn into wolves themselves. And clearly, as we've read in Prospero Burns, those who do conquer the geneseed, go on to join one of the most tactically efficient fighting forces in the galaxy. Some, such as myself, would argue they are the smartest as well.

CP


----------



## Words_of_Truth

I was more thinking of who the Rune priest said it was, the main character seemed to just skirt over it.

I would of thought he'd enquire about it more and try get an answer.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Words_of_Truth said:


> I was more thinking of who the Rune priest said it was, the main character seemed to just skirt over it.
> 
> I would of thought he'd enquire about it more and try get an answer.


yeah, you're right. seems he wanted answers to everything else... why not that.

CP


----------



## Angel of Blood

Commissar Ploss said:


> one of the most tactically efficient fighting forces in the galaxy. Some, such as myself, would argue they are the smartest as well.
> 
> CP


 
I completly agree with you on this aswell. They aren't book smart like the Thousand Sons or some of the other Legions, but they are certainly terrifyingly smart when it comes to the art of war in all its aspects

I believe Hawser didn't enquire more on that incident as he probably realised it was just one of those things he should not get involved in.


----------



## Phil73805

Is it now clear why the Thunderwolves unit in the Space Wolf codex is ever so slightly gay? 

Space Wolves playing horsey, really?


----------



## Commissar Ploss

thunder cats! thunder cats! thunder cats! Hooooooooo!!!

CP


----------



## Commissar Ploss

my review of Prospero Burns: http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?t=79198

CP


----------



## Cowlicker16

I only recently got the book and am only like 100 pages into it I think it has been interesting so far, I've been looking foward to this one for so long it will take a truly awful novel for me to hate it. From what I hear most other books in the series is better which is fine I'm pretty dead-set about Fulgrim being the best.

As long as it's better then Nemesis I'm good, it just didn't really get to me in any way


----------



## Giant Fossil Penguin

People get a BL war-porn book and complain they don't want war-porn; they then get a non-war-porn book and there are complaints that nothing happens...
When it comes to the burning of Prospero, what would have the point been in showing it again? We saw everything that needd to be seen, including the famous brawl between two Primarchs, each going at it full-pelt, and then we got the sorcerous ending. For Abnett to have re-hashed that would have removed the ability to actually look at what else was happening there. We get to see how advanced the planning of the warp gods was, how careful and patient they had been, playing Humanity for fools, truths are lies are truths are legends don't exist are truths.
It took me a bit to get through the book (although hype has been making me a bit wary of the last few books- I never want anything ruined for me the way the first _Batman_ film was by other people selling as sooooooo amazing it could never live up to it). But still I really liked the fact that the Wolves are 3d, not this ridiculous Viking-in-space thing that the Ragnar books made them. They have deep thoughts, they have deep motives, they have a deep self-knowledge and precious few illusions about the state of things- which is one way in which they are caught out by the machinations of the Primorial Annihaltor. Come to think of it, when has Chaos ever referred to itself as such? The only ones who have given it that name before are the _Cabal_.
AT the risk of re-igniting the debate with the Unknown Primarch, I think people missed what he was getting at. Why Lorgar falls is well explained. The issue he, and I, have with this is that Lorgar didn't even consider the alternative set out by his Father. It might have been utterly alien to him, revulsed him, repelled him for existence to be so...mundane. But he never gave it a chance, not once. If he had been shown doing it and it becoming clear to him over a period of time (it wouldn't even have to be too long, maybe even a year) that he hadn't been convinced, that he knew that he couldn't betray himself and his convictions, then I would have felt a better ring of authenticity. But, like most of the traitor Primarchs, it does seem that each Primarch when confronted with a particular problem, folds really quickly and turns their back on everything they once held dear. Which is why I hold that each Primarch is rather weak in a particular area of their psyche and that each one was attacked in precisely the correct way, exposing a particular weakness that is completely idiosyncratic, to get this reaction.
_Prospero Burns_ didn't really tell more of the story, rather it deepened it. It showed motivations and nuance where before there was only howling rage and deceit. It shows better the way that the Emperor is, in some ways, a prisoner of his success, having to play politics. To me, it also showed that it wasn't just about Magnus being distrusted and hated, but that his brothers were truly concerened to him. The message was delivered badly and certainly not understood. If left alone then it might have worked out, but it wasn't left alone; it was manipulated and twisted until there could be only one outcome.
It is a watershed book. This is when the triumph ends and the tears start. 

GFP


----------



## KjellThorngaard

I can't really agree. While I love the Wolves, and all the book ahs to say about them, I enjoy the flashbacks, too. In fact, I hope the next series is the Unification Wars. The view of Terra post Old Night is pretty fascinating to me. 

The quote on the top of page 210 in italics is my favorite in the book. It is the essence of the Wolves at war. I'll post it up in the morning after work.


----------



## Words_of_Truth

I think Dan just put his stamp on the book, it's style was similar to the one he uses for Gaunt Ghosts, very complicated full of mystery and very grounded rather than being over the top.


----------



## forkmaster

My wondering is, so it was a chaos daemon in disguise that infiltrated and made Kasper his inside agent and not the Thousand Sons?


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

forkmaster said:


> My wondering is, so it was a chaos daemon in disguise that infiltrated and made Kasper his inside agent and not the Thousand Sons?


From what I can remember yes. Chaos (by _'infiltrating'_ the Vlka Fenryka and the Thousand Sons) made both Legions paranoid in regards to each other and to further establish a form of suspicion and eventual hatred by making them think they were the ones actually infiltrating each other. All part of chaos' plan to remove two of the most powerful Legions out of the proceedings.


----------



## Baltar

[Insert the utterly expected Dan Abnett abuse one should expect from Baltar here]

That is all.

PS: Giving things that already have names, 'Dan Abnett names', such as 'The Fang', so that it ends up being called, well, something else, etc etc, is very unnecessary and fairly (IMO) pretentious. Silly Abnett. Stick to comics, fool. Please don't write one about the space jack russels, though.


----------



## Phoebus

Baltar,

We have to remember, though, that not EVERYTHING is the same ten thousand years ago.

What was Bodrun called, for example, when Alexander the Great sieged it? That was less than 2.5k years ago, never mind approx. 10 millennia.

The Space Wolves are a society, like any other. They would have evolved. That includes their names for places, their titles for people, the way they dressed and acted, etc.

Just my two cents' worth!


----------



## Baron Spikey

Phoebus said:


> Baltar,
> 
> We have to remember, though, that not EVERYTHING is the same ten thousand years ago.
> 
> What was Bodrun called, for example, when Alexander the Great sieged it? That was less than 2.5k years ago, never mind approx. 10 millennia.
> 
> The Space Wolves are a society, like any other. They would have evolved. That includes their names for places, their titles for people, the way they dressed and acted, etc.
> 
> Just my two cents' worth!


Minor fluff point that backs up this argument from Index Astartes- the Space Wolves have over 10,000 years changed their armour colour significantly from a dark, charcoal grey to a bright blue-grey and the Salamanders have done a similar thing from dark green to a much brighter hue (in fact in _Salamander_ they seemed mildly surprised to find out that their current armour colour isn't the same as the original legion's).


----------



## Baltar

Is that a characteristic of the second founding, etc, or is it really simply due to a passing of time?

I'd be inclined to believe the former.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

This is prevalent in pretty much every Legion/Chapter. Due to the passage of time, and significant events, little things tend to change a bit in regards to the armour, actions, and attitudes of the Legions/Chapter in question.

CP


----------



## Brother Subtle

im only 30 pages in... and its been a bloody slog to get that far! far far far too much describing and background detail going on. its hard to feel the book flow when you spend so much time talking about everything.

i hope it gets better.


----------



## ChaplinWhulfgar

Well I just finished the book and while the flash backs are a bit tedious there pay off is huge.


----------



## RuneGuard

ChaplinWhulfgar said:


> Well I just finished the book and while the flash backs are a bit tedious there pay off is huge.


I Completly agree withh you, there are parts, particulalrly flashbacks that make you wonder just what the heck is the point in showing me this past life, but by the end of the novel, it all makes sense, genious writing.:clapping:


----------



## Phoebus

Baltar said:


> Is that a characteristic of the second founding, etc, or is it really simply due to a passing of time?
> 
> I'd be inclined to believe the former.


Time and other types of context, I'd say.

The Luna Wolves became the Sons of Horus who became the Black Legion--due to two defining events. In more recent works, the War Hounds became the World Eaters, a name that was an evolution of a monicker used by Angron's gladiator rebels. Death Guard versus Dusk Raiders, and so on.

With that in mind, it's not tough to imagine the Space Wolves having a name they prefer for themselves or eventually changing the name of their real estate.



Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> 1. That the "underling" characters you describe aren't underlings; they're now established major characters with a lot to do with the Heresy.
> ...
> 4. That the "underling" characters are just as interesting in many stories as the power-players. It's a common theme in fiction. There's a difference between what's necessarily interesting and what's powerful.


I saw this, and wanted to comment on it. Without these basic premises for fiction, masterworks like "The Three Musketeers" would never have existed. Instead, Dumas would have written a dreary novel that centered principally on Richelieu cackling and arching his fingertips like some 17th-century Lex Luthor, the Queen frantically looking for her jewels, and the King gallivanting about and hunting without a clue as to what was what.

At some point, four mysterious swordsmen--theoretically INTEGRAL to the plot--would have arrived with said jewelry, saved the Queen's ass, and prevented war between France and England at a critical juncture in history. But we would have had _no clue whatsoever_ as to how this happened, or the dramatic action surrounding their deeds, because we were focused on the leading men (and woman) of the time.

With that in mind, I am absolutely happy to follow the footsteps of the Garros, Lokens, Argel-Tals, etc., of the Heresy. What the hell else would I have read in "Flight of the Eisenstein"?!? The eighth iteration of Horus and Mortarion yelling "Have you caught those fucking guys yet?!?" to their underlings? :grin:

*Back to the original topic:*

Since this question still seems to be coming up...

*Yes, buy this book.* It is a good book. You will enjoy it. If nothing else, pretend the title of the book is "Prosper Will Burn" instead of "Prospero Burns", and enjoy the ride.


----------



## radicallight

I'm in general agreement that the title Prospero Burns was stretching it a bit. I was on page 340-something before they even got to Prospero. In retrospect, i quite like what Dabbers did with the subject. I know he'd stated in the press that he was going to do something different with the space wolves, and the whole shamanic/pagan theme really appealed to me. Fair enough, it was a bit meandering in places, but i feel that he was trying to push it, in terms of getting the reader to engage with the psychodrama that underpinned the whole tale. The theme's of strategy (the games of chess and Horus revealing his involvement) and identity (the many names of the protagonist) were particularly powerful i thought. 
I think that this book,and the first heretic, introduce a new level of maturity to the series. I feel, that in many ways, the First Heretic was the book that Fulgrim should have been. A Primarch's fall to chaos should be tragic, disturbing and moving, as it was (to a degree) in the 1st heretic. In fulgrim? i couldn't give a toss about the pompous tosspot. It was only the drop site massace at the end that really made it a classic.


----------



## AK74Bob

Well just ordered it, so I'll give my opinion after I'm done reading it...Jesus I hope it doesn't take me as long to read as it did for some of you.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

AK74Bob said:


> Well just ordered it, so I'll give my opinion after I'm done reading it...Jesus I hope it doesn't take me as long to read as it did for some of you.


here's hoping you enjoy it more than i did...

CP


----------



## genesis80

well, pretty much my first post in HO, but i really feel strongly about this, so here goes.

Quite frankly, this was my biggest disappointment of the whole HH series. 

1) The title
This is the most basic criteria. This book should NOT have been called Prospero Burns. I can think of a lot of other more suitable names for it. (for example, when you name a book "The Three Musketeers", you can be fairly certain it will involve and star some musketeers. Not the life story of some scribe following the Musketeers)

2) A reminder of not to "judge a book by its cover"
A Space Wolves picture. They should have gone with the picture of some historian instead. Would have made a lot more sense.

3) Lost touch with majority of readers
I think i can safely say that "most" readers of the HH series are looking for marines, primarchs, the emperor, horus, etc etc. Not devoting half (or more!) of a book to a character that no one cares (or cared) about and no one paid good money to read.

All in all, i feel a lot of people liked legion and the author wanted to duplicate its success here. I did like legion, its only down point was focusing NOT on the alpha legion & instead on "others". This was made MUCH MUCH more worse in prospero burns. I rate this book 3/10. Nemesis, i give a solid 7/10 or 8/10. I cant help but feel really cheated.


----------



## Cowlicker16

I must say I'm about 1/2-3/4 way in and this book has really picked up for me, I enjoy this character and I think these flashbacks have really helped me feel for him. I wasn't sure when I started but this book is quickly becoming really good for me


----------



## Phoebus

That's how I felt.

Once I got past the first 30-40 pages (and especially the first couple of flashback scenes), everything started clicking, the Space Wolves became more and more interesting, and I simply sunk into it.

I think I felt the same way reading "Brothers of the Snake". I was initially put off a bit, but then the Chapter Abnett described was so interesting and different that I bought into it.


----------



## radicallight

There seems to be a Pay off in these books: story and dialogue vs battle porn. I don't think any of the authors have really nailed a satisfying and emotionally in-depth story along side some heart racing combat scenes. Dabbers is close, when bear turned up and fucked up all those Viking dudes, my pulse was banging like his bolter. Y'know, I'm an older reader who has been into 40k since the 1st edition, and I have been waiting for this story to be told for decades. IMO the first heretic was the first (!?) of the series to really satisfy of all levels.


----------



## Angel of Blood

genesis80 said:


> well, pretty much my first post in HO, but i really feel strongly about this, so here goes.
> 
> Quite frankly, this was my biggest disappointment of the whole HH series.
> 
> 1) The title
> This is the most basic criteria. This book should NOT have been called Prospero Burns. I can think of a lot of other more suitable names for it. (for example, when you name a book "The Three Musketeers", you can be fairly certain it will involve and star some musketeers. Not the life story of some scribe following the Musketeers)
> 
> 2) A reminder of not to "judge a book by its cover"
> A Space Wolves picture. They should have gone with the picture of some historian instead. Would have made a lot more sense.
> 
> 3) Lost touch with majority of readers
> I think i can safely say that "most" readers of the HH series are looking for marines, primarchs, the emperor, horus, etc etc. Not devoting half (or more!) of a book to a character that no one cares (or cared) about and no one paid good money to read.
> 
> All in all, i feel a lot of people liked legion and the author wanted to duplicate its success here. I did like legion, its only down point was focusing NOT on the alpha legion & instead on "others". This was made MUCH MUCH more worse in prospero burns. I rate this book 3/10. Nemesis, i give a solid 7/10 or 8/10. I cant help but feel really cheated.


Strange how you give Nemesis a solid 7/8 when it involves round about the same amount of Primarch, and vastly less Astartes. And in no way shape or form advances the plot of the Heresy. 

I still stand by Prospero Burns being a very good book. I still don't like how people will tell others not to bother or give it a terrible rating just because the cover wasn't entirely accurate. The book itself is still excellent, that is if your not reading the Heresy series because you just want more bolter porn set in 30k instead of 40k. I found Kaspers character very interesting, liked him alot and thought Abnett did a very good job of getting a remembrancer into the Vlka Fenryka whilst still conforming to their views on such individuals and giving them a slight twist. He made the Vlka Fenryka quite possibly one of the most interesting Legions active during the Great Crusade and Horus Heresy, up there with the like of the Alpha Legion. I could go on, but i've summed this up in previous posts and most of my views are on the same lines of Phobeus in his review of the book.

In short, i don't need bolter porn, astartes and primarchs everywhere to make a good Heresy book for me. I loved Legion, Mechanicum and Prospero Burns, despite all of their main characters not being Astartes. There is more than enough of the Primarchs and Astartes main characters in the other books and will be many more to come.


----------



## ckcrawford

I totally agree with Angel of Blood. The book contributed to the Heresy in a great way. It did show the Thousand Sons for what they were and also the true purpose and functions of the Space Wolves. 

I think its to easy to say that the book was a disappointment because it wasn't what we expected. I definitely have the same feeling about many books in the heresy. But I try to stick with its contribution to the heresy. And I felt like it revolved around more than just the Space Wolves.

In my previous posts I've basically stated like you that the book was much like _Legion_ with the concept that the book revolved around the mystery of the legion.


----------



## Euphrati

Well, having read Prospero Burns twice now I keep trying to tell myself that I liked it... but being unable to deny the sense of frustration and honest feeling of disappointment.

As an aficionada of the sons of Russ; PB was like going to an aclaimed steakhouse resturant, being told that the head chef himself is preparing your meal, patiently watching as table to your right and left are served a mouth-watering tenderloin (A Thousand Sons) and a gorgeous prime rib (The First Heretic), and, when the server finally sets a beautiful platter down in front of you and lifts off the cover, you find yourself face to face with... a salad. 

An attractive and artfully prepared salad, but a salad none the less and not what you were really hungry for.

Now, don't get me wrong, I liked Prospero Burns... but I didn't _*love it*_ and I think that is the greatest lament I have. I _wanted_ to love it, more so than any other book in the HH set... it was supposed to be about my beloved Wolves for Russ' sake!

I think the greatest failing of PB is Abnett's purposeful choice of viewpoint- as if he went out of his way to deny SW fans the unfettered story of the Sixth Legion seen through the eyes of a true son of Fenris (No matter how ‘accepted’ the main character was, he was _*NOT*_ a Vlka Fenryka) as well as completely snubbing the readers desires for more than an outsider's look at their beloved Primarch, Leman Russ… you know- the ruggedly handsome fellow upon the cover of the book? Something that both Graham McNeill (A Thousand Sons) and Aaron Dembski-Bowden (The First Heretic) seemed to understand and subsequently delivered (yes, there is a note of envy there) to the fans with their recent works.

In the end all I can do is hope that the BL feels sorry for SW fans and throws us a metaphorical bone with a second HH novel that actually features the ‘Vlka Fenryka’. I’m not asking for bolter porn here, but I would really like some red meat to go along with my salad!


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Euphrati said:


> Well, having read Prospero Burns twice now I keep trying to tell myself that I liked it... but being unable to deny the sense of frustration and honest feeling of disappointment.
> 
> As an aficionada of the sons of Russ; PB was like going to an aclaimed steakhouse resturant, being told that the head chef himself is preparing your meal, patiently watching as table to your right and left are served a mouth-watering tenderloin (A Thousand Sons) and a gorgeous prime rib (The First Heretic), and, when the server finally sets a beautiful platter down in front of you and lifts off the cover, you find yourself face to face with... a salad.
> 
> An attractive and artfully prepared salad, but a salad none the less and not what you were really hungry for.
> 
> Now, don't get me wrong, I liked Prospero Burns... but I didn't _*love it*_ and I think that is the greatest lament I have. I _wanted_ to love it, more so than any other book in the HH set... it was supposed to be about my beloved Wolves for Russ' sake!
> 
> I think the greatest failing of PB is Abnett's purposeful choice of viewpoint- as if he went out of his way to deny SW fans the unfettered story of the Sixth Legion seen through the eyes of a true son of Fenris (No matter how ‘accepted’ the main character was, he was _*NOT*_ a Vlka Fenryka) as well as completely snubbing the readers desires for more than an outsider's look at their beloved Primarch, Leman Russ… you know- the ruggedly handsome fellow upon the cover of the book? Something that both Graham McNeill (A Thousand Sons) and Aaron Dembski-Bowden (The First Heretic) seemed to understand and subsequently delivered (yes, there is a note of envy there) to the fans with their recent works.
> 
> In the end all I can do is hope that the BL feels sorry for SW fans and throws us a metaphorical bone with a second HH novel that actually features the ‘Vlka Fenryka’. I’m not asking for bolter porn here, but I would really like some red meat to go along with my salad!


very very very well said. i agree completely. I had all of the exact feelings...except now i want a steak...

CP

+rep


----------



## ckcrawford

The title and the book cover are obviously tools used the sell the book and don't really speak for the book. But I'd relate it to having had the wrong order but getting a better order that you didn't expect. 

I'm surprised you didn't like reading it the second time. I think the only disappointment really is the fact that it wasn't what we really thought it was. So if that was the problem you had with the book, I'm surprised it still bothered you despite the fact you know what the book was about going threw it the second time.

As a Wolves fan myself, I couldn't help but enjoy the view point. The purposeful outlook at the Space Wolves is that you could not really understand one. Its just not possible to have an "animal like" killer trying to act as though he is actually smart, logical, and tactful. It would be really weird to have the wolves trying to defend their legion's reasons for how and why they do things without talking to an outsider. They needed an outsider to look at the wolves starting at the most stereotypical outlook we already had and then slowly learning by the wolves actions and secrets.


----------



## Gree

ckcrawford said:


> I totally agree with Angel of Blood. The book contributed to the Heresy in a great way. It did show the Thousand Sons for what they were


I don't understand how they could have done that when the Thousand Sons barely appeared in the book.



Even the one Thousand Son we saw was actually a daemon in disguise and not actually a Thousand Son.


----------



## vulcan666

thing is with dan abnet is he has got trouble with space marines, finds it hard to relate to them so from his point of view he is trying to make sense, hence we have this hawser bloke, he is there to help both the author and us understand the wolves better in pre heresy times.

yes hawser is boring but i find he does help you to understand better the wovles and why they are disliked a lot. i think it would be harder to get the same effect from the point of view of a wolf, they would see things different as such. 

nemisis is the worst book of the seris, its the only one i wish i had not read, and i will have to say i found first heritic to be amoung the best of the heresy series.


----------



## Angel of Blood

I disagree, Abnett did an amazing job with the Astartes in Horus Rising, truely amazing.


----------



## raider1987

I don't understand all the hate for Nemesis. It had a great set of charactes, unique plot with plenty of action. So what there are few space marines, the assassins are just as cool, and in most cases, more interesting.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Angel of Blood said:


> I disagree, Abnett did an amazing job with the Astartes in Horus Rising, truely amazing.


yeah, the audiobook was top notch too. and i've read/listened to both, so i'm aware of the sections they cut out.

CP


----------



## Euphrati

*wolves*



ckcrawford said:


> The title and the book cover are obviously tools used the sell the book and don't really speak for the book. But I'd relate it to having had the wrong order but getting a better order that you didn't expect.
> 
> I'm surprised you didn't like reading it the second time. I think the only disappointment really is the fact that it wasn't what we really thought it was. So if that was the problem you had with the book, I'm surprised it still bothered you despite the fact you know what the book was about going threw it the second time.


Actually, I did note that I liked it. 


Euphrati said:


> Now, don't get me wrong, I liked Prospero Burns... but I didn't _*love it*_ and I think that is the greatest lament I have. I _wanted_ to love it, more so than any other book in the HH set... it was supposed to be about my beloved Wolves for Russ' sake!





ckcrawford said:


> As a Wolves fan myself, I couldn't help but enjoy the view point. The purposeful outlook at the Space Wolves is that you could not really understand one. Its just not possible to have an "animal like" killer trying to act as though he is actually smart, logical, and tactful. It would be really weird to have the wolves trying to defend their legion's reasons for how and why they do things without talking to an outsider. They needed an outsider to look at the wolves starting at the most stereotypical outlook we already had and then slowly learning by the wolves actions and secrets.


I'm just going to have to say that I utterly disagree with you on this and question if we are speaking of the same legion as that statement is far from the truth and the very stereotype that was pinned upon the Wolves by outsiders!
All we have seen is an outsider's views upon the legion so far in the HH set, who better than a Wolf to feel the distrust and scorn of other legions first hand and the weight that is placed upon the Allfather's executioners?


----------



## ckcrawford

Gree said:


> I don't understand how they could have done that when the Thousand Sons barely appeared in the book.
> 
> 
> 
> Even the one Thousand Son we saw was actually a daemon in disguise and not actually a Thousand Son.


The way they appeared in the book was sufficient enough. The book shows fact by action where in _A Thousand Sons_ its fact with explanation. Two ways both legions show their reasons as to their actions. The opening scene where the Thousand Sons basically jack all the works and finding is a scene that shows how the Thousand Sons were looked upon even without the Wolves. I don't think its just a random scene. The scene had a purpose. Despite having creed by the Emperor to go and seek knowledge, the Thousand Sons wanted it to their selves. 



I thought the Thousand Son that turned into a daemon was possessed. If so, then it just goes to show, that the Thousand Sons had less control than they thought. Even before the breaking of the Imperial Webway 




Angel of Blood said:


> I disagree, Abnett did an amazing job with the Astartes in Horus Rising, truely amazing.


I also agree. Even though Loken during _Horus Rising_ was an almost lost character in the book. Unable to fully be accepted in the Mournival. Dan Abnett made the character relatable to the characters by making him seem more human than the other astartes. We see this with his doubts about the Imperium and his council with Sindermann.



vulcan666 said:


> thing is with dan abnet is he has got trouble with space marines, finds it hard to relate to them so from his point of view he is trying to make sense, hence we have this hawser bloke, he is there to help both the author and us understand the wolves better in pre heresy times.


Thats a tricky thing. Space marines for the most part should have completely different personalities than human beings. Dan Abnett seems to be making a more realistic approach to the astartes. The Thousand Sons, Emperor's Children, and Word Bearers may have been easier to write in the eyes of the astartes due to the fact that they were flawed in one form or another.

For example, ADB's description of the Word Bearers during the beginning of the novel before they were disgraced by the Emperor and the Ultramarines, depicts them a little more high and mighty. Then they revert to more human like traits after they are disgraced. 

The Emperor's Children and Thousand Sons try to seek perfection become imperfect in their ways of obtaining them, so they also develop human like traits to make the reader understand them better.



raider1987 said:


> I don't understand all the hate for Nemesis. It had a great set of charactes, unique plot with plenty of action. So what there are few space marines, the assassins are just as cool, and in most cases, more interesting.


I'm not going to disagree with you. After all, your opinion is yours to keep. But from what I and what I've seen other people saying about their dislike with _Nemesis_, is that the failed attempted assasinations don't really play that much of a roll in the heresy as a whole. Both Malcador and Dorn are very important characters, but nothing they did in the book really changed the course of things.


----------



## ckcrawford

Euphrati said:


> I'm just going to have to say that I utterly disagree with you on this and question if we are speaking of the same legion as that statement is far from the truth and the very stereotype that was pinned upon the Wolves by outsiders!
> All we have seen is an outsider's views upon the legion so far in the HH set, who better than a Wolf to feel the distrust and scorn of other legions first hand and the weight that is placed upon the Allfather's executioners?


I don't think you understand what I'm saying. The wolves live and try to depict themselves in that stereotypical fashion. They _live_ that stereotypical fashion. The truth behind them is not something the Wolves share openly with one another. Its pretty much a mutual understanding of their true motives. It requires an outsider for the wolves to open up and purposely show who they really are. And they did it on purpose too. The wolves explain why they were so open with the outsider.

And I'm not sure its really an "outsider's view" literally. Its a first hand account of his experiences. He's there with the wolves and you get actual communication and experiences between them. You make it sound as though the outsider simply wrote the book. 

Dan Abnett purposely wrote it the way he did because its next to impossible to relate the mentality of the wolves to our mentalities. Even the main character of the novel is left in awe and mystery to certain aspects to the legion.


----------



## genesis80

ckcrawford said:


> I don't think you understand what I'm saying. The wolves live and try to depict themselves in that stereotypical fashion. They _live_ that stereotypical fashion. The truth behind them is not something the Wolves share openly with one another. Its pretty much a mutual understanding of their true motives. It requires an outsider for the wolves to open up and purposely show who they really are. And they did it on purpose too. The wolves explain why they were so open with the outsider.


maybe instead of taking a human historian, he could have used a "newly inducted" space wolf instead. There were a few of them in the book which i felt were NOT explored enough and I had to slog through reading what was essentially a "memoirs of a historian" novel



ckcrawford said:


> I'm not going to disagree with you. After all, your opinion is yours to keep. But from what I and what I've seen other people saying about their dislike with _Nemesis_, is that the failed attempted assasinations don't really play that much of a roll in the heresy as a whole. Both Malcador and Dorn are very important characters, but nothing they did in the book really changed the course of things.


I felt the assassination attempts were an important aspect to understand about HH. That not all the attempts at stopping horus were limited to feeding space marines into a meat grinder. How people can say it didnt play much of a role in the heresy is beyond me. It was directly targeted at HORUS and was aimed at stopping his "heresy". Much less misleading than some other books i'd care to name.

* aside from that, assassins are cooler than space marines and a LOT cooler than a historian.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

as he's told, many times. "There are some things best left unknown." and "there is such thing as knowing too much."

CP


----------



## Commissar Ploss

genesis80 said:


> * aside from that, assassins are cooler than space marines and a LOT cooler than a historian.


he's not so much an historian, but a pawn, culled since birth in the image of what the Thousand Sons wanted him to be. He is a slave to his legacy, not mearly an historian but also a unknowing pawn and conduit.

CP


----------



## Gree

ckcrawford said:


> The way they appeared in the book was sufficient enough.


For you maybe, _defintely_ not for me.



ckcrawford said:


> The book shows fact by action where in _A Thousand Sons_ its fact with explanation.


A pair of brief scenes without any kind of deep detail is not something that completelty defines a Legion for what they really are. Those two scenes could easily be interpreted in any number of ways.



ckcrawford said:


> Two ways both legions show their reasons as to their actions. The opening scene where the Thousand Sons basically jack all the works .


No, we don't even know who the Thousand Son is or what his complete purpose was in the first.



ckcrawford said:


> and finding is a scene that shows how the Thousand Sons were looked upon even without the Wolves. I don't think its just a random scene. The scene had a purpose.


You can't really use that as an example. What the Imperium _thinks_ of a Legion is different than what a Legion actually _is_. Case in point the Wolves themselves.



ckcrawford said:


> Despite having creed by the Emperor to go and seek knowledge, the Thousand Sons wanted it to their selves.


They were? That was their purpose by the Emperor? Going by A Thousand Sons they where the only Legion who was going for knowledge by their own will, not by any orders from the Emperor. It was the _opinion_ of a Space Wolf Longfang that the Emperor created his Legions for a purpose.

Prospero Burns does not show the Thousand Sons for ''what they really are'' any more than A Thousand Sons shows the Space Wolves for ''what they really are''. Both books have their own biases and contridictions (Which I believe when the books where first being advertised, was deliberate). But the Thousand Sons actions where almost completely shown from an outsider point of view and not explained or defined very well at all.



ckcrawford said:


> I thought the Thousand Son that turned into a daemon was possessed. If so, then it just goes to show, that the Thousand Sons had less control than they thought. Even before the breaking of the Imperial Webway




No, read the book again. The daemon even states that the real Amon was with his Primarch the entire time.




Commissar Ploss said:


> he's not so much an historian, but a pawn, culled since birth in the image of what the Thousand Sons wanted him to be. He is a slave to his legacy, not mearly an historian but also a unknowing pawn and conduit.
> 
> CP




Except the Thousand Sons never sent him. It was the daemon at the end who pretty much admits to doing so.


----------



## RuneGuard

I thought that the thousand sons appearance troughout *Prospero Burns* was more than enough, however, what i did not understand was why was the scene from a *thousand sons (*where they draw first blood against the wolves) was never brought up?
I know that it was fyf that was present at the time, but a transgression like that surely would of been brought to Hawsers attention.


----------



## ckcrawford

Gree said:


> For you maybe, _defintely_ not for me.


 Oh well.




Gree said:


> A pair of brief scenes without any kind of deep detail is not something that completelty defines a Legion for what they really are. Those two scenes could easily be interpreted in any number of ways.


No, we don't even know who the Thousand Son is or what his complete purpose was in the first.



Gree said:


> You can't really use that as an example. What the Imperium _thinks_ of a Legion is different than what a Legion actually _is_. Case in point the Wolves themselves.


Sure you can. Space Wolves will always be savages in their own right. But not stupid. What we can tell about the Thousand Sons is that they had their own agenda about things. And in some cases like this one, it pretty much took away from the purpose of the Imperium. The researchers where working for the Emperor but then the Thousand Sons took away their findings for their own purposes. Now, for speculation, thats different. Whether it was for good or bad means is different.



Gree said:


> They were? That was their purpose by the Emperor? Going by A Thousand Sons they where the only Legion who was going for knowledge by their own will, not by any orders from the Emperor. It was the _opinion_ of a Space Wolf Longfang that the Emperor created his Legions for a purpose.


And they were condemned for it. It was not their purpose, in all respects. They were a legion gifted with psychic abilities and knowledge. But they were created to rule and invade for the Imperium. Not to be their own researchers. 

Longfang is a character that identifies it, but even Dan Abnett confirms this.




Gree said:


> No, read the book again. The daemon even states that the real Amon was with his Primarch the entire time.


I don't think he was. Because the daemon was obliterated back into the warp. What I do know about daemons, is that they need mortal flesh in order to manifest themselves. I'm pretty sure Amon was a possessed Thousand Son. If he wasn't, no one would have recognized him and would have let him into Nikea. The Thousand Sons isn't a big enough legion to not realize a different marine.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Afraid this is where i will agree with Gree for once. 

He was not a possessed Thousand Son but a deamon, one that had been manipulating them, Hawser and the Rout for decades, centuries even


----------



## Gree

ckcrawford said:


> Sure you can. Space Wolves will always be savages in their own right. .


No, the point of Prospero Burns was that they acted as savages in order to furfill their role. The image presented to the outside Imperium is something deliberately done.

A Thousand Sons shows them as brutish barbarians. Prospero Burns presents a different picture of much more intelligent Wolves who act like that deliberately as a show. Hawser even talks to one of the wolves about it.



ckcrawford said:


> What we can tell about the Thousand Sons is that they had their own agenda about things.


No, that's what the Imperium _interprets_ them as, like with the Wolves.



ckcrawford said:


> No, we don't even know who the Thousand Son is or what his complete purpose was in the first.


I know, that's why we can't judge it completely and we can interpret it in any number of ways.



ckcrawford said:


> And in some cases like this one, it pretty much took away from the purpose of the Imperium. The researchers where working for the Emperor but then the Thousand Sons took away their findings for their own purposes. Now, for speculation, thats different. Whether it was for good or bad means is different.


No, that's what presented from an outsider's view. In A Thousand Sons the Sons want to use that knowledge for the Imperium. In fact a non Thousand Son even gets acess to some of their own records in the book.

Again, that's how the Imperium views them, not what's nessecarily true.



ckcrawford said:


> And they were condemned for it.


No, they where condemmed for using psychic powers. Re-read the Emperor's proclamation at Nikea.



ckcrawford said:


> They were a legion gifted with psychic abilities and knowledge. But they were created to rule and invade for the Imperium. Not to be their own researchers.


They do rule and invade for the Imperium, however they also do research when they can, saving works from destruction.



ckcrawford said:


> Longfang is a character that identifies it,


No, in Longfang's biased opinion he identifes it. This is from an Astartes of a Legion that already distrusts the Sons due to outside manipulation. His word is inherantly biased against the Sons.



ckcrawford said:


> but even Dan Abnett confirms this.


Where does Abnett confirm it? Keep in mind Abnnet and McNeill have deliberately said that both novels are skewed for the viewpoint of each Legion.



ckcrawford said:


> I don't think he was.


Actually the daemon flat out confirms it himself. He even shapeshifts into a vareity of different forms to demonstrate.

In Prospero Burns the daemon is obliberated at the end of the battle and sent back to the warp. In A Thousand Sons, Amon is alive and well with Ahriman at the Pyramid of Photep at the end of the battle.



ckcrawford said:


> What I do know about daemons, is that they need mortal flesh in order to manifest themselves.


No, some daemons do. It's possible for certain daemons to manifest from the warp by themselves, hard, but not impossible.

Alternately he could have possessed a body and then shapeshifted it, like he demonstrated to Hawser.



ckcrawford said:


> I'm pretty sure Amon was a possessed Thousand Son. If he wasn't, no one would have recognized him and would have let him into Nikea. The Thousand Sons isn't a big enough legion to not realize a different marine.


The daemon can _shapeshift_. He even demonstrates this to Hawser by changing into Navid, Horus and Amon.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Gree said:


> No, the point of Prospero Burns was that they acted as savages in order to furfill their role. The image presented to the outside Imperium is something deliberately done.
> 
> A Thousand Sons shows them as brutish barbarians. Prospero Burns presents a different picture of much more intelligent Wolves who act like that deliberately as a show. Hawser even talks to one of the wolves about it.


i agree and disagree. they don't act as savages at all, ever. Their ruthlessness is often misconstrued as savagery. But never truly an act of savagery.




> No, that's what the Imperium _interprets_ them as, like with the Wolves.


But who doesn't really have their own agenda about things.



> No, they where condemmed for using psychic powers. Re-read the Emperor's proclamation at Nikea.


This is untrue. Your attempt to refute ckcrawford's words is, in itself, refutable. All Legions use psychic powers. The Thousand Sons were condemned for gross misuse of their psychic powers as well as dabbling in the arcane uses of black arts. Not for the base use of the psychic powers themselves. 

Although the counter argument is this: The Emperor's hypocrisy is flagrant during the Nikea proclamation. Condemning the use of strong psychic powers while he himself is a overwhelmingly powerful psyker. To condemn the alleged "abuses" of psychic ability by Magnus, and then allow for the inclusion of Librarian contingents in the Legiones Astartes, is a highly hypocritical ruling. As well as Magnus' final use of the "dark arts" for the Imperium's benefit being misconstrued as a rouse to trick the Emperor (Using his strong psychic mind to send a message directly to the Emperor warning that Horus, his most beloved son, would betray him. Therefor proving to the rest of us that Magnus' intentions were always for the benefit of the Imperium, and never for the benefit of himself alone. Although, being the pious and loving/humble/trusting son that he was, Magnus accepted his father's ruling and did now choose to appeal it. Although, had he chose to, he would have probably skirted a lot of the problems he encountered later on...i.e. the destruction of his Legion stronghold etc.). 



...skip skip skip...




> The daemon can _shapeshift_. He even demonstrates this to Hawser by changing into Navid, Horus and Amon.


you realize that the daemon only shapeshifts within the easily malleable confines of Hawsers mind/dreams. He does not physically manifest within the bonds of the flesh and blood world. EXCEPT whilst in the meatsack of another Astartes, i.e. the changing into a giant dog/wolf thing in the woods.

CP


----------



## Gree

Commissar Ploss said:


> But who doesn't really have their own agenda about things.


But the Sons really don't ethier, as seen by A Thousand Sons.



Commissar Ploss said:


> All Legions use psychic powers.


Actually no. the Death Guard did not (Mortarion himself even notes this) the Fists and the Raven Guard where recorded in Collected Visions as not.



Commissar Ploss said:


> The Thousand Sons were condemned for gross misuse of their psychic powers as well as dabbling in the arcane uses of black arts. Not for the base use of the psychic powers themselves.


No, that was in the Index Astartes. In the Horus Heresy novels and Collected Visions it's all psychic powers and the Librarian issue in general.



Commissar Ploss said:


> Although the counter argument is this: The Emperor's hypocrisy is flagrant during the Nikea proclamation. Condemning the use of strong psychic powers while he himself is a overwhelmingly powerful psyker. To condemn the alleged "abuses" of psychic ability by Magnus, and then allow for the inclusion of Librarian contingents in the Legiones Astartes, is a highly hypocritical ruling.


But he did not. Re-read A Thousand Sons. The Emperor says that _all _Librarians must be disbanded and all Astartes may not use psychic powers. He did not allow the inclusion of Librarian contingents after Nikea.

A Thousand Sons pg 355.



> ''Henceforth, it is to be my will that no Legion will maintain a Librarius department. All it's warriors and instructors must be returned to their battle companies and never again employ psychic powers.''





Commissar Ploss said:


> you realize that the daemon only shapeshifts within the easily malleable confines of Hawsers mind/dreams. He does not physically manifest within the bonds of the flesh and blood world. EXCEPT whilst in the meatsack of another Astartes, i.e. the changing into a giant dog/wolf thing in the woods.


No, where does it state that in the novel?

And even if he could only shapeshift while in a fleash and blood body, he won't need an Astartes body to do it.


----------



## ckcrawford

Gree said:


> No, the point of Prospero Burns was that they acted as savages in order to furfill their role. The image presented to the outside Imperium is something deliberately done.


They lived as savages. No matter how you look at it. Was it just a show, yes. But there is no instance where they revert to any other way of life. They lived as barbarians. Eating raw meets, and drinking liquids which could be most related to fuel. They only wear pelts and their armor. They are pretty much the only legion to wear their hair long. They were almost not joking when they thought about eating Hawser. They literally bite their enemies fricken faces off. They are savages. Again its a show. But they are living it. To refer to them to something else is not possible. But by no means does that make them a blood crazed legion who lacks intelligence though. I believe it is people's lack of understanding and stereotype of animals in which legions like the Thousand Sons think they are stupid and relate that savagery nature to being stupid. But it is not the case.



Gree said:


> A Thousand Sons shows them as brutish barbarians. Prospero Burns presents a different picture of much more intelligent Wolves who act like that deliberately as a show. Hawser even talks to one of the wolves about it.


I got this. 



Gree said:


> No, that's what presented from an outsider's view. In A Thousand Sons the Sons want to use that knowledge for the Imperium. In fact a non Thousand Son even gets access to some of their own records in the book.


At least thats what they said. Unfortunately the only action, which could also be interpreted differently is the breaking of the Imperial Webway. The scene showed that their agenda was their's alone. They stole imperial findings for themselves. Even in Thousand Sons with all their explanation over why they were right to seek out the ultimate sorceries, there was almost no evidence that their knowledge spread throughout the Imperium. Now the Librarian practices can be seen as something. Though it could be a more diplomatic tool by Magnus for support.




Gree said:


> They do rule and invade for the Imperium, however they also do research when they can, saving works from destruction.


Can't deny what they do. It is true. You could even go as far and say that their works were much more spectacular than the rest of the Imperium. However, like Logar being condemned for his zeal, and that fact that it wasn't his job. The same can be said about Magnus. They do rule and conquer, thats there job. To spread and conquer the forbidden is not their work. Let alone, they were not created to be adding detail.



Gree said:


> No, in Longfang's biased opinion he identifes it. This is from an Astartes of a Legion that already distrusts the Sons due to outside manipulation. His word is inherantly biased against the Sons.
> 
> Where does Abnett confirm it? Keep in mind Abnnet and McNeill have deliberately said that both novels are skewed for the viewpoint of each Legion.


Oh. You probably haven't seen the little preview of the books. Dan Abnett confirms it. You can youtube it if you'd like. Its nothing new really.



Gree said:


> Actually the daemon flat out confirms it himself. He even shapeshifts into a vareity of different forms to demonstrate.
> 
> In Prospero Burns the daemon is obliberated at the end of the battle and sent back to the warp. In A Thousand Sons, Amon is alive and well with Ahriman at the Pyramid of Photep at the end of the battle.



Well thats interesting. I know he is a daemon. And from the sound of it, he sounded like a unclean one. But I don't understand how he was able to manifest itself.


----------



## Gree

ckcrawford said:


> At least thats what they said. Unfortunately the only action, which could also be interpreted differently is the breaking of the Imperial Webway..


Except that was pure accident.



ckcrawford said:


> The scene showed that their agenda was their's alone.


How so? Magnus seemed pretty detirmined to warn the Emperor of Horus's treachery.



ckcrawford said:


> Even in Thousand Sons with all their explanation over why they were right to seek out the ultimate sorceries, there was almost no evidence that their knowledge spread throughout the Imperium.


That's because the Imperium did't want it. They where ignorant and distrusted the Sons because of their powers. Lemuel even muses wheter the Imperium really is as enlightened as it claims.

And we know that at least the Remanbrancers of the Sons got the chance to view the knowledge.



ckcrawford said:


> However, like Logar being condemned for his zeal, and that fact that it wasn't his job. The same can be said about Magnus.


Except Magnus was not condemmed for researching things. There is nothing as far as I can read that says that Magnus was chatised for being slow or not focusing on his job.



ckcrawford said:


> They do rule and conquer, thats there job. To spread and conquer the forbidden is not their work. Let alone, they were not created to be adding detail.


Except that doesn't appear to be a problem at all. The issue during Nikea was not knowledge, but psychic powers.




ckcrawford said:


> Oh. You probably haven't seen the little preview of the books. Dan Abnett confirms it. You can youtube it if you'd like. Its nothing new really.


I have actually, (I've even read the author's notes on Barnes and Noble and on their blogs for both books) and I still stand by my opinion.



ckcrawford said:


> Well thats interesting. I know he is a daemon. And from the sound of it, he sounded like a unclean one. But I don't understand how he was able to manifest itself.


He could posses someone and then shapeshift the body. It does't have to be an Astartes, he shapeshifts freely from a Primarch, to a normal human, to an Astartes, to a daemon.


----------



## ckcrawford

Gree said:


> But the Sons really don't ethier, as seen by A Thousand Sons.


I disagree. I think the book covered it up a little. The Commisiar is right when he says the other legions and primarchs have their own agenda about things. They all wanted to out due one another. However, how did the Council of Nikea come up though? Do you remember? This furthers my point. Magnus and his Thousand Sons were going to go out of their way to get what they wanted. They stood up and fought against another legion and used those abilities to get what they wanted. This is how I saw it. Magnus was more concerned about obtaining those books and knowledge in that library than stepping down and letting the Wolves just sack it. Of course I'm stating that unbiasly. Both can be blamed for the incident. But every case needs a hero. If both books show that both primarchs have the ability to reason with one another, it brings up the intentions in which brought up the conflict. Who's intentions were selfish and who's were in best interest to the Imperium.





Gree said:


> No, where does it state that in the novel?
> 
> And even if he could only shapeshift while in a fleash and blood body, he won't need an Astartes body to do it.


Well thats not the point. The point is that the daemon possessed someone to manifest itself in he Material World. Its more of a daemon fact that can be found in the Chaos Daemons Codex. Unless their was a warp rift close by to feed the daemon energy, I'm not sure if their is any other possible way to stay alive for a daemon. 

I thought the daemon was just trying to manifest itself amongst the psychically talented; which they usually do. Amon was just a gifted Thousand Son swimming too far into the warp and got possessed. It would make sense, because astartes can better withstand daemons in their bodies than a regular human. Normal human beings almost always instantly explode and become daemons. A space marine provides with a better host to hide itself.


----------



## ckcrawford

Gree said:


> Except Magnus was not condemmed for researching things. There is nothing as far as I can read that says that Magnus was chatised for being slow or not focusing on his job.


Except he was. Remember, Magnus was able to research the restricted and went way out of line. So yes, he was condemned. By restricted of course I mean the warp and its forbidden secrets. The Imperium and the Emperor forbid him to use it. Now Magnus may have not been "slowed down" by his research, to the extent of Logar, but he did interfere with the rest of the Imperial Agenda. If the Emperor wanted something destroyed (obviously for a reason) then the Thousand Sons would save it. If other sections of the Imperium had something (like in that early scene in _Prospero Burns_) in which it was their job to research and investigate, the Thousand Sons would take it for themselves. Despite the fact that that research was ordered by the Emperor to research it and the Thousand Sons had no right to take it.

That was the problem with the Thousand Sons. That early scene was perfect. Because, that scene would be shown and pushed into a greater conflict before the Council of Nikea where Russ would persecute Magnus for his actions. The Thousand Sons however, deal with another Astartes Legion who would not back down. The Thousand Sons are almost bullying the rest of the Imperium to get their means. Basically that scene in _A Thousand Sons_, the Thousand Sons just picked the wrong adversaries of the Emperor to fuck with.



Gree said:


> Except that doesn't appear to be a problem at all. The issue during Nikea was not knowledge, but psychic powers.


It is knowledge. No one can truly understand the warp. That much is true. But you can learn some aspects to it. So yes it was a problem. Even some of the artifacts and alien knowledge led to this. Thats why the Emperor was so determined to get rid of so much of it.




Gree said:


> I have actually, (I've even read the author's notes on Barnes and Noble and on their blogs for both books) and I still stand by my opinion.


Wait, so you just don't believe him?



Gree said:


> He could posses someone and then shapeshift the body. It does't have to be an Astartes, he shapeshifts freely from a Primarch, to a normal human, to an Astartes, to a daemon.


Okay so I was right. I thought people were saying it was some random daemon that appeared from the blue.


----------



## Gree

ckcrawford said:


> However, how did the Council of Nikea come up though? Do you remember? .


Yes, it was about the Librarian issue, it's quite clearly explained in A Thousand Sons.



ckcrawford said:


> This furthers my point. Magnus and his Thousand Sons were going to go out of their way to get what they wanted.


They did? Where? As far as I've read most if not all of the thousand Sons actions coincided with their battles.



ckcrawford said:


> They stood up and fought against another legion and used those abilities to get what they wanted.


No, they defended themselves against fellow Astartes with a clear intent to kill.



ckcrawford said:


> I thought the daemon was just trying to manifest itself amongst the psychically talented; which they usually do. Amon was just a gifted Thousand Son swimming too far into the warp and got possessed. It would make sense, because astartes can better withstand daemons in their bodies than a regular human. Normal human beings almost always instantly explode and become daemons. A space marine provides with a better host to hide itself.


Except it's not Amon. The daemon even states so clearly that Amon was with his primarch the entire time. Later in the battle Amon is alive and well with Ahriman when the daemon is banished back to the warp.

And no, it's perfectly possible for a daemon to posses a normal human just fine. They did so before the Astartes where created and they do so later on. They don't ''almost instantly explode'' when they get possesed. I've never read that.



ckcrawford said:


> Except he was.


He was? Where was this in the books? I don't ever recall reading it.



ckcrawford said:


> Remember, Magnus was able to research the restricted and went way out of line. So yes, he was condemned.


Where was he condemmed again? I recall the issue at Nikea being about psychic powers. Malcador even states it flat out.



ckcrawford said:


> The Imperium and the Emperor forbid him to use it.


Where was this again? I recall the Emperor forbidding his Legion to use psychic powers, there is nothing in Prospero Burns or A Thousand Sons about the Emperor forbidding research before Nikea.



ckcrawford said:


> If the Emperor wanted something destroyed (obviously for a reason) then the Thousand Sons would save it.


I don't ever recall anything like that happening. The Thousand Sons saved some stuff from the Wolves at Shrike, but there was absolutely no indication that the Emperor ordered their destruction.



ckcrawford said:


> Despite the fact that that research was ordered by the Emperor to research it and the Thousand Sons had no right to take it.


I don't recall the Emperor ever saying that.



ckcrawford said:


> That was the problem with the Thousand Sons. That early scene was perfect. Because, that scene would be shown and pushed into a greater conflict before the Council of Nikea where Russ would persecute Magnus for his actions. The Thousand Sons however, deal with another Astartes Legion who would not back down. The Thousand Sons are almost bullying the rest of the Imperium to get their means. Basically that scene in _A Thousand Sons_, the Thousand Sons just picked the wrong adversaries of the Emperor to fuck with.


Bullying?

The Wolves attacked the Sons first and Magnus deliberatly told his Sons not to kill the Wolves and instead to go on the _defensive_. I have no idea how that's considered bullying.

Ahriman asks Wyrdmake for his knowledge and even _shares_ some of his with him.



ckcrawford said:


> It is knowledge. No one can truly understand the warp. That much is true. But you can learn some aspects to it. So yes it was a problem. Even some of the artifacts and alien knowledge led to this. Thats why the Emperor was so determined to get rid of so much of it.


Except that's not what Nikea was about. It was about Librarians and the use of psychic powers. It ends with the Emperor restricting _all_ psychic powers and everything.

There is nothing in the books about the Emperor forbidding research before Nikea and even Nikea was focused mor eon the usage of psychic powers.



ckcrawford said:


> Wait, so you just don't believe him?


No, I just don't believe your _interpretation_ of it.



ckcrawford said:


> Okay so I was right. I thought people were saying it was some random daemon that appeared from the blue.


No, you claimed it was Amon. I pointed out another possibility and then I pointed out the multiple scenes in both books that proved that it was not Amon. Then I suggested the possibility but I never confirmed it.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

this is quite a circular argument isn't it? lol carry on. 

CP


----------



## Angel of Blood

I'm again inclined to agree with Gree on most points presented here. 

The Council of Nikea was about the Librarian Crisis, the edict the Emperor proclaims clearly states no psychic powers are to be used from then on. He mentioned nothing about banning the Legions from gathering knowledge, true if said knowledge fell under the advancement of psychic powers category, then of course they aren't allowed. But the Sons wanted knowledge in all forms and aspects, not purely psychic advancement, so they were still perfectly free to be able to gather knowledge on other subjects.

In regards to the deamon, it had definetly not possessed Amon, for one he is accounted for as preparing Magnus ritual for the duration of the Burning and there really is no way he could have been destroyed by the Rout and then managed to somehow ressurect himself to be in the Temple later on. The deamon was merely taking on guises of any individuals useful in furthering its own objective, such as Amon, Horus or Navid. It could have possessed any random Son, Prospero Spireguard or civilian. But i am inclined to believe it was a able to manifest itself without needing to possess something, as it is clearly a very powerful deamon with one of the most important objectives of all the agents and deamons Chaos employed to bring about the Heresy.

Although i will agree that the Thousand Sons clearly had their own agendas. All the Legions did to certain degrees. The Thousand Sons were obsessed with gathering knowledge by any means, even as said willing to stand off and potentially fight another Legion(and they would of without the Urziens intervention) than let some ultimately unimportant information be destroyed by the Vlka Fenryka. True the Rout may have attacked first, but they could very easily have just let the information to be destroyed. I find their willingness to fight another Legion quite disturbing just to gain some more Xenos info.

They were also clearly spying on the Vlka Fenryka for their own reasons (as were the Rout i know) which is an agenda in itself.

I for one still find the Sons to be the most arrogant of all the Legions and ultimately brought about their own downfall because of their supreme arrogance and opinion of superiority over their fellow Legions.


----------



## FORTHELION

BULLSHIT! i smell hypocritical bullshit on this thread. 
How can anyone in their right mind think this book was genious. (And there have been a few who have used that exact word)

I cant help but feeling that people want to love this book because it was written by Dan Abnett, and they have convinced themselves that they loved it.

Lets face fact here if the book had to have been written by Goto or Swallow it would be condemned as an utter failure.

Descent of Angels was condemned because it was about the primarch growing up and give a great account of actually how the Dark Angels legion operates. I cant see the difference in that book and prospero burns other than the name of the author. Both books concentrate on the inner workings of the legions, one is hailed and the other condemned.

I rest my case.


----------



## Baltar

FORTHELION said:


> BULLSHIT! i smell hypocritical bullshit on this thread.
> How can anyone in their right mind think this book was genious. (And there have been a few who have used that exact word)
> 
> I cant help but feeling that people want to love this book because it was written by Dan Abnett, and they have convinced themselves that they loved it.
> 
> Lets face fact here if the book had to have been written by Goto or Swallow it would be condemned as an utter failure.
> 
> Descent of Angels was condemned because it was about the primarch growing up and give a great account of actually how the Dark Angels legion operates. I cant see the difference in that book and prospero burns other than the name of the author. Both books concentrate on the inner workings of the legions, one is hailed and the other condemned.
> 
> I rest my case.


Absolutely perfect post. Completely agree. +rep coming.

I am glad that someone else is finally seeing sense on this forum.

Let's try to end the furious anal pleasuring of Dan Abnett.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Wow, you two really are constructive. The fact that the two books the two books you compared aren't even remotely similar. 

So let's get this straight. Descent of Angels:
- Primarch growing up
- Life on Caliban before the Imperium found it
- Following a recruit around on joining one of the knightly orders and his progression though it
- towards the end of the book showing his transformation to an Astartes and how things have changed
- Showing how the rift between the Legion began
- Doesn't really show anything we didn't know about how the Legion operates
- Doesn't reveal anything about the Heresy we didn't already know really or change anything

Now Prospero Burns
- Showing a rembrancer being intigrated into the Vlka Fenryka
- Showing the inner workings of a Legion, how they really operate, and how they don't conform to the way other Legions work
- Shows the real reasons between why the Thousand Sons and Wolves rivalry really happened
- Reveals a long and intricate twist and plot chaos had planned for a long time

But yes, i can totally see how they are the same book by different authors. How about next time you try and properly justify your reasons instead of just spouting out some random Abnett hate. 

Oh of course theres also the fact that Horus Rising, Fulgrim, Legion, Thousand Sons, The First Heretic are all also books that your words _"concentrate on the inner workings of the legions"_ so by your reasoning these are all the same as Descent of Angels aswell and i could argue are only praised because they were written by Graham Mcniell and ADB.


----------



## World Eater XII

FORTHELION said:


> BULLSHIT! i smell hypocritical bullshit on this thread.
> How can anyone in their right mind think this book was genious. (And there have been a few who have used that exact word)
> 
> I cant help but feeling that people want to love this book because it was written by Dan Abnett, and they have convinced themselves that they loved it.
> 
> Lets face fact here if the book had to have been written by Goto or Swallow it would be condemned as an utter failure.
> 
> Descent of Angels was condemned because it was about the primarch growing up and give a great account of actually how the Dark Angels legion operates. I cant see the difference in that book and prospero burns other than the name of the author. Both books concentrate on the inner workings of the legions, one is hailed and the other condemned.
> 
> I rest my case.


Totally agree with this too, ive lurked on the thread for awhile and, yeah, opinion summed up above.

Apart from im not a fan of DoA anyways.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Angel of Blood said:


> Wow, you two really are constructive. The fact that the two books the two books you compared aren't even remotely similar.
> 
> So let's get this straight. Descent of Angels:
> - Primarch growing up
> - Life on Caliban before the Imperium found it
> - Following a recruit around on joining one of the knightly orders and his progression though it
> - towards the end of the book showing his transformation to an Astartes and how things have changed
> - Showing how the rift between the Legion began
> - Doesn't really show anything we didn't know about how the Legion operates
> - Doesn't reveal anything about the Heresy we didn't already know really or change anything
> 
> Now Prospero Burns
> - Showing a rembrancer being intigrated into the Vlka Fenryka
> - Showing the inner workings of a Legion, how they really operate, and how they don't conform to the way other Legions work
> - Shows the real reasons between why the Thousand Sons and Wolves rivalry really happened
> - Reveals a long and intricate twist and plot chaos had planned for a long time
> 
> But yes, i can totally see how they are the same book by different authors. How about next time you try and properly justify your reasons instead of just spouting out some random Abnett hate.
> 
> Oh of course theres also the fact that Horus Rising, Fulgrim, Legion, Thousand Sons, The First Heretic are all also books that your words _"concentrate on the inner workings of the legions"_ so by your reasoning these are all the same as Descent of Angels aswell and i could argue are only praised because they were written by Graham Mcniell and ADB.


True story.



FORTHELION said:


> Descent of Angels was condemned because it was about the primarch growing up and give a great account of actually how the Dark Angels legion operates. I cant see the difference in that book and prospero burns other than the name of the author. Both books concentrate on the inner workings of the legions, one is hailed and the other condemned.
> 
> I rest my case.


The sheer amount of depth and character the _Vlka Fenryka_ were given in _Prospero Burns_ far outweighs the amount the First Legion were given in _Descent of Angels_. _Descent_ was a total flop in that regard.


----------



## FORTHELION

@ Angel of blood.
how can u say there was no info on the inner workings of the Dark Angels. I suggest you go back and read the book again.

It shows us where the inner circle comes from and where Cypher origionated from, and why the lion is so paranoid because he knew the planet was tainted, which Ultimately led to him sending back the Caliban Dark Angels from the Crusade. Oh and i almost forgot it also showed us why the Lion and luther fell out after Luther became jealous and nearly let the bomb go off and kill the lion. Most of these points are still big players in 40k today.
Especially Cypher as no one knows his agenda and is debated quite regularly on these threads.
Yeah your probably right, was a wate of a book with no info whatsoever.

IMO prospero burns was an ok book nothing special, revealed very little about the heresey that we didnt already know.

I usually like Dan Abnetts work. Ravener was really good, legion was ok as was prospero burns, and horus riseing was fucking emmence.

I just think there is a big Abnett band wagon that every one has jumped on. If people would only just say the book was ok and not GENIUS. Come on GENIUS? I dont think so. Now a thousand sons that was fucking genius closely followed by the first heretic and fulgrim and horus riseing.


@child of the emperor i totally agree with you that descent of Angels wasnt a great book. As i think prospero burns wasnt a great book. Its just getting on my nerves that alot of people are saying it was amazing and genius just because it was Abnett wrote it.


----------



## Angel of Blood

FORTHELION said:


> @ Angel of blood.
> how can u say there was no info on the inner workings of the Dark Angels. I suggest you go back and read the book again.
> 
> It shows us where the inner circle comes from and where Cypher origionated from, and why the lion is so paranoid because he knew the planet was tainted, which Ultimately led to him sending back the Caliban Dark Angels from the Crusade. Oh and i almost forgot it also showed us why the Lion and luther fell out after Luther became jealous and nearly let the bomb go off and kill the lion. Most of these points are still big players in 40k today.
> Especially Cypher as no one knows his agenda and is debated quite regularly on these threads.
> Yeah your probably right, was a wate of a book with no info whatsoever.


Point out exactly where i said it was a waste of a book.......oh that's right you can't, because i never said that did i. I believe you missed the entire point of my post. So let's just reiterate it again short for you. Descent of Angels and Prospero Burns are in no way the same book with a different cover. And if anything you just completely destroyed your own arguement with your last post when you claimed Descent of Angels revealed alot and Prospero Burns did not.

None of those points you made are groundbreaking or changes anything really. Prospero Burns changes almost everything we knew about the Vlka Fenryka, changed everything about the conflict between the Rout and the Sons, showed another reason as to why the edict of Nikea was cast, an event which altered the events of the Heresy on a massive scale. 

I didn't like the book because it was Abnett at all, i liked it because its a good book. I like ADB, but i don't like the First Heretic. I just love how when people don't like an Abnett book they just decide everyone else only likes it because its Abnett. We liked it, you didn't get over it.


----------



## FORTHELION

OH I didnt know you were Psychic. Can you tell me where you read about where Cypher came from and where he got his name, and while your at it where did you read about the atomic bomb on the lions ship that luther wasnt going to do anything about. I didnt know any of that before the book. Where did you find all this out?

And by the way no need to be aggressive and tell me to get over myself, this is supposed to be a debate. If you dont like my point of view thats no problem, but if you cant handle someone disagreeing with you then a forum is probably not the place for you. So get over yourself:wink:


----------



## Angel of Blood

No need to get aggressive? I hardly say i'm getting any more agressive than you are. You have openly called people hypocrits, said it's all bullshit, said people are out of their minds, decided for yourself exactly why people like this book and claim to know exactly why we like this book, claiming we are all jumping on bandwagons and putting words in peoples mouths. So how about you stop making presumptions about how other people think and so blantenly disregarding peoples opinions and i'll stop being a wise ass back. And i didn't tell you to get over yourself, i told you to get over the fact that we liked the book and you didn't

And no, i didn't say i knew all those things before, but once again, it's nothing groundbreaking. We already knew Cypher was a member of the Dark Angels anyway, we already knew that the Lion sent Luther home, all Descent of Angels did was elaborate on Cyphers name, which changes nothing and elaborates as to another reason as to why Jonson sent Luther back to Caliban, which again changes nothing. Prospero Burns changed everything about the incident on Prospero, how it came to be, the real reason behind their rivalry and the reason why one of the core events of the Heresy happened.


----------



## FORTHELION

I never decided for people what they should like. What i meant was i cant understand how people thought the book was genius. Maybe its just me but it was too long winded the revelations too spread out and it took the last 15 pages to make the book. 
Come on the book is 430 odd pages long, and its the first heresey book i struggled to read. It took me a week to finish it. ALot of it was wasted but then again thats my opinion. So maybe were gonna have to agree to disagree.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Yep you are perfectly entitled to not like Prospero Burns, i don't have a problem with it at all. What i don't like is you saying people only like this book because Abnett wrote it. As i sure as hell am not so close minded as to only like a book because of its author and i'm certain most other members of this board aren't either. We like the book because we think it gives us a truely excellent view into how the Vlka Fenryka really operated and how the events of Prospero came to be. That's our opinion and again it's not for you and Balter to decide that we only like it because of Abnett


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

FORTHELION said:


> I just think there is a big Abnett band wagon that every one has jumped on. If people would only just say the book was ok and not GENIUS. Come on GENIUS? I dont think so. Now a thousand sons that was fucking genius closely followed by the first heretic and fulgrim and horus riseing.
> 
> 
> @child of the emperor i totally agree with you that descent of Angels wasnt a great book. As i think prospero burns wasnt a great book. Its just getting on my nerves that alot of people are saying it was amazing and genius just because it was Abnett wrote it.


That's the beauty of a little thing called _'personal opinion'_. If some thought _Prospero Burns_ was genius, they are perfectly entitled to think so and I will not slate their view as long as they justify it, which most have done.

And for the record no one has simply said _Prospero Burns_ was fantastic because Abnett wrote it, as I said for the most part they have justified their conclusions.


----------



## Phoebus

FORTHELION said:


> BULLSHIT! i smell hypocritical bullshit on this thread.
> How can anyone in their right mind think this book was genious. (And there have been a few who have used that exact word)


Most of the posters here cited their reasoning... I suppose you could let us know which of our reasons for thinking the book was good doesn't strike you as sound. 



> Descent of Angels was condemned because it was about the primarch growing up and give a great account of actually how the Dark Angels legion operates. I cant see the difference in that book and prospero burns other than the name of the author. Both books concentrate on the inner workings of the legions, one is hailed and the other condemned.
> 
> I rest my case.


For myself, I liked them both.

I think there is a point to be made about both books offering something that most readers didn't necessarily expect. Along those lines, I completely agree with people who felt "Prospero Burns" was a misleading title.

That major criticism aside, I really can't see how someone can argue that, on its own merits and nothing else, this was a _bad_ book. It's not a _great_ book--few novels ever are--but I have yet to hear someone pose a cogent argument against it. Mostly what I see in complaints boils down to "how come the protagonist had to be a normal human?" or "we don't get to see Russ that much!"



> @ Angel of blood.
> how can u say there was no info on the inner workings of the Dark Angels. I suggest you go back and read the book again.


Forthelion, no offense, but I think _you_ might need to go back and do the same... for both novels. See below.



> It shows us .. why the lion is so paranoid because he knew the planet was tainted, ...


No, not really. Paranoia is not a theme that is ever expressed in the novel. Or maybe I completely missed it? By all means, share away.



> ... which Ultimately led to him sending back the Caliban Dark Angels from the Crusade.


Again, no, not really.

The Lion sends back 500 Calibanite Dark Angels (out of tens of thousands), and he does so as part of an excuse to unofficially punish Luther for almost allowing an assassination attempt to go down against the Lion.



> IMO prospero burns was an ok book nothing special, revealed very little about the heresey that we didnt already know.


_Really?!?_ The fact that the forces of Chaos were manipulating and affecting the relations between Primarchs and their Legions as part of a calculated plan to eliminate key opposition before the Heresy qualifies as very little? This isn't a revelation of any meaningful weight when compared to what we knew from the Codices and Index Astartes?!? Wow! :grin:



> I just think there is a big Abnett band wagon that every one has jumped on.


In fact, I would be willing to bet that more Heretics have expressed _negative_ opinions than positive ones.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Phoebus said:


> In fact, I would be willing to bet that more Heretics have expressed _negative_ opinions than positive ones.
> 
> Cheers,
> P.


that being said, it will still outsell anything that has come before and will not be bested in sales for some time to come... Sad, i didn't enjoy this NYT Bestseller as much as i did TFH (which i'm rereading, at its author's behest...), and Prospero is actually doing better on the charts... sad...

CP


----------



## Baltar

That's the power of the Abnett.

Shame the reputation isn't deserved.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Baltar said:


> That's the power of the Abnett.
> 
> Shame the reputation isn't deserved.


As a friend of mine said, It's Black Library's most popular author writing about GW's most popular Legion. It's bound to sell. 

CP


----------



## genesis80

Angel of Blood said:


> Now Prospero Burns
> - Showing a rembrancer being intigrated into the Vlka Fenryka
> - Showing the inner workings of a Legion, how they really operate, and how they don't conform to the way other Legions work
> - Shows the real reasons between why the Thousand Sons and Wolves rivalry really happened
> - Reveals a long and intricate twist and plot chaos had planned for a long time


"- Showing a rembrancer being integrated into the Vlka Fenryka"
Fair enough, but does this character really need to take hundreds of pages to develop the character, flashbacks and all? People here talk about the one dimensional characters that no one could care less about in the other books in the HH series, but to be honest, there is no one i could care less about whether they lived or died that this "historian/pawn" (in fact, its made MUCH worse than the other HH books due to the sheer number of pages devoted to this character)

"- Reveals a long and intricate twist and plot chaos had planned for a long time"
I thought many already knew/suspected this to be happening what with the primarchs being spirited away during birth and all that. Did you guys not read "first heretic"? Its obvious chaos was working since the very beginning.

** whats it with the "wet leopard growls"???!!! Seriously! On every other page?! (ok, an exaggeration, but come ON!!)
1) Wolves and leopards make very different growls, so unless there are leopards on Fenris or this book was actually about the "sky leopards" chapter, its all very confusing

2) You DONT need to put it on every other page in the book!! We got it the 1st 235 times!!

** Im having trouble with the whole space wolves as "we are savage executioners, we destroy every enemy and rip their whole civilization to bits & everyone is so scared of us" gig. One would like to think the world eaters or night lords would have lived up to this bill better. Well...more so the former, i guess.
Despite vlka fenryka reputation, i highly doubt angron or horus would piss their pants if they knew russ was coming for them. (& i can honestly say this even as a space wolf fan)

** Btw, many here have said that the author "needed" to put all those pages with that irritating historian in because "no one else can tell the story like he did due to closed nature of the legion and the fact that everyone in the legion understands their nature without it needing to be explained to them".
I disagree.
Take a look at soul hunter and you will see what I mean. He used a "normal" serf. Took up MUCH less space and delivered the goods.
Or if you want a book WITHOUT serf or historians, you can look at "The Flight of the Eisenstein". I seriously recommend this books to you guys. 

And about all this "you guys are all about "bolter porn".
Seriously, the best books in HH (& BL for THAT metter) didnt skimp on the battle scenes like PB did. Do you consider those books "bolter porn"??
We did join the hobby due to interest in its setting. If you are anti violence and only look at character development in non-violent settings, there are many other books i could recommend to you.


----------



## Phoebus

genesis80 said:


> Fair enough, but does this character really need to take hundreds of pages to develop the character, flashbacks and all?


Thing is, that complaint only goes so far. A good chunk of said flashbacks tie in to an integral plot point. Not knowing where the character came from would have killed the main storyline*.



That is, his role as a spy and the machinations of Chaos before the Heresy even begins.


Obviously, though, that's a "two-edged sword" kind of comment. I freely admit (and said so in my review) that some of those flashbacks were not necessary.



> "- Reveals a long and intricate twist and plot chaos had planned for a long time"
> I thought many already knew/suspected this to be happening what with the primarchs being spirited away during birth and all that. Did you guys not read "first heretic"? Its obvious chaos was working since the very beginning.


Yeah, but not so actively. The idea that Chaos may or may not have screwed around with the Primarchs during their scattering was brought up a ways back. The idea that Chaos had agents sewing discord throughout the Legions during the actual Crusade, though? Sorry, but this is a major theme that had never been revealed prior to Erebus' work with the Lodges, and "Prospero Burns" shows its most significant advancement since "Horus Rising".



> ** whats it with the "wet leopard growls"???!!! Seriously! On every other page?! (ok, an exaggeration, but come ON!!)


The repetitiveness got to me, I'll admit. It's like with Nick Kyme's "Salamander" novels, which constantly repeat anvil/fire/forge themes. That having been said, I think it was Abnett's attempt to get beyond the constant wolf themes.



> ** Im having trouble with the whole space wolves as "we are savage executioners, we destroy every enemy and rip their whole civilization to bits & everyone is so scared of us" gig. One would like to think the world eaters or night lords would have lived up to this bill better. Well...more so the former, i guess.


Neither the World Eaters nor the Night Lords operated within their mandate. The point of the Rout was that they were able to do said things but at the same time willingly remain under control. Discipline was the byword of Russ' Legion. Can you say that about the World Eaters post-cerebral surgery or the Night Lords after their Legion was compromised/corrupted by the induction of murderers, thieves, and rapists?



> Despite vlka fenryka reputation, i highly doubt angron or horus would piss their pants if they knew russ was coming for them. (& i can honestly say this even as a space wolf fan)


But that wasn't the point. The point was to have a Legion capable of doing it, and doing it right.



> Take a look at soul hunter and you will see what I mean. He used a "normal" serf. Took up MUCH less space and delivered the goods.
> Or if you want a book WITHOUT serf or historians, you can look at "The Flight of the Eisenstein". I seriously recommend this books to you guys.


Neither book deals with themes of mystery. Septimus doesn't reveal anything new about the Night Lords because there isn't something new to learn (well, not to the degree of "Prospero Burns"). 



> And about all this "you guys are all about "bolter porn".
> Seriously, the best books in HH (& BL for THAT metter) didnt skimp on the battle scenes like PB did.


Interesting. I honestly didn't feel "Prospero Burns" skimped on battles. Between the Fenrisian fight, Bear's intro, the first look at the Rout in battle, the battle at Nikaea, and the final battle itself, I didn't feel cheated.



Baltar said:


> That's the power of the Abnett.
> 
> Shame the reputation isn't deserved.


I can't agree with that. "Prospero Burns" was highly anticipated, and, if anything, would have benefited from the added sales courtesy of new readers seeing "The First Heretic" in the NYT Bestseller list prior to its release. The Horus Heresy isn't the type of series where you can seriously expect to skip books here and there and maintain a full grasp on what's going on. Thus, I can't see people saying "Oh, I'll skip books X, Y and Z... but wait: here's an Abnett novel--I'm definitely getting this one!"

Just my two cents' worth! 

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Azkaellon

Commissar Ploss said:


> As a friend of mine said, It's Black Library's most popular author writing about GW's most popular Legion. It's bound to sell.
> 
> CP


And here i thought The most popular legion was the Smurfs...


----------



## genesis80

Phoebus said:


> Obviously, though, that's a "two-edged sword" kind of comment. I freely admit (and said so in my review) that some of those flashbacks were not necessary.


At the end of the day, he is still a one dimensional character to me. One that I had hoped would have been killed off by page 4 of the novel.



Phoebus said:


> The repetitiveness got to me, I'll admit. It's like with Nick Kyme's "Salamander" novels, which constantly repeat anvil/fire/forge themes. That having been said, I think it was Abnett's attempt to get beyond the constant wolf themes.


Oh no. Dont get me started on Kyme and his themes. I absolutely hated that he ruined the salamanders novels so completely with that. But thats another story.
But at least with Kyme, you understand the connection between the themes and the chapter.
Just use "growl" if you dont want to use "wet wolf growl". Ppl WILL understand what you mean. But the moment a leopard comes into the picture......ppl will be "wtf?"
What will we see next? Salamanders and Blood Angels doing "dry lion growls" to get away from their "themes"?




Phoebus said:


> Neither the World Eaters nor the Night Lords operated within their mandate. The point of the Rout was that they were able to do said things but at the same time willingly remain under control. Discipline was the byword of Russ' Legion. Can you say that about the World Eaters post-cerebral surgery or the Night Lords after their Legion was compromised/corrupted by the induction of murderers, thieves, and rapists?


Well, they werent that disciplined as they'd like us to believe if they smashed up all the data and artifacts that could have been preserved. They are supposed to be "so highly disciplined to keep all that rage under a tight leash" after all.
I always thought the REAL end game of "executioners" was to make people, well in this case "legions" so afraid they wouldent rebel and the willingness to carry out the executions. (which is why i brought up those 2). Well, I felt that if the emperor handled those 2 legions differently, they would have been a little better at the role. 

Ok, say you were a primarch of a legion. Who would you prefer coming after you.

a) Angron
b) Konrad (yes, he did turn slightly wussy at the end, but before that I mean)
c) Russ

I would choose Russ. WHY? Because Angron would have handed me my a** and Konrad would have hung the heads of all my company captains in front of my door every morning

I mean come on..the emperor was SO TOTALLY CLUELESS about what chaos was doing to his legions??! The "man" who can see into the future, whom the chaos gods are so scared of and has the psychic potential of...i was going to say tzeentch, but that seems wrong somehow...well, im sure you understand.... (sorry for diverting to another topic btw, lets focus on whats at hand) 




Phoebus said:


> Interesting. I honestly didn't feel "Prospero Burns" skimped on battles. Between the Fenrisian fight, Bear's intro, the first look at the Rout in battle, the battle at Nikaea, and the final battle itself, I didn't feel cheated.


Ok, while your descriptions do make the book seem like semi "bolter porn", the actual length of those battles and the length comparison between the battles and the unnecessary flashbacks are what really get to me.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Witch King of Angmar said:


> And here i thought The most popular legion was the Smurfs...


no, that's the most used for demonstrations etc. not the most popular played Legion.

CP


----------



## Baltar

Commissar Ploss said:


> As a friend of mine said, It's Black Library's most popular author writing about GW's most popular Legion. It's bound to sell.
> 
> CP


All I'm going to say is that ADB would have smashed it out of the park. No question.

Dan did not.

:biggrin:


----------



## raider1987

Baltar said:


> That's the power of the Abnett.
> 
> Shame the reputation isn't deserved.


I think his reputation is deserved, although I wasn't a fan of Prospero Burns, but I am currently reading Eisenhorn and it is incredible. Every author slips up every now and then. But I have to admit I will be more cautious about buying his books in the future. Which is a shame as every other one of his books I have read has been brilliant.


----------



## Dead.Blue.Clown

Commissar Ploss said:


> that being said, it will still outsell anything that has come before and will not be bested in sales for some time to come...


The next massive seller will be Signus Prime and the Blood Angels, though it's unlikely to quite hit Dan's level of sales, it will probably still beat everything else.




Commissar Ploss said:


> Sad, i didn't enjoy this NYT Bestseller as much as i did TFH (which i'm rereading, at its author's behest...)


Mwuh?


----------



## Angel of Blood

Baltar said:


> All I'm going to say is that ADB would have smashed it out of the park. No question.
> 
> Dan did not.
> 
> :biggrin:


I find it quite funny how you chastise people so much for supposedly jumping on the Abnett bandwagon when you are so clearly on another authors bandwagon yourself.


----------



## Dead.Blue.Clown

Angel of Blood said:


> I find it quite funny how you chastise people so much for supposedly jumping on the Abnett bandwagon when you are so clearly on another authors bandwagon yourself.


Y'know, this is something I only really see on Heresy-Online. In a lot of instances, there are several writers where any time someone says they like them, they're accused of fanboyism and bandwagonning.

Seriously, you guys need to rein that shit in, because it sucks credence from everything both sides are saying. 

What, exactly, in Baltar's post is even remotely like bandwagonning? He said Author X would do a better job on Book Y than Author Z. That's all. That's bandwagonning to you? Honestly?

Everyone says that kind of statement. I say it myself: am I on Robin Hobb's bandwagon, or am I allowed to just like her as an author without such bizarre accusations?

There's more and more of this lately, and it's one of those attacks that makes a great soundbite, but has very little substance in a lot of cases, no matter who is saying it to whom, or about what. 

Seriously, H-O, you've gotta ease up on it. It's parasitic and lame.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> Y'know, this is something I only really see on Heresy-Online. In a lot of instances, there are several writers where any time someone says they like them, they're accused of fanboyism and bandwagonning.
> 
> Seriously, you guys need to rein that shit in, because it sucks credence from everything both sides are saying.
> 
> What, exactly, in Baltar's post is even remotely like bandwagonning? He said Author X would do a better job on Book Y than Author Z. That's all. That's bandwagonning to you? Honestly?
> 
> Everyone says that kind of statement. I say it myself: am I on Robin Hobb's bandwagon, or am I allowed to just like her as an author without such bizarre accusations?
> 
> There's more and more of this lately, and it's one of those attacks that makes a great soundbite, but has very little substance in a lot of cases, no matter who is saying it to whom, or about what.
> 
> Seriously, H-O, you've gotta ease up on it. It's parasitic and lame.


:goodpost:

That applies to all you bitches, that's an order! :king:

But seriously yeah, no one is jumping on the Abnett bandwagon by saying _Prospero Burns_ is amazing. They have all justified the reasons why they liked it, and that's cool. Similarily I don't think anyone else is jumping on any other author's bandwagon (apart from _Lord of the Night_, but that's a given :biggrin. So let's all stop accusing people of such things, and get on with the _Prospero Burns_ discussion (nicely)!


----------



## raider1987

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> Y'know, this is something I only really see on Heresy-Online. In a lot of instances, there are several writers where any time someone says they like them, they're accused of fanboyism and bandwagonning.
> 
> Seriously, you guys need to rein that shit in, because it sucks credence from everything both sides are saying.
> 
> What, exactly, in Baltar's post is even remotely like bandwagonning? He said Author X would do a better job on Book Y than Author Z. That's all. That's bandwagonning to you? Honestly?
> 
> Everyone says that kind of statement. I say it myself: am I on Robin Hobb's bandwagon, or am I allowed to just like her as an author without such bizarre accusations?
> 
> There's more and more of this lately, and it's one of those attacks that makes a great soundbite, but has very little substance in a lot of cases, no matter who is saying it to whom, or about what.
> 
> Seriously, H-O, you've gotta ease up on it. It's parasitic and lame.


I agree completely. Unfortunately, this is the internet and there isn't an IQ test before allowing access, most people on this site do offer unbiased balanced opinions. However there will always be, and I am not intending to point out anyone in particular, the minority who let everyone else down.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> The next massive seller will be Signus Prime and the Blood Angels, though it's unlikely to quite hit Dan's level of sales, it will probably still beat everything else.


good to know. 



> Mwuh?


 yes, Youwuh! it was your wonderful little posts that made me feel guilty for not reviewing it! lol

you know. this whole accusation of bandwagonning is absurd. There's nothing to say someone can't like an author. I'm always excited when Dan writes a book, or has another one coming out. This is because i routinely enjoy his stories and his level of writing. Does this mean i'm on the bandwagon? No. or i wouldn't have given his latest the honest review that i did.

I'm really starting to lose it with this bandwagonning bullshit... Lets keep it together, my fellow Heretics and lets accept the fact that a popular author is going to sell lots of copies, even for his first (in my opinion) flop. The notion of a bandwagon is silly anyways.


----------



## forkmaster

I say people simply have different taste, when I see the name of an author on a BL-novel, I often compare it to earlier works of his. Dan Abnett has made a good contribution to the BL but he has made some novels that quite havent lived up to the expectation, which necessarly doesnt mean the book is bad, more not what I expected. But a bad writer he is not.

Ive simply started to ignore posts once the "bandwagon"-word comes up in the context. Surely I can admit I admire different authors for the different writing styles, Dan for his character-developtment and often twist-ending stories, Graham for tragic stories with the corruption which develops within characters and destroys their very essence and ADB for his newer edgier cocky style. But I try and look it at the novels by themselves, how they are written and not who wrote them.


----------



## D-A-C

Gonna paint that band wagon,
Paint it till it's strong,
Paint it with my bile and hate,
Until I prove you wrong.

Gonna paint that band wagon,
Paint it till it's tough,
Paint it with stupidity,
Until you've had enough.

Gonna paint that band wagon,
Paint it till it's right,
Paint it with my ignorance,
Until you've taken flight

Gonna paint that band wagon,
Paint it all alone,
Paint it with my loneliness,
Cuz everyone is gone.



I have no clue why I decided to write that ... all I know is I spent the last five minutes writing it thanks to the way this thread has started to go lol.


----------



## NiceGuyEddy

I too choose to mount the bandwagon of not accusing others of mounting bandwagons. Bad Heretics! Bad! 

On topic. _Prospero Burns_ was a good book. I have no blindingly obvious criticisms. It was not what I expected however and I feel that others could have the following problem(s).

Lack of action. Now by action here I mean battles involving legions. Not, as Phoebus pointed out, Bear fighting natives or the odd brawl here and there. I expected given the title and cover to have a decent portion of the book given over to the sacking of Prospero. 

Similarly the cover portrays Leman Russ who is little more than a supporting charachter. Before anyone complains about judging books by covers I'll end my point here by simply saying it was not exactly what I expected in this regard. 

What I'm getting at is that all the marketing and hype around this book has centred on the battle of Prospero, which as pointed out is minimally portrayed. Even the BL's current "About the book" summary at:

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Horus-Heresy/Prospero-Burns.html

Doesn't prepare the reader for the amount of backstory and culture exploration the boook offers. In short It's a perfectly fine book that could have been marketed better.

My one tiny question is is it really necessary to start calling them all "Vlka Fenryka" or the "Rout"? Chaos influencing astartes and all the other stuff I have no problem with believing oddly enough. But this just seems to be something that is completely UNNECESSARY and unbelievable. How could we have never, ever, heard about them not liking to be called Space Wolves when they, and everyone else, has been calling them that for decades-worth of fluff. Why can't they just be Space Wolves?! Theres nothing wrong with Space Wolves is there!? :angry:


----------



## raider1987

NiceGuyEddy said:


> My one tiny question is is it really necessary to start calling them all "Vlka Fenryka"


Agreed, it irritates me as well.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> Y'know, this is something I only really see on Heresy-Online. In a lot of instances, there are several writers where any time someone says they like them, they're accused of fanboyism and bandwagonning.
> 
> Seriously, you guys need to rein that shit in, because it sucks credence from everything both sides are saying.
> 
> What, exactly, in Baltar's post is even remotely like bandwagonning? He said Author X would do a better job on Book Y than Author Z. That's all. That's bandwagonning to you? Honestly?
> 
> Everyone says that kind of statement. I say it myself: am I on Robin Hobb's bandwagon, or am I allowed to just like her as an author without such bizarre accusations?
> 
> There's more and more of this lately, and it's one of those attacks that makes a great soundbite, but has very little substance in a lot of cases, no matter who is saying it to whom, or about what.
> 
> Seriously, H-O, you've gotta ease up on it. It's parasitic and lame.


Meh, i don't believe in fanboyism and bandwagons, if you looked at my other posts you would see that. I'm merely using Baltars own views back at him. I gurantee you if i said that The First Heretic would have been better if Abnett had wrote it(i don't think that) then he would have been all over the statement accusing it of Abnett fanboyism. You must have missed that, oh well, again look at my previous posts


----------



## Angel of Blood

NiceGuyEddy said:


> my one tiny question is is it really necessary to start calling them all "Vlka Fenryka" or the "Rout"? Chaos influencing astartes and all the other stuff I have no problem with believing oddly enough. But this just seems to be something that is completely UNNECESSARY and unbelievable. How could we have never, ever, heard about them not liking to be called Space Wolves when they, and everyone else, has been calling them that for decades-worth of fluff. Why can't they just be Space Wolves?! Theres nothing wrong with Space Wolves is there!? :angry:





raider1987 said:


> Agreed, it irritates me as well.


Generally because it sounds a thousand times better than Space Wolves, which sounds a bit lame when you think about it. There was a thread a while back asking people which names they dislike, and Space Wolves featured rather heavily on the thread. And alot changes in 10,000 years, not too hard to believe they dropped the moniker after a couple thousand years


----------



## Baltar

Angel of Blood said:


> Meh, i don't believe in fanboyism and bandwagons, if you looked at my other posts you would see that. I'm merely using Baltars own views back at him. I gurantee you if i said that The First Heretic would have been better if Abnett had wrote it(i don't think that) then he would have been all over the statement accusing it of Abnett fanboyism. You must have missed that, oh well, again look at my previous posts


No, I wouldn't. I would have just told you that you are wrong.

Mainly because I'm not one of the countless idiots that actually believes that opinions are neither right or wrong (when they can be either).


----------



## World Eater XII

Fuck bandwagons ill just get in my LAV and go all great destroyer on people  

In all seriousness, Prospero burns is quite hard to get into, think its good that it gives an alternate name for said space pups. Space wolves is on the same level as space sharks for leaving a bitter taste!


----------



## Angel of Blood

Baltar said:


> No, I wouldn't. I would have just told you that you are wrong.
> 
> Mainly because I'm not one of the countless idiots that actually believes that opinions are neither right or wrong (when they can be either).


Fairly sure theres a contradiction right there


----------



## Baltar

And despite that, there isn't.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Oh yeah, sorry must have misread the part where you stated you would say i was wrong and then went on to say you don't do that.


----------



## Baltar

Actually, I said that I'm not the sort of idiot that believes that opinions are neither right or wrong (because they can be either).

There is a problem, these days, due to people believing that only facts are correct or incorrect, and that opinions are exempt from being incorrect. It's utter rubbish.


----------



## Angel of Blood

If i believed Abnett could do a better job, then who are you to tell me i'm wrong. Again i'm not saying that, but i wouldn't be wrong as we can't know how it would have been with Abnett, it could very easily have been better or worse. Not all opinions are right or wrong, they are just that, opinions. Granted in some cases opinions can be right or wrong, such as if i said in my opinion Horus killed Sanguinius, then that is right, if i said, in my opinion Sanguinius killed Horus then i would be wrong(unless Lux was reading it). But if i think Abnett is a better writer then that's fine, it's not right or wrong, it's just an opinion, my own personal view.


----------



## Baltar

Yes, unfortunately in this country we are taught that opinions are subjective, just as you have listed.

Again, unforunately, it's not the case (i.e., a load of utter rubbish - all opinions may be incorrect or correct).

Only the criteria by which an argument decides whether an opinion is 'correct' changes.

Other than that, I'm really not willing to discuss it further - mainly because I don't want to argue with a whole tide of people that:

1: Believe opinions really are subjective, and that they can't be incorrect, because 'it's my opinion so there'.

2: Because they don't even understand the argument even if they took part in it (even if they probably believe that they do).


----------



## NiceGuyEddy

Angel of Blood said:


> Generally because it sounds a thousand times better than Space Wolves, which sounds a bit lame when you think about it. There was a thread a while back asking people which names they dislike, and Space Wolves featured rather heavily on the thread.


Yeah it is I suppose. Good to know GW and Abnett are supposedly paying attention to our threads :laugh:



Angel of Blood said:


> And alot changes in 10,000 years, not too hard to believe they dropped the moniker after a couple thousand years


It’s possible but in Tales of Heresy, Battle For the Abyss and A Thousand Sons they are referred to as and call themselves Space Wolves. At the moment I can’t see any reason for them to stop calling themselves Vlka Fenryka (or start for that matter). It kinda contradicts pretty much every author that has ever written about the space wolves and for what? So they can have a cooler name or be a bit more mysterious? I think it’s pointless but I’ll leave that up to yourselves to decide :wink: 



genesis80 said:


> whats it with the "wet leopard growls"???!!! Seriously! On every other page?! (ok, an exaggeration, but come ON!!)
> 1) Wolves and leopards make very different growls, so unless there are leopards on Fenris or this book was actually about the "sky leopards" chapter, its all very confusing
> 
> 2) You DONT need to put it on every other page in the book!! We got it the 1st 235 times!!


Yeah that did get a bit repetitive alright. I have the ebook and a quick autosearch of “leopard” has revealed no less than eleven wet leopard growls, three wet leopard purrs, two wet leopard snarls and a solitary wet leopard chuckle.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

NiceGuyEddy said:


> My one tiny question is is it really necessary to start calling them all "Vlka Fenryka" or the "Rout"? Chaos influencing astartes and all the other stuff I have no problem with believing oddly enough. But this just seems to be something that is completely UNNECESSARY and unbelievable. How could we have never, ever, heard about them not liking to be called Space Wolves when they, and everyone else, has been calling them that for decades-worth of fluff. Why can't they just be Space Wolves?! Theres nothing wrong with Space Wolves is there!? :angry:


Quite simply because _'Space Wolves'_ sucks. As does _'Space Marines'_ while were on that topic. 



NiceGuyEddy said:


> It’s possible but in Tales of Heresy, Battle For the Abyss and A Thousand Sons they are referred to as and call themselves Space Wolves. At the moment I can’t see any reason for them to stop calling themselves Vlka Fenryka (or start for that matter). It kinda contradicts pretty much every author that has ever written about the space wolves and for what? So they can have a cooler name or be a bit more mysterious? I think it’s pointless but I’ll leave that up to yourselves to decide :wink:


_'Space Wolves'_ is the term outsiders apply to the VI Legion, and whilst it may be the Legion's official name, it is just part of the whole underestimating (in the sense of merely thinking of them as simple barbarians) them thing. That's how I interpreted it anyway.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Indeed, they still call themselves to the other Legions in the books you mentioned to keep playing up to their reputation, Vlka Fenryka is in their own tounge aswell, one i'm sure they wouldn't speak infront of outsiders that much.


----------



## Euphrati

Now, correct me if I am wrong here, but as far as I understand it- Vlka Fenryka roughly translates to 'Wolves of/from Fenris' (note the irony of the self-given title and the running theme in both A Thousand Sons and Prospero Burns). 

I'm sure that each Legion's name would sound/appear different if it was printed in that Legion's home tongue. Take the Night Lords for example- I'm sure the translation of their name in Nostraman would sound, as it has been so eloquently put- like a murderer by your bedside, whispering in your ear.


----------



## NiceGuyEddy

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> _'Space Wolves'_ is the term outsiders apply to the VI Legion, and whilst it may be the Legion's official name, it is just part of the whole underestimating (in the sense of merely thinking of them as simple barbarians) them thing. That's how I interpreted it anyway.





Angel of Blood said:


> Indeed, they still call themselves to the other Legions in the books you mentioned to keep playing up to their reputation, Vlka Fenryka is in their own tounge aswell, one i'm sure they wouldn't speak infront of outsiders that much.


Both of these points make perfect sense in the context of _Prospero Burns_ but little in the context of all other wolf-lore. 

I simply can't see how the names "Vlka Fenryka" and the "Rout" could be unknown to us. In regards to whether or not they share it with outsiders I cant say for certain because, well, they only appear in one book. But as we know: 



Hawser was a "spy" so it was hardly too big of a secret if they told him
 

William Kings books on the Space Wolves show no mention of it and they too explore the background of the wolves and the natives of Fenris not to mention the numorous codices on offer. Why should Abnetts one book take on the wolves overrule Kings and all others? 

As for the 10,000 year forgetfulness I doubt something as elementary as there own names would be forgotten especially for such a deeply traditional legion.

To put it simply _Prospero Burns_ says that they call themselves one thing but in every other source regardless of the company they are in they call themselves something else. Its a minor and tiny (as I said initially) inconsistency which imo was totally avoidable but its still an obvious inconsistency.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

NiceGuyEddy said:


> To put it simply _Prospero Burns_ says that they call themselves one thing but in every other source regardless of the company they are in they call themselves something else. Its a minor and tiny (as I said initially) inconsistency which imo was totally avoidable but its still an obvious inconsistency.


The lore changes (or is expanding upon, or contradicted depending on how you look at it), it's as simple as that. 



NiceGuyEddy said:


> Why should Abnetts one book take on the wolves overrule Kings and all others?


It shouldn't. Individuals can choose which background source they prefer and take that as a precedent, if not both. 

That having been said I imagine most people will take _Prospero Burns_ as definitive considering it is much more recent and part of the widely read Horus Heresy series. But that doesn't make them universally correct. It's all down to personal preference.


----------



## World Eater XII

More of the newer generation or even semi readers of BL books, in my opinion, will read this 'fore they read Kings books.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Just wanted to mention that this is one of the top six hottest threads on Heresy right now.  keep up the great discussion.

CP


----------



## ckcrawford

Sorry been out with the Steeler fans Steelen it up. I'm back!



Gree said:


> Yes, it was about the Librarian issue, it's quite clearly explained in A Thousand Sons.


By just stating its a sole Librarian issue doesn't really help. Its not about Librarians but the difference from being a controlled psyker and a sorcerer, and because of Magnus being uncontrollable, the consequences the Librarians as a whole have to suffer because of him. To leave his ACTIONS out, takes away from the point. Its Magnus' trial, over what he did. 

"History would recall this assembly as the Council of Nikea. Others would know it as the trial of Magnus the Red." ATS _Page 323 _

"Sorcery wielded by men who peered too deeply into dark places they should have known to leave alone."- Mortarion _ATS pg.326_

Throughout the trial it is discussed that Magnus and his legion are sorcerers and warlocks. Rarely are they referred to as psykers or Librarians. So this is clearly about their actions. Now on the surface, the out come is about the closure of the Librarians in the Astartes. But thats only the tip of the iceberg during this whole thing. This "council" or "trial" is clearly about Magnus and his actions.

And I asked you how the Council of Nikea came to be. It was Magnus actions against Russ and his legion that brought it up. They just didn't decide one day to stop the Librarian teachings throughout the legions. Magnus fricken killed astartes with that sorcery. And even that, his legion's practices are shown to be completely different from most from Wyrdmake's account at Nikea. He didn't simply go there hoping that he would also have to stop his ways.



Gree said:


> They did? Where? As far as I've read most if not all of the thousand Sons actions coincided with their battles.


If you have to attack an ally, or even have to defend something from your ally after a battle, that better be because that something is going to save someone importants life. Whatever happened; whether it was Magnus that defended the books or whether it was Russ and his wolves that started it because they were defending the books, Magnus cannot defend himself for using sorcery against a fellow astartes. Thats what I mean by "they went out of there way to obtain what they wanted."




Gree said:


> No, they defended themselves against fellow Astartes with a clear intent to kill.


But its as though your making it sound like the Wolves just went crazy and started attacking the Thousand Sons for no reason. Oh no they lost their mind! That wasn't the case though. The Thousand Sons were protecting something they ought to not have. So your making a big leap to say they were defending themselves, when clearly they were defending something else.



Gree said:


> Except it's not Amon. The daemon even states so clearly that Amon was with his primarch the entire time. Later in the battle Amon is alive and well with Ahriman when the daemon is banished back to the warp.
> 
> And no, it's perfectly possible for a daemon to posses a normal human just fine. They did so before the Astartes where created and they do so later on. They don't ''almost instantly explode'' when they get possesed. I've never read that.


I'm glad to be elaborated upon that. I was a bit confused.

The second though. Did I just say they could possess a normal human being just fine? Oh I'm sorry. Except no I did not. I thought I was explaining why a daemon would rather chose to hide within an astartes host than a normal human being. Have you seen and read about what happens to a normal human beings body when a daemon possesses it? Kind of hard to hide that. However, in astartes it is a lot easier. 




Gree said:


> Where was he condemmed again? I recall the issue at Nikea being about psychic powers. Malcador even states it flat out.


If that is all you recall than I truly feel sorry for you. Its like you got the book and skipped to the Council of Nikea and forgot why and how Magnus got in the mess he did. Again, I have not stated that the Council of Nikea wasn't about the issue of the Librarians. But you are basically taking out the why. Leaving your statement completely clueless. Do you actually think that this whole thing wasn't a direct hit on Magnus and his actions?




Gree said:


> I don't ever recall anything like that happening. The Thousand Sons saved some stuff from the Wolves at Shrike, but there was absolutely no indication that the Emperor ordered their destruction.


The implication derives from the Wolves Legion. Not in a literal sense. It was their planet to do with it what they pleased. Not Magnus', and Russ explained that to him. That doesn't explain why Magnus did what he did. I will further explain a little down my post.



Gree said:


> I don't recall the Emperor ever saying that.


No, we don't see that. Remember we have to accept Hawsers word on this. And no, if your going to grasp every literal aspect of the Emperor's word in the grand Imperium than I guess you could say that nothing anyone ever does in the Imperium has been ordered by the Emperor. So in the most LITERAL aspect of the word, the Unification Council Office of Conversation allowed for Hawser to research these findings. I'm not understanding you saying you don't "recall." Of course you don't, the Emperor wasn't in this scene. And it still does not give reason or excuse for the Thousand Sons to keep it.



Gree said:


> Bullying?
> 
> 
> The Wolves attacked the Sons first and Magnus deliberatly told his Sons not to kill the Wolves and instead to go on the _defensive_. I have no idea how that's considered bullying.




Yes bullying. And you don't see that as bullying. Lets see. First of all, the Thousand Sons have no rights over the planet. And this is clearly seen at the last page of the chapter where Russ explains it. Its his planet to plunder. They had their chance and now they would be destroyed along with everything. Now, this is where you and I see things differently.

You seem to believe the Thousand Sons just got into the library on Shrike and just started collecting books and just dropped their rifles and got to it. Meanwhile the wolves were like... fuck this shit, I hate book worms! And started ripping them apart.

Now if you don't mind, this is my view on it which I think is more realistic. Magnus knew the Wolves were going to sack the library. So ordered a group his astartes to secure the library. Secure- fixed or fastened so as not to give way, become loose, or be lost. 

Magnus on page 230.

"I secured the Great Library with the Scarab Occult, but Skarsee's Great Company arrived right on our heels. They sought to destroy the library. I stopped them."

What do you think he means by I stopped them? Now I guess we have to guess and use our imaginations. But I doubt his actions where peaceful. He might have told Arniham that he didn't want him or his astartes to escalate the fight, but to think the Thousand Sons weren't the first to conjure this little battle can be explained by this little sneaky passage.




Gree said:


> No, I just don't believe your _interpretation_ of it.


What that they were created to destroy another legion? What was your interpretation of it?



Do I think you are wrong about what you say, I would say no. But you put it so narrowly and bias. As though Magnus had not been the reason for the Council/Trial of Nikea. He is to blame. Him and his legion's actions.

Furthernote, I was wrong about the forbidden knowledge before Nikea. I was sure I read somewhere there were things the Emperor told Magnus not to do. But after skimming and rereading passages I could not find it.


----------



## Phoebus

NiceGuyEddy said:


> It’s possible but in Tales of Heresy, Battle For the Abyss and A Thousand Sons they are referred to as and call themselves Space Wolves.


All of the above are set later in the timeline. "Prospero Burns" starts about seventy years prior to the Heresy.

EDIT:
Also, in "A Thousand Sons", Skarssensson formally calls out Magnus with summons and uses "Space Wolves" as part of said formal summons. Given the formal nature of the whole situation, I think the normally unliked term had to be used. Ditto for Wyrdmake, who is formally introducing himself with his full rank when he uses "Space Wolves". Brynngar never uses the term himself; Cestus introduces him as a Space Wolf, to which the old wolf simply growls. Bulveye also never uses it for himself, and the only time he seems like is about to is when he formally introduces himself with his full rank.

Personally, I don't think terms like "Vlka Fenryka" or "the Rout" are secret. I think the Wolves' reputation as savages leads outsiders to either disregard their own names for themselves or at least keeps them far apart so that they don't bother learning their traditions. For their part, the Wolves don't seem that interested in correcting these misperceptions...

But honestly, some times it comes down to having to call a spade a spade and realizing that Dan Abnett's ideas in regards to the Space Wolves did not come forth until after he got the nod to write "Prospero Burns". This sometimes leads to the sort of continuity issue we're trying to resolve, but all in all I think this is a rather minor one.



> At the moment I can’t see any reason for them to stop calling themselves Vlka Fenryka (or start for that matter).


Well, of course not. We still have several years of Heresy, Scouring, etc., during which timeframe this change might occur.



> It kinda contradicts pretty much every author that has ever written about the space wolves ...


Does it? Does the fluff (Index Astartes, Codices) not indicate massive chunks of missing knowledge from this era? Do you get the impression that the Imperium would maintain--ten millennia later--something as esoteric as a Legion's favored name for themselves? :grin:



> ... and for what? So they can have a cooler name or be a bit more mysterious? I think it’s pointless but I’ll leave that up to yourselves to decide :wink:


I think it has less to do with having a cooler name and more with fleshing out the past. I like these tidbits and nicknames. They show a past, they add depth. 

Also:


Does it not seem as if "A Thousand Sons" hints at Magnus having knowledge of Hawser"? And also, it seems McNeill and Abnett talked to one another in regards to what the wolves of Fenris really are...


Cheers,
P.


----------



## Gree

ckcrawford said:


> By just stating its a sole Librarian issue doesn't really help. it.


Why not?



ckcrawford said:


> By just stating its a sole Librarian issue doesn't really help. Its not about Librarians but the difference from being a controlled psyker and a sorcerer,


It seemed that way to me.



ckcrawford said:


> Throughout the trial it is discussed that Magnus and his legion are sorcerers and warlocks. Rarely are they referred to as psykers or Librarians. So this is clearly about their actions.


Except Librarians are also lumped in with them, along with their psychic powers. They are referred to as warlocks out of ignorance, because that's what others see the Librarians as.

Most of what Magnus's Legion did, apart from the tutelaries, was essentially the same as a modern 41st millenium Librarian.



ckcrawford said:


> This "council" or "trial" is clearly about Magnus and his actions.


In your _opinion_ yes. Magnus introduced the Librarius into the Legions and Mortarion's words where biased against all Librarians and psykers.



ckcrawford said:


> And I asked you how the Council of Nikea came to be. It was Magnus actions against Russ and his legion that brought it up.


I don't recall that being stated anywhere.



ckcrawford said:


> They just didn't decide one day to stop the Librarian teachings throughout the legions. Magnus fricken killed astartes with that sorcery.


No he didn’t. He had his Sons use regular psychic powers and he ordered them not to kill any Wolves.



ckcrawford said:


> He didn't simply go there hoping that he would also have to stop his ways.


Why would he?



ckcrawford said:


> If you have to attack an ally, or even have to defend something from your ally after a battle, that better be because that something is going to save someone importants life.


Then the Wolves where clearly in the wrong then. Attacking an ally over mere books and information is ridiculous.



ckcrawford said:


> Magnus cannot defend himself for using sorcery against a fellow astartes.


He did not use sorcery. Telekinesis, biomancy and other powers are used to today’s Librarians.



ckcrawford said:


> Thats what I mean by "they went out of there way to obtain what they wanted."


Then apparently they didn’t go out of their way.



ckcrawford said:


> But its as though your making it sound like the Wolves just went crazy and started attacking the Thousand Sons for no reason.


They did.



ckcrawford said:


> That wasn't the case though. The Thousand Sons were protecting something they ought to not have.


Who ordered them not to?



ckcrawford said:


> So your making a big leap to say they were defending themselves, when clearly they were defending something else.


No, if anything you’re the one making the leap.



ckcrawford said:


> The second though. Did I just say they could possess a normal human being just fine? Oh I'm sorry. Except no I did not. I thought I was explaining why a daemon would rather chose to hide within an astartes host than a normal human being. Have you seen and read about what happens to a normal human beings body when a daemon possesses it? Kind of hard to hide that..


Yes I have, they can do it pretty well actually. So far I've seen no real peice of fluff saying that normal humans are unsuitable for daemonic possesion. (In fact if you read Eisenhorn normal humans are frequently used for daemonic possesion)

Of course that does not explain Navid’s appearance, or the fact that Amon was alive and well around the time the daemon was banished. I have brought up that point twice before and you have been unable to counter it.



ckcrawford said:


> If that is all you recall than I truly feel sorry for you. Its like you got the book and skipped to the Council of Nikea and forgot why and how Magnus got in the mess he did.


Actually I’ve read the book several times over. And careful, your tone here is bordering on condescending.



ckcrawford said:


> Again, I have not stated that the Council of Nikea wasn't about the issue of the Librarians.


Which it was.



ckcrawford said:


> Do you actually think that this whole thing wasn't a direct hit on Magnus and his actions?


Magnus himself maybe, his actions no.



ckcrawford said:


> The implication derives from the Wolves Legion. Not in a literal sense. It was their planet to do with it what they pleased. Not Magnus', and Russ explained that to him. That doesn't explain why Magnus did what he did. I will further explain a little down my post.


No, it wasn’t their planet and there was absolutely no indication that the Emperor ordered everything to be destroyed. What Russ said was his opinion. Two other Legions where there and had fought on the planet and had as much right as he did.



ckcrawford said:


> No, we don't see that. Remember we have to accept Hawsers word on this.


Why should we accept his biased opinion?



ckcrawford said:


> And no, if your going to grasp every literal aspect of the Emperor's word in the grand Imperium than I guess you could say that nothing anyone ever does in the Imperium has been ordered by the Emperor.


No, there are authority vested into others and general proclamations as such. However I have found no evidence that the Emperor forbade the Thousand Sons from research prior to Nikea.



ckcrawford said:


> And it still does not give reason or excuse for the Thousand Sons to keep it.


Why not? Was there orders preventing them from doing so?



ckcrawford said:


> First of all, the Thousand Sons have no rights over the planet.


Why not? They were ordered there, they fought there.



ckcrawford said:


> And this is clearly seen at the last page of the chapter where Russ explains it.


No, that’s Russ unsupported opinion.



ckcrawford said:


> They had their chance and now they would be destroyed along with everything. Now, this is where you and I see things differently.


So far nothing you’ve said has been convincing at all.



ckcrawford said:


> You seem to believe the Thousand Sons just got into the library on Shrike and just started collecting books and just dropped their rifles and got to it. Meanwhile the wolves were like... fuck this shit, I hate book worms! And started ripping them apart.


That’s pretty much what happened when I read it.



ckcrawford said:


> Now if you don't mind, this is my view on it which I think is more realistic. Magnus knew the Wolves were going to sack the library. So ordered a group his astartes to secure the library. Secure- fixed or fastened so as not to give way, become loose, or be lost.


And you are entitled to your opinion.



ckcrawford said:


> "I secured the Great Library with the Scarab Occult, but Skarsee's Great Company arrived right on our heels. They sought to destroy the library. I stopped them."


So the Thousand Sons arrived there first and the Wolves attacked them without provocation.



ckcrawford said:


> What do you think he means by I stopped them? Now I guess we have to guess and use our imaginations. But I doubt his actions where peaceful. He might have told Arniham that he didn't want him or his astartes to escalate the fight, but to think the Thousand Sons weren't the first to conjure this little battle can be explained by this little sneaky passage.


I don’t see how. But if the Wolves attacked him first (And that’s what it’s sounding like to me) then Magnus would have been well justified in whatever methods he chose.



ckcrawford said:


> What that they were created to destroy another legion? What was your interpretation of it?


That was the Wolves’s _opinion_ of themselves.



ckcrawford said:


> Do I think you are wrong about what you say, I would say no. But you put it so narrowly and bias.


I could say the exact same thing about you. Excep I don’t agree with anything you say at all and no offense, but so far nothing about your arguments had been convincing at all for me.

I don't think the Thousand Sons are blameless, but I doubt that Prospero Burns, a book biased to the Wolves, showed them ''for what they really where'' it's far more grey than what you seem to put forward.



ckcrawford said:


> As though Magnus had not been the reason for the Council/Trial of Nikea. He is to blame. Him and his legion's actions.


What did his actions do? Use telekinesis and biomancy in a non-lethal manner? Both powers that are commonly accepted and used among modern say Sanctioned Psykers and Librarians?


----------



## radicallight

Here's a couple of points: where were the Wulfun (sp?) they are on the cover.
Also wasn't there something about Leman Russ getting blagged into sacking Prospero? (by Horus or Lorgar)


----------



## Words_of_Truth

radicallight said:


> Here's a couple of points: where were the Wulfun (sp?) they are on the cover.
> Also wasn't there something about Leman Russ getting blagged into sacking Prospero? (by Horus or Lorgar)


I think it was the whole "spy" thing. It was done by chaos in the form of Horus not by Magnus, the little scuffle during the council of Nikea wasn't between the wolves and thousand sons, again it was chaos taking the form of a thousand son to influence the goings on. 

The thousands sons didn't help themselves by going full out on their pysker powers either and basically forced Russ to sacking prospero.


----------



## Euphrati

Arguing over the stand-off at the Library on Shrike between the Wolves and the Thousands Sons is rather pointless seeing as not only do we not have all of the information regarding the encounter, but the little information we do have is completely bias to one side.

We do not know what truly passed between the two Legions before the moment we enter the scene- the accounts we get are from the mouths of the TS's and Magnus himself sees fit to gloss over the details of his actions. We don't know who threw the first blow or, in the instance of the TS's, used the first power. Nor do we know what Magnus did/said to 'stop' the Wolves... although whatever he did was enough to enrage Russ to the point of the psy-howl.

You can spin it whichever way you wish, but in the end we are left with precious little actually facts to draw judgment either way.

Personally, I think Magnus knew from the start he was traversing thin ice with his actions and was placing his hand in the metaphorical mouth of the wolf in an act of smugness... knowing full well that trouble would come of it either way. Why else would he have taken the entire Scarab Occult to 'secure' the building if he had not expected the act to be challenged by his Brother? 

What landed Magnus in trouble was not the Librarian Issue per se, although that topic went to the trial at his side dressed in the skin of a scapegoat, but the real heart of his censure was Magnus' hubris in the belief that there was nothing beyond his control and no knowledge that was 'too dangerous' for him to master despite warnings from the Emperor. Which, at the point of the trial, had already proven to be his downfall as he had long since sold his soul to the Warp in exchange for his Legion’s future.


----------



## Insurance

ckcrawford said:


> Sorry been out with the Steeler fans Steelen it up. I'm back!


see you in texas. da bears!


----------



## NiceGuyEddy

Phoebus said:


> But honestly, some times it comes down to having to call a spade a spade and realizing that Dan Abnett's ideas in regards to the Space Wolves did not come forth until after he got the nod to write "Prospero Burns". This sometimes leads to the sort of continuity issue we're trying to resolve, but all in all I think this is a rather minor one.


:goodpost: I said as much earlier. It's just for now I'm still used to calling them "Wolves of Fenris", "Sons of Russ" or "Space Wolves" so when I hear their new names I immediately think 'hey that doesn't sound right'. It'll grow on me. :wink:




Phoebus said:


> Does it? Does the fluff (Index Astartes, Codices) not indicate massive chunks of missing knowledge from this era? Do you get the impression that the Imperium would maintain--ten millennia later--something as esoteric as a Legion's favored name for themselves? :grin:


It does imo. Not just any legion the SW are one of the more traditional legions and they still have a living link to that time in Bjorn who is unlikely to have forgotten such a basic fact as his legions preferred name and I'm not suggesting that the imperium in entirety would be expected to remember it.



Phoebus said:


> Also:
> 
> 
> Does it not seem as if "A Thousand Sons" hints at Magnus having knowledge of Hawser"? And also, it seems McNeill and Abnett talked to one another in regards to what the wolves of Fenris really are...





The hints from A thousand Sons, as follows, are probably in relation to other sources Magnus has in the SWs not Hawser. Hawser was a pawn/spy of chaos not Magnus right? 

1. In A Thousand Sons Magnus doesn't appear surprised when the rememberencers "wolves are coming" warning is delivered.

2. He knows things about the "wolves/wulfen" that even Ahriman doesn't.

3. He knows a GREAT deal about the canis helix.

4. The clincher is Magnus' claim which does have a definite similarity to Hawser's case:

_“Have no fear, Ahzek,” he said, “Wyrdmake was not our only source within the Wolves. I have other assets in place, none of whom know they dance to my tune.” - A Thousand Sons - p. 241_

5. This one may have been intel from a spy or alternatively it could be Magnus' sorcery: 

_“Leman Russ and his Wolves,” said Magnus matter-of-factly, as though such an occurrence was wholly expected, “together with elements of the Custodes and the Silent Sisterhood.” - A Thousand Sons p. 419_


----------



## Angel of Blood

That does seem like a clincher, but from Prospero Burns i thought



A: Hawser was a chaos spy all along
B: Both Legions had spies within each others Legions or at least observing them from the outside
C: Which is why the Vlka Fenryka and others would assume that Hawser was one of Magnus spies


----------



## NiceGuyEddy

Angel of Blood said:


> That does seem like a clincher, but from Prospero Burns i thought
> 
> 
> 
> A: Hawser was a chaos spy all along
> B: Both Legions had spies within each others Legions or at least observing them from the outside
> C: Which is why the Vlka Fenryka and others would assume that Hawser was one of Magnus spies


Yeah I still think what you say is correct. It was just that passage made me pause...


----------



## Unknown Primarch

im nearing the half way point of pb. found it hard going for the first 25-30 pages then got into the flow of how the novel is set out (present and past points of view) and im really enjoying both points of view in the story.

ive got to say if the novel wasnt called prospero burns then people would be raving about this book. the insight into the wolves is unbelieveable, im really get a sense of what they are all about and their style is still what it always has been but not overly viking at the same time. it seems very normal for a people who live in a harsh iceland to live that way and i actually get the angle abnett has gone with when the meaning of hawser and the wolves compared to real history and think it actually validates the whole story of the novel. dont get me wrong im only half way through but its going good so far and ive not put it down now hawser has just become a skjald. hopefully it keeps getting good.

now onto the negative aspect of the book. i really cant fathom why abnett didnt do the novel as to the synopsis. i was expecting to see the reaction of the emperor after magnus fucked everything up and also what was said and done with sanctioning russ to obliterate prospero. i was expecting to get the wolves angle on the attack and also see the scheming of all the characters involved and maybe get the odd revelation along the way. this book so far seems to be about a guy becoming one with the wolves and for me that is not what this novel was supposed to be about.
the bad thing is the whole story that we were expecting cant be touched on again now and we have missed out on some really important aspects of the HH which could make the whole series not as complete as it should.
as for the changing of some of the names of things, most are good but changing the name of the fang to aett is just a step to far. the fang is the fang and i dont care how good abnett is as a author you cant tamper with stuff like that. its like changing The Emperor to The King just NO!

good book so far on its own merits but i think abnett must have been having a bad time with the whole illness thing when he got round to writing it as its just not what its supposed to be and seems abit of a school boy error to think people would overlook these things.


----------



## genesis80

Unknown Primarch said:


> now onto the negative aspect of the book. i really cant fathom why abnett didnt do the novel as to the synopsis. i was expecting to see the reaction of the emperor after magnus fucked everything up and also what was said and done with sanctioning russ to obliterate prospero. i was expecting to get the wolves angle on the attack and also see the scheming of all the characters involved and maybe get the odd revelation along the way. this book so far seems to be about a guy becoming one with the wolves and for me that is not what this novel was supposed to be about.
> the bad thing is the whole story that we were expecting cant be touched on again now and we have missed out on some really important aspects of the HH which could make the whole series not as complete as it should.
> as for the changing of some of the names of things, most are good but changing the name of the fang to aett is just a step to far. the fang is the fang and i dont care how good abnett is as a author you cant tamper with stuff like that. its like changing The Emperor to The King just NO!


I agree with everything you said, but you left out the wet leopard bits for the negative aspects. :biggrin:

(it kinda reminded me of a book for 5-6 year olds where the author kept on using the word "low dog growl" in every single page...for abnett to use it in the HH series....*facepalm*....i dont know if its more insulting to me or to him.)

** If you dont understand how irritating it was for me, i will reply ALL postings in this forum with the words "wet leopard growl". Then you will understand.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

while ive noticed it because you guys have mentioned it alot its not really annoyed me as such but something that id say is daft to have used as much as it has. but the thing about it is that he is using it to get a idea of a certain noise and i just cant see a astartes doing a growl like that. now you mention it it just damn right ridiculous and abnett does deserve some facepalm action for it. haha

one gripe i have got from reading more today is that he has got them into a battle which i cant see why he wouldnt have angled it has some part of the sacking of prospero. just seems odd to have them in that situation in a novel called prospero burns and not actually be on prospero.

one other thing. could what magnus said to russ when they attacked that scintilla city possibly be something along the lines of 'so are you gonna attack and kill another brother legion like you did in the past' to which russ feels great hurt and walks away as he didnt actually want to kill a brother primarch but that was his orders and thats what he is supposed to do. just a guess, cant remember if that was mentioned in TOS.


----------



## Yllib Enaz

It does make me wonder if the growl of the wet leopard is very different to the growl of a dry leopard


----------



## Baron Spikey

Is it a Leopard that just fell into a puddle *OR* a Leopard that decided to growl through a mouthful of water *OR* is it a Leopard that has fallen into a puddle and is trying to growl with a mouthful of water?


----------



## NiceGuyEddy

Baron Spikey said:


> trying to growl with a mouthful of water?


A gurgling leopard? Good dental hygiene...


----------



## Commissar Ploss

NiceGuyEddy said:


> A gurgling leopard? Good dental hygiene...


rinse and spit please. 

CP


----------



## Chaosveteran

Strange that a legion so related to wolves and so apparent in their savagery and war-making would emit a sound of the smallest of the 4 big-cats...


----------



## Baron Spikey

Chaosveteran said:


> Strange that a legion so related to wolves and so apparent in their savagery and war-making would emit a sound of the smallest of the 4 big-cats...


You mean the 2nd smallest of the 3 largest spotted Big Cats?

There are more than 4 species of Big Cats :laugh:


----------



## Serpion5

Chaosveteran said:


> Strange that a legion so related to wolves and so apparent in their savagery and war-making would emit a sound of the smallest of the 4 big-cats...


The smallest _big_ cat is the cheetah, and a cheetah does not roar or growl. They hiss, that`s about it. A leopard is somewhat bigger than a cheetah in terms of weight at least, and growls similarly to a lion or jaguar, just a little quieter. 

Lion, tiger, leopard, jaguar, cheetah, cougar. I count six from memory... 

There`s also lynx, bobcat etc, but they`re a fair bit smaller.

EDIT: On topic, I personally considered Prospero burns to be Abnett`s weakest work, and certainly the worst of the Heresy series I`ve read to date.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Serpion5 said:


> EDIT: On topic, I personally considered Prospero burns to be Abnett`s weakest work, and certainly the worst of the Heresy series I`ve read to date.


Really? Even compared to _Battle for the Abyss_, _Descent_, _Fallen Angels_ and _Galaxy in Flames_? :shok:


----------



## Chaosveteran

Baron Spikey said:


> You mean the 2nd smallest of the 3 largest spotted Big Cats?
> 
> There are more than 4 species of Big Cats :laugh:


I know there's more but for simplicity's sake I went the easy way: quote from Wikipedia "the smallest of the four "big cats" in the genus Panthera, the other three being the tiger, lion and jaguar". Anyhow, I just wanted to emphasise that it's strange that a generally wolf/dog legion emit cat sounds (and not even the largest cats, ie lion). 



Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> Really? Even compared to _Battle for the Abyss_, _Descent_, _Fallen Angels_ and _Galaxy in Flames_? :shok:


More on topic, I think that Prospero Burns is a great piece of work (with the exception of the wet leopard-growl phenomenon) but this is based on one parameter: IF ONLY IT WASN'T CALLED WHAT IT'S CALLED and didn't have the synopsis it was given! For me, the worst novel is BftA closely followed by the 2 DA books (can't decide which is worse).


----------



## forkmaster

I think they should have done a thing like with the Descent of Angels, first you write about Hawser finding the wolves what is it, 70-90 years before the heresy when hes dwelling with the... Rout? THEN you write a kick-ass Prospero Burn á la earlier novels standard.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

im getting near the end of PB now and was gonna say the same. i think that maybe this could be angled as a space wolf duology and we actually get the novel we thought we were getting. but the more i read of PB the more i get the feeling that a novel on just the wolves attacking prospero would have been quite predictive, boring and just plan not lived up to expectation. the hauser thing is quite long winded and doesnt really have a point to be honest. that its such a important piece of HH lore to warrant 80% of a book about prospero burning doesnt add up. 
now if it came down to the wolves not knowing hauser was a spy and then there being some sort of scheme involved to make the wolves attack prospero instead of bringing magnus in then it would make sense to have alot of hauser in. at this point of the story im not getting any of that. they just attacking prospero now so maybe that will change (but i doubt it) god i hope abnett put out some response to what most people think of this book and explain his actions before i start to wet-leopard growl at him.

and for the record the dark angels books are quality. they get so much flak because after the first 5 books we went from revelation to something not directly related to the current plot that we had been reading. same happened with fallen angels but if you read them as the first HH novels you read the story would seem good. ive got a 40yr old work mate reading them who doesnt know anything about 40k and he has enjoyed every one of these books and its solely down to the fact he hasnt any prior knowledge, expectation or opinion on the lore as he doesnt know of it. one thing he did say was that while BftA was good in itself it missed any real piece where it had a big revelation that got you thinking about other things, it was more like a filler episode in a tv series before you got to the good episodes where something significant happens.


----------



## BlackApostleVilhelm

i would like to try and shed some light on the "wet leopard" growls. yes we have all heard that deep pur/growl that many big cats emit for whatever reason. these are a very very deep growl-like sound, indeed cats do not growl at all only dogs do but there is no dog big enough on this planet that can make a sound that deep. i believe that is what Abnett is trying to get across, that the Space Wolves themselves can actually make this sound and if there were a dog as big as them it would sound much like the deep gutteral "growl" that comes out of them and, it would seem, leopards too. 

the wetness refers to the gutteral tone of the growl, it comes from deep in the throat, which is a place that is usually never dry. so when a deep growl comes out the saliva/spit gurgles the sound and messes with it because it is coming from deeper inside the body. 

hope that made sense!


EDIT: also about the constant flashbacks. when i first started the book i thought they were ridiculous and at many times not needed, but looking back on it and what people have said in this thread i think they serve a purpose. you find out later on that Hauser had in fact been a pawn of chaos, he was actually not a pawn of the Thousand Sons at all as we were all led to believe, he had been guided by this daemon for an extremely long period of time. chaos was playing off of the fact that the legions had spies that watched the other legions and gave thier commanders information on their brothers and so on and so forth, SO in essence hauser was the tool used to push the Wolves to attack Prospero. 

towards the end russ speaks to hauser believing magnus is listening, which obviously he is not because hauser is not his pawn. another indicator of this is the fact that the "Amon" that the wolves had fought at Nikea was the daemon itself because the real Amon was down with Magnus himself. i think these flashbacks serve the purpose of making us believe that Hauser came to fenris of his own free will, that his whole life he was not tainted and had complete control over himself, when in fact at the end we find out that this is not even remotely true at all.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

the question that really stinks about this daemon is how can not one of the imperial personal on nikea sense this being and not only imperial personal but the Emperor Of Mankind, Malcador The Sigillite, Magnus The Red, Head Navigator, Master Of Astropaths and several legion librarians that were there for the meeting. we are talking about the imperiums strongest psykers and not one whiff of foetid stink of the warp was sense.

anyone care to elaborate?


----------



## BlackApostleVilhelm

i will take that challenge. this is how i see it, and this is coming from someone who has played chaos since he started and who revels in all fluff warptainted. 

the Emperor was/is the strongest psyker of mankind, this we know. 

we also know that the chaos gods, all four of them, are beings of immense psychic energy etc etc and so on. personally i believe that the emperor was so powerful in fact that he could actually challenge these four beings. now seperately he could have probably taken them each on, and quite possibly succeeded, but during the great crusade, or rather from the start of the Emperor's outward conquest, all four of them were working together to stop this threat. 

many say that time flows differently in the warp, i like to think that the warp is not necessarily connected to time at all, hence why you could be in it for years but come out and have only two minutes pass in realspace. so in essence there is somewhat of a connection, but it is rather loose to say the least. 

i do believe that the chaos gods are more than capable of hiding one specific daemon from the sights of all those present, including the emperor, if all of them were working together to shield said daemon. in reality it shouldnt be that hard to hide it from all of them, excluding the Emperor and maybe Magnus, after all they are beings of immense psychic energy and potential. 

on the other hand it is very possible that magnus was so caught up in what was going on that he did not register the daemon's presence, after all it is just one daemon. maybe the emperor DID see it and hoped that whoever ran into it, the wolves, would be able to kill it and be done with it. 

im thinking that whoever was involved with the council of Nikea was very caught up in what was happening they simply didnt notice the daemon at all. i mean if you think about it what was going on there was deciding the path that the human race took as a whole, this is no simple matter that could be easily decided, and for the Emperor one of his sons had the possibility of being sanctioned for simply being himself. for magnus this was his way of life and it was being questioned as if he was a simple minded sorceror who knew not what he was doing, which many of us can say he was not. 

my explanation is that seeing as how the many "psychic" minds there were so caught up in what was happening that they did not register the presence of ONE daemon that happened to appear fairly far away from the proceedings. often the safest place to hide a spy is closest to your enemy, indeed often right in there presence, because that is the place that they often check the least.


----------



## genesis80

BlackApostleVilhelm said:


> i would like to try and shed some light on the "wet leopard" growls. yes we have all heard that deep pur/growl that many big cats emit for whatever reason. these are a very very deep growl-like sound, indeed cats do not growl at all only dogs do but there is no dog big enough on this planet that can make a sound that deep. i believe that is what Abnett is trying to get across, that the Space Wolves themselves can actually make this sound and if there were a dog as big as them it would sound much like the deep gutteral "growl" that comes out of them and, it would seem, leopards too.


so youre saying a GIANT wolf's growl is the same as a growl from a small leopard...not even say a lion or tiger but a leopard. The only response i can give to that is that i find your justifications a bit far fetched but still highly amusing.


Furthermore, I think you completely missed the MAIN gripe. Using the term wet leopard growl maybe once or twice would have been slightly amusing, but ok. Using it 30-50 times (like we didnt get it the 1st time round) is just plain insulting.





BlackApostleVilhelm said:


> EDIT: also about the constant flashbacks. when i first started the book i thought they were ridiculous and at many times not needed, but looking back on it and what people have said in this thread i think they serve a purpose. you find out later on that Hauser had in fact been a pawn of chaos, he was actually not a pawn of the Thousand Sons at all as we were all led to believe, he had been guided by this daemon for an extremely long period of time. chaos was playing off of the fact that the legions had spies that watched the other legions and gave thier commanders information on their brothers and so on and so forth, SO in essence hauser was the tool used to push the Wolves to attack Prospero.


The same argument again. Ppl here do understand why he chose the historian. Ppl do NOT understand why it was necessary to devote 1/2 of a book entitled "Prospero Burns" to all his flashbacks. Most of it was unnecessary. If the book was titled differently, maybe you could find more sympathy but as it stands, its like walking into Starbucks and finding out that only thing on the menu is a McChicken burger.




BlackApostleVilhelm said:


> on the other hand it is very possible that magnus was so caught up in what was going on that he did not register the daemon's presence, after all it is just one daemon. maybe the emperor DID see it and hoped that whoever ran into it, the wolves, would be able to kill it and be done with it.


Remember that the emperor wasnt supposed to be just the best psychic, he was supposedly the "fullest potential of man" in body and mind. Now, im as far from that as the next guy, and even I can tell you that having an agent of your archenemy being able to infiltrate one of your most important events in HISTORY cant just be waived away and well....someone will handle it.....
Being able to get a demon that close to a conclave of the the most powerful humans without being detected should have set off the most direst alarms. A simple human might even have suspected they were being watched and manipulated...But of course, these being the most intelligent, powerful minds, they just COULDENT have made this simple connection right?? I bet you think malcador being the head assassin and chief psyker was just too busy tying his shoe laces to notice too.
Also, the 4 chaos gods working together being able to shield demons and whatnot, and the emperor being unable to defeat or even sense them if they put all 4 powers into their pawn, you should read about what happened to this fellow called horus and how he met his end.


** My main point: A good sci fi book shouldent require this level of leaps of logic (and no small amount of faith) to be good. Seriously, if this much explanation is required for wet leopard growls and why prospero burns contains almost nothing about the burning of prospero, you have to wonder about the bandwagon theory and how some ppl will think of any justification just to meet their needs.


----------



## Serpion5

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> Really? Even compared to _Battle for the Abyss_, _Descent_, _Fallen Angels_ and _Galaxy in Flames_? :shok:


Really! All of those other books were enjoyable for the plot if not for Dan`s writing talents (which have become a bit hit and miss lately). BftA and GiF I have read through twice, and while I didn`t particularly enjoy the DA books either, at least they had the character depth you`d expect. I`ll admit I didn`t read them as thoroughly as I should havem and POrospero didn`t get much better treatment from me after the halfway mark.

Abnett does little to get me on the side of the SW (or the Vlka Fenryka) in Prospero, I still have pretty much the same understanding of them as I drew from _A Thousand Sons._ Everything seemed to come from Hawser`s PoV, and frankly I couldn`t care less what his problems are. He did not delve deeply enough into the Wolves` mentality (if it does indeed go deeper at all) and the half arsed flashbacks add fuck all to the story, except for his meeting with the Thousand Sons near the beginning. 

In my view, Abnett could have done more. Looking at what McNeill did for TS made me expect so much more from the other side, but maybe that was the problem. The content didn`t live up to the hype. 

I guess all writers hit a slump now and then though.


----------



## BlackApostleVilhelm

i never said that the fact that he used the "wet leopard" growl all the time didnt bug me, it most certainly did. i also didnt say i enjoyed the fact that more than half the book was devoted to flashbacks, i was simply offering possible explanations. IMHO i enjoyed the book as a whole and i feel that if it wasnt entitled "Prospero Burns" people would enjoy it more. i feel like the title led many, and i admit me also, to believe that the book was going to dive into what happened on prospero and the main events leading to that and so on and so on. 

overall i enjoyed more so than some of the other books in the series even though the title was grossly misleading, much of itwas devoted to this historian and the frequent wet leopard growl. i feel like it gave a unique view into the Space Wolves and their culture like many of the HH books have been doing, giving insights into the different legions and their inner workings and such


----------



## Euphrati

genesis80 said:


> Remember that the emperor wasnt supposed to be just the best psychic, he was supposedly the "fullest potential of man" in body and mind. Now, im as far from that as the next guy, and even I can tell you that having an agent of your archenemy being able to infiltrate one of your most important events in HISTORY cant just be waived away and well....someone will handle it.....
> Being able to get a demon that close to a conclave of the the most powerful humans without being detected should have set off the most direst alarms. A simple human might even have suspected they were being watched and manipulated...But of course, these being the most intelligent, powerful minds, they just COULDENT have made this simple connection right?? I bet you think malcador being the head assassin and chief psyker was just too busy tying his shoe laces to notice too.
> Also, the 4 chaos gods working together being able to shield demons and whatnot, and the emperor being unable to defeat or even sense them if they put all 4 powers into their pawn, you should read about what happened to this fellow called horus and how he met his end.


I think that people are forgetting the fact that daemons have already appeared in a place that was as much, if not more, heavily guarded than Nikaea... 


Namely the hidden creation chamber of the Primarchs as seen in False Gods and more recently in The First Heretic. Both times the daemon brings along company (in the form of a Primarch and multiple astartes) and is able to shield them from the Emperor's awareness. But, of course, knowing daemons both times could have simply been elaborate lies...


----------



## BlackApostleVilhelm

thank you Euph, i forgot to mention that:victory:


----------



## genesis80

Euphrati said:


> I think that people are forgetting the fact that daemons have already appeared in a place that was as much, if not more, heavily guarded than Nikaea...
> 
> 
> Namely the hidden creation chamber of the Primarchs as seen in False Gods and more recently in The First Heretic. Both times the daemon brings along company (in the form of a Primarch and multiple astartes) and is able to shield them from the Emperor's awareness. But, of course, knowing daemons both times could have simply been elaborate lies...


I thought in those events, it was just the "emperor" and not his ENTIRE posse.
Even then I thought, hey, if the emperor is all THAT, then shouldn't the man at least be able to sense demonic presence in the very least. I mean, you're the EMPEROR, for crying out loud. If the chaos gods are able to shield demons from you even realizing they are there, its time to forget the "war" and just join Chaos already. It obvious your a** is already getting handed to you.
I mean, if the situation were reversed and the grey knights are able to join in the chaos conclave between the 4 gods and their discussions, i would say the war is as good as over. 
Ditto with the harlequins discovering one of their guardians of the black library was actually the changeling in disguise. (hmmmm...now that i think of it........)


----------



## Phoebus

Perhaps the band of Sisters of Silence scattered throughout the area served to stifle whatever "signature" the daemon would have been emitting?


----------



## genesis80

Phoebus said:


> Perhaps the band of Sisters of Silence scattered throughout the area served to stifle whatever "signature" the daemon would have been emitting?


eh? I thought the sisters would have prevented the daemon from materializing in the 1st place. Can daemons really manifest within a group of sisters (or culexus / necron pariahs for that matter)


----------



## Serpion5

genesis80 said:


> eh? I thought the sisters would have prevented the daemon from materializing in the 1st place. Can daemons really manifest within a group of sisters (or culexus / necron pariahs for that matter)


Yes, they can, but it damages them. 



Serpion5 said:


> I can answer this. It`s covered very briefly in either Eisenhorn or Ravenor, but it basically has to do with brain structure. A normal human brain has its typical neurons, buzzing away and being typical. A psyker has a slightly different make, the neurons that allow for greater linkage to the warp are amplified (yes even the warp has its roots in science).
> 
> Blanks are different. Instead of psyker neurons, they possess a brain structure that has the opposite effect. Remembering that this gene was planted by the c`tan, and it makes sense that the pariah gene is generally stronger than the psyker gene, but still has limits.
> 
> Just as a psyker can wear out with overuse of his/her abilities, a blank can also be pushed to breaking point if they encounter a strong enough psionic force.
> 
> Hope this helped.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Unknown Primarch said:


> the question that really stinks about this daemon is how can not one of the imperial personal on nikea sense this being and not only imperial personal but the Emperor Of Mankind, Malcador The Sigillite, Magnus The Red, Head Navigator, Master Of Astropaths and several legion librarians that were there for the meeting. we are talking about the imperiums strongest psykers and not one whiff of foetid stink of the warp was sense.
> 
> anyone care to elaborate?


The only such explanation really is that the Emperor (and others) couldn't detect it's presence. I don't think so much thought should go into occurences like this where daemons are concerned, they are creatures of the warp and where their concerned many illogical things seem to occur. 

An example of such feats though is used in _A Thousand Sons_. Magnus preforms a ritual that enables them to talk in utter secrecy, he boasts that not even the Emperor could eavesdrop on them whilst under the ritual. If Magnus can achieve such feats, I see no reason why a powerful daemon couldn't.

Also take into account the wording in _Codex: Chaos Daemons_: 
_"During this period the Chaos Gods *tried with all their might* to bring about the Master of Mankind's downfall, Culminating in their corruption of the Primarchs and the wars of the Horus Heresy."_

*"Tried with all their might"* - does seem to suggest that anything goes considering the Four had temporarily allied and were fully committed to the Emperor's downfall (especially considering how powerful and influential the Four were/are).


----------



## Unknown Primarch

NO NO NO, just finished PB and while i can overlook what the book is about i just cannot under any circumstances over look the fluff fuckup of how bjorn lost his arm. thats just one step too far mr abnett, you have lost alot of respect from me with this book and maybe its time for the whole book to be retconned so we can get back to business.
i didnt like how ADB changed the shaming of lorgar and his legion when it was already mentioned in scions of the storm in a different way but something like that just seemed rushed for one but totally unneeded and beyond a oversight.


----------



## Baron Spikey

Unknown Primarch said:


> NO NO NO, just finished PB and while i can overlook what the book is about i just cannot under any circumstances over look the fluff fuckup of how bjorn lost his arm. thats just one step too far mr abnett, you have lost alot of respect from me with this book and maybe its time for the whole book to be retconned so we can get back to business.


Seriously, all the more important things that the HH series has changed from the fluff that came before it and you bitch about the reason someone had their arm cut off?
How about we retcon the old fluff...oh wait that's what's happening.

Right I'm not sure if I'm doing this correctly, I'm not hip like the rest of you, but here goes:
Unknown Primarch= Fail!


----------



## Commissar Ploss

U.P, mate, shit changes, that's how life goes on. Lots of older stuff is no longer canon. and besides, it's all fake gibberish. it's not like they're changing anything of any actual importance. you have to realize what you're complaining about, it's not really that important. 

CP


----------



## Serpion5

Unknown Primarch said:


> NO NO NO, just finished PB and while i can overlook what the book is about i just cannot under any circumstances over look the fluff fuckup of how bjorn lost his arm. thats just one step too far mr abnett, you have lost alot of respect from me with this book and maybe its time for the whole book to be retconned so we can get back to business.
> i didnt like how ADB changed the shaming of lorgar and his legion when it was already mentioned in scions of the storm in a different way but something like that just seemed rushed for one but totally unneeded and beyond a oversight.


Many things have changed to add interest to the overall plot. Keep in mind the overall story was pretty vague at first and this series has gone into a far greater detail than ever before. 

If new ideas crop up that make the story more interesting, BL and GW have every right to change it. For example, the new story of Magnus` missing eye is far more compelling than _He was born that way._ Also consider the revelation that Alpharius had a previously unknown twin. 

I`m interested to see if Sanguinius` wings will ever receive a cool new backstory in greater detail. As has been said, things change, and it`s not your place to stop that.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

well when its a general known fact that valdor was the one that chopped bjorns arm off then id say thats not something that was vague and was expanded further plus the fact im sure it states in a thousands sons that this happened how can you explain that away. school boy error from abnett id say.


----------



## Baron Spikey

Unknown Primarch said:


> well when its a general known fact that valdor was the one that chopped bjorns arm off then id say thats not something that was vague and was expanded further plus the fact im sure it states in a thousands sons that this happened how can you explain that away. school boy error from abnett id say.


Yeah it didn't happen in _A Thousand Sons_, actually have a read before you claim Abnett was making a school boy error.

So what if they've changed such an incredibly minor point? It takes away *nothing* from the Heresy or 40k.


----------



## Angel of Blood

So your fine with a Primarch quite suddenly having an identical twin? Or one being possessed by a deamon? Magnus having made a deal with Tzeentch? These are all much more major points than Valdor being the one to chop Bjorns arm off. I'm sure much more major things will be changed before the heresy is out


----------



## Unknown Primarch

i didnt say it was definate in a thousand sons but im sure it was (lent TS to a friend to check) but it defo in collected visions and having hawser doing it made no sense or added anything to the story. what would have been better is if the sisters and valdor turned up and he chopped it off quickly so as to help bjorn then attacked the daemon and actually did something in PB. 

and actually it isnt a minor point, its actually the genesis of the name of bjorn the fell handed and while not highly important considering its a known point in HH history that deserved more than just hawser chopping it off. lame and rushed if you ask me.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

Angel of Blood said:


> So your fine with a Primarch quite suddenly having an identical twin? Or one being possessed by a deamon? Magnus having made a deal with Tzeentch? These are all much more major points than Valdor being the one to chop Bjorns arm off. I'm sure much more major things will be changed before the heresy is out


actually yes on all of those. why couldnt a primarch be a twin, thats just stupid saying it couldnt happen. the emperor made them all for a reason so why not make twins for a certain reason. its not unheard of for any living creature to divide in the womb and create twins so why not a primarch.

if a sword, tank, titan or any being be possessed by a daemon why cant a primarch but seeing as fulgrim let himself be possessed then thats the answer. he let his defences down to be taken so thats how it happened. if he just got possessed just by having the sword then that would be lame but it was explained logically.

as for magnus, well he was exposed all this life to the warp and thought he could control what he was doing so didnt think by getting help from chaos it would be something that would spiral and get out of control. he fucked up and knows full well his mistake.

as for the last point. by all means flesh out and expand but dont alter what is already known about the heresy. you go down that route and you may as well as sanguinius didnt get killed he just in a coma and ferrus isnt really dead they sowed his head back on. no by all means expand but dont alter, it just causes people to moan all the time


----------



## Baron Spikey

Unknown Primarch said:


> and actually it isnt a minor point, its actually the genesis of the name of bjorn the fell handed and while not highly important considering its a known point in HH history that deserved more than just hawser chopping it off. lame and rushed if you ask me.


Yeah...that's pretty much the idea of a minor point, you know not being important and all.

Now Bjorn has a new genesis for being called the Fell-Handed, woop.



Unknown Primarch said:


> as for the last point. by all means flesh out and expand but dont alter what is already known about the heresy. you go down that route and you may as well as sanguinius didnt get killed he just in a coma and ferrus isnt really dead they sowed his head back on. no by all means expand but dont alter, it just causes people to moan all the time


You make it sound as if Prospero Burns is the first book to change something which was previously 'known' to be something else- it's happened with every single book, hell I woulnd't be surprised at all if the events in HH: Colected Visions differed from what was known before it was published.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

ive found myself arguing with you on another thread now. im done arguing on here. you have your opinion and ill have mine. ie the ultramarines arent the greatest astartes out there. guilleman was just a sad bore who was OCD and was lucky to land on a planet that wasnt near earth, chaos tainted or a deathworld. he got handed things on a plate and got lucky that dorn went nuts and he grasped power 3rd hand instead of first hand like he always wised he did.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Nice to see you were constructive there. Would you rather everyone simply agreed with you on your points? Shit i've argued with some people relentlessly on multiple threads at the same time, i don't simply go "I'm done arguing with you now, bollucks to it" 

Now, I didn't say any of those things couldn't happen either. But they are HUGE changes and developments. A twin primarch?!?! That's one of the largest revelations in the HH series so far imo. The fact that Fulgrim was until now completely unknown to have been possessed, again a massive revelation. That Magnus made a pact with Tzeentch before he even embarked on the Great Crusade, that the Thousand Sons were damned from their very begginings. These are all huge changes to what we knew before, things that change entire previously heard accounts, potentially alter things in the current 40k universe itself. 

And then you have Bjorn having his hand cut off my someone else. He still keeps his nickname, he lost it in the same way, it changes fuck all in the present, it changes fuck all in the Heresy itself. It basically does absoloutely nothing, its barely even a minor point.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

read below 
v v


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Totally agree with you _Angel_ (and everyone else), _Unknown Primarch_ is getting his panties in a bunch over nothing. 



Angel of Blood said:


> The fact that Fulgrim was until now completely unknown to have been possessed


Although one minor correction. We were actually already aware that Fulgrim was to become possessed prior to the release of _Fulgrim_, but _Fulgrim_ itself was still full of other revelations previously unheard of. Eldrad Ulthuan contacting Fulgrim in an attempt to prevent the Heresy?! That's a pretty epic revelation right there!


----------



## raider1987

I really don't understand how so called fluff mistakes can anger people so much. I mean everything that happened during the heresy is ancient history to 40k. As far as I care, and feel free to disagree with me on this as it is just my opinion, anything said in the 41st millennium about the heresy is legend, knowledge passed down 10,000 years, biased and misshaped over time. Also, if the Horus Heresy series kept everything exactly the same as the fluff and knowledge we already know about the heresy, it would be boring as there wouldn't be as many surprises or plot twists. 

I don't play the game, paint models or own any of the codex's, it just doesn't interest me. I just really don't care if a book I read is disputed by a manual for a game that was written years before the book.


----------



## bobss

I finished _Prospero Burns _about a week ago, and utterly adored it. Despite having a lot less action and generific bolter-porn, I still think it's superior to_ A Thousand Sons_. However, having finished the absolute abomination of _Courage and Honour_, my liking of McNeill is at an all-time low.

And Unknown Primarch: Fucking grow up and discuss plastic-space men like a real man.


----------



## Baltar

The big 'eye opener' for me will be the throne room scene, where Sanguinius confronts Horus.

Some accounts say that they fought and that Sanguinius lost. Some say that Sanguinius wouldn't fight and tried to convince Horus that what he was doing was wrong and that Horus simply killed him while he was on his knees.

We will have to wait and see.

I've got no doubt that they'll let shitty Abnett write the final (and thus most epic books), simply because he is anally pleasured by bazillions of mouth-foaming fans (hell knows why). Because I know this to be true, I have already decided that the whole scene will be a disappointment in some way, probably because Abnett will decide that they have a cup of tea and play chess, before Sanguinius slits his own wrists, or something.


----------



## Baron Spikey

bobss said:


> I finished _Prospero Burns _about a week ago, and utterly adored it. Despite having a lot less action and generific bolter-porn, I still think it's superior to_ A Thousand Sons_. However, having finished the absolute abomination of _Courage and Honour_, my liking of McNeill is at an all-time low.
> 
> And Unknown Primarch: Fucking grow up and discuss plastic-space men like a real man.


I have some good and bad news for you.
Good News- I think I can save you some money and a fair few hours.
Bad News- _Chapter's Due_ is *much* worse than _Courage and Honour_.


Baltar said:


> The big 'eye opener' for me will be the throne room scene, where Sanguinius confronts Horus.
> 
> Some accounts say that they fought and that Sanguinius lost. Some say that Sanguinius wouldn't fight and tried to convince Horus that what he was doing was wrong and that Horus simply killed him while he was on his knees.
> 
> We will have to wait and see.
> 
> I've got no doubt that they'll let shitty Abnett write the final (and thus most epic books), simply because he is anally pleasured by bazillions of mouth-foaming fans (hell knows why). Because I know this to be true, I have already decided that the whole scene will be a disappointment in some way, probably because Abnett will decide that they have a cup of tea and play chess, before Sanguinius slits his own wrists, or something.


Gosh the most popular BL author being considered to write the culmination of the BL flagship series, wow crazy stuff...


----------



## Angel of Blood

Baltars standard Abnett flaming aside i'm also quite interested as to how they will tackle the Horus vs Sagnuinius fight. Been too many conflicting versions of the story. Will it be a prolonged fight? will Sanguinius indeed make an opening in Horus armour that the Emperor will expose? How exactly is Horus going to murder Sanguinius. Looking forward to the eventual time either way, say we've still got a few years to wait though


----------



## Baltar

Baron Spikey said:


> I have some good and bad news for you.
> Good News- I think I can save you some money and a fair few hours.
> Bad News- _Chapter's Due_ is *much* worse than _Courage and Honour_.
> 
> Gosh the most popular BL author being considered to write the culmination of the BL flagship series, wow crazy stuff...


Once again... and again, and again, and again...

Popularity =/= quality

Frankly, Stepheny Meyer is WAY more popular than Abnett. Wouldn't get her to write the final though, personally.


----------



## Baltar

Angel of Blood said:


> Baltars standard Abnett flaming aside i'm also quite interested as to how they will tackle the Horus vs Sagnuinius fight. Been too many conflicting versions of the story. Will it be a prolonged fight? will Sanguinius indeed make an opening in Horus armour that the Emperor will expose? How exactly is Horus going to murder Sanguinius. Looking forward to the eventual time either way, say we've still got a few years to wait though


The Heresy artwork book gives an account of the fight between Emperor and Horus, and there is no mention of 'an opening in the armour'. There is just 'Boom' from the Emperor, in the form of an unstoppable psychic blast.

There is more or less no coverage of the Sanguinius/Horus confrontation, other than that there was one, and that Sanguinius dies.

As I say, if Abnett has his way, we will be getting the account of the fight from some wet, kind-of-boring, human character, who watches from the sidelines, and then just happens to perhaps stab Sanguinius a few times (just for shocks and horror, and so that Abnett can butcher the HH series up a bit more, and to impress us all with how much he dislikes space marines).

Who knows.

Perhaps Sanguinius growls like a wet leopard as he dies.



PS: If anyone from BL reads these stupid threads, PLEASE don't let Abnett near it. PLEASE let ADB do it. He's way better. That is all.


----------



## NiceGuyEddy

Baltar said:


> Once again... and again, and again, and again...
> 
> Popularity =/= quality
> 
> Frankly, Stepheny Meyer is WAY more popular than Abnett. Wouldn't get her to write the final though, personally.


Why bother talking about this, we'll all be in old people nappies by the time it ever gets released so it'll probably be written by someone half our age. :angry:


----------



## Baltar

NiceGuyEddy said:


> Why bother talking about this, we'll all be in old people nappies by the time it ever gets released so it'll probably be written by someone half our age. :angry:


Someone at GW told me the number of books they had planned to publish. I don't remember what it was, but I do remember that we are above half way - so I don't see how we are all going to be old by the time it happens....

It only took them a few years to get more than half way (in terms of book number), which I see as quite impressive.

Frankly, that's churning them out.


----------



## FORTHELION

Personally id like it to be written by 3 authors from different prespectives, Abnett, adb and mcneill.
3 seperate books for a brilliant trilogy to round off the series.

Though none of these authors may be alive come the end of the series if GW have their way. That could be a 100 years down the line by the time they milk it.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Baltar said:


> Someone at GW told me the number of books they had planned to publish. I don't remember what it was, but I do remember that we are above half way - so I don't see how we are all going to be old by the time it happens....
> 
> It only took them a few years to get more than half way (in terms of book number), which I see as quite impressive.
> 
> Frankly, that's churning them out.


I'm fairly sure that several HH authors have said there isn't a set number of novels planned for the series. Theres no need to restrict themselves in that way.


----------



## Baltar

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> I'm fairly sure that several HH authors have said there isn't a set number of novels planned for the series. Theres no need to restrict themselves in that way.


I'd agree.

Although it's understandable that they would at the very least make a framework or plan around which the authors can do their job. Having some sort of benchmark (rather than an absolute fixed number) is probably a wise move.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Baltar said:


> The Heresy artwork book gives an account of the fight between Emperor and Horus, and there is no mention of 'an opening in the armour'. There is just 'Boom' from the Emperor, in the form of an unstoppable psychic blast.
> 
> There is more or less no coverage of the Sanguinius/Horus confrontation, other than that there was one, and that Sanguinius dies.


 
There have been other accounts of the fight or how Sanguinius was killed scattered throughout various IA's, Codexes and WD's. Some saying it was a prlonged fight, others saying it was over very quickly. The on is from the perpective of Captain Tycho as he makes his last stand, he envisions himself as Sanguinius in his final moments, and in it he wounds Horus, its debatable as to what Tycho saw however, it could be completely fabricated, but its said several time Blood Angels feel themselves living out Sanguinius last moments, whether they actually are or not is open for your own interpretation.


----------



## Baltar

Personally, I don't mind too much whether they make him submissive and simply executed, or if they make it prolonged fight.

What I DO want to happen, however, is a very swift fight with the bloodthirster on top of the Eternity Gate. Hello Bloodhtirster. SMASH. CUTS HEAD OFF. THROWS AT HOARD.

Stitch that, mofo's.

Etc.

All well written.... do it ADB... (don't let Abnett get his grubby hands on it...)


----------



## NiceGuyEddy

Baltar said:


> Someone at GW told me the number of books they had planned to publish. I don't remember what it was, but I do remember that we are above half way - so I don't see how we are all going to be old by the time it happens....
> 
> It only took them a few years to get more than half way (in terms of book number), which I see as quite impressive.
> 
> Frankly, that's churning them out.


Oh my god I can't believe you actually took that literally...

My point was that: 

(a) By the time they write it Abnett may not be "shitty" as you choose to call him.

and

(b) Abnett may not even be top dog by then.

And I don't think there's a set number of heresy novels and even if we were half way through in 5 years time alot could change.


----------



## Angel of Blood

In virtually all versions i've read though Sanguinius gets smacked about quite a bit by Ka'bandha before he defeats him


----------



## Baron Spikey

Angel of Blood said:


> In virtually all versions i've read though Sanguinius gets smacked about quite a bit by Ka'bandha before he defeats him


Yeah we don't want that skipped over just so we can have a fight that lasts 1 page.


----------



## Roninman

Im not sure where i read about this, but some account says Horus strangled Sanguinius. Have to try remember, it wasnt long time ago i read this. That would be more dramatic however.


----------



## Baron Spikey

Roninman said:


> Im not sure where i read about this, but some account says Horus strangled Sanguinius. Have to try remember, it wasnt long time ago i read this. That would be more dramatic however.


Yeah I've read that! Curse you brain, remember where!


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

There was definatley something in _Codex: Blood Angels 3rd ed_. Don't have my copy on me currently though. That might be what your looking for.

Although _Codex: Blood Angels 5th ed_ (the most recent source on the battle to my knowledge) does note that _'There are many tales told of this final battle and, though the exact facts are long lost, one detail holds through all the recitations through all the millennia since. Despite the Emperor's great power, he could never have bested Horus had not the blade of Sanguinius wrought a ***** in the Warmaster's armour.'_

Of course though that is just one variation of the tale among countless. It will certainly be interesting to see what course the HH series itself will take. Hopefully several different takes, wrought through different novels resulting in several contradictions.


----------



## Baltar

Baron Spikey said:


> Yeah we don't want that skipped over just so we can have a fight that lasts 1 page.


We could get Abnett to write it, instead.

Perhaps some menial serf within the palace can give a monologue of his recollection of the battle.... yawn...


----------



## Unknown Primarch

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> There was definatley something in _Codex: Blood Angels 3rd ed_. Don't have my copy on me currently though. That might be what your looking for.
> 
> Although _Codex: Blood Angels 5th ed_ (the most recent source on the battle to my knowledge) does note that _'There are many tales told of this final battle and, though the exact facts are long lost, one detail holds through all the recitations through all the millennia since. Despite the Emperor's great power, he could never have bested Horus had not the blade of Sanguinius wrought a ***** in the Warmaster's armour.'_
> 
> Of course though that is just one variation of the tale among countless. It will certainly be interesting to see what course the HH series itself will take. Hopefully several different takes, wrought through different novels resulting in several contradictions.


seems abit hokey that sanguinius can create a ***** in horus's armor but the emperor wouldnt have been able to. im sure the emperor has a mightier looking sword than sanguinius so that idea seems lame. i think if we see sanguinius have a real good scrap with horus but because he been fighting on terra against great daemons and such that he was just not a match for horus in the end and horus just chokes him to death. 

im not a uber BA fan or anything but sanguinius deserves to go out on a high as for me is was one of the best primarchs and probably the best one to ever replace the emperor if something had happened to him and things hadnt turned to dust.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Unknown Primarch said:


> seems abit hokey that sanguinius can create a ***** in horus's armor but the emperor wouldnt have been able to. im sure the emperor has a mightier looking sword than sanguinius so that idea seems lame.


I believe that particular take on the final confrontation had the intention of making Sanguinius' noble sacrifice worthwhile, rather than it being seemingly pointless. Take into account it only comes from Blood Angels sources though (_Codex: Blood Angels_ 3rd and 5th editions are the only two sources I'm aware of that mention it). 

Personally I prefer this take on it though, and hope they roll with it in the HH series.


----------



## Angel of Blood

I honestly can't remember where the Tycho vision story is from, might have been whichever Index Astartes gave the rules for Death Company Tycho, or Codex: Armageddon perhaps. Either way it had Sanguinius trying his best to fight Horus and putting up a very good fight, being after all supposedly one of the best combatants of the Primarchs, but he is still no match for the grossly impowered Horus and is tired from the Siege and in the end he just goes for an all out last ditch attempt and makes a ***** in Horus armour, he is then promplty brutally murdered


Edit: As for Sanguinius being strangled. Horus himself in collected visions says to the Emperor "With my
bare hands I throttled the life from him."


----------



## Baltar

I like the idea of Sanguinius being choked to death. They are supposed to be very close, Horus and Sanguinius, and there is something 'complete' about Horus choking his closest brother to death near the end, with regard to how far gone Horus is to chaos.


----------



## Lord of the Night

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> There was definatley something in _Codex: Blood Angels 3rd ed_. Don't have my copy on me currently though. That might be what your looking for.
> 
> Although _Codex: Blood Angels 5th ed_ (the most recent source on the battle to my knowledge) does note that _'There are many tales told of this final battle and, though the exact facts are long lost, one detail holds through all the recitations through all the millennia since. Despite the Emperor's great power, he could never have bested Horus had not the blade of Sanguinius wrought a ***** in the Warmaster's armour.'_
> 
> Of course though that is just one variation of the tale among countless. It will certainly be interesting to see what course the HH series itself will take. Hopefully several different takes, wrought through different novels resulting in several contradictions.


I'm hoping that it takes this route as well, Sanguinius had psychic powers and had foresight, it is likely that he knew going to the Vengeful Spirit would end in his death and I doubt he would have gone anyway unless he knew that his death would lead to victory for the Emperor, therefore he knew that his death would save the Imperium.



Unknown Primarch said:


> seems abit hokey that sanguinius can create a ***** in horus's armor but the emperor wouldnt have been able to. im sure the emperor has a mightier looking sword than sanguinius so that idea seems lame. i think if we see sanguinius have a real good scrap with horus but because he been fighting on terra against great daemons and such that he was just not a match for horus in the end and horus just chokes him to death.


Thats likely because the Emperor wasn't trying to kill Horus, he was trying to convince his wayward son to return to the Imperium and only when Horus showed how corrupt he had become by flaying an Guardsman, Imperial Fist Terminator or Custodian depending on which version you believe, personally I believe the Terminator. Only after that did the Emperor take advantage of the ***** that Sanguinius gave his life to create and end Horus with a single strike.

Sanguinius was more than a match for Horus, he was better then Horus at warfare and blade-work, for the majority of the fight he was winning against the Warmaster. It was only when Horus employed his enhanced psychic powers, courtesy of Chaos, that he was able to kill his brother and win the fight.


----------



## Baltar

Whilst that may be true in a fair match, you have to remember that Sanguinius has just fought... erm... bazillions of choas space marines... and a Bloodthirster... and who-knows-what else...


----------



## raider1987

Baltar said:


> Perhaps Sanguinius growls like a wet leopard as he dies.
> 
> 
> 
> PS: If anyone from BL reads these stupid threads, PLEASE don't let Abnett near it. PLEASE let ADB do it. He's way better. That is all.


I have to agree with the wet leopard growl part, that really irritated me in prospero burns. 

But, even though I didn't enjoy Prospero Burns half as much as I would like, I still believe that Abnett has written some of the best books I have read. I mean the last book I read was his, the Eisenhorn Omnibus and it was incredible. I ordered Ravenor and all 3 gaunts ghosts omnibuses after finishing it. 

In Horus rising he showed how he was more than capable of writing from the point of view of the astartes, and I was told brothers of the snake is also amazing, which I also got delivered. Just because I didn't like one of his books, doesn't mean I still don't have faith in him to write an incredible book.


----------



## bobss

I'm sorry, but Abnett's Horus in _Prospero Burns_, and even his Fulgrim are far superior to any other authors. Although that's just the affect I got from the novel. However, yes, I agree that ADB should be involved in the Siege of Terra somehow. Hinting at it in both _Soul Hunter _and _At Gaius P__oint_, and the quality of both extracts is quite nice also.

*Unknown Primarch*. I'd rather you didn't PM me with: ''shut your fucking mouth you prick.'' as it just rammifies my point that, quite simply, grow up.


----------



## Lord of the Night

The Siege of Terra should be written by Aaron Dembski-Bowden, Dan Abnett and Graham McNeill, personally I think the final confrontation should be penned by McNeill since he writes Astartes much better than Abnett does. I think Abnett just doesn't enjoy writing about them, he'd rather write about the mortal humans of the Imperium rather than its angels of death.


----------



## Roninman

I finally remembered where i got that newest info of this, Battle for Terra short story on HH boardgame. And maybe on Collected Visions before that.

Says this:

-Face glowing with internal bloodlight, Horus turned to emperor and spoke. "Poor Sanguinius. I offered him a position of power in the new order. He could have sat at right hand of a god. Alas he chose to alignment himself with the losing side. He gave me little alternative but to kill him. With my bare hands i throttled the life of him."
The Emperor stood transfixed by the grim tableaux, one son dead and the other this hideously transformed murderer. He tried to force words from his frozen tongue. In the end he could only whisper, "why?"-

I like the way it was written on here. There is lot more info too, how Emperor fought him. But concerning Sanguinius, they were really close with Horus and it seemed he might not have wanted afterall to kill him but in the end was necessary. And i think by strangling it would be most dramatic and sad way to end Sanguinius. 

Concerning combat with Sanguinius and Bloodthirster it says this:

-"Now you are finished pathetic little bird," rumbled the daemon, and threw the Primarch down onto the Gate below. The granite stonework splintered as the Primarch's body smashed onto it. The traitor horde watching roared their approval, The Primarch lay still upon the broken stone as the daemon landed next to him and prepared to deal the deathblow.

This combat did see Sanguinius atleast injured but not enough for him to break the daemon's back. Atleast i can think this is last "official" recollection of this whole battle. It has quite detailed section on Emperor facing Horus though. Of course knowing BL, lot of things can change when novels get out but its the latest.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

bobss said:


> I'm sorry, but Abnett's Horus in _Prospero Burns_, and even his Fulgrim are far superior to any other authors. Although that's just the affect I got from the novel. However, yes, I agree that ADB should be involved in the Siege of Terra somehow. Hinting at it in both _Soul Hunter _and _At Gaius P__oint_, and the quality of both extracts is quite nice also.
> 
> *Unknown Primarch*. I'd rather you didn't PM me with: ''shut your fucking mouth you prick.'' as it just rammifies my point that, quite simply, grow up.


it doesnt really, it just points out that you think saying some bs to me is ok but when something is said back to you it not on. dont talk shit and i wont respond to it.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Unknown Primarch said:


> it doesnt really, it just points out that you think saying some bs to me is ok but when something is said back to you it not on. dont talk shit and i wont respond to it.


Would prefer it if you two kept your personal feuds withing the PM's if you don't mind.

I hope they do make the Sanguinius and Ka'Bandha quite a good fight and not just some on hit wonder from both sides. I mean for me it's one of the most epic sounding scenes of the whole Seige. It's the perfect comparison of light vs dark, good vs bad. The winged Angel vs the winged Deamon, duking it out with both sides pausing to watch the fight. Sanguinius being cast to the ground, seemingly defeated before rising up and breaking the deamons back over his knee and throwing it throught the Eternity Gate as it finally closes.


----------



## Baron Spikey

Angel of Blood said:


> Would prefer it if you two kept your personal feuds withing the PM's if you don't mind.
> 
> I hope they do make the Sanguinius and Ka'Bandha quite a good fight and not just some on hit wonder from both sides. I mean for me it's one of the most epic sounding scenes of the whole Seige. It's the perfect comparison of light vs dark, good vs bad. The winged Angel vs the winged Deamon, duking it out with both sides pausing to watch the fight. Sanguinius being cast to the ground, seemingly defeated before rising up and breaking the deamons back over his knee and throwing it throught the Eternity Gate as it finally closes.


It has to be built up in the Signus campaign though, so it's as if Sangunius and Ka'Banha are continuing some properly epic grudge match.


----------



## bobss

Baron Spikey said:


> It has to be built up in the Signus campaign though, so it's as if Sangunius and Ka'Banha are continuing some properly epic grudge match.


I heard the Signus novel would be, or is planning to be, _Fulgrim_-sized. Which I really can't wait for. I mean, the Dropsite Massacre upon Isstvan was always the major fight before Terra, with Prospero close behind. But Signus is something someone, like me, who does not own Collected Visions is interested in.

I know it's pretty much the Blood Angels fighting against cultists, then Khornate Demons (Khorne's interest in Sanguinius?) and finally Ka'Bandha cutting through the Legion's veterans and duelling the Primarch.

From the latest Blood Angels Codex, it mentions how the Legion clashed with the World Eaters; the perfect Traitor Legion to add to the Signus equation?


----------



## Baron Spikey

bobss said:


> I heard the Signus novel would be, or is planning to be, _Fulgrim_-sized. Which I really can't wait for. I mean, the Dropsite Massacre upon Isstvan was always the major fight before Terra, with Prospero close behind. But Signus is something someone, like me, who does not own Collected Visions is interested in.
> 
> I know it's pretty much the Blood Angels fighting against cultists, then Khornate Demons (Khorne's interest in Sanguinius?) and finally Ka'Bandha cutting through the Legion's veterans and duelling the Primarch.
> 
> From the latest Blood Angels Codex, it mentions how the Legion clashed with the World Eaters; the perfect Traitor Legion to add to the Signus equation?


Not just Khornate Daemons, a horde of all daemons- Ka'Bandha isn't even the leader of the force that falls to a Slaanesh Keeper of Secrets whose name escapes me.

It's also where the Black Rage first begins to rear it's head...


----------



## Baltar

He fights through slaaneshy daemons first, cutting the head of one prince.

Then Khorne randomly arrives and starts offering the usual: power, glory, skulls, blood, whatever.

The expected answer is given: shag off

A fight begins, which continues all the way to the Eternity Gate, which could be likened to that of Peter Griffin and the giant chicken from Family Guy.

(Sanguinius even has a point where he is on the ground, clutching his knee, sighing deeply over and over again)

The end.


----------



## forkmaster

Roninman said:


> I finally remembered where i got that newest info of this, Battle for Terra short story on HH boardgame. And maybe on Collected Visions before that.
> 
> Says this:
> 
> -Face glowing with internal bloodlight, Horus turned to emperor and spoke. "Poor Sanguinius. I offered him a position of power in the new order. He could have sat at right hand of a god. Alas he chose to alignment himself with the losing side. He gave me little alternative but to kill him. With my bare hands i throttled the life of him."
> The Emperor stood transfixed by the grim tableaux, one son dead and the other this hideously transformed murderer. He tried to force words from his frozen tongue. In the end he could only whisper, "why?"-
> 
> I like the way it was written on here. There is lot more info too, how Emperor fought him. But concerning Sanguinius, they were really close with Horus and it seemed he might not have wanted afterall to kill him but in the end was necessary. And i think by strangling it would be most dramatic and sad way to end Sanguinius.


Really sad moment that touched me! I remember reading about the final confrontation between the Emperor and Horur in Realms of the lost and damned (is that the right name on the book?). It covered it pretty well, I have to re-read it someday.


----------



## Brother Subtle

Anyway, back to prospero burns. 1/2 way through the book and while I am enjoying the Space Wolf side of the book. I'm getting very sick and bored of the flashbacks. So many flashbacks, so not needed. I honestly don't care how he came to be on Fenris, Just talk about the Wolves! Thats why you're there!


----------



## World Eater XII

Ive postponed reading PB at the mo due to the epic level of flashbacks.

I think they would be interesting if the book was about this guy with the SW's...not as a nork that should have been as awesome as A Thousand Sons.


----------



## Serpion5

Baltar said:


> He fights through slaaneshy daemons first, cutting the head of one prince.
> 
> Then Khorne randomly arrives and starts offering the usual: power, glory, skulls, blood, whatever.
> 
> The expected answer is given: shag off
> 
> A fight begins, which continues all the way to the Eternity Gate, which could be likened to that of Peter Griffin and the giant chicken from Family Guy.
> 
> (Sanguinius even has a point where he is on the ground, clutching his knee, sighing deeply over and over again)
> 
> The end.



My god, Baltar. You can`t seem to give any semblance of respect to these people anymore can you? Or is it just Dan Abnett you`re pissed at? Seriously, I know he`s not the best writer out there, I know he`s had a few low points lately, but this atitude you seem to have towards things _before_ their release just seems blatantly unfair and uncalled for. Now you`re saying the rest of the series will be shit just because of Abnett`s involvement? 

Many people have complained on this thread, me included, but you seem to return again and again to add your own brand of whiny bullshit to the topic. 

How many books have you had published? Would you care to write your own version of Prospero Burns and upload it for all our benefit? Would you like to show us all how it really should have happened, since you`re obviously the most qualified surly prick on the forums aren`t you? 

I eagerly await _Burning Prospero,_ to be written by Heresy`s most beloved writer and critic; Baltar. :clapping:


----------



## Commissar Ploss

whiny bullshit aside, i have refined the main reason behind me not liking the book as much as i could have. you can find the post here in my review of the book: http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?p=857253#post857253

CP


----------



## Baltar

Serpion5 said:


> My god, Baltar. You can`t seem to give any semblance of respect to these people anymore can you? Or is it just Dan Abnett you`re pissed at? Seriously, I know he`s not the best writer out there, I know he`s had a few low points lately, but this atitude you seem to have towards things _before_ their release just seems blatantly unfair and uncalled for. Now you`re saying the rest of the series will be shit just because of Abnett`s involvement?
> 
> Many people have complained on this thread, me included, but you seem to return again and again to add your own brand of whiny bullshit to the topic.
> 
> How many books have you had published? Would you care to write your own version of Prospero Burns and upload it for all our benefit? Would you like to show us all how it really should have happened, since you`re obviously the most qualified surly prick on the forums aren`t you?
> 
> I eagerly await _Burning Prospero,_ to be written by Heresy`s most beloved writer and critic; Baltar. :clapping:


If you want criticism of Abnett, then see other posts. This one is a comical reference to the confrontation between Sanguinius and the bloodthirster. I see no complaint within it.

As for the rest - yes - I hate Abnett. I wish they wouldn't let him write books concerning space marines (and thus anything within the HH series). He takes books which should be, more or less, TOTALLY about space marines, and writes about other gibberish.

I have zero respect for him, or his hoard of fanboys. I see them all foaming at the mouth, light years away, and pre-empt their deifying bullshit with my own complaints.

If they let Abnett write the conclusion, then it will be a disappointment. If they let ADB write the conclusion, it will be win.

That's all there is to it.


----------



## mal310

Finished Prospero Burns last night and I have to say I thought it was a shocker. Too many long winded descriptions of locations, too many flashbacks, weird and unnecessary take on the story. Centered on a character that to be honest I’m sure not many people could give a f*** about! I could go on and on. Overall I thought it was boring and I found it difficult to finish. In the end I was skim reading it, slowing at the more interesting bits. Just thought it was dire overall. It’s nothing to do with the author as I loved Legion and Horus Rising. I just don’t understand why he has chosen to write this the way he has or why BL have ok’d his synopsis. And to say it was linked with A Thousand Sons, well that just comes across as marketing bullshit now. I get the impression that this book was originally something completely different and has evolved over time into what has been published.


----------



## Brother Subtle

Baltar said:


> If they let Abnett write the conclusion, then it will be a disappointment. If they let ADB write the conclusion, it will be win.
> 
> That's all there is to it.


Hmmm I'm not so sure. I'm happy to let Prospero Burns go through to the keeper. Sure it was a bit... Well... Average. But we all know Abnett is capable of some great work such as Eisenhorn, Ravenor and Horus Rising. IMO McNeil seems to be the solid writer of the HH series. I've loved everything he's had to do with the Heresy. As for ADB, yep, First Heretic was a cracker. But does one great heresy novel entitle you to close out the saga?... Maybe not. Time will tell i guess.


----------



## Dead.Blue.Clown

Brother Subtle said:


> Hmmm I'm not so sure. I'm happy to let Prospero Burns go through to the keeper. Sure it was a bit... Well... Average. But we all know Abnett is capable of some great work such as Eisenhorn, Ravenor and Horus Rising. IMO McNeil seems to be the solid writer of the HH series. I've loved everything he's had to do with the Heresy. As for ADB, yep, First Heretic was a cracker. But does one great heresy novel entitle you to close out the saga?... Maybe not. Time will tell i guess.


I think it will (and should) be Dan.

I once saved over a 15,000-word Black Templar short story with a few paragraphs of in-character fiction about my fiancee's WarCraft character. I can't be trusted to hit CTRL-V at the right time, let alone close out a _New York Times_ bestselling series.

Fuck, I'm barely allowed to _drive._


----------



## Unknown Primarch

you maybe right ADB but i think the thing with you writing the ending would be that your fresh and people dont really know what to expect from you wordpaly wise. we have had alot of abnett and mcneil and got a feel for their work. it might actually work out well for someone who is can be frsh to end it or we will get a crazy ass thread that says someone else was very samey and didnt produce it in a way we havent seen before.

if i ran BL i think i would get you, DA and GMcN to write your own versions and see which seems the most appealing and go with that. dont think they could do another different perspective angle again. this one hasnt gone too well has it.


----------



## Brother Subtle

Unknown Primarch said:


> if i ran BL i think i would get you, DA and GMcN to write your own versions and see which seems the most appealing and go with that. dont think they could do another different perspective angle again. this one hasnt gone too well has it.


If you ran BL like that then it'd be broke. No established author is going to write a book for nothing. And you can't afford to pay all 3, especially when you only going to choose one authors work. Plus making it a 'competition' would be just plain insulting. It's not high school, its business.


----------



## Serpion5

Baltar said:


> If you want criticism of Abnett, then see other posts. This one is a comical reference to the confrontation between Sanguinius and the bloodthirster. I see no complaint within it.
> 
> As for the rest - yes - I hate Abnett. I wish they wouldn't let him write books concerning space marines (and thus anything within the HH series). He takes books which should be, more or less, TOTALLY about space marines, and writes about other gibberish.
> 
> I have zero respect for him, or his hoard of fanboys. I see them all foaming at the mouth, light years away, and pre-empt their deifying bullshit with my own complaints.
> 
> If they let Abnett write the conclusion, then it will be a disappointment. If they let ADB write the conclusion, it will be win.
> 
> That's all there is to it.



Ok mate. Comical or not, it was still rather derogatory of another`s work. Rather than simply insult the guy, has it ever occured to you to be a bit more constructive with your criticism? 

Don`t think I`m just aiming at you either. I`ve tried writing, I`ve been on the receiving end of your kind of put down, and frankly I find it insulting, especially when I have yet to see anything better from you. I`ve seen this sort of thing a few time down in Original Works, and I have given similar responses there. 

I don`t have a problem with you disliking Abnett`s work. But there are more tactful ways to say it could have been better. If that`s okay with you.


----------



## HOBO

I don't give a shit if others don't like Abnett, or any of the others for that matter. I go off my own views of a particular Author, and seen as Eisenhorn and Ravenor are my favourite BL Novels I'm an Abnett fan. ADB I also think is great because of The First Heretic. In the end so long as I can immerse myself in the actual story the book is telling then that's all I need. 

I'm in the middle of Prospero Burns and I'm liking it a lot so far, but by mistake I haven't read Thousand Sons yet...hopefully that won't ruin TS for me.


----------



## genesis80

HOBO said:


> I don't give a shit if others don't like Abnett, or any of the others for that matter. I go off my own views of a particular Author, and seen as Eisenhorn and Ravenor are my favourite BL Novels I'm an Abnett fan. ADB I also think is great because of The First Heretic. In the end so long as I can immerse myself in the actual story the book is telling then that's all I need.
> 
> I'm in the middle of Prospero Burns and I'm liking it a lot so far, but by mistake I haven't read Thousand Sons yet...hopefully that won't ruin TS for me.


I dont understand ppl from both sides of the divide saying, "I dont care what others think. For me, i hate / i love Abnett. "...the majority of ppl here are looking for answers to their questions....these kind of statements add nothing new to their knowledge.

What I really dont get is that I loved Abnett right up until PB. But PB looks like it was written by a seven year old and Abnett just signed off on it. I still have not gotten an answer to the highly repetitive leopard references and the unnecessary flashbacks. I still have not gotten an answer to the misleading title of the book (not to mention the cover). 

To his fans, I would say, I too was a fan. But this book makes me realize Abnett HATES writing SM novels. He would do great writing =I= novels or guard novels, but NOT SM and not HH (well the SM part of HH anyway). Your "support" is forcing apple juice to come out of an orange.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

Brother Subtle said:


> If you ran BL like that then it'd be broke. No established author is going to write a book for nothing. And you can't afford to pay all 3, especially when you only going to choose one authors work. Plus making it a 'competition' would be just plain insulting. It's not high school, its business.


oh shut up. why is it people seem to have to be constantly slating other peoples ideas on here in a most derogitory way. it was a idea and seeing as i dont run BL it wont happen but if i did then i would consult the authors and see what they thought. it might have actually created a little competition between them to produce a kickass novel and seeing as it the final ending of HH would be a one off way to see who can produce the best novel. obviously the other authors get to read all copies and then we would discuss amongst ourselves and see which we all liked best. never going to happen so there was no real need to comment like you did to be honest.


----------



## Baltar

Serpion5 said:


> Ok mate. Comical or not, it was still rather derogatory of another`s work. Rather than simply insult the guy, has it ever occured to you to be a bit more constructive with your criticism?
> 
> Don`t think I`m just aiming at you either. I`ve tried writing, I`ve been on the receiving end of your kind of put down, and frankly I find it insulting, especially when I have yet to see anything better from you. I`ve seen this sort of thing a few time down in Original Works, and I have given similar responses there.
> 
> I don`t have a problem with you disliking Abnett`s work. But there are more tactful ways to say it could have been better. If that`s okay with you.


No, it's not okay with me.

I say as I please, and as I find.

The support for Abnett is purile, at best.

The post you quoted was totally unrelated to Abnett or anyone elses work - it was completely non sequitur, and I don't see why you're going on about it. Nobody has written about the Sanguinius confrontation, so it couldn't possibly be disrespectful.

Being disrespectful would be saying that Abnett is an over-rated writer that should leave books about the space marines well-alone, and stick to crappy comic books :grin:

I think we are going to see a whole lot more just like Prospero Burns from Abnett, if everyone keeps reaming him as they are currently doing.

As someone else said, you're giving love to an orange, expecting apple juice to come out of it.

Let a writer who actually likes space marines write the books about space marines. Let Abnett stick to his little kiddie comics.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Unknown Primarch said:


> Oh shut up. Why is it people seem to have to be constantly slating *my* ideas on here in a most derogitory way.


There ya go, changed it for you. Maybe people are trying to tell you something... :smoke:


----------



## Phoebus

Baron Spikey said:


> I have some good and bad news for you.
> Good News- I think I can save you some money and a fair few hours.
> Bad News- _Chapter's Due_ is *much* worse than _Courage and Honour_.


Agree to disagree, Baron. While I was not thrilled by "The Chapter's Due", I found it to be quite better than "Courage and Honour".



Unknown Primarch said:


> NO NO NO, just finished PB and while i can overlook what the book is about i just cannot under any circumstances over look the fluff fuckup of how bjorn lost his arm. thats just one step too far mr abnett, you have lost alot of respect from me with this book and maybe its time for the whole book to be retconned so we can get back to business.
> i didnt like how ADB changed the shaming of lorgar and his legion when it was already mentioned in scions of the storm in a different way but something like that just seemed rushed for one but totally unneeded and beyond a oversight.


Dude, you do realize that this is the same novel that reveals that...



... the wolves on Fenris are basically Space Wolves who fall the Wulfen curse, ...


... right? And you are worried because Abnett switched the hacker of Bjorn's hand? I'd like to bring up the fact that the 40k point of view of the Heresy is removed from ten thousand years and based on incomplete, censored, and mythologized accounts of what happened eons ago.

It's like the Athenians using the Iliad as a historical document for the Trojan War, times twenty in terms of time in which the document could be degraded/corrupted. :biggrin:

P.


----------



## Yllib Enaz

Well I enjoyed Prospero Burns, the only slightly irritating thing being the number of leopards harmed in the writing of it. I agree it is not much like the blurb on the cover, however I had read enough reviews to know this before I got my copy, so maybe I would have been more disapointed if I had gone into it blind.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

@CotE - thats just the sort of thing im on about. certain people thinking their opinion is the only one that counts and if people dont conform then they get shot down. i dont care if im right or wrong in other peoples minds, i have my opinions and ideas on 40k which wont always be the same as others but you wont see me trying to seem supirior on here. all you regular posters who seem to think they are something special on here dont mean shit to me FACT.

@phoebus - are you for real, i already had the opinion they were from reading bill king SW novels years ago so why would you think abnett has added something special on that account?!

as for the arm thing. while the passing of time makes sense to somethings getting twisted ie fallen fluff something like bjorns arm being taken by hawser is just something abnett added to give abit more weight to his place in HH history. and this is very lame to be honest. but im quite amused how alot of hawser haters are the ones commenting on my opinion that is crap to have him take bjorns arm. 

my opinion is by all means flesh out fluff but dont change it just for the sake of it. hawser taking the arm added nothing to the story or HH so why do it?


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor

Unknown Primarch said:


> @CotE - thats just the sort of thing im on about. certain people thinking their opinion is the only one that counts and if people dont conform then they get shot down. i dont care if im right or wrong in other peoples minds, i have my opinions and ideas on 40k which wont always be the same as others but you wont see me trying to seem supirior on here. all you regular posters who seem to think they are something special on here dont mean shit to me FACT.


I didn't even present an opinion, thereby you've got no basis to suggest I think my opinion is superior to anyone elses (which of course I don't). But at least I present my opinions with reasoned logic. 

I was merely pointing out that you are generally the only one here that is constantly whining and bitching about something or another. And when people challenge your views with evidence or established lore (or even just common sense) you resort to saying something along the lines of: "I don't give a shit, stop trying to change my opinion". Which you say in most threads you post in where you get drawn into some form of debate.

I'm not saying all your opinions are illogical or trying to change your view on things, not at all. I'm merely saying that you seem to be very up tight when it comes to debates. By all means post your opinions and thoughts, but don't expect them to not get challenged or debated against if people don't agree with you. And when they do get challenged, don't automatically start whining.



Unknown Primarch said:


> but im quite amused how alot of hawser haters are the ones commenting on my opinion that is crap to have him take bjorns arm.


These 'Hawser haters' as you put it generally had issues with the way _Prospero Burns_ was more centered around the character of Hawser rather than Vlka Fenrkya or the Burning of Prospero rather than because of the change in the lore so that it was Hawser that cut off Bjorn's arm rather than Valdor. In fact you are the only individual i've come across that has had a major issue (or any issue at all) with the *very* minor change in the lore regarding Bjorn becoming _the fell-handed_. I see nothing amusing about it at all.

(There. I just stated an opinion. Please don't get on your high-horse and start claiming I think it's worth more than anyone elses or that i'm trying to degrade your opinion by derogatory means).


----------



## Unknown Primarch

hang on, i make one opinion on PB that was different to all the 'we hate it because it wasnt the sacking of prospero' and its got into a big issue. i probably am the only one who has mentioned that because they either skim read over it or were that numbed into submission by the book that it got overlooked.

as for what your saying about my posts, i normally just leave my opinion and thats it as there is no real need to debate things as such as we all see 40k differently. id say your singling this instance out just for the point of your comment as you wont actually find me getting too heavy into things like some of you forum bashers. 

and ill state it again having hawser be the one to chop bjorns hand off is stupid and very pointless as it did nothing to add to the lore of bjorn but was just something to boost hawsers part in HH. for me this is abit poor to be honest as it just seems tacked on and was that short it didnt need changing and if they had kept valdor doing it would have added abit of weight to the scene were the custodes and sisters arrived and actually gave us something of a reason for them even being in that scene as the dreads practically took that daemon out anyway. 

im not trying to or gonna change your opinion on this but thats mine, if you dont like it tough but if you do find time to think about it then maybe YOU can actually have a debate on it from a angle of how the actual scene went and not a debate my so called whining about a piece of a book that all you guys have been moaning about for a full 30 pages. 

seems its ok for people to whine about the whole book but not for someone to 'whine' about a certain piece of it, how the hell does that work?!


----------



## Angel of Blood

Because everyone else is still debating it, no one else has resorted to getting bitchy like you have done. 

No point in debating? Think your very much in the wrong place then. People post on here specifically to get into debates with others. 

And yes, i'm sure everyone just skimmed over that part of the book, it's not like it stuck out or anything. And there are plenty of people on both sides for and against Prospero Burns and the use of Hawser, you're the only person who thinks its a massive issue. If you had just expressed your problem with it then people probably wouldn't have reacted much, but you started going on about how it was a huge change to a vital part of the Heresy (Which it really isn't) so of course people are going to argue back.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

dont know why you think that. i posted my comment as a comment, not one looking for reaction or anything. and im actually quite surprised its even got more than 1-2 mentions to be honest but then with people like you seeming to wanna flame things nearly everytime its ran out of steam i shouldnt be surprised.


ORIGINAL POST.

NO NO NO, just finished PB and while i can overlook what the book is about i just cannot under any circumstances over look the fluff fuckup of how bjorn lost his arm. thats just one step too far mr abnett, you have lost alot of respect from me with this book and maybe its time for the whole book to be retconned so we can get back to business.
i didnt like how ADB changed the shaming of lorgar and his legion when it was already mentioned in scions of the storm in a different way but something like that just seemed rushed for one but totally unneeded and beyond a oversight.


AS YOU CAN SEE IT WAS A STATEMENT WITH NO FORM OF QUESTION IN THERE FOR ANYONE TO REALLY NEED TO REPLY. IT IS CLEARLY MY OPINION WITH NO MENTION OF THIS SHOULD BE THE OFFICIAL THOUGHT PROCESS OF EVERY OTHER 40K/HH FAN WHO ATTENDS THESE FORUMS. MAYBE I SHOULD FINISH ALL MY POSTS WITH A DISCLAIMER TO THIS EFFECT IN FUTURE.


----------



## Phoebus

Unknown Primarch said:


> @phoebus - are you for real, i already had the opinion they were from reading bill king SW novels years ago so why would you think abnett has added something special on that account?!


I must have missed that. I'll go back and check them out again, but I don't recall anything that went beyond "Space Wolves sometimes fall prey to the Canis Helix and become Wulfen".



> as for the arm thing. while the passing of time makes sense to somethings getting twisted ie fallen fluff something like bjorns arm being taken by hawser is just something abnett added to give abit more weight to his place in HH history. and this is very lame to be honest.


The passing of the time and how it gets stuff twisted is precisely the reason why the authors are afforded the room to make changes on the "original story", and why they take it.
Furthermore, the alternative version you propose came from the "Horus Heresy Artbook" series. I could see if this came from one of the Codices or an older Index Astartes article... but it comes from a book that, while fun, has been a constant source of discussion for its OWN digressions from "established canon".



> but im quite amused how alot of hawser haters are the ones commenting on my opinion that is crap to have him take bjorns arm.


Probably because one's opinion on the character does not somehow automatically dictate how they will feel about Bjorn's arm's loss?



> my opinion is by all means flesh out fluff but dont change it just for the sake of it. hawser taking the arm added nothing to the story or HH so why do it?


That's just your opinion--that it didn't add to it, or that it somehow took away from it. And that's fine. But many of us thought that was a neat twist. Such is life.


----------



## Euphrati

Phoebus said:


> I must have missed that. I'll go back and check them out again, but I don't recall anything that went beyond "Space Wolves sometimes fall prey to the Canis Helix and become Wulfen".
> 
> 
> The passing of the time and how it gets stuff twisted is precisely the reason why the authors are afforded the room to make changes on the "original story", and why they take it.
> Furthermore, the alternative version you propose came from the "Horus Heresy Artbook" series. I could see if this came from one of the Codices or an older Index Astartes article... but it comes from a book that, while fun, has been a constant source of discussion for its OWN digressions from "established canon".


Yes, stories change over time. 10K years sees the accounts of the HH pass from one generation to the next and understandably the details of those great heroes become a bit blurry with each re-telling. There is only one problem with that ... Bjorn is still quite alive and serving the Allfather. Infact, he is noted to be one hell of a great storyteller when the Wolves gather every century for the remembrance of Russ' disappearance. 

One would think with the importance of memories to the Sons of Russ (according to both King and Abnett) that Bjorn would recall who cut off his hand and gave him his namesake.

As well on the topic of the wolves of Fenris- don’t forget that the wolves stalked the planet before the Legion did... Russ himself was raised by a pack of them when he was a newborn Primarch cast upon the world from the warp. Magnus notes in A Thousand Sons that the first colonists were fearless in their genetic manipulation to settle the worlds they came across. Undoubtedly the 'curse' has something to do with more than the canis helix alone- though it seems to unlock something fundamentally different in the genetics of those who call Fenris home.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Euphrati said:


> One would think with the importance of memories to the Sons of Russ (according to both King and Abnett) that Bjorn would recall who cut off his hand and gave him his namesake.


this could be countered with the quoting of the passage where Hawser receives the pelt that he wears throughout the novel. Given to him to make the giver sound better in the stories retelling. Bjorn could have changed the retelling of the story over the millennia to suite the nature of the audience at hand. Some stories sound better than others. (notice i don't quite have the passage off hand, but it'sthere, look for it in the book, you'll see.)

not saying i agree with the idea, as a blantant change in canon like this is "iffy" at best, but that's the counterargument for those who care.

CP


----------



## Euphrati

You could pose that counterargument, however I would counter your counter ( :spiteful: ) with, as a Fenrisian tradition, (noted page 208 in Prospero Burns) a warrior's stories are the measure of him and it would be a grave mark of dishonour for Bjorn to 'alter the truth' of his tellings.

Even in the point you note (page 112 for referance)- the Wolf, Bitur Bercaw, that gives Hawser his pelt asks him to remember the act of kindness in his retelling- not to alter the truth of his tale.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Although i get the impression from the end of the book that Hawser was hidden away, too dangerous or knew too much to continue living amongst the Wolves. I could quite easily see Russ ordering the Rout not to talk about Hawser any more, hence why Bjorn wouldn't tell others who it was that gave him his namesake


----------



## Phoebus

Euphrati said:


> Yes, stories change over time. 10K years sees the accounts of the HH pass from one generation to the next and understandably the details of those great heroes become a bit blurry with each re-telling. There is only one problem with that ... Bjorn is still quite alive and serving the Allfather. Infact, he is noted to be one hell of a great storyteller when the Wolves gather every century for the remembrance of Russ' disappearance.


Correct. My question, though is whether the Horus Heresy Artbooks made mention of Bjorn himself saying "my hand got chopped off by Valdor" and such.

I'm not trying to discount Alan Merrett's work, and I certainly hope I'm not coming off that way. The art books, however, were published in 2004, which, if I recall correctly, was about two years before "Horus Rising" was ever published. Ideas change, drafts change, and stories change. This isn't that unfair of a concept--not in this case, at any rate. We're talking about a series of art books that supported a trading card game first and foremost. While I have no doubt that they also served as a template for the series of novels to come, I don't believe anyone from GW or BL has come out to say that there had been some grand conclave that determined it to be the end-all, be-all of the Heresy.

With that in mind (and the understanding that humans make errors firmly in the "on" position), I'll go ahead and remember that this is the same fictional universe where Guilliman was once an Imperial Guard officer and press on with my life. 

As for Bjorn's memories? The newest Codex states that "... the epic events he describes seem more like a skjald's tales than hard fact ..." And, besides, even if you want to presume that the art book account is the one he has been passing on during story-time, he has every reason to fib about how he lost his hand.

_"Oh, let me tell you about the story when Chaos fooled us all, and caused us to attack the one loyal Legion that figured out what Horus was up to! Lo, was that a great day for the Astartes in general!"_





> As well on the topic of the wolves of Fenris- don’t forget that the wolves stalked the planet before the Legion did...


Actually, the recurring theme since "A Thousand Sons" is that there are no wolves on Fenris.



And that there is a rather sinister relationship between the Space Wolves, the Wulfen, and said wolves... courtesy of the Canis Helix.




> Russ himself was raised by a pack of them when he was a newborn Primarch cast upon the world from the warp.


That's what the Space Wolves' mythology states--ten thousand years (roughly) after Russ left them. Again, the newest Codex simply has Russ being found and raised by Fenrisians.



> Magnus notes in A Thousand Sons that the first colonists were fearless in their genetic manipulation to settle the worlds they came across. Undoubtedly the 'curse' has something to do with more than the canis helix alone- though it seems to unlock something fundamentally different in the genetics of those who call Fenris home.


Exactly. Hence, "there are no wolves in Fenris..." :grin:



Angel of Blood said:


> Although i get the impression from the end of the book that Hawser was hidden away, too dangerous or knew too much to continue living amongst the Wolves. I could quite easily see Russ ordering the Rout not to talk about Hawser any more, hence why Bjorn wouldn't tell others who it was that gave him his namesake


Precisely. Yes, the Space Wolves have their traditions--but their pragmatism and absolute devotion to duty is what *defines* them.


----------



## Khorne's Fist

Angel of Blood said:


> Although i get the impression from the end of the book that Hawser was hidden away, too dangerous or knew too much to continue living amongst the Wolves.


There is an old piece of fluff regarding the awakening of ancient dreadnoughts every few hundred years to recount sagas of heroes long gone. Russ says to Hawser, "I won't be around to watch over the Vlka Fenryka forever. When I'm gone, you'd better make sure they hear the stories." I would imply from this that Hawser would be defrosted every so often to tell the tales of the early days of the _Vlka Fenryka_.


----------



## Euphrati

Khorne's Fist said:


> There is an old piece of fluff regarding the awakening of ancient dreadnoughts every few hundred years to recount sagas of heroes long gone. Russ says to Hawser, "I won't be around to watch over the Vlka Fenryka forever. When I'm gone, you'd better make sure they hear the stories." I would imply from this that Hawser would be defrosted every so often to tell the tales of the early days of the _Vlka Fenryka_.


Actually, Hawser seems to strengthen this point in speaking about his time in stasis. Noting that 'Neverless, once in a while, when we are disturbed and revived, we are never content to see the daylight.' (Prospero Burns page 442 - directally across from the passage with Russ that you quoted from).



Phoebus said:


> As for Bjorn's memories? The newest Codex states that "... the epic events he describes seem more like a skjald's tales than hard fact ..." And, besides, even if you want to presume that the art book account is the one he has been passing on during story-time, he has every reason to fib about how he lost his hand.


Yet, one of the defining roles of a Skjald is as a keeper of the truth.



Page 208 in Prospero Burns notes- '... that was another reason why skjalds existed. They were brokers of the truth, neutral mediators who would not let any fluctuations like pride or bias or mjod affect the agreed value of truth.' 
 



Phoebus said:


> Actually, the recurring theme since "A Thousand Sons" is that there are no wolves on Fenris.
> 
> 
> 
> And that there is a rather sinister relationship between the Space Wolves, the Wulfen, and said wolves... courtesy of the Canis Helix.
> 
> 
> 
> That's what the Space Wolves' mythology states--ten thousand years (roughly) after Russ left them. Again, the newest Codex simply has Russ being found and raised by Fenrisians.


That was somewhat my point- there are no _wolves_ on Fenris. And yet, there are lupine-like beasts that have stalked the planet since the time of the colonists... :grin: Basically, it comes down to the notion that not everything might be as it first appears (Wolves that are not wolves...).


----------



## Phoebus

I agree with your last point. As for what a skjald would and would not relay? You have my thoughts on that, above. I simply don't see how anyone would feel comfortable letting the cat out of the bag in regards to how both Legions were duped. Hawser being "shelved" for the foreseeable future goes hand in hand with that.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

while i still dont like the change in fluff on this issue i thought id have another read of the attack on prospero in TS and the bit where its says something about valdors sinister urgings for the attack on prospero got me thinking a little. 

now i may be way off and some may say its impossible but could it be that valdor is the one that is the spy for horus on terra as stated in nemesis and the whole reason abnett could have changed bjorns fluff is because he has advanced knowledge of this idea. 
its probably very flimsy to think valdor wouldnt cut bjorns chaos tainted arm off because he is in league with them but its a possibility that could arise. HH seems to through some curveballs in now and then and this could be one of them. i would think valdor would be close to horus more than any other primarch seeing as he was found first and i think i read somewhere they dueled once and they were equal or valdor bested him. could that have sealed a bound and somehow horus has angled it somehow to get help from him. sounds crazy even to me but could it be possible?

im more of the opinion he is a follower of the growing imperial creed myself or has alot of knowledge about the emperors plans and is doing his masters bidding in someway but im sure we will find out at some point.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Indeed Valdor being a spy has come up before in various topics. I find the idea quite interesting and would definetly be a massive curveball. But i think Valdor is a loyalist. He's the head of the Emperors guard, the commander of the Custodes, it just seems he is far too close to the Emperor for Horus to be able to turn him. The sinister urgings quote is intriguing, but i just believe it's about something else, if there is any relevance to it at all anymore. Again still an interesting theory


----------



## Unknown Primarch

after that sinister urging statement, on the very next page it goes on to say something about 'lies, even if they have noble causes'. not got my book on hand to get official quote but it didnt quite say it was on about valdor but then it never said it wasnt. not sure if anyone can elaborate on this and make abit of sense to it?


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Euphrati said:


> You could pose that counterargument, however I would counter your counter ( :spiteful: ) with, as a Fenrisian tradition, (noted page 208 in Prospero Burns) a warrior's stories are the measure of him and it would be a grave mark of dishonour for Bjorn to 'alter the truth' of his tellings.
> 
> Even in the point you note (page 112 for referance)- the Wolf, Bitur Bercaw, that gives Hawser his pelt asks him to remember the act of kindness in his retelling- not to alter the truth of his tale.


aye, thank you for the quotation. you could indeed counter my counter. :laugh: I appreciate the alacrity with which you replied.  cheers for that. 

as for the rest of you, not specifically singling any of you out: Lets keep this as civil as possible. no talk of flaming this debate into ridiculousness, no accusations of stupidity or the like, please. Don't make me go mod on your asses. 

consider this a preemptive strike. I like where this debate is going, and i'm very pleased with the level of restraint of all of you, just don't lose your cool. 

CP


----------



## increaso

Unknown Primarch said:


> after that sinister urging statement, on the very next page it goes on to say something about 'lies, even if they have noble causes'. not got my book on hand to get official quote but it didnt quite say it was on about valdor but then it never said it wasnt. not sure if anyone can elaborate on this and make abit of sense to it?


I know this is in there somewhere, but struggling to find it right this second.

However, considering pages 516-517 (when you have the book to hand).

I am probably too trusting of the characters, but I find it difficult to conclude that Valdor is Horus' spy and whilst I won't got down the wacky theory route I think their is argument to say that the Emperor is Horus' spy that both Valdor or Malcador. But not going there.

The intentional slant that ATS puts on the Custodes (as early as Nikaea) is in complete contrast to PB. This is probably intentional and is one of these 'contradictions' or simply a matter of perception.


----------



## Cambrius

Just my tuppence:

The frequent complaint about how much Primarch is in a novel seems to ignore the idea that this series covers the colossal scope of events occurring galaxy-wide during the Horus Heresy. So many griping about how crap _Nemesis_ was just because it had the temerity to show events at the ground level, where mere mortals reside. Many responses make it appear as though they would prefer a graphic novel version, something dumbed down to pure Astartestosterone. And I just don't understand that. None of you come across as this simplistic or easily bored.

For myself, I have thoroughly enjoyed each of the HH novels for what they are. I do my best not to bring any expectations for what each novel should be and just sort of enjoy the ride, as someone put it.

I loved that _Prospero Burns_ took the often one-dimensional Space Wolves and developed them into serious business. There's nothing cheesy or silly about the Rout. The _Vlka Fenryka_ culture is fairly deep and quite believable. The frequent flashbacks to Hawser's past didn't seem terribly jarring or invasive to me, and many of the HH novels have a focal character that isn't Astartes, so that wasn't a drawback either.

Maybe I'm just an easy sell for this series. In fact, that's probably exactly it, because I'm terribly picky otherwise about what I read. But personally, I haven't found much of anything to really criticise. Even if I did, who cares except me anyway? To whom else does it really matter?

:grin:


----------



## Serpion5

:goodpost: Absolutely right. Maybe the problem was we had expectations of what it would be, and were displeased when it became something else. 

Plot weakness and misleading title aside, I stick by my opinions of Abnett`s style on this book; the overly frequent use of flashbacks and _wet leopard growls_ was unnecessary and distracting.


----------



## World Eater XII

I really dont think it should have been advertised as Opposite to ATS, if they kept them apart and marketed them as seperate books, i dont think we'd have as such a big problem.


----------



## Phoebus

Well, even for someone like me--who enjoyed "Prospero Burns"--the cover and the description label were misleading. Not that I _wouldn't_ have subsequently enjoyed a "Space Wolves Burn Prospero"-kind of book, but I think they ultimately did damage to the book itself and its author.

And therein lies my main potential criticism of Abnett where this book is concerned. You're a decent author; you wrote a decent book. Do you have room to maneuver in objecting a misleading title, cover, description, etc... and if you do, why didn't you use it?


----------



## Unknown Primarch

im still hoping to actually hear something out of the abnett camp to try and get his explanation for how this book went down the way it has. be interested to see his angle on things so we could put PB into perspective a little more. wouldnt hurt i dont think.


----------



## Baltar

What are you expecting? Abnett himself to come online and answer you?

You are an odd one.

I'd love it if he did come online. I'd tell him to stop pleasuring himself quite so hard whenever the space wolves enter his thoughts.


----------



## jasonbob

If you go on youtube and listen to him and while he does mislead about what his book is about he is cryptic and vague with his answers.


----------



## Serpion5

jasonbob said:


> If you go on youtube and listen to him and while he does mislead about what his book is about he is cryptic and vague with his answers.


He has to be, or GW`s legal team will rape him in the bum. :rtfm:


----------



## Baltar

Rightly so, too.

He does constantly feel the need to re-write 40k fluff, so it's only fair that when he isn't being paid to do it then he keeps his mouth tightly shut.


----------



## LimitingFactor

This was a decent Heresy book , with flashback scenes that i would speed read through in order to get back to the main storyline.

I think that this is my favourite Space Wolves book and i found the others to be simplistic and flat. In this book i finaly understood why many players love the wolves.

It fits into the Heresy story well but does not shine - although the at times i found the combat scenes to be visceral.

This music was in my mind at times while reading the story 




:biggrin:


----------



## Unknown Primarch

Baltar said:


> What are you expecting? Abnett himself to come online and answer you?
> 
> You are an odd one.
> 
> I'd love it if he did come online. I'd tell him to stop pleasuring himself quite so hard whenever the space wolves enter his thoughts.


why do you think im on about him coming on here? im on about him posting something on BL website. 

seems your the odd one, abnett basher. besides PB i think all his other work has been topnotch. PB wouldnt be as badly percieved if it was for the synopsis either.


----------



## Phoebus

Careful! You could be misconstrued as "anally pleasuring" Dan Abnett right now! :grin:


----------



## Baron Spikey

Phoebus said:


> Careful! You could be misconstrued as "anally pleasuring" Dan Abnett right now! :grin:


Why does it have to be 'anally pleasuring'? Why not just a sly reach around?


----------



## Brother Subtle

Baron Spikey said:


> Why does it have to be 'anally pleasuring'? Why not just a sly reach around?


you sir have a sick sense of humour. and i like it!


----------



## Baltar

It's not so much a sly reach-around as it is a full-on grease-down followed by extreme ass-fisting.

That's just the regular fans.

The only way to describe what the Gaunt's Ghost fanboys think of doing to Abnett, is to picture the most depraved thing ever conceived by Slaanesh, and then to put it into words.

Frankly, if they get any further inside Abnett, then he's in great danger of burping out fans every time he speaks.


----------



## gothik

the Hawser flashbacks are starting to severly bore me, but then when it gets onto the wolves (or rout as they prefer) then it picks up paces, i start finding myself wanting to ignore the hawser flashbacks but then that would defeat the whole object.
its not dans best book in the series. Horus Rising remains his best book with leigon second but will stick with it although i have started reading angels of darkness again which shows how bored i am getting with the book.


----------



## Phoebus

Truthfully, I have yet to see an Abnett fan level praise for this author commensurate to Baltar's venom. :biggrin:


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Phoebus said:


> Truthfully, I have yet to see an Abnett fan level praise for this author commensurate to Baltar's venom. :biggrin:


i would make love to him. Horrible, unnerving, gut-wrenching love to him. It's the only way Commissars can love; full-tilt.

CP


----------



## Phoebus

You're never in uniform, so I simply cannot believe what you say.


----------



## Baron Spikey

Phoebus said:


> You're never in uniform, so I simply cannot believe what you say.


Uniforms are restrictive, he has to be ready at any moment to seize the opportunity for rough, and possibly non-consensual, Abnett loving.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Phoebus said:


> You're never in uniform, so I simply cannot believe what you say.





Baron Spikey said:


> Uniforms are restrictive, he has to be ready at any moment to seize the opportunity for rough, and possibly non-consensual, Abnett loving.


(to the above, DAMN RIGHT!)

i wanted to say, "It's all leather and whips here, boy" but my Commissar instincts tell me that would be a bad choice of words...

CP


----------



## Phoebus

I can only go by what I see, and I only casual dress in your avatar. No high-peaked cap, no skull/eagle decorated greatcoat, etc.

I'm starting to think you're going soft... Gaunt, Cain, etc., would never operate in such a lax manner. :grin:


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Phoebus said:


> I can only go by what I see, and I only casual dress in your avatar. No high-peaked cap, no skull/eagle decorated greatcoat, etc.
> 
> I'm starting to think you're going soft... Gaunt, Cain, etc., would never operate in such a lax manner. :grin:


lol My Schola Progenium was a bit more progressive.  I'll hopefully be larping the outfit soon. 

CP


----------



## Phoebus

Haha! Excellent!


----------



## Commissar Ploss

as long as i can find and fabricate the necessary parts. 

CP


----------



## gothik

the idea of CP in a long leather trechcoat and peaked cap whislt giving abnett some loving is somewhat......disturbing i mean i knew the commissars were tight assed but thats a little bit ridiculous lol


----------



## Yllib Enaz

gothik said:


> the idea of CP in a long leather trechcoat and peaked cap whislt giving abnett some loving is somewhat......disturbing i mean i knew the commissars were tight assed but thats a little bit ridiculous lol


I would have thought it was the tightness of abnett's ass that was in question here...


----------



## Baltar

After all of those fans climb out, it will be like a clown's pocket.


----------



## Phoebus

I can picture you secretly reading Abnett novels and then climbing into scalding hot showers to erase the shame, Baltar. :grin:


----------



## Commissar Ploss

he's secretly wanking to him. you know he is. :wink:

CP


----------



## Serpion5

Commissar Ploss said:


> he's secretly wanking to him. you know he is. :wink:
> 
> CP


Of course, now everything makes sense. :laugh:


----------



## Unknown Primarch

Baltar is Abnetts alter-ego!


----------



## Phoebus

That, too, could make sense. By generating outrageously negative publicity on his own, Abnett seeks to generate goodwill toward his person... Hmmm....


----------



## Baltar

Phoebus said:


> That, too, could make sense. By generating outrageously negative publicity on his own, Abnett seeks to generate goodwill toward his person... Hmmm....


This has a strange, but not altogether ridiculous logic to it.

Maybe I am indeed sucking off a 1:1 scale papier mache model of Ibram Gaunt, as we speak, while fantasising that Abnett is ramming himself into my ass.

Oh, wait. No... I'm not a Space Wolf fan.


----------



## gothik

Baltar said:


> This has a strange, but not altogether ridiculous logic to it.
> 
> Maybe I am indeed sucking off a 1:1 scale papier mache model of Ibram Gaunt, as we speak, while fantasising that Abnett is ramming himself into my ass.
> 
> Oh, wait. No... I'm not a Space Wolf fan.


me thinks the phrase is...the man doth protest too much:so_happy:


----------



## Baltar

The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks.

Misquoted often with 'methinks' as the prefix.


----------



## World Eater XII

Is this the busiest BL thread weve had in yonks?


----------



## gothik

World Eater XII said:


> Is this the busiest BL thread weve had in yonks?


could well be, then again it could be the idea of CP getting all dressed up to pleasure abnett either way its certainly busy.

onto the OP finished Prospero burns and um...yeah was ok, not the best one i've read but not the worst, both Dark Angels and BFTA hold that title for me but i would have to say this is definatly not dans best work and that is my opinion.

i like his work and i am not about to go gushing on it but this was a bit of a let down for me still it happens from time to time and maybe i'll read it again although i did struggle to read it first time round.


----------



## gothik

Baltar said:


> The gentleman doth protest too much, methinks.
> 
> Misquoted often with 'methinks' as the prefix.


i stand corected but the sentiment is the same


----------



## Phoebus

Baltar said:


> This has a strange, but not altogether ridiculous logic to it.
> 
> Maybe I am indeed sucking off a 1:1 scale papier mache model of Ibram Gaunt, as we speak, while fantasising that Abnett is ramming himself into my ass.
> 
> Oh, wait. No... I'm not a Space Wolf fan.


We really don't have any way of knowing, do we... :grin:

EDIT: according to book jackets, Dan Abnett lives and works in Maidstone, Kent, England. Your profile info states *YOU* are from Kent, England as well. *Que dramatic music*



gothik said:


> ... um...yeah was ok, not the best one i've read but not the worst, *both Dark Angels* ... hold that title for me ...


**FROTHING**


----------



## Baltar

He does indeed.

He turned up to a convention held where I work. I wanted to buy a load of 1st edition copies of PB, get him to sign them, and then sell them on ebay.

Seeing as everyone hates it, I didn't bother.


----------



## gothik

Phoebus said:


> **FROTHING**




oops better get the shield upfor Phoebus frothing or pass the jusg so my beer gets a head onit:grin:

homestly though i had trouble reasding the dark angels HH books and Battle for the abyss, and sad as i am to say it i think Propero Burns is going to be added to that list for me at anyrate


----------



## World Eater XII

Man worst books from BL that ive read is the inquisition wars....Prospero burns isnt the worst book to be written in exsistence


----------



## Brother Emund

*Question?*

Plodding through at the moment, it's hard but not too bad. One thing that hit me. Hawser was talking to Combat Master Korine about a previous Wolf action. 

He mentions a battle against what is obviously an Eldar Craftworld. He did not name them as Eldar. Were they an unknown xenos race at this time? Had we (the Imperium) not had contact with them before?

It made my ears prick up!


----------



## Thyr

I for one thoroughly enjoyed PB. Was it anything like I’ve expected? No, not at all. Do I wish we would have seen more of Russ? Yes, without a doubt. But I hope we get to see much more of Russ in other books. Other than that I love this book. In the end it was far more than what I'd expected. It's beautifully written. And the flashbacks serve their purpose in the end. 

I also like the 2 DA HH novels very much. I love the medieval feel of DoA and the background of the legion and how things start to slowly and secretly fall apart in FA. 

And no, I'm not ashamed for liking the books.


----------



## HorusReborn

I thought it was a big let down. Dan Abnett is a good author, but I think he has too much hype and is too much of an Idol in the fan base for people to see that Prospero Burns wasn't as great as it should have been. I call this book Prospero Singed, not Burned because Thousand Sons ended where PB should have taken off, with the Thirteenth Warrior part as a sub plot to the story. It was taken in the wrong direction and was a very hard read for me honestly.


----------



## gothik

Thyr said:


> I for one thoroughly enjoyed PB. Was it anything like I’ve expected? No, not at all. Do I wish we would have seen more of Russ? Yes, without a doubt. But I hope we get to see much more of Russ in other books. Other than that I love this book. In the end it was far more than what I'd expected. It's beautifully written. And the flashbacks serve their purpose in the end.
> 
> I also like the 2 DA HH novels very much. I love the medieval feel of DoA and the background of the legion and how things start to slowly and secretly fall apart in FA.
> 
> And no, I'm not ashamed for liking the books.


don' be ashamed for reading them and enjoying them everyones opinion is differentafter all:grin:


----------



## Phoebus

Thyr said:


> And no, I'm not ashamed for liking the books.


In no way SHOULD you be ashamed for this. When you meet people you disavow them, remember that they also disavow the Emperor. Suffer not the heretic! :biggrin:


----------



## HorusReborn

haha spoken like a true son of Guilliman Phoebus! I'd slap you with my Thunder hammer for questioning my loyalty! LOL but no, no one should be ashamed of liking, or disliking anything. This forum is all about sharing your opinion!


----------



## Unknown Primarch

i just had a little gander back into PB and a thought occured to me that has great ramifications on probably everything in 40k.

the bit were that daemon knows the names of people and can do anything to them for it really makes things abit crazy to be honest.

think how the primarchs would know every warriors name in their legion and probably in the other legions too. well think when the traitors attack terra they should be able to use that power against the loyalists. even if it just daemons that can do it why wouldnt they have done it with the loyal primarchs and saved themselves from losing. 
you see what im getting at. that actual power has such negatives to what and what cannot happen in the whole 40k universe that maybe it shouldnt actual have been added as its kind of a be all and end all of powers. anyone like to comment?


----------



## Angel of Blood

Could they subdue a Primarch with the power though? The deamon was losing its grasp on Amon as time went on as he fought against the hold on him. Primarchs might be too powerful. And i get the impression it was a very powerful and important deamon, judging by how vital its task was, and it just got pretty fucked over on Prospero.


----------



## Lord of the Night

Phoebus said:


> In no way SHOULD you be ashamed for this. When you meet people you disavow them, remember that they also disavow the Emperor. Suffer not the heretic! :biggrin:


Bah loyalist rabble. Give into the Dark Prince, embrace excess!.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Never! The Emperor protects! (and dumps on us from a great height)


----------



## Brother Emund

Angel of Blood said:


> Never! The Emperor protects! (and dumps on us from a great height)


As a true and loyal follower of the Emperor, I would be honoured if he dumped on me!


----------



## Phoebus

HorusReborn said:


> haha spoken like a true son of Guilliman Phoebus! I'd slap you with my Thunder hammer for questioning my loyalty! LOL but no, no one should be ashamed of liking, or disliking anything. This forum is all about sharing your opinion!


How dare you, sir. I only use an Ultramarine avatar because it looked neat. I see I'm going to have to go back to my Dark Angel avatar, even if it looks redundant next to my signature.

I could only truly like the Ultramarines if they had more of a Greek theme than a Roman one. :grin:

EDIT: wait, there has been some confusion here. I had directed my original comments to Thyr. Your loyalty needs not be questioned; as you can have NO loyalty, being named after the Arch-Traitor. :biggrin:


----------



## gothik

Brother Emund said:


> As a true and loyal follower of the Emperor, I would be honoured if he dumped on me!


seeing as he hs not been to the lav in over 10000 years that would be a hell of a lot of dumping...espeecially if someone has to clean out the golden throne.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

gothik said:


> seeing as he hs not been to the lav in over 10000 years that would be a hell of a lot of dumping...espeecially if someone has to clean out the golden throne.


yeah, eating all those psychic souls must really fuck up your bowels. uke:

CP


----------



## Brother Emund

I'd even accept a Golden shower from the Golden Throne!:alcoholic:


----------



## HorusReborn

jesum crow... a golden shower... a dump from the emp.. I'll bring the pictviewer for the masses of the Imperium.. of course the Inquisition might get involved!!!


----------



## Baltar

This is all happening in Abnett's version of the conclusion, right?

He re-writes it so that a bloodthirster climbs from the webway, and they all have a sexy party time together. The Sigilite dances the time warp, while fabricator general does a bit of a robot dance in the corner.

Then loads of space wolves turn up and kill everyone, and we read for the next 300+ pages about how awesome the space wolves are, and in particular how awesome the sounds they make are (and about how they aren't just a bunch of space-dwarves who fart, eat, drink, and burp loudly, with a bit of food in their beard, and talk about honour and fighting because they are moronic - which in fact they are, as William King got it spot on the first time around  )


----------



## gothik

Baltar said:


> This is all happening in Abnett's version of the conclusion, right?
> 
> He re-writes it so that a bloodthirster climbs from the webway, and they all have a sexy party time together. The Sigilite dances the time warp, while fabricator general does a bit of a robot dance in the corner.
> 
> Then loads of space wolves turn up and kill everyone, and we read for the next 300+ pages about how awesome the space wolves are, and in particular how awesome the sounds they make are (and about how they aren't just a bunch of space-dwarves who fart, eat, drink, and burp loudly, with a bit of food in their beard, and talk about honour and fighting because they are moronic - which in fact they are, as William King got it spot on the first time around  )


Balter, why is it that you constantly see the need to shit on Abnett be it his work or his personality. I get it that you are not an abnett fan and thats all well and good its your opinion and you are entitled to it but enough is enough man. I come to the conclusion in my opinion that he must have seriously upset you at some point for you to keep bleating like this. The guy has talent and is not confined to space wolves either, maybe he is better at writing guard/inquisition novels then marine one although Horus Risingg was fantastic, but you know what i am starting to find your comments somewhat offensive and a little immature. Get over it already man


----------



## gothik

Brother Emund said:


> I'd even accept a Golden shower from the Golden Throne!:alcoholic:


ahh so thats what happen to the psychic souls all shower water....ewwww lol


----------



## Baltar

gothik said:


> Balter, why is it that you constantly see the need to shit on Abnett be it his work or his personality. I get it that you are not an abnett fan and thats all well and good its your opinion and you are entitled to it but enough is enough man. I come to the conclusion in my opinion that he must have seriously upset you at some point for you to keep bleating like this. The guy has talent and is not confined to space wolves either, maybe he is better at writing guard/inquisition novels then marine one although Horus Risingg was fantastic, but you know what i am starting to find your comments somewhat offensive and a little immature. Get over it already man


I just find it ironic that GW gets so touchy when it comes to their intellectual property, but then they hand it right over for change to a nincompoop like Abnett, who jizzes all over it just so that people will recognise his additions to it. I'm not sure I can find a better way of phrasing it than that GW has a bedroom, where the bedroom is the fluff/intellectual property of 40k, and they get REALLY angry when anyone walks in there with their shoes on - but they will let Abnett run in there, naked, and covered from head to toe in donkey shit, while he is busy having an epileptic fit and he is suffering from chronic bouts of vomiting.


----------



## Roninman

I found Abnett among best writers of BL arsenal, but not best though. Sometimes even good writers make something bad and all hell breaks loose after that.

But i admit, he was wrong choice for writing script for Ultramarines movie. Thats why there are real screenplay writers.


----------



## HorusReborn

eeshh Baltar, you really have some issues with gay porn! Nothing some electro shock therapy couldn't fix though. Yes Abnett isn't all that great of a writer IMO too.. the Ghosts were cool and he should have stayed in the Sabbat system and out of the Heresy. The masses are blind and follow like lemmings I know, but Baltar, this thread isn't for **** porn and visions of guys running around covered in shit. And well, the seizure thing isn't grounds for making fun of a guy, that's a serious medical condition and as someone who suffers from it, I can attest to the fact that it CAN kill you. You sir are out of bounds, and off topic!


----------



## fearoffenris

i foun the book great exept.... of course the flashbacks ive started reading it a 3rd time and i'm just skipping them all together
i do have to say as a wolves player ive dug up a lot of narative to put back into my army

mostly i'm shocked how blind the astartes were to treason then in comparison of 40k wise if magnus had not sent a message to the emperor there might still have been a thousand son chapter 
poor healfwulf had ogvai heard you out and not blown your brain out


----------



## gothik

Baltar said:


> I just find it ironic that GW gets so touchy when it comes to their intellectual property, but then they hand it right over for change to a nincompoop like Abnett, who jizzes all over it just so that people will recognise his additions to it. I'm not sure I can find a better way of phrasing it than that GW has a bedroom, where the bedroom is the fluff/intellectual property of 40k, and they get REALLY angry when anyone walks in there with their shoes on - but they will let Abnett run in there, naked, and covered from head to toe in donkey shit, while he is busy having an epileptic fit and he is suffering from chronic bouts of vomiting.


thanks for pointing out just how pathetic you are if you think having epilepsy is something to have a joke about. i lost my nephew to epilepsy and i actually think its astonishing that you feel that you can attribute such a condition in this vein. 
I really do not care wether he is a better guard writer or space wolves writer, the guy has talent or else why would BL keep him. You really are obsessed with pornography starring Dan Abnett which i might find mildly amusing if they were not spouted witth such obvious vitrol but to put it like this then you are so far out of order i am surprised you can even see the finishing line.


----------



## Phoebus

I haven't by any means read all of Abnett's novels. I've read the "Eisenhorn" trilogy, the first three "Ghosts" novels, and his Horus Heresy novels. I think Abnett is an enjoyable author, without necessarily being great (in the sense of authors whom our children and grandchildren will read about--think Herbert, Heinlein, Asimov, etc.).

That having been said, I struggle to compare his works with anything else I've read from the Black Library catalogue and find something that I would place even in the bottom fifty percent overall.

And really, that's why I find your posts on Abnett so curious and entertaining, Baltar. Maybe I have been completely unlucky in my non-Abnett Black Library purchases, and there are a plethora of novels written by other authors that would change my opinion of his writing skill and grasp of the 40k milieu, leaving me with the impression that it's garbage.

That's not to say that I _haven't_ read BL novels by other authors that I enjoyed more than Abnett's. I have.

With that in mind, I'm open to your suggestions, Baltar. Share with me the titles that you feel make BL's trust in Abnett suspect. Give me some examples of where you feel he shits on the fluff. I'm sure we'll probably have to agree to disagree on what you consider unforgivable and what I deem trivial, but I think it will be interesting to get beyond the frothing, ranting, and raving you put forth against the man.


----------



## Oldenhaller

being lazy and not wanting to trawl 40 pages of vitriol I was just wondering if the issue of the lack of a fight on prospero has been attributed to the page count yet?

Just checked last night and prospero burns is approximately 110 pages shorter than 1ksons...just about the right amount for fleshing out the fight into another 2-3 chapters. bit of a shame they didn't think it was needed...

-O


----------



## gothik

Oldenhaller said:


> being lazy and not wanting to trawl 40 pages of vitriol I was just wondering if the issue of the lack of a fight on prospero has been attributed to the page count yet?
> 
> Just checked last night and prospero burns is approximately 110 pages shorter than 1ksons...just about the right amount for fleshing out the fight into another 2-3 chapters. bit of a shame they didn't think it was needed...
> 
> -O


i agree the fight scene could have been longer but if they thought it wasn't needed....probably why i enjoyed thousand sons and first heretic


----------



## Oldenhaller

In my mind it was going to show both sides of the story - it failed to do so as it only gave bear being revealed as someone afraid of dreadnoughts and some glass getting broken. 

Shame really


----------



## mal310

A lot of the stuff being written on this thread (especially from Baltar) is absolute pathetic puerile. I’m all for a debate about the merits or not of an author or his work but the kind of disgusting and insulting rubbish that is being written just drags Heresy Online into the gutter.


----------



## raider1987

I agree, the select few who are saying that Dan Abnett is a terrible writer etc, in most peoples opinions, including my own, they are wrong. 

I wasn't a fan of prospero burns either, but I loved Horus Rising and Legion, and I have just finished reading Eisenhorn and Ravenor and they were incredible, and I am onto Gaunts Ghosts next which most people here seem to regard as the best books in 40k.


----------



## gothik

gaunts ghosts were the first books given to me as a present as an introduction to the 40k universe whereas up until then i had been a fantasy fan and had started with warhammer through the old 1980's whfrp of which i still proudly own a copy although it is dog eared.
i thoughaly enjoyed the gaunts ghosts novels and from there stared building my book collection up. i hardly look at the fantasy side of things now except the time of legends series which reminds me i need to get the last sigma novel. 
i admire Abnetts work and i have known of him from my comic collections anyway and i think the best writers in BL at the moment are Dan Abnett, Graham MaCneil, Gav Thorpe and recently added to that ADB as i enjoyed soul hunter and first heretic immensly. 
I can accept that there are people out there that do not agree with everyones opinion but to constantly shit on thier personality and thier abilities for whatever reason and then make fun of what is a serious illness and one that strikes home with me and others i suspect, is going way too far. 
I managed to read Prospero Burns and although it was good it was not in my opinion the best work of his and could have been better, maybe the hype that it wa the other side of the coin to the 1K sons was what led to great expectations and failed a little dramatically. 
I have a signed copy of Leigon thanks to the lads at GW York who very kindly got him to sign it for me when work commitments meant i could not make it to the store on the day and i think Horus Rising was fantastic. I am now ploughing my way through the Ravenor books and i adore Eisenhorn which has opened my eyes to the Inquistion.
I am sure there are writers that are better out there but even so that does not give anyone the right to use a mans illness agaqinst him in such vile and vulgar terms as was used.


----------



## Baltar

Sigh.

People obviously have trouble reading.

If someone can quote me anything written that subjects those with epilepsy to taunting or ridicule, I may offer an apology. Considering that no such thing has been written, I'll ignore all of the "OMG HE JUST MADE FUN OF EPILEPSY RAWR RAWR!" drivel, and continue.



> With that in mind, I'm open to your suggestions, Baltar. Share with me the titles that you feel make BL's trust in Abnett suspect. Give me some examples of where you feel he shits on the fluff.


I've been down this road in threads before. All of the fanboys come out of the woodwork to try and suggest work-around theories to protect Abnett's flagrant God-modding of certain characters (to give one example method of 'fluff shitting').


----------



## HorusReborn

here's your quote Baltar. "but they will let Abnett run in there, naked, and covered from head to toe in donkey shit, while he is busy having an epileptic fit and he is suffering from chronic bouts of vomiting". It's not exactly making fun of Epilepsy, but it's in the context that you use his epileptic "fits" as you call them and being "naked, and covered from head to toe in donkey shit..." which sets the tone. At it's most base level, no you aren't making fun of his Epilepsy, but everything else around your comment of it sets the tone wonderfully to show that indeed you are!


----------



## Baltar

Not really.

But you're free to take a post however you want. Nobody can decide that for you. If you're determined to be offended by something that simply isn't there, then go right ahead - there's not much I can do to stop you.


----------



## HorusReborn

sure you can take it how you want, it's the problem with a forum and the net in and of itself... however you can't deny the context and tone you were using that in! This is blatant and you cannot deny that! It's like saying on Facebook, I like Cock and Balls... EVERYONE is going to think you're gay.. but you could mean you like eating chicken and playing baseball, or football... However, are you going to say you like COCK and BALLS to represent that? doubt it.. you used his Epilepsy in a rant about him... You just shouldn't have brought it up!


----------



## Baltar

I don't think he has epilepsy, btw.

You're being ridiculous.


----------



## Dead.Blue.Clown

Baltar said:


> I don't think he has epilepsy, btw.


He does, but only for the past year or so.

Guys, guys, guys (and girls), not to break in and take a whizz on anyone's partytastic parades, but I think this thread could really use a little backing up. Everyone's talking past each other and arguing, and at the risk of sounding like an idiot, H-O is better than that. 

"Ease down, Ripley. You're just grinding metal."


----------



## Baron Spikey

So we've established that some people like Prospero Burns, some people would like it more if they hadn't felt misled by the synopsis, some people are 'meh', and finally some people dislike the book with varying degrees of intensity.

Now we've managed to climb to heights of insulting each other for insulting an author and Baltar's crazed conspiracy theory.

That about it?

Maybe we should toot the magic whistle and ask a staff member to close the thread or at least enforce some of the site rules.


----------



## gothik

i offer my apologies and will say no more on it


----------



## Baltar

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> He does, but only for the past year or so.
> 
> Guys, guys, guys (and girls), not to break in and take a whizz on anyone's partytastic parades, but I think this thread could really use a little backing up. Everyone's talking past each other and arguing, and at the risk of sounding like an idiot, H-O is better than that.
> 
> "Ease down, Ripley. You're just grinding metal."


In that case (although I am unsure if you're actually serious - it's not easy to tell on a forum) I strongly apologise. I was unaware that Abnett actually had epilepsy.

He's still not got what it takes to write the concluding books well.

If this thread is closed on the basis of the previous arguments, I'll be even more convinced that any belly-aching with regard to Abnett just leads to a fanboy over-reaction (which is what closing the thread would be equivalent to).

As far as I'm concerned, he's had a no-lose-possible book topic, and dished out a solid fail. Still we get the adamant "nah brah, he's well awesome".


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Baltar said:


> In that case (although I am unsure if you're actually serious - it's not easy to tell on a forum) I strongly apologise. I was unaware that Abnett actually had epilepsy.
> 
> He's still not got what it takes to write the concluding books well.
> 
> If this thread is closed on the basis of the previous arguments, I'll be even more convinced that any belly-aching with regard to Abnett just leads to a fanboy over-reaction (which is what closing the thread would be equivalent to).
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, he's had a no-lose-possible book topic, and dished out a solid fail. Still we get the adamant "nah brah, he's well awesome".


yes, he does have epilepsy.

and as it seems i've been away and missed all the witless banter and name calling, this is far far out of line.

I'll give you one chance to get back on topic (all of you) or i'm pulling the pin on this thread. that's it, one chance. Thank you D.B.C. and Baron for stepping in whilst i clearly wasn't here.

CP


----------



## Baron Spikey

Baltar said:


> In that case (although I am unsure if you're actually serious - it's not easy to tell on a forum) I strongly apologise. I was unaware that Abnett actually had epilepsy.
> 
> He's still not got what it takes to write the concluding books well.
> 
> If this thread is closed on the basis of the previous arguments, I'll be even more convinced that any belly-aching with regard to Abnett just leads to a fanboy over-reaction (which is what closing the thread would be equivalent to).
> 
> As far as I'm concerned, he's had a no-lose-possible book topic, and dished out a solid fail. Still we get the adamant "nah brah, he's well awesome".


Yeah Dan was raced to hospital at least once after a seizure.

At the end of the day Baltar you don't like Abnett and look down on anyone who does, proclaiming them raving fanboys if they espouse an appreciation of his books, so we don't care what you would think if the thread was closed.
You're no Stella after all...


----------



## Baltar

Baron Spikey said:


> Yeah Dan was raced to hospital at least once after a seizure.
> 
> At the end of the day Baltar you don't like Abnett and look down on anyone who does, proclaiming them raving fanboys if they espouse an appreciation of his books, so we don't care what you would think if the thread was closed.
> You're no Stella after all...


I don't want to be Stella. I have the ability to both spell, and to apply proper sentence structure. I won't comment on Stella's abilities in that regard.

I see it as the opposite - I'm in a minority who dislike Abnett, but the majority seem to dislike Prospero Burns (i.e., the subject of this thread - remember). Anyone speaks badly about an author, and whoa... they're just a whinger... Nobody actually stops to think that they might have a good point.

Prospero Burns isn't a quality book.


----------



## Jezlad

Baron Spikey said:


> So we've established that some people like Prospero Burns, some people would like it more if they hadn't felt misled by the synopsis, some people are 'meh', and finally some people dislike the book with varying degrees of intensity.
> 
> Now we've managed to climb to heights of insulting each other for insulting an author and Baltar's crazed conspiracy theory.
> 
> That about it?
> 
> Maybe we should toot the magic whistle and ask a staff member to close the thread or at least enforce some of the site rules.


Rules?

They're a charade, to lull people in. :laugh:


:security: "We have a situation in the Black Library forums, send reinforcements"


----------



## Baron Spikey

Baltar said:


> I don't want to be Stella. I have the ability to both spell, and to apply proper sentence structure. I won't comment on Stella's abilities in that regard.
> 
> I see it as the opposite - I'm in a minority who dislike Abnett, but the majority seem to dislike Prospero Burns (i.e., the subject of this thread - remember). Anyone speaks badly about an author, and whoa... they're just a whinger... Nobody actually stops to think that they might have a good point.
> 
> Prospero Burns isn't a quality book.


I can only speak for myself and say that I have no problem with your dislike of Abnett's writing style or books, confusion perhaps as he is my favourite BL author but that's neither here nor there.

Where the problem arises is you transferring your dislike of Abnett's work to mean that any fans of his are in some way deficient- disagreeing with you, even passionately so, does not make someone a fanboy.

You argue that a lot of people like Dan Abnett simply because a lot of people like Dan Abnett (or at least that's how it reads) whereas you seem to be the 'hipster' who dislikes him for the exact same reason.


----------



## Phoebus

Baron Spikey said:


> Where the problem arises is you transferring your dislike of Abnett's work to mean that any fans of his are in some way deficient- disagreeing with you, even passionately so, does not make someone a fanboy.
> 
> You argue that a lot of people like Dan Abnett simply because a lot of people like Dan Abnett (or at least that's how it reads) whereas you seem to be the 'hipster' who dislikes him for the exact same reason.


That sums up my thoughts nicely.

I'll also add that delivering an _opinion_ as more-or-less fact also strikes me as rather curious. Especially when it goes hand-in-hand with the "Abnett's fanboys coming out of the woodwork" routine. Together, they just sort of come off like an "I'm right, and if you don't agree with me you're clearly crawling up Abnett's ass" view of the world. Again, rather curious. 



Baltar said:


> I've been down this road in threads before. All of the fanboys come out of the woodwork to try and suggest work-around theories to protect Abnett's flagrant God-modding of certain characters (to give one example method of 'fluff shitting').


I'm actually gonna raise the B.S. flag here, since work-around theories are hardly unique or even mostly prevalent to Abnett's readership. On this forum and others as well, readers routinely strive to justify or explain apparent disconnects in the canon. And, again, this phenomenon--the disconnects--are hardly unique to Abnett's titles.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Baltar

Baron Spikey said:


> I can only speak for myself and say that I have no problem with your dislike of Abnett's writing style or books, confusion perhaps as he is my favourite BL author but that's neither here nor there.
> 
> Where the problem arises is you transferring your dislike of Abnett's work to mean that any fans of his are in some way deficient- disagreeing with you, even passionately so, does not make someone a fanboy.
> 
> You argue that a lot of people like Dan Abnett simply because a lot of people like Dan Abnett (or at least that's how it reads) whereas you seem to be the 'hipster' who dislikes him for the exact same reason.


Hmmm, well, that may be how it plays out in your head. I'm not sure how it could be construed as 'hip' to dislike Abnett, though.

It's hard to spot a true fanboy. There is an easy litmus test, though; but I won't say what it is, because the torrent of fanboyish hatred that would be produced is too much for a Monday evening.

For me, he's had excellent books, and he's had books that were so utterly boring that I couldn't even be bothered to finish them. Since Prospero Burns, the number of the latter (that I have read) has risen beyond the number of the former. Admittedly, I must read the Eisenhorn series.

For me, it plays out like this:

Legion: - Bored me completely to tears. The end chapters with the twist was the only part of interest (and the occasional inclusion of John Grammaticus).

Any Gaunt's Ghosts novel: - Same as above, but worse. Not only were they boring, the fluff was ridiculous. Suddenly a handful of guardsman can slay whatever they want. Gaunt - invincible. That bores me. The worst thing about this, though, is that there are BILLIONS of them, and they're ALL the same. (By the way, Bernard Cornwell called, and he wants his character back)

Brothers of the Snake: - I enjoyed this book a lot. The chapter was interesting, and I thought that the main characters were well-developed. For a mere moment, Abnett managed to write a great book about space marines.

Horus Rising: - Was actually brilliant. I can't say much else about it, really.

I don't hate Abnett irrationally, but people do certainly sing his praises irrationally. All his work is not brilliant just because some of it has been, and he does not deserve the title of BL's 'best author'. The concluding books of HH should be reserved for whoever does, IMO.

As for Prospero Burns, I see it as an attempt to make a fairly shallow chapter into something more than they are, and in the attempt, the book turned out bland.

People are, in my opinion, playing the 'hip' card by claiming they are more interested in literary greatness than they are in 'bolter porn' - but let's get real - when it comes to the Space Wolves, some severe bolter porn/chainsaw fest is what will represent them the best. Not some wordy pile of boredom.


----------



## Baltar

Phoebus said:


> I'm actually gonna raise the B.S. flag here, since work-around theories are hardly unique or even mostly prevalent to Abnett's readership. On this forum and others as well, readers routinely strive to justify or explain apparent disconnects in the canon. And, again, this phenomenon--the disconnects--are hardly unique to Abnett's titles.
> 
> Cheers,
> P.


I think you've misunderstood what I meant.

Basically, question anything beyond what is likely in an Abnett book, and there will be a thousand fanboys in a queue to tell you why it would have happened.

There is not BS, there is simply a mention of Gaunt and the incident with the Khorne Beserkers.

Apparently, surprise means everything, according to others in this thread 

I was trying not to go there, but since you absolutely HAD to know...


----------



## Phoebus

Baltar said:


> For me, he's had excellent books, and he's had books that were so utterly boring that I couldn't even be bothered to finish them. Since Prospero Burns, the number of the latter (that I have read) has risen beyond the number of the former. Admittedly, I must read the Eisenhorn series.
> ...
> I don't hate Abnett irrationally, but people do certainly sing his praises irrationally. All his work is not brilliant just because some of it has been, and he does not deserve the title of BL's 'best author'. The concluding books of HH should be reserved for whoever does, IMO.


See, that strikes me as eminently reasonable. Though I will also add that, if we're to mention the irrational, at no point have I ever seen someone engage in praise of Abnett so "irrational" (I add quotes as I'm rather sure you're quite rational) as to match the denouncements you post about the man.



> As for Prospero Burns, I see it as an attempt to make a fairly shallow chapter into something more than they are, and in the attempt, the book turned out bland.
> 
> People are, in my opinion, playing the 'hip' card by claiming they are more interested in literary greatness than they are in 'bolter porn' - but let's get real - when it comes to the Space Wolves, some severe bolter porn/chainsaw fest is what will represent them the best. Not some wordy pile of boredom.


Agree to disagree, I guess.



> Brothers of the Snake: - I enjoyed this book a lot.


All is forgiven. :biggrin:

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Baron Spikey

See I wasn't a big fan of _Brothers of the Snake_, and I've read some stuff of Dan's outside of Warhammer (comics mostly) and I wasn't exactly blown away so whilst I do think Abnett is the 'best BL author' (in my eyes obviously), I acknowledge that he isn't flawless and that he's created some stuff that is passable at best.


----------



## Baltar

I'm yet to hear (other than on this forum, where 'legion' seems to be lavished with praise) anyone say that Eisenhorn isn't his best BL book. So, perhaps I need to give that a go.


----------



## Roninman

Im fan of some of his books, not all. Think Brothers of Snake was bad in story, some early GG novels were bad too after reading first two omnibuses. 

Considering how many stories he writes every year, there is bound to be some that people generally dislike. I still think his best are Legion, Horus Rising, Eisenhorn and Titanicus which is more than some other authors have ever written for BL.

Just name me any author that has always written good books and i can tell you there hardly isnt any. I concur that there is quite big following on most popularly named authors here, even books reviews shows that. Most popular authors get multiple book reviews compared to some less known. Its all about popularity.

I recently read Dead man walking which i found to be quite good book, considering after reading a thread her that some readers found book just average. Some new blood is necessary to BL, you cant except forever to someone write always good books. Graham was maybe my favourite few years ago, but after his last three Ultramarines book he wont be among my top 3 BL authors and even Thousand Sons cant save this.

I still wait to read Ben Counter novel which i would rate above average.


----------



## docgeo

Honestly it was VERY difficult for me to finish this book. I only did because I pride myself on finishing any book that I start...but man it was difficult. For me the story was long and tiring, it doesnt help that I dislike the space wolves. Their mysticsim is not interesting , for me, in the least. Sorry... but I still like Mr. Abnett.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Roninman said:


> Im fan of some of his books, not all. Think Brothers of Snake was bad in story, some early GG novels were bad too after reading first two omnibuses.
> 
> Considering how many stories he writes every year, there is bound to be some that people generally dislike. I still think his best are Legion, Horus Rising, Eisenhorn and Titanicus which is more than some other authors have ever written for BL.
> 
> Just name me any author that has always written good books and i can tell you there hardly isnt any. I concur that there is quite big following on most popularly named authors here, even books reviews shows that. Most popular authors get multiple book reviews compared to some less known. Its all about popularity.
> 
> I recently read Dead man walking which i found to be quite good book, considering after reading a thread her that some readers found book just average. Some new blood is necessary to BL, you cant except forever to someone write always good books. Graham was maybe my favourite few years ago, but after his last three Ultramarines book he wont be among my top 3 BL authors and even Thousand Sons cant save this.
> 
> I still wait to read Ben Counter novel which i would rate above average.


Have you tried anything by Aaron Dembski-Bowden? i've been very pleased with all of his books so far. Another one to watch out for, coming soon (i.e.: new blood) would be Sarah Cawkwell. she's got a good thing going with the Silver Skulls chapter. She is currently writing a Space Marine Battles novel with them as the lead chapter.



docgeo said:


> Honestly it was VERY difficult for me to finish this book. I only did because I pride myself on finishing any book that I start...but man it was difficult. For me the story was long and tiring, it doesnt help that I dislike the space wolves. Their mysticsim is not interesting , for me, in the least. Sorry... but I still like Mr. Abnett.


You know, some authors hit a low streak. And i feel the same way about how the story got on, as i stated in my book review. As you do, i too like to really finish a book that i start. it's more satisfying that way. I take that back, Dawn of War II: The novel, i quit, just quit cold turkey because i almost vomited. i absolutely hated that novel... 

I still like Mr. Abnett too. 

CP


----------



## gothik

do you know anything else by Sarah Crackwell, is it just me or are there very few female authors in BL like to read some of thier works a bit more. 
not even tried the DOW series the game was ok but i am not a big fan of it.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

gothik said:


> do you know anything else by Sarah Crackwell, is it just me or are there very few female authors in BL like to read some of thier works a bit more.
> not even tried the DOW series the game was ok but i am not a big fan of it.


Her fanfiction can be found at the Black Library Bolthole, just google "bljunkies" otherwise, her published works are just that one so far.

CP


----------



## Unknown Primarch

i never really even started reading the first 2 grey knights books as i just couldnt get into either of them. hammer of daemons was good though even though i didnt know how he got to that point. 

anyone have trouble with that eldar craftworld book by goto. didnt sem eldary to me.

and the one i just cant bring myself to finish is emperors mercy by henry zou. might just be me but is that story boring and doesnt seem to be going anywhere. and also seems to be abit of a mish mash of abnett themed novels.

anyone agree or is it just me?


----------



## gothik

Unknown Primarch said:


> i never really even started reading the first 2 grey knights books as i just couldnt get into either of them. hammer of daemons was good though even though i didnt know how he got to that point.
> 
> anyone have trouble with that eldar craftworld book by goto. didnt sem eldary to me.
> 
> and the one i just cant bring myself to finish is emperors mercy by henry zou. might just be me but is that story boring and doesnt seem to be going anywhere. and also seems to be abit of a mish mash of abnett themed novels.
> 
> anyone agree or is it just me?


got given eldar craftworld and emperors mercy as xmas presents and i set them aside as i could not get into them so i gave up, not often i do that but i can't enjoy them however, i do like Ben Counters Grey Knights novels and find i actually like them a lot


----------



## Wusword77

After finishing Prospero Burns, I wish I hadn't filled out the "Worst HH book" poll until after I fully read the book.

I am deeply disappointed in the book, and I feel it added almost nothing to the HH series as a whole. So much promise and it was wasted in setting up a book that takes place after the heresy.

Oh well, I'm hoping the next HH book can make up for it.


----------



## Doelago

Commissar Ploss said:


> Have you tried anything by Aaron Dembski-Bowden? i've been very pleased with all of his books so far.


I would also recommend Aaron Dembski-Bowden, for I was really pleased with the Crimson Fists story *"One Hate"* in *Legends of the Space Marines*. Heck, it was probably the best story in the whole damn book, closely followed by the Salamanders story.


----------



## Commissar Ploss

Wusword77 said:


> After finishing Prospero Burns, I wish I hadn't filled out the "Worst HH book" poll until after I fully read the book.


haha, my thoughts exactly. lol

CP 

but then again, i'm an unabashed realist. I don't butter up anything i say, especially when it comes to talking about books.


----------



## Angel of Blood

I fail to see how it added nothing to the Heresy though. It completely changed everything about the conflict between the Rout and the Thousand Sons, how the Burning of Prospero came about, potentially how the result of Nikea panned out and everything about the Fenryka in general.

It may not have been what it was described to be, and you may not have liked it, thats fine, but i just cant see how it added nothing to the Heresy.


----------



## Wusword77

Angel of Blood said:


> I fail to see how it added nothing to the Heresy though. It completely changed everything about the conflict between the Rout and the Thousand Sons, how the Burning of Prospero came about, potentially how the result of Nikea panned out and everything about the Fenryka in general.
> 
> It may not have been what it was described to be, and you may not have liked it, thats fine, but i just cant see how it added nothing to the Heresy.


It gave very limited depth into the Space Wolves. Hell it was just a pretty way of telling us what we already knew about them. They got the shitty jobs no one else liked, we got that impression from 1k sons. We also learned from 1k sons that the Space Wolves are not just space vikings.

Russ was shown to be softer (somewhat) at the end with his dealings against Magnus. They already hinted at this in 1k sons when Lorgar mentions his battle with the Lion.

The reveal in the end of the book by



The deamon


We knew about that from 1k sons as well.

And then there is Nikea. Sure that little twist was kind of cool, but the fact is we're told in 1k sons that only Ahirman goes there with Magnus. It feels like it was added in to be an example of how "subtle" Chaos can be (and it wasn't very subtle, hell it seemed somewhat dumb).

At the end of the day it was a HH book that only set up another book that takes place after the Heresy.


----------



## Angel of Blood

In what part of Thousand Sons did it ever mention the deatils revealed at the end of Prospero Burns.


----------



## Wusword77

Angel of Blood said:


> In what part of Thousand Sons did it ever mention the deatils revealed at the end of Prospero Burns.


"They drunk from the same chalice as you and you wish them to serve a man who has betrayed you?" PG 451. It is implied that the Deamon planned all of this to happen to bring the 1k sons into it's ranks or see them destroyed. Knowing that, the reveals at the end of PB aren't hard to jump to.


----------



## Angel of Blood

What? How does that even begin to reveal that chaos had been manipulating both the Wolves and Thousand Sons, that chaos had been infiltrating both Legions, subtly altering and influencing events to make the two legions suspect, distrust and antagonise each other, all of which coming together to lead the Wolves to attack Prospero and seal both of their fates.


----------



## genesis80

Angel of Blood said:


> What? How does that even begin to reveal that chaos had been manipulating both the Wolves and Thousand Sons, that chaos had been infiltrating both Legions, subtly altering and influencing events to make the two legions suspect, distrust and antagonise each other, all of which coming together to lead the Wolves to attack Prospero and seal both of their fates.


Is this a trick question or what? It seems pretty clear to me. It was already hinted at in 1k sons, just expanded somewhat in PB.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Sorry but your going to have to elaborate. I seriously don't see anywhere in that passage that indicated they have been manipulating the Thousand Sons and Space Wolves rivalry, planting spies in both the legions, using events to engineer their distrust and contempt of each other, influencing the council of Nikea. Seriously, explain how it does, cause i'm really failing to see how you made such a massive leap of logic, i mean if it was so obvious why had no one on these boards or any others talked about it before PB came out.


----------



## Wusword77

Does the book come right out and tell us that? No, but the jump in logic isn't to far fetched.

We know from 1k sons that Magnus made a deal with the powers in the warp to save his legion from mutation, if only for a time.

We know that the Deamons wanted to have Magnus instead of Horus but had to settle for Horus instead, as he got "too powerful".

During the Shrike incident some of the 1k sons started to go through the flesh change (which the chaos powers stopped for a time) in front of the Wolves. Very convenient for that, as it causes the Wolves to see them even more like Warlocks and distrust them.

The Trial of Magnus happens, and he is barred from using magic, but he does anyway to warn the Emperor. Something in the Warp offers him power to get to Terra through the warp. The result is the destruction of the webway project and the cause for Unleashing the Wolves.

Knowing the warp did all that is it really THAT much of a leap to think they (Chaos) would plant 1 spy among the Space Wolves, that has clearly been modified through psy abilities? Hell no. Sure the twists they put in the the Trial were kind of cool, but it added a little fluff rather then be a game changer.

So, honestly, telling us that the Warp sent a spy to live with the Wolves for 70 years so they can suspect Magnus of witchcraft? Not needed to add more suspicion about the 1k sons. And the bit about the 2 legions wiping each other out, well we got told that in HH collected visions was part of Horus' plan.

The book was not needed and it added little to nothing into the overall story.


----------



## Angel of Blood

Sorry but to be frank i dont believe anyone made that massive leap of logic at the time. Not one single person on any board made any such comment relating to it and sicne PB coming out, the revelation that chaos manipulated the rivalry the entire time and Nikea was one of the big things people talked about. Hauser was not the only spy they planted, that wasn't the only thing they did, they had been manipiulating the two Legions since their inception, they were implied to have planted many spies and false information, the Shrike thing is hardly relevant seeing as the Wolves already clearly held the Thousand Sons in enough contempt by that point. I don't even see how people are making this logic leap now, it was hardly 'expanded' upon at all, there was absoloutely no hints or clues that chaos had engineered the rivalry the entire time. 

And Nikea not game changing? Sure it is, the fact that the Emperors decision was very likely because of a chaos agent all along and that he may not have been so harsh on Magnus without said agents actions. Nikea is the game winner, if the Emperor had come to a different decision at Nikea then it could have changed the entire course of the Heresy.


----------



## Unknown Primarch

i doubt if the emperors decision to KEEP psyker powers would have changed the heresy. there still would have been a galactic war but with someone else in charge as the hatred towards the emperor by some of his sons was just ripe for tainting. 
i think if chaos planned to have magnus in charge there must have been something to make him turn from the emperor and take charge of all the traitor forces in the first place. obviously it wasnt the flesh change or he would have turned in the first place, not sort of forced to by what russ did. they must have seen something in magnus that they thought they could use against the emperor, weither it was his powers or some inner hatred or doubt. that always seems the theme of tainting people.
seems to me that whatever happened the forces of man were always gonna tear each other apart and all paths of fate lead to the emperors vision of a utopian galaxy turn to dust. 

but i suppose you could pin alot of things on the emperor without knowing the reasons his actions.

1. why didnt he teleport down to de'shea to help angron defeat his enemies and then that would have kept him on side.

2. why give perturabo all the shit jobs and then have his known rival get all the sweet jobs. yes they are grown men but by doing things this way its just asking for trouble.

3. why let lorgars world stay as it was when it goes against all that was imperial truth then only after years of living this way have something to say about it. he should have dealt with it straight away one way or the other.

4. why not lock the psychotic night haunter up straight away. the guy is completely deranged and in need of help but he has a body and powers of a primarch. he is then given control of a legion. maybe curze's trait from the emperor is being a lunatic, someone who can envisage a galactic empire and attain it how he did cant be all there to be honest. lol


----------



## Baltar

You would call Curze a lunatic, but defend Angron?

Interesting.


----------



## BlackGuard

Just started Prospero Burns, and I'm finding the first twenty pages mind-numbingly boring. This does not bold well for me, only _Battle for the Abyss_ was this boring ... :cray:


----------



## Phoebus

Unknown Primarch said:


> i doubt if the emperors decision to KEEP psyker powers would have changed the heresy.


Agreed. It was a compromise decision. Several Primarchs despised psychic powers, and those who tolerated them were still not going to back Magnus on account of (A) his penchant for sorcery and (B) the risk of angering the anti-Psyker clique.



> they must have seen something in magnus that they thought they could use against the emperor, weither it was his powers or some inner hatred or doubt. that always seems the theme of tainting people.


Given Magnus' personality and desires, I have no doubt they originally thought to tempt him with the powers the Warp offers. Magnus, however, appears to have been more grounded than most give him credit for, and rejected the Ruinous Powers. That having been said, his hubris was great enough, however, to lead him to believe that he came ahead of the bargain when he "cured" his Legion.



> 1. why didnt he teleport down to de'shea to help angron defeat his enemies and then that would have kept him on side.


I hear this a lot, and I just can't understand this reasoning. By Angron's own admission, he attacked the Emperor without provocation and killed one of his Custodes before being psychically knocked out. Furthermore, those survivors of his army were _also_ fitted with rage-implants, which means that there was probably no way of preventing a fight without teleporting out of there.

Hindsight is always a great tool to use, but the fact of the matter is that the Emperor is not prophetic--and if he is, to any degree, he's not infallible.



> 2. why give perturabo all the shit jobs and then have his known rival get all the sweet jobs. yes they are grown men but by doing things this way its just asking for trouble.


Perturabo wasn't given "shit jobs". He got the same assignments every other Primarch got. Every Legion had to fight through sieges; Perturabo's was just _better_. Not every Legion refused to leave behind garrisons on conquered worlds; in fact, the Ultramarines _prospered_ from the practice. Unlike Guiliman, though, Perturabo never developed the talent, skill, whatever, needed to bring people over to his (and the Imperium's) side, which resulted in one Legion (the Ultramarines) setting up worlds that were called "utopian", and another (the Iron Warriors) having to deal with rebellions and such.

Either way, this can't be pinned on the Emperor.



> 3. why let lorgars world stay as it was when it goes against all that was imperial truth then only after years of living this way have something to say about it. he should have dealt with it straight away one way or the other.


Probably because he was trying to avoid turning their lives upside down overnight and, in the process of doing so, not only fostering enmity and rebellion, but also undermining the Primarch, who had grown up there and was revered by his people.

Lorgar was given his marching orders but ignored them.



> 4. why not lock the psychotic night haunter up straight away. the guy is completely deranged and in need of help but he has a body and powers of a primarch. he is then given control of a legion. maybe curze's trait from the emperor is being a lunatic, someone who can envisage a galactic empire and attain it how he did cant be all there to be honest. lol


Because when you're handed lemons, you might as well try to make lemonade. It's obvious that, at some point, the Emperor decided that even broken Primarchs were better than no Primarchs.

Besides, when you look behind the shiny propaganda of that era, all the Primarchs were ruthless. Russ' campaigns were just as devastating, and he wasn't insane. Guilliman torched an entire city _just to prove a point._ Dorn's complaint against Curze seems to have centered less on what he was doing during campaign... and more on the fact that he didn't know when to _stop._


----------



## Orbital

I was looking forward to this book so much due to the time delay and having the other side of the Burning told.

It a good book for what told however it's the only HH book that I fell asleep reading on the train (daily commute work) because it didn't hold my attention or stir my feelings.

I can only put this down to two things.
1, As other have said the title of picture doesn't relate to what is inside the book and that was what I was expecting.

2, The story was just Blah. The were great moments within the story e.g. the scene between Hawser and 'Amon'. It did make sense at the end and you understood why the flashbacks were in there but really it was just an averge way to show us how the chaos gods had been plotting the downfall of the legions for a long time. 

I am meeting my brother tomorrow and I am lending him this book before TS because otherwise i know he'll be disspointed..I know I was.


----------

