# Horus Heresy: Best novel of the series



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

With the release of _Prospero Burns_ the acclaimed Horus Heresy series has reached fifteen novels and continues onwards, with _Age of Darkness_, _The Outcast Dead_ and _Deliverance Lost_ due next year. But out of the fifteen current novels which of all fifteen is the best, is it the very start with _Horus Rising_, is it the fall of the Emperor's Children in _Fulgrim_, is it the sacking of Prospero in _A Thousand Sons_?. I created this poll as I was curious as to which book is considered the best by the majority of Heresy Online members. 

Cast your vote and if you feel like it give your reasons why.

I vote for _The First Heretic_ for the fantastic story that I was engrossed in on every page, compelling characters that I really sympathized with like Lorgar and Argel Tal, visceral battles that were not only violent but played their own role in the story, and for revelations that shook the 30k universe and revealed the truth behind many events and actions that lead to the downfall of the Imperium and the death of mankind's hope.

Lord of the Night


----------



## Bane_of_Kings (Oct 28, 2009)

You forgot to put a poll up there . 

I will have to vote for _Prospero Burns_, as it was personally my favourite, not just because it features about the Space Wolves, but also is written by Dan Abnett. Oh yes, and it has my favourite Vlkya Fenryka in. 



Bjorn the Fell-Handed 's my favourite.


Second favourite would probably be _The First Heretic_, Third _A Thousand Sons_, Fourth _Fulgrim_ and Fifth _Flight of the Eisenstien_.


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Bane_of_Kings said:


> You forgot to put a poll up there .
> 
> I will have to vote for _Prospero Burns_, as it was personally my favourite, not just because it features about the Space Wolves, but also is written by Dan Abnett. Oh yes, and it has my favourite Vlkya Fenryka in.
> 
> ...


Actually I was writing it up, took a few minutes :grin:.

And _Prospero Burns_ is great, but I prefer _The First Heretic_ because it featured more battles and more about the story, rather then trying to show who the Word Bearers were and what their culture was like, like _Prospero Burns_ did with the Vlka Fenryka.

That and it featured plenty of moments that make you go.. :shok: "Holy ****, did that just happen?!"


----------



## FORTHELION (Nov 21, 2009)

A thousand sons for me, as i havnt read prospero burns yet.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Flight of the Eisenstein for me: the Heresy is starting and word needs to be delivered. A few good men must push aside their desire to do what feels right in order to accomplish what must be done. Cast to the winds, riding blind, and with almost every belief called into question with no one to turn to.

To me, Flight is more than just the novel that revolves around warning the loyalists. Its an author who is improving given a chance to make something grand, and succeeds.


It might not be an exploration of a legion, how they began and why they in turn did what they did; or the culmination of a turning point, or of some epic or major battle that older players interested in the fluff will recognize and newer ones will never forget. Flight is something more important, the delivering of the most important message to the man that needs to get it and who likely won't want to believe it.

After that, gotta go with Descent of Angels, Legion, Galaxy in Flames, and Tales of Heresy


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

_A Thousand Sons_ for me, even if I am a SW fanboy. _Fulgrim, Mechanicum_ and _FotE_ would be up there. I hate say it, but _Prospero Burns_ barely makes my top 5.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Personally _Legion_ is my favourite, with _Horus Rising_ a close second. I'll hopefully be reviewing both relatively soon, so i'll justify my decisions then.  



Khorne's Fist said:


> I hate say it, but _Prospero Burns_ barely makes my top 5.


Im with you on that one.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Legion for me. Loved Prospero Burns, but i think its going to take something monumental to topple Legion of its pedestal. For a top five i would probably say

1. Legion
2. Prospero Burns/Horus Rising
3. Flight of the Eisenstien
4. Thousand Sons


----------



## xNoPityx (Dec 23, 2010)

1.Horus Rising
2.Flight of the Einstien
3.The First Heretic


----------



## Svartmetall (Jun 16, 2008)

*posting from work*

I really had to think hard about this one, it ended up being a close race between Flight, Thousand Sons, Legion and Heretic; went for Flight since it's got the Death Guard in but the other three are damn good too. Can't wait to get my hands on a copy of 'Prospero Burns' as that could be another killer one, too.


----------



## March of Time (Dec 4, 2009)

1.Flight of the Eisenstein
2.Horus Rising
3.Mechanicum


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

I haven't read 1st heretic yet its staring at me now..

but for me 1 Thousand sons
2 Galaxy in flames
3 Flight of the Eisenstein


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

I'm currently reading first heretic. Own prospero burns. I won't vote till I finish both. But for me its either fulgrim, fallen angels or a thousand sons.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

_Legion_- Cote & AoB saved me the bother of explaining myself...thanks.


----------



## HOBO (Dec 7, 2007)

I waited to read Thousand Sons until Prospero Burns came out so I can read them in order, but still having read either yet because I'm in the middle of The First Heretic.

They all have something to offer, but pushed for an answer I'd say -
Legion
Mechanicum
Nemesis

basically ones that aren't so focussed on SM's.


----------



## Fire Tempered (Dec 16, 2010)

Havent read Mechanicum, Nemesis, Battle for the Abyss and Prospero Burns, but from ones I read:
Thousand Sons
First Heretic
Fulgrim


----------



## mal310 (May 28, 2010)

Has to be Legion, although The First Heretic pushes it close.


----------



## M3N0N26 (Sep 18, 2008)

Fulgrim for me, amazing book from start to finish

2nd would be Thousand Sons, and 3rd The First Heretic although both are too close to call :]


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Good to see Legion taking the lead.


----------



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

Although I simply cannot deny *Horus Rising's *brilliance, I wasn't too fond of _Legion_. Plus, as I hate to jump onto the 'Dan Abnett is akin to a God' bandwagon, I'm voting _Fulgrim_ by Graham McNeill. Although _A Thousand Sons _is close and _The First Heretic _is promising...


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

No question - a tie between Fulgrim and First Heretic. Perhaps one of the early 3 books should get in there, but I don't remember which one it was that blew me away completely (if it was indeed only the one).

Frankly, I think people must be OUT of their minds to be voting for Legion; the book was utter boredom. Other than John Grammaticus, and the last 10 pages, it was utterly dull.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

bobss said:


> Although I simply cannot deny *Horus Rising's *brilliance, I wasn't too fond of _Legion_. Plus, as I hate to jump onto the 'Dan Abnett is akin to a God' bandwagon, I'm voting _Fulgrim_ by Graham McNeill. Although _A Thousand Sons _is close and _The First Heretic _is promising...





Baltar said:


> No question - a tie between Fulgrim and First Heretic. Perhaps one of the early 3 books should get in there, but I don't remember which one it was that blew me away completely (if it was indeed only the one).
> 
> Frankly, I think people must be OUT of their minds to be voting for Legion; the book was utter boredom. Other than John Grammaticus, and the last 10 pages, it was utterly dull.


Well i believe your both in the minority in regards to _Legion, _but hey everyones got their own opinion. And Dan Abnett IS god ^^ he is without a shadow of a doubt the best BL author imo, Legion, Horus Rising, Burning of Prospero, Gaunts Ghosts, Eisenhorn and Ravenor all attest to that

And why did you find Legion boring? not enough stereotypical shooty shooty 'For the Emperor!!!!' Astartes running around? I couldn't get enough of it, the web of intrigue and manipulation the Alpha Legion and Grammaticus himself spread throughout the novel was more gripping then anything i've read before. Witnessing the human element of the crusade and how its fought, how they look upon the Astarte. The completely unique and engrossing way the XX Legion operate, their use of agents, actually caring for those agents, 'I am Alpharius' and the way your never quite certain which character actually is Alpharius at the time. Again, easily the best book i have read, Abnett truely outdid himself and outshone all the other authors.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Baltar said:


> Frankly, I think people must be OUT of their minds to be voting for Legion; the book was utter boredom. Other than John Grammaticus, and the last 10 pages, it was utterly dull.


And I think you must be OUT of your mind for thinking it was dull. 



bobss said:


> Plus, as I hate to jump onto the 'Dan Abnett is akin to a God' bandwagon


Just to note, I personally am by no means part of that bandwagon. I think _Legion_ is clearly the best HH novel because of the novel itself not simply because I think it's the best of Abnett's HH work. One only needs to look at my recent review of _Prospero Burns_ to see that im critical of Abnett in that particular novel.


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

I personally didn't like legion, but i generally not a fan of mystery stories

I thought the first half of legion was dull and hard to get through, but the second half when the cabal gets involved improved it tenfold.

The nurethene war was too long and generally fairly uninspiring, I couldn't relate to Sonaka or the alpha legion.


----------



## forkmaster (Jan 2, 2010)

Fulgrim has since I read it stayed on the top as the best novell, followed by FotE! Legion I think its a great perspektive from Alpha Legion but I dont like novell. I might be in the minority but my opinion none the less. Prospero Burns have what I read so far of the first 70 pages a slow start. I love Dan Abnetts work, especially the GG, but I cant say he make good novells all the time.


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

Angel of Blood said:


> Well i believe your both in the minority in regards to _Legion, _but hey everyones got their own opinion. And Dan Abnett IS god ^^ he is without a shadow of a doubt the best BL author imo, Legion, Horus Rising, Burning of Prospero, Gaunts Ghosts, Eisenhorn and Ravenor all attest to that
> 
> And why did you find Legion boring? not enough stereotypical shooty shooty 'For the Emperor!!!!' Astartes running around? I couldn't get enough of it, the web of intrigue and manipulation the Alpha Legion and Grammaticus himself spread throughout the novel was more gripping then anything i've read before. Witnessing the human element of the crusade and how its fought, how they look upon the Astarte. The completely unique and engrossing way the XX Legion operate, their use of agents, actually caring for those agents, 'I am Alpharius' and the way your never quite certain which character actually is Alpharius at the time. Again, easily the best book i have read, Abnett truely outdid himself and outshone all the other authors.


While I did love legion, it isn't my most loved book as I haven't read or have any experience with any imperial guard novels. A lot of things went way over my head and I had to use 40k wikis on several occasions. 

After finishing the heresy I will try the gaunts ghosts omnibus I have sitting there. 

But I did love the story of it, it really surprised me even though a friend ruined it for me by blurting out 

that the primarch was a twin


I just wished I knew more about the Imperial guard before I went into it,and hadn't had the ending ruined for me.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Finished _Prospero Burns_ and I can happily say I don't need to change my vote, _Legion_ is still the best HH novel to date.

I noticed the over-use of 'wet-leopard growl' after CotE pointed it out, does Abnett not know another phrase to use as that one became meaningless after the first 10 times it ws used?

I did enjoy the tie in to the _Ravenor_ trilogy though, that was cool.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

I am considering whether or not to just skip reading Prospero Burns entirely. I've read A Thousand Sons, and I really don't need to read another Space Puppy-bumming sermon, especially not from the furiously over-rated Abnett. Considering the story is identical to A Thousand Sons, but from Space Puppy perspective, I really don't think I'll miss anything by leaving out all of the 'I smell them coming', random getting angry, burping, uncool dwarf-like behaviour ('honour' this, and 'honour' that, etc.), shaggy beards/crap hair, growl growl, etc etc.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Well it isn't just the same story from the SW point of view- as with the actual burning of Prospero in _A Thousand Sons_ most of the novel doesn't deal with the battle at all.

If you want to skip a good book go ahead, but out of curiosity since you rate Dan Abnett so low who is one of your favourite BL authors (if you say James Swallow I'll laugh).

Edit: The Space Wolves in Propero Burns are actually serious warriors rather than the wolfy space viking cartoon style characters in the Space Wolf Omnibus.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Dembski-bowden is way better, no danger.

Graham Mcniell

William King

All deserve way more credit than Abnett IMO, who, for some reason, gets lavished with praise simply for writing the yawn-worthy Gaunt series. It's not exactly original to take a character, God mod them to oblivion so that they can kill everything that moves, put them in a trench coat and boots, and then spin off a billion same-ish novels about them. The Iron Snakes novel was jiz-worthy, but that's about all I remember of Abnett that I really liked.

James Swallow can f' right off. I REALLY hope GW don't let him have ANY involvement with the BA section of the HH series, although I have heard that he is writing them (disappointment looms in the distance, it seems). I would consider it almost an extreme difficulty to get the BA books wrong in the HH series, as people are destined to like them, but if anyone can manage such a trajedy, it's James Swallow (although, it could be worse; Gotto could be writing them).


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Baltar said:


> Dembski-Bowden is way better, no danger.


Right on!



Baltar said:


> All deserve way more credit than Abnett IMO, who, for some reason, gets lavished with praise simply for writing the yawn-worthy Gaunt series. It's not exactly original to take a character, God mod them to oblivion so that they can kill everything that moves, put them in a trench coat and boots, and then spin off a billion same-ish novels about them. The Iron Snakes novel was jiz-worthy, but that's about all I remember of Abnett that I really liked.


Again I agree with you. _Gaunt's Ghosts_ is overrated, its good but to me its just not the epic series that many make it out to be. _Ciaphas Cain_ is a far better Imperial Guard series, and Abnett's finest work is the Inquisition series, both _Eisenhorn_ and _Ravenor_ trump Gaunt any day. _Brotherhood of the Snake_ was great as well, but its just a stand-alone novel, if it were a full series that'd be cool but I don't think Abnett likes the Astartes very much. He prefers to write about the other Imperial groups.



Baltar said:


> James Swallow can f' right off. I REALLY hope GW don't let him have ANY involvement with the BA section of the HH series, although I have heard that he is writing them (disappointment looms in the distance, it seems). I would consider it almost an extreme difficulty to get the BA books wrong in the HH series, as people are destined to like them, but anyone can manage such a trajedy, it's James Swallow (although, it could be worse; Gotto could be writing them).


Im in the minority here but I like James Swallow, I like his Blood Angels series, and that means all of it, I like _Deus Sanguinius_ and _Deus Encarmine_, not just _Red Fury_ and _Black Tide_. I like his Heresy novels and I look forward to his Heresy Blood Angels story. Im not blind, I see his flaws and his terminology issues, however you can't solely blame the author for mistakes in terminology. Black Library has editors you know, and they seem to think its fine. Blame the editors as well, they are the ones who are okaying the terminology. So either the editors are in the wrong as well, or we are wrong and Jim Swallow's terminology is fine.


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

Lord of the Night said:


> Im in the minority here but I like James Swallow, I like his Blood Angels series, and that means all of it, I like _Deus Sanguinius_ and _Deus Encarmine_, not just _Red Fury_ and _Black Tide_. I like his Heresy novels and I look forward to his Heresy Blood Angels story. Im not blind, I see his flaws and his terminology issues, however you can't solely blame the author for mistakes in terminology. Black Library has editors you know, and they seem to think its fine. Blame the editors as well, they are the ones who are okaying the terminology. So either the editors are in the wrong as well, or we are wrong and Jim Swallow's terminology is fine.


I really enjoy his books as well, I loved FOTE and Nemesis, so brought the Blood angels omnibus and can't wait to get into it.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

ADB is good no argument but he still trails behind McNeill, Abnett, and Mitchell.

Regarding _Iron Snakes_, I personally consider it the weakest of his BL books- it's the closest he's gotten to pure bolter porn. 
And William King...just no. He was one of the best authors when he used to write for BL but considering the talent that writes for them now he doesn't even deserve to be considered as one of the Top 5 BL authors.

_Sabbat Martyr_ is the best BL book published so far (in my opinion of course), one day it'll be surpasssed no doubt but it's unlikely to be by anybody other than Abnett, McNeill, Mitchell, or possibly ADB.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Baron Spikey said:


> Finished _Prospero Burns_ and I can happily say I don't need to change my vote, _Legion_ is still the best HH novel to date.


Hear hear!



Baron Spikey said:


> I noticed the over-use of 'wet-leopard growl' after CotE pointed it out, does Abnett not know another phrase to use as that one became meaningless after the first 10 times it ws used?


Aye, it was a shame. Just seemed like he lost interest after he used it literally dozens of times.



Baron Spikey said:


> I did enjoy the tie in to the _Ravenor_ trilogy though, that was cool.


I havn't read _Ravenor_ yet (yeah, yeah), so that flew straight over my head, care to elaborate?


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

I'm not going to say that I didn't enjoy the BA books written by Swallow, but I only enjoyed them because they were furiously selling-out on every front. By that, I mean that Swallow could simply not lose with those books. The crop of characters readily available to write about (even some of the bad guys 'dropped' into the story, too) made it so that the books were awesome before he'd even started.

However... Let's get some perspective... The books were enjoyable in the 'general BL sense', rather than on the same scale as the HH series - which, frankly, is on a whole different level.

With the BA (just like the SW) in HH, there is a no-lose situation, in that the events set to take place are awesome, the chapter is awesome, and the primarch is awesome. It's not possible to screw it up, but it's possible, if the right writer is set to it, to make it complete win.

Dembski-Bowden took what could have been previously described as the most boring chapter possible (the bible bashers), and actually wrote an awesome book despite not having the concrete 'no-lose' foundation that either thousand sons/prospero burns or the BA books have.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> I havn't read Ravenor yet (yeah, yeah), so that flew straight over my head, care to elaborate?


_Enuncia_- the magical language that isn't actually magic, it's a big part of the Ravenor trilogy (you know the thing Kaspar uses to blow the face off...the thing).


----------



## Ultra111 (Jul 9, 2009)

I've only read books 1 - 8, but I would say my favourite out of them was probably Galaxy in Flames, been ages since I read any of them though.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Baltar said:


> I am considering whether or not to just skip reading Prospero Burns entirely. I've read A Thousand Sons, and I really don't need to read another Space Puppy-bumming sermon, especially not from the furiously over-rated Abnett. Considering the story is identical to A Thousand Sons, but from Space Puppy perspective, I really don't think I'll miss anything by leaving out all of the 'I smell them coming', random getting angry, burping, uncool dwarf-like behaviour ('honour' this, and 'honour' that, etc.), shaggy beards/crap hair, growl growl, etc etc.


I think your letting your bias about Abnett overshadow any potential the book has. Odd how you bash the Space Wolves so much there but then list William King as a better author than Abnett, despite him being the main culprit for turning the Wolves into how you have described them. And though Baron as already pointed it out, they are not like that at all in Prospero Burns. The book give almost an entirely new take on the Wolves and how they were in the Heresy, there isn't really any random anger, dwarf behaviour or burping. And again it's hardly A Thousand Sons from another standpoint at all, very little of the book is actually dedicated to the burning of Prospero and the little bit that is focuses on an entirely different area of the battle. And you say Abnett is furiously over rated, i would disagree, you don't get lauded as one of the best authors by the vast majority when your not. 



Baltar said:


> Dembski-bowden is way better, no danger.
> 
> Graham Mcniell
> 
> ...


I don't think any of the above are better than Abnett, they are all amazing writers don't get me wrong, but just because ADB made the Word Bearers interesting (slightly) doesn't make him the god everyone seems to be claiming he is now. The First Heretic doesn't even almost enter my top 5 of Heresy books. It was very good yes, but full of some very bad parts, some utterly boring parts and a host of completely unlikeable characters and he made very little effort to disguise his blatent favouring of the Night Lords. But the finer points of why i don't rate the book as high as others is for another thread. Similarly is the matter of how good the Ghosts series are. Again you are in the minority, the vast majority of us believe it to be one of the best series going with some of the best books the BL has every produced such as the aforementioned Sabbyt Martyr. Again, you may not like it, but the majority and reviewers are on our side of the arguement, but hey, opinions.

And Abnett is hardly lauded with praise soley because of Gaunts Ghosts. He's made that yes, and its immensly succesful and again praised by the majority, which counts for alot tbh. But then theres Eisenhorn and Ravenor, both highly acclaimed series. Horus Rising, he kick started the series and set the bar straight away, making the arch-traitor Horus into a massively likeable character is far greater a sucess than turning Lorgar into mroe of a whining little bitch and his legion a bunch of possesed and annoying freaks. Then Legion, whilst you might not like it, is again considered by the majority to be one of the best in the series and very good by others. That is why Abnett is lauded with alot of praise, because he writes incredibaly good books, just because you don't think he is does not make it so, you will of course argue that just because i think he is good doesn't make it so, but again in the numbers game, far, far, far more people like his work than dislike it.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Can sum up an entire reply by stating the obvious:

Popularity =/= Quality

Just because something is popular (like Abnett) does not mean IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER that it is actually any good at all (I could list a billion popular things as proof, such as Twilight, The Beatles, Communism, Cliff Richard, the list is practically endless....). Abnett is on the list.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Yet that is not the case all the time at all. Popularity can equal excellent quality, it being popular because its excellent, and it is treated as such as well. Twilight may be popular to the armies of teenage girls etc, but there are just as many people if not more that hate it with a passion, it's won no awards, many major critics hate it etc etc.

The same cannot be said for countless other immensly popular shows, films or books. And just because you don't like them is not 'proof' in any way shape or form. Just because you and a minority of others dont like something does not mean IN ANY WAY WHATSOEVER that is is bad


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

And again that would entirely be your opinion.
My list of Popularity=/=Quality:

Nick Kyme (to be honest I just think he's an average writer not a terrible one)
Soul Drinkers (this series is bird cage filler at worst, something to read on the toilet at best)
Lost
Heroes
Final Fantasy (all of them)
Metal of all varieties (some, the minority, of metal bands are good but the rest are ear bleeders)

Just as often- Popularity=Quality
Graham McNeill
Gaunts Ghosts series
Supernatural
Fable 1-3
etc etc


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Obviously, things with quality tend to be popular.

Popularity in itself, however, is no such indication.

I'm quite willing to be part of a minority that stands amidst criticism in order to temper the tides of mouth-foaming Abnett worshipers, even if only to prevent them from completely misinforming the world about his apparent brilliance.

Abnett can leave me cold (a'la Gaunt's Ghosts - it was tepid at best) like the worst of them. I can't say the same of very good authors.


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

Baltar said:


> Abnett can leave me cold (a'la Gaunt's Ghosts - it was tepid at best)


I agree to a certain extent. Some of Abnett's work is excellent, however sometimes I get the feeling he's just pumping out books due to contractual obligations (_Bloodpact_) as opposed to releasing good stories. I loved _Mechanicum _and _Titanicus_ as well as the Eisenhorn books, however I got seriously bored with the _Ravenor_ trilogy, and the GG books have been in decline for two or three books now. 

But because his good ones are so good, I'll always pick up his new novels in the hope it's toward the higher end of the scale.


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Angel of Blood said:


> I don't think any of the above are better than Abnett, they are all amazing writers don't get me wrong, but just because ADB made the Word Bearers interesting (slightly) doesn't make him the god everyone seems to be claiming he is now. The First Heretic doesn't even almost enter my top 5 of Heresy books. It was very good yes, but full of some very bad parts, some utterly boring parts and a host of completely unlikeable characters and he made very little effort to disguise his blatant favouring of the Night Lords. But the finer points of why I don't rate the book as high as others is for another thread. Similarly is the matter of how good the Ghosts series are. Again you are in the minority, the vast majority of us believe it to be one of the best series going with some of the best books the BL has every produced such as the aforementioned Sabbyt Martyr. Again, you may not like it, but the majority and reviewers are on our side of the arguement, but hey, opinions.
> 
> And Abnett is hardly lauded with praise soley because of Gaunts Ghosts. He's made that yes, and its immensly succesful and again praised by the majority, which counts for alot tbh. But then theres Eisenhorn and Ravenor, both highly acclaimed series. Horus Rising, he kick started the series and set the bar straight away, making the arch-traitor Horus into a massively likeable character is far greater a success than turning Lorgar into mroe of a whining little bitch and his legion a bunch of possesed and annoying freaks. Then Legion, whilst you might not like it, is again considered by the majority to be one of the best in the series and very good by others. That is why Abnett is lauded with alot of praise, because he writes incredibaly good books, just because you don't think he is does not make it so, you will of course argue that just because i think he is good doesn't make it so, but again in the numbers game, far, far, far more people like his work than dislike it.


_The First Heretic_ is only part of why ADB is considered one of Black Library's finest writers. Theres also _Soul Hunter_, _Helsreach_ and _Cadian Blood_, his only four novels and yet every single one of them has been acclaimed.


Just something in regard to your comments about _The First Heretic_ AoB. ADB isn't lauded because he made the Word Bearers into a sympathetic force rather than everyone just saying they were weak and went to Chaos because they were selfish. They turned because of good intentions, which seem to turn more people then bad intentions, and only wanted everyone to be happy in having the love that they felt a god would bring. They wanted truth and wanted to have a place in the galaxy that was rapidly turning against them and the things they had cherished all their lives. I felt the characters were not only likeable but sympathetic, you see how much they believe in their cause and feel bad that only after a hundred years of believing they were doing good were they smacked down and told they are a disgrace, something they did not even remotely deserve.

And Lorgar is not a whiny bitch. _The First Heretic_ showed how much he believed in what he preached, it showed that he felt Colchis was the example of humanity and he believed people were abandoning hope and faith for a militaristic style of life and that he truly believed that without faith the galaxy was doomed to an existence without hope. He was the only Primarch who didn't want to murder millions, rather he would have liked to merely converse and enlighten others with his words rather then subjugate them with a gun as the other Primarchs did.

Oh and the part about favouring Night Lords. It was clearly documented that Konrad Curze was the strongest Primarch physically. He nearly killed Rogal Dorn and at the time he was out of his mind with pain and couldn't even see what he was doing, and he still nearly managed to kill Dorn. Its no wonder he beat Corax, he was lucid and focused on his goal and was fighting in his own style of brutal punches and under-handed tactics, while Corax was using his own style of guerilla warfare. Frankly if Corax had won, i'd be saying that it was completely unrealistic, and that if he had won Corax must have been stronger than every other Primarch, which Curze is.


But back to the topic. Dan Abnett is a good author and I don't dispute that, I do however believe he is heavily overrated because of _Gaunt's Ghosts_. Its a good series but its not Black Library's best and for me its not even in the Top 10, and I feel that the story of _Gaunt's Ghosts_ has gone downhill since Caffran died, and that very soon there won't be any original characters left in the series apart from Gaunt himself. I feel that Abnett's best work is _Eisenhorn_, followed by _Ravenor_ and then his Horus Heresy work. And I feel his Heresy work, except _Horus Rising_, is overrated too. _Legion_ was good but it wasn't anywhere near the quality of _A Thousand Sons_ or _The First Heretic_ both of which told a better story then the reasons that the XX Legion decided to listen to scheming aliens with their own agenda and betray the Emperor, had more likeable characters than a few spies who weren't even that talented and a Primarch who was nearly killed by a mere human, and showed events far more important than a battle for a single unimportant world and the fate of an Imperial Army legion and despite being advertised as an Alpha Legion story was about the Imperial Army and barely included anything on the XX Legion.


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

The trouble with prospero burns is that prospero is first mentioned about 50 pages from the end, then the battle is rushed through, once again devoting too much space to the rememberancer. 
I only rushed to get it because of sons involvement which was generally lacking, theres never a mentioned of ahriman or any of the sons captains even though wrydrakes present for big bits. 
I would call the wolves fatalistic rather than serious, who still hold to religion in a secular imperium

Based on Abnett in the adverts i thought that alot more would have been made of the "2 loyal legions" perspective


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Khorne's Fist said:


> I agree to a certain extent. Some of Abnett's work is excellent, however sometimes I get the feeling he's just pumping out books due to contractual obligations (_Bloodpact_) as opposed to releasing good stories. I loved _Mechanicum _and _Titanicus_ as well as the Eisenhorn books, however I got seriously bored with the _Ravenor_ trilogy, and the GG books have been in decline for two or three books now.
> 
> But because his good ones are so good, I'll always pick up his new novels in the hope it's toward the higher end of the scale.


_Mechanicum_ was written by Graham McNeill, not Dan Abnett. 

And I agree that Ravenor is good, but its somewhat in the middle of the scale. Eisenhorn is a classic, something that Black Library can be proud of. And Abnett did invent Malus Darkblade so for that im extremely grateful to him, though Mike Lee wrote the books he wouldn't have had the Druchii anti-hero to write about if it weren't for Abnett.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Lord of the Night said:


> Oh and the part about favouring Night Lords. It was clearly documented that Konrad Curze was the strongest Primarch physically. He nearly killed Rogal Dorn and at the time he was out of his mind with pain and couldn't even see what he was doing, and he still nearly managed to kill Dorn. Its no wonder he beat Corax, he was lucid and focused on his goal and was fighting in his own style of brutal punches and under-handed tactics, while Corax was using his own style of guerilla warfare. Frankly if Corax had won, i'd be saying that it was completely unrealistic, and that if he had won Corax must have been stronger than every other Primarch, which Curze is.


It's clearly documented that Curze sucker punched Dorn in a berserker rage, don't know where you got the idea he was the physically strongest of the Primarchs.
Corax didn't get his arse kicked by Night Haunter- he fled before any real fight broke out because he was sensible enough not to try and take on 2 Primarchs at the same time.
You've got too much Konrad Curze love yourself mate...



Lord of the Night said:


> But back to the topic. Dan Abnett is a good author and I don't dispute that, I do however believe he is heavily overrated because of _Gaunt's Ghosts_. Its a good series but its not Black Library's best and for me its not even in the Top 10, and I feel that the story of _Gaunt's Ghosts_ has gone downhill since Caffran died, and that very soon there won't be any original characters left in the series apart from Gaunt himself. I feel that Abnett's best work is _Eisenhorn_, followed by _Ravenor_ and then his Horus Heresy work. And I feel his Heresy work, except _Horus Rising_, is overrated too. _Legion_ was good but it wasn't anywhere near the quality of _A Thousand Sons_ or _The First Heretic_ both of which told a better story then the reasons that the XX Legion decided to listen to scheming aliens with their own agenda and betray the Emperor, had more likeable characters than a few spies who weren't even that talented and a Primarch who was nearly killed by a mere human, and showed events far more important than a battle for a single unimportant world and the fate of an Imperial Army legion and despite being advertised as an Alpha Legion story was about the Imperial Army and barely included anything on the XX Legion.


Feel like making a 'Name your favourite BL series' style thread, settle this once and for all? More of a list style thing so we can do Top 5-10 with a poll for favourites (My bet is that the HH series will get the most votes, even if I have no intention of voting for it).


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

LOL @ Curze being the strongest primarch. Just LOL.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Lord of the Night said:


> Oh and the part about favouring Night Lords. It was clearly documented that Konrad Curze was the strongest Primarch physically. He nearly killed Rogal Dorn and at the time he was out of his mind with pain and couldn't even see what he was doing, and he still nearly managed to kill Dorn. Its no wonder he beat Corax, he was lucid and focused on his goal and was fighting in his own style of brutal punches and under-handed tactics, while Corax was using his own style of guerilla warfare. Frankly if Corax had won, i'd be saying that it was completely unrealistic, and that if he had won Corax must have been stronger than every other Primarch, which Curze is.


Indeed, as the others have said im slightly confused as to where you came to this conclusion. Its wiedely believed that Angron, Horus and Saguinius are the strongest fighters actually. As said, Curze sucker punched a completely unsuspecting Dorn who wasn't looking for a fight and then fled. No where else has he ever been mentioned as being better than any other primarchs in combat, it's not clearly documented anywhere. As Baron said, Corax wasn't beaten at all, he retreated because it would be suicide for any of the Primarchs to take on two at once.

And in regard to ADB, i like the Night Lords books, but i still don't rate them as highly as others do, they are very good, but there are many better books. And i see your point on the First Heretic, but i still don't buy into it, i just disliked the Word Bearers more and more as the book went on and Lorgar with them. The only time i didn't hate Lorgar was when he ran to face Corax knowing he would be killed and then liked the fact that he did get his arse truely handed to him whilst not hurting Corax beyond superficial damage. I will applaud ADB for that. But i still disliked them massively. Xaphen wasn't even slightly likeable, not from the start and the crowning moment of awesome for the book was tied between him being killed and Lorgar almost being killed. But i only ever sympathetic to the Word Bearers at the beggining, but became disappointed in how much i started to dislike them as it went on and hoped that the point they choose to willingly embrace chaos was a little better than what it was. Plus i found the vision of Terra again much like the one Horus had to be highly irritating, it could be (and i believe it is) so easily a complete fabrication with no an ounce of truth in it, just used by chaos to trick them into joining them, the fact that they barely even questioned this was a little annoying.


----------



## Insurance (Sep 8, 2010)

my vote goes towards the first heretic. in my opinion, aaron dembski-bowden is the best storyteller of all the black library authors. he took a legion i cared nothing for and ended up making me feel sympathetic towards them.

i considered voting for fulgrim, as the drop site massacre is such a vital part of the horus heresy. however, i am not overly impressed by graham mcneill. the novel was certainly enjoyable, but i think dan abnett or aaron dembski-bowden could have painted the picture of isstvan v in better detail.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Baltar said:


> LOL @ Curze being the strongest primarch. Just LOL.


It's not that much of a lol considering it's logical to assume he is one of the most physically apt Primarchs. Perhaps not *the* most powerful, but then again there isn't a strict system of measurement or comparison for such things.



Angel of Blood said:


> Its wiedely believed that Angron, Horus and Saguinius are the strongest fighters actually.


Well, that's only Corax's opinion. But yes it should be quite rightly taken into account as fairly accurate considering he was himself a Primarch.



Angel of Blood said:


> As said, Curze sucker punched a completely unsuspecting Dorn who wasn't looking for a fight and then fled. No where else has he ever been mentioned as being better than any other primarchs in combat, it's not clearly documented anywhere.


Actually we don't know what truly occured between them. To save me the effort i'll quote a fellow heretic:


Sir Whittaker said:


> There is no blow by blow report of the 'fight' between Dorn and Curze. We do know that Curze confided in his old teacher Fulgrim, when Fulgrim found him fitting, of the visions that had plagued him and how the Imperium was doomed.
> 
> Fulgrim in turn told Dorn, who had already had strong words with Curze previously about his actions upon the Cherott (sp?) system. Dorn took offence to this slight on the Imperium and in turn the Emperor, and went to confront Curze once again.
> 
> ...





Angel of Blood said:


> And in regard to ADB, i like the Night Lords books, but i still don't rate them as highly as others do, they are very good, but there are many better books.


_'Book'_, singular. 



Angel of Blood said:


> I just disliked the Word Bearers more and more as the book went on and Lorgar with them... But i only ever sympathetic to the Word Bearers at the beggining, but became disappointed in how much i started to dislike them as it went on


If I remember, the point of the _The First Heretic_ was to get us to sympathise with Lorgar and the Word Bearers at the beginning (Monarchia and all that) and then to slowly distant us from Lorgar and his Legion as they fell into the fold of chaos. In this regard I think ADB did a remarkable job.



Angel of Blood said:


> Xaphen wasn't even slightly likeable, not from the start


I don't know what it was about Xaphen, I knew I really shouldn't have liked him as he became more and more like Erebus from the opening trilogy as the _The First Heretic_ went on, but I was genuinely touched by his death - despite the fact I knew I shouldn't really have been.



Angel of Blood said:


> and hoped that the point they choose to willingly embrace chaos was a little better than what it was.


Really? I felt the Eye of Terror scenes, with Argel Tal reciting his tale back to Lorgar was excellent.



Angel of Blood said:


> just used by chaos to trick them into joining them, the fact that they barely even questioned this was a little annoying.


What was it that ultimately made Cyrene believe in the existence of gods? The destruction of the perfect city. What was it that made Argel Tal accept chaos? The sheer power he witnessed in the Eye of Terror coupled with realisation of the Emperor's lies. It's witnessing monumental things such as these that make people believe, in Argel Tal's case it was witnessing the sheer power of the warp and chaos that not only proved the Emperor's Imperial Truth was a lie, but also validated his acceptance of these entities as 'the truth'.

Their acceptance of chaos was built up to and handled from the destruction of Monarchia until the culmination of the Pilgrimage (and even beyond, Lorgar on Isstvan V for example), and very well I felt.

And they did question it (or at least their dedication to Lorgar), the whole corruption of their geneseed thing. But ultimately they had witnessed the power of chaos firsthand in the largest warp rift in the known galaxy, you can't rely deny something like that - especially when it had been rooted in your own homeworld (pre-Imperium) and in fact even across countless human cultures and civilisations throughout the galaxy.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

It is a rather large LOL.

It's an assumption, and all assumptions in this case are foolish. Nothing at all suggests anything even remotely resembling anything like the fact that he could be one of the strongest primarchs. Nothing at all.

Fanfiction at best.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

I dunno, again i don't believe what the Chaos showed Horus and Argel Tal was what actually happened in the Emperors labs. I just think they should have questioned the truth of it a little more in both cases, they both realise these powers do not like the Emperor yet don't seem to wonder for a moment whether the vision that damns the Emperor so much in their eyes was real or not.

I didn't like the Word Bearers or Lorgar much before readin The First Heretic, and although i briefly sympathised with them, the dislike came back fairly quickly and if anything became even stronger. Yet most people seem to be lauding it as making them very sympathetic and full understanding why they should accept chaos so readily. I feel they were very naive and made a terrible decision and should have been alot smarter than they were, apparently though im in the minority. Ah well, can't please all i supose.


----------



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

I'm actually really pleased by the result thus far. I'm delighted _Fulgrim_, _A Thousand Sons_ and _The First Heretic _all have 7 votes and are way out infront of all except_ Legion _:victory:


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Baron Spikey said:


> It's clearly documented that Curze sucker punched Dorn in a berserker rage, don't know where you got the idea he was the physically strongest of the Primarchs.
> 
> Corax didn't get his arse kicked by Night Haunter- he fled before any real fight broke out because he was sensible enough not to try and take on 2 Primarchs at the same time.
> 
> You've got too much Konrad Curze love yourself mate...


By the time they found Dorn he had been savaged, ill admit that the pain Curze was going through likely propelled him onwards and made him frantic but it speaks a lot that he could overpower another Primarch so easily. And being unaware is an excuse for a mortal, not a Primarch. With their supernatural reflexes and awareness Dorn should have been able to see it coming, or at least defend himself. That he didn't means either Dorn was an idiot or Curze was one of the strongest Primarchs.



Baron Spikey said:


> Feel like making a 'Name your favourite BL series' style thread, settle this once and for all? More of a list style thing so we can do Top 5-10 with a poll for favourites (My bet is that the HH series will get the most votes, even if I have no intention of voting for it).


Good idea, ill do just that.



Angel of Blood said:


> Indeed, as the others have said im slightly confused as to where you came to this conclusion. Its widely believed that Angron, Horus and Saguinius are the strongest fighters actually. As said, Curze sucker punched a completely unsuspecting Dorn who wasn't looking for a fight and then fled. No where else has he ever been mentioned as being better than any other primarchs in combat, it's not clearly documented anywhere. As Baron said, Corax wasn't beaten at all, he retreated because it would be suicide for any of the Primarchs to take on two at once.


I don't care for Dorn much but no Primarch was a coward, Dorn wouldn't flee. No Primarch would. By the time they found him he was beaten up and bloodied and unconscious at Curze's feet. Its been mentioned quite often that Curze did beat Dorn and quite easily too, so he must have been one of the strongest.



Angel of Blood said:


> And in regard to ADB, I like the Night Lords books, but i still don't rate them as highly as others do, they are very good, but there are many better books. And I see your point on the First Heretic, but i still don't buy into it, i just disliked the Word Bearers more and more as the book went on and Lorgar with them. The only time i didn't hate Lorgar was when he ran to face Corax knowing he would be killed and then liked the fact that he did get his arse truely handed to him whilst not hurting Corax beyond superficial damage. I will applaud ADB for that. But i still disliked them massively. Xaphen wasn't even slightly likeable, not from the start and the crowning moment of awesome for the book was tied between him being killed and Lorgar almost being killed. But i only ever sympathetic to the Word Bearers at the beggining, but became disappointed in how much i started to dislike them as it went on and hoped that the point they choose to willingly embrace chaos was a little better than what it was. Plus i found the vision of Terra again much like the one Horus had to be highly irritating, it could be (and i believe it is) so easily a complete fabrication with no an ounce of truth in it, just used by chaos to trick them into joining them, the fact that they barely even questioned this was a little annoying.


Well I quite liked Xaphen, he added an aura of mystery to the Serrated Sun Chapter. He accepted the truth of Chaos without any complaint unlike Argel Tal showing that he believed that if his Primarch accepted it, then it was correct. Plus I liked the fact that we never saw what he looked like as a Possessed Marine, making you wonder just what was underneath that helmet made him seem more ferocious than Argel/Raum.



Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> I don't know what it was about Xaphen, I knew I really shouldn't have liked him as he became more and more like Erebus from the opening trilogy as the _The First Heretic_ went on, but I was genuinely touched by his death - despite the fact I knew I shouldn't really have been.


I felt that Xaphen's death was very sad because of the Gal Vorbak's decimation. By the end so few of them remain, and as they enclose on the final Custodes you feel that they have won and that they can be proud. And then, even on the jaws of death, the Custodes lashes out and claims one of the most valiant Word Bearers in a single blow. It was very unexpected that Xaphen would die, and in such a callous fashion as well, unable to fight against his killer and killed by an enemy backed into a corner.



Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> Really? I felt the Eye of Terror scenes, with Argel Tal reciting his tale back to Lorgar was excellent.


Yeah it felt like an epic cinema scene, the very first time that the horrors of Chaos have been witnesses by the Imperium and the tale that Argel Tal weaves of Astartes cannibalising each other and drinking engine fluid to survive, and of the monsters that stalked the ship and in their nightmares is really poignant because its not some Imperial Army soldiers that are easily traumatized, these are Astartes who have come very close to real terror at what they've experienced on board that ship. And when Lorgar says they have only been gone for a few minutes, despite spending decades on that ship, was excellent.



Angel of Blood said:


> I dunno, again i don't believe what the Chaos showed Horus and Argel Tal was what actually happened in the Emperors labs. I just think they should have questioned the truth of it a little more in both cases, they both realise these powers do not like the Emperor yet don't seem to wonder for a moment whether the vision that damns the Emperor so much in their eyes was real or not.


With Chaos its hard to tell truth from lies but I feel that the Gene-lab scene was the truth. Mainly because it was Argel Tal that shorted out the Gellar Field and sent the Primarchs on their sojourn through the stars. Its a time paradox, Argel Tal sends the Primarchs into the stars and then becomes an Astartes through the consequences of that action only to go back in time with Ingethel and perform it again, thus continuing the cycle.

And the Word Bearers knew that Ingethel and the True Gods do not like the Emperor, but remember at the time they didn't like him either. At the time the Emperor was already hated by them for what he did to them at Monarchia, the humiliation they suffered made them more receptive to Chaos and its offerings of truth and power.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Lord of the Night said:


> And being unaware is an excuse for a mortal, not a Primarch. With their supernatural reflexes and awareness Dorn should have been able to see it coming, or at least defend himself. That he didn't means either Dorn was an idiot or Curze was one of the strongest Primarchs.


No, simply no. A primarch being being caught unawares by a normal human or something lesser than him is an excuse. You being caught unawares by something or someone that is your equal is perfectly fine.

If we go by what your implying than say someone were to punch me such that I could not fight back. That must mean he/she is stronger than me. Well my younger brother is most certainly not stronger than me, but hit me in the right places and I'll go down, especially if you sucker punch me in one of them.


Dorn has supernatural senses and reflexes honed by decades of fighting, but guess what? Night Haunter had it as well, so that puts the two on relatively equal footing regardless of how much you or anyone else wants to make him sound that much better. Fact remains, until it is retconned, that Night Haunter supposedly caught Dorn unawares and sucker punched him while in a less than lucid state of mind.



So, has this thread devolved from a vote on which is your favorite Heresy novel or is that still happening? Because lets be honest, from what appears to be post 28 onwards (with four or five exceptions if we are lucky) its been back and forth useless slagging off of a novel from a baseless, biased misconception, the pointing out how that point of view is baseless, the back and forth, someone else feeling the need to toss in their own ever-so-biased two cents in defense of person one, and then others either coming in to back up poster two in this or to have a little go at the new defender and then more shit.


I realize this thread may have been a hopeful attempt by the OP to heap some praise on one or two authors; so why don't you lot either take it somewhere else, have the poll taken down and change the thread, or get back to what this topic is (IE get to fucking stepping and stop derailing the poll about your favorite Heresy novel by whinging about how much you hate author X.)


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

The thread has gone off-topic, fair enough. Well I think enough votes have been gathered for a preliminary ruling on the Heresy series. 


In third place comes _*A Thousand Sons*_ and _*Fulgrim*_. Both of these novels are great and have definitely earned their rank.

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Horus-Heresy/Fulgrim.html
http://www.blacklibrary.com/Horus-Heresy/A-Thousand-Sons.html

In second place comes _*The First Heretic*_. Glad to see that TFH made it into the top rankings, it definitely deserves it.

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Horus-Heresy/First-Heretic-The.html

In first place, for the best Heresy novel, comes _*Legion*_ and while I disagree with this novel being here I admit that the majority do like it so it probably deserves its place here.

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Horus-Heresy/Legion.html


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

I personally really dislike Dorn, and Guilliman. To stoic, do what daddy tells them to do. At least Dorn shows emotion, but he's still a dick. 

I would be interested in knowing what would be the rankings in combat when it came to the primarchs. I mean we know that when it comes to martial prowess, from corax's point of view Angron, Horus and Sanguinius are the toughest. And we know Sanguinius gets whooped by horus in the battle of terra. We know Lorgar is probably down the bottom somewhere as he simply does not want to fight, he wants to build cities and religions. 

And I Doubt Kurze was a weak primarch but defiantly not the toughest, yeah he beat down dorn, who was going to argue with him anyway, so he should have expected a fight and been prepared. He also throws back Corax with little difficulty, bearing in mind that corax has just beaten down lorgar so taken a few blows and had his power claw broken. 

Alpharius gets stabbed in a fight with a human at the end of legion, it doesn't hurt him, but it shows you that if he concedes blows against humans, no matter how badass they are, most other primarchs would kick his ass. I mean we know legend has it that guilliman kills him in a duel. Fulgrim is obviously more powerful than ferrus mannus... and guilliman. But at the end of 'Fulgrim' (the novel) he/the deamon tells horus he has little chance against horus in a fight. 

Russ was able to beat down magnus who was arguably, the most powerful because of his abilities, but magnus could have just wanted to disguard his mortal form so he ascended. And russ had an army at his side and giant wolves attacking magnus at the same time. It is said that russ and the lion fought for days without victor so those two are pretty much even. 

Sorry I am rambling. Its just something to think about. I wish they would be ranked in levels of badassness.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Lord of the Night said:


> I don't care for Dorn much but no Primarch was a coward, Dorn wouldn't flee. No Primarch would. By the time they found him he was beaten up and bloodied and unconscious at Curze's feet. Its been mentioned quite often that Curze did beat Dorn and quite easily too, so he must have been one of the strongest.


I'm not saying any of them fled. Well Kurze fled the scene after he savaged Dorn, but it was hardly a cowardly act. Nor did Corax flee from Kurze due to any cowardness, he assesed the situation, likely realised its suicide to face two primarchs and withdrew to another area of the battlefield. And where is it mentioned quite often that he beat Dorn easily? The fight is barely mentioned in any official fluff anywhere at all, and where it is listed its very very vague and goes into no detail about what happened




Lord of the Night said:


> Well I quite liked Xaphen, he added an aura of mystery to the Serrated Sun Chapter. He accepted the truth of Chaos without any complaint unlike Argel Tal showing that he believed that if his Primarch accepted it, then it was correct. Plus I liked the fact that we never saw what he looked like as a Possessed Marine, making you wonder just what was underneath that helmet made him seem more ferocious than Argel/Raum.
> 
> I felt that Xaphen's death was very sad because of the Gal Vorbak's decimation. By the end so few of them remain, and as they enclose on the final Custodes you feel that they have won and that they can be proud. And then, even on the jaws of death, the Custodes lashes out and claims one of the most valiant Word Bearers in a single blow. It was very unexpected that Xaphen would die, and in such a callous fashion as well, unable to fight against his killer and killed by an enemy backed into a corner.


Supose its all whether you like Xaphen or not. To me (and i was team Custodes) It was a massive Crowning Moment of Awsome for Sythran, coupled with his line of "I always hated you Xaphen" to break his silent vow, was like he was saying what i had been thinking the whole novel



Lord of the Night said:


> With Chaos its hard to tell truth from lies but I feel that the Gene-lab scene was the truth. Mainly because it was Argel Tal that shorted out the Gellar Field and sent the Primarchs on their sojourn through the stars. Its a time paradox, Argel Tal sends the Primarchs into the stars and then becomes an Astartes through the consequences of that action only to go back in time with Ingethel and perform it again, thus continuing the cycle.


I just think its a little too much, any would be incredibly disappointed if it was actually Argel Tal and co who spirited the Primarchs away through a time paradox shift, just seems so Terminator for the writers to do and just terrible in general. Yeah it just seems like far too much that Chaos could send Argel Tal and co back in time into the most guarded place on Terra, get them to deactivate the Geller Field and then whisk them back out again to the present.



raider1987 said:


> And I Doubt Kurze was a weak primarch but defiantly not the toughest, yeah he beat down dorn, who was going to argue with him anyway, so he should have expected a fight and been prepared. He also throws back Corax with little difficulty, bearing in mind that corax has just beaten down lorgar so taken a few blows and had his power claw broken.


Well again we don't know how the Dorn fight went at all. And he hardly threw Corax back at all. As said above Corax actually used his brain and logic and decided fighting two primarchs wasnt a smart idea at all, i'm willing to be it could have been any primarch that saved Lorgar and Corax still would have pulled out



raider1987 said:


> Alpharius gets stabbed in a fight with a human at the end of legion, it doesn't hurt him, but it shows you that if he concedes blows against humans, no matter how badass they are, most other primarchs would kick his ass. I mean we know legend has it that guilliman kills him in a duel. Fulgrim is obviously more powerful than ferrus mannus... and guilliman. But at the end of 'Fulgrim' (the novel) he/the deamon tells horus he has little chance against horus in a fight.


I don't agree too much with the Alpharius bit, Chayne does seem to be a massive exception to the rule and a truely incredible swordsman. But in the end he does nothing but superficial damage and i imagine he could do the same to many others. 

And in regards to Fulgrim, i think he and Ferrus were pretty much even, with the sword giving him the edge in the fight. In fact without the sword i think Ferrus would have beaten him.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Slagging off authors in a thread about novels is hardly off-topic.

I also hardly think there is any point in moderators coming into a thread and summarising with things like 'one person' and 'author x', when it's perfectly clear that they mean 'Baltar' and 'Dan Abnett'.

If I feel that people are only picking Legion because it's OMFGSPLOSION written by DANABNETT!!! X-D , then I'll point it out. The reason it rings true is because Legion is, frankly, boring. Everything of worth happens in the final chapter, and a person could basically read through that and skip the rest and have missed little of enjoyment. The only real enjoyment they might have missed is the awesomeness of John Grammaticus (and perhaps the all too infrequent mentioning of the Lucifer Blacks), which, frankly, is all that kept that novel afloat. Everything else in between was pure filler, just to make up the pages to get to the point of the book - which was right at the end. I don't count that as being the greatest book of a series of fantastic books.

But... if people want to try as hard as they can to conceive a child with a book just because it's been written by Abnett... who am I to judge? Whatever gets you off, I suppose...


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

Angel of Blood said:


> And in regards to Fulgrim, i think he and Ferrus were pretty much even, with the sword giving him the edge in the fight. In fact without the sword i think Ferrus would have beaten him.


But earlier on in the book fulgrim beat ferrus in a fight without his deamon blade, and let ferrus live.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

I don't reccomend Legion to people simply because its written by Abnett, nor is that the reason i like it so much. The reason i like it so much and think its an excellent book is because it IS. No one here or that i have ever talked to has said "i love Legion because it was Abnett" They've all gone into great detail about the different characters, story aspects, twists and other things. Find me a review someones made of Legion where they've said "Forget the story! Its Abnett, read because of that, i dont like the story but Abnett wrote it so i love it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!". You won't find one.




raider1987 said:


> But earlier on in the book fulgrim beat ferrus in a fight without his deamon blade, and let ferrus live.


Hmmm true, but on Istvaan Ferrus is to me, clearly about to kill Fulgrim or at least take him out of the fight when the deamon blade jumps to Fulgrims hand to defend him against the blow.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

I am more willing to buy a book if it's written by Abnett, but that's the limit when it comes to how influential the Abnett name is in how much I enjoy a story. But then again I'm the same with McNeill, Thorpe, Mitchell, and ADB so it's not even a Dan Abnett exclusive thing.


----------



## DeathGuardGarro (Nov 8, 2010)

Descent of Angels is a great book. I love how it depicts a Primarch life before the Imperium, and also the transformation from one to astartes. Great book. Glad I started reading it. Some told me not to read the Angels books. 

As for the Fulgrim and Manus fight. Fulgrim indeed won the first fight but it took Manus by surprise. The second fight Manus had him beat and as he was about to kill him, the Daemon Sword took control of Fulgrims strengths and defeated Manus.


----------



## Cowlicker16 (Dec 7, 2010)

Most definitely Fulgrim, the amount of detail showing just how far everyone turns, not just the legion itself but the remembrancers too, I've read this book a dozen times and it still makes me grit my teeth as I imagine what this would really be like to experience that


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Fulgrim really does crap all over Legion, tbh. I'm not even going to discuss why the alpha legion and alpharius leave me completely cold. Still, could be worse, they could be 'wolves or ultra's, where you get to choose between food-caught-in-beard syndrome, or "we are the Ultramarines, resistance is futile because we are godmodded".

If GW suddenly had the urge to get rid of Swallow and replace him with ADB, that would make me very happy. He ruined Nemesis with the ridiculous plot, and now he's going to ruin the BA section, too. Thanks GW.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

While i disagree with you on the Alpha Legion, i couldn't agree more on the Ultramarines, they've not been too bad in the Heresy series so far (battle for the abyss aside, because that should just not be counted) but if someone does a Matt Ward with them it will be disasterous. And i'm not looking forward to seeing Swallow take the reins for the Blood Angels either. I was really hoping for McNiell, Abnett, or ADB to do the Blood Angels, but alas no, never know, he may yet suprise us.......


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

I'm prolly being way too harsh.

He didn't actually, to my mind, do such a bad job with the 40k BA series. I was disappointed with Nemesis.

I think he did better with the BA series because he is a BA fan, and I'm hoping that fact will push it in his favour and that it will mean he does a great job. Perhaps he performs a little better when he's a fan (seems like it could be a truism - Abnett, for example, is definitely biased towards the space wolves).


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Baltar said:


> I'm prolly being way too harsh.
> 
> He didn't actually, to my mind, do such a bad job with the 40k BA series. I was disappointed with Nemesis.
> 
> I think he did better with the BA series because he is a BA fan, and I'm hoping that fact will push it in his favour and that it will mean he does a great job. Perhaps he performs a little better when he's a fan (seems like it could be a truism - Abnett, for example, is definitely biased towards the space wolves).


No Swallow ONLY managed to make an average quality book out of the last 2 BA novels because of the premise- all the successor chapters assemble, see how they interact (another author would probably still have done it better) AND a vengenace force of BA and FT invade Fabius Bile's sanctum.

The first 2 BA novels are things to be endured, not enjoyed.

BA could be an interesting Chapter, but other than a couple of their characters GW appear to have decided to leave them as just sterotypical vampires with a soul trying to reform (Angel is cool but I don't particularly want an army of him). At least Prospero Burns (for all it's other faults) redeems the cliche that was Space Wolves- people think they're drunken barbarians because that's exactly what the Space Wolves want them to think.


----------



## mal310 (May 28, 2010)

Baltar said:


> Slagging off authors in a thread about novels is hardly off-topic.
> 
> I also hardly think there is any point in moderators coming into a thread and summarising with things like 'one person' and 'author x', when it's perfectly clear that they mean 'Baltar' and 'Dan Abnett'.
> 
> ...


I voted for Legion because I think its the best book in the series, I couldn't give a dam who wrote it. All that drivel you have written above about why people have voted for it and it being boring is just your your opinion. If you don't like the outcome of the poll then thats just tough.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Baron Spikey said:


> No Swallow ONLY managed to make an average quality book out of the last 2 BA novels because of the premise- all the successor chapters assemble, see how they interact (another author would probably still have done it better) AND a vengenace force of BA and FT invade Fabius Bile's sanctum.
> 
> The first 2 BA novels are things to be endured, not enjoyed.
> 
> BA could be an interesting Chapter, but other than a couple of their characters GW appear to have decided to leave them as just sterotypical vampires with a soul trying to reform (Angel is cool but I don't particularly want an army of him). At least Prospero Burns (for all it's other faults) redeems the cliche that was Space Wolves- people think they're drunken barbarians because that's exactly what the Space Wolves want them to think.


Indeed. I love the Blood Angels, but as it goes on, the codex writers and authors are really bringing them down. Which is exactly why i hoped Abnett, McNeill or ADB would take them on for the Horus Heresy and bring them back to a brilliant image. The vampire thing is really grating on me in particular


----------



## DeathGuardGarro (Nov 8, 2010)

What are good Blood Angels books to read? the omnibus, red fury, etc?


----------



## Cowlicker16 (Dec 7, 2010)

In my opinion I loved the BA series, I guess I'm easily entertained but the the first 2 were the best ones for me. I loved the whole corruption of the chapter but I love watching any Imperial force tear itself apart. For what it's worth I think he's doing a fine job with them.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Remember, though, the BA _have_ to be different to how they are depicted in the 40k BA novels, because Sanguinius is still alive. They aren't going to be uber angry all the time, and they won't be super-dooper in CC like they are in 40k either (well, no more than any other chapter). Really, they will be fairly codex standard issue, but red.

Swallow has a pretty good premise to work with if it's going to start with the cleansing of Signus......


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Baron Spikey said:


> BA could be an interesting Chapter, but other than a couple of their characters GW appear to have decided to leave them as just sterotypical vampires with a soul trying to reform (Angel is cool but I don't particularly want an army of him). At least Prospero Burns (for all it's other faults) redeems the cliche that was Space Wolves- people think they're drunken barbarians because that's exactly what the Space Wolves want them to think.


But that is the premise of the Blood Angels. Lost nobility and the fight for salvation. The Blood Angels are the noblest of chapters, they are proud and quite possibly the only chapter that does other things besides kill every enemy that they see, they paint and sculpt and draw. Their artistry is a sign of their humanity and that they are closer to it then other Astartes because they retain something that humans possess, the desire and ability to create.

They are one of the toughest chapters too because for them death isn't the worst thing that can happen, neither is being entombed in a Dreadnought. And they get constant reminders about what will likely happen to them if they don't die in the form of Chaplains, battle-brothers lost to insanity and a history of fear of the darker side of their nature. There are some chapters that if afflicted with the Black Rage would have their entire chapter carry it and become an unstoppable fighting force, but the Blood Angels don't because it tears their humanity away and leaves them nothing but hollow shells.

Perhaps James Swallow will take the Blood Angels in a new direction at Signus Prime, we'll have to see. But ill wait until the novel comes out before I condemn him to failure, which frankly I don't think he will. I think that James Swallow is a good author, not saying he's the best, who makes mistakes with the terminology and people use that to demonize him, again not saying that you specifically do this reader of my post but some do. But the editors are the ones who read his novels, and the other authors as well, and they see no problems with it. I enjoyed _Flight of the Eisenstein_, _Nemesis_ and the _Blood Angels_ series, im confident that ill enjoy his _Sisters of Battle_ series and the coming Blood Angels heresy novel _Fear to Tread_ and I think that James Swallow is a good author, he's in my Top 5.

Lord of the Night's Top 5 Black Library Authors (From 1 to 5)

-Aaron Dembski-Bowden
-C.L Werner
-Mike Lee
-Graham McNeill
-James Swallow


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

Agreed! Mike lee is great! Fallen angels and The wolf at the door in tales of heresy are both outstanding! Also Swallow is underrated, nemesis and flight of the eisenstein were both excellent. I brought the blood angels omnibus and are really looking forward to them.


----------



## mal310 (May 28, 2010)

Fallen Angels has got the votes it deserves. None


----------



## Roninman (Jul 23, 2010)

Legion, only book of HH i read twice.

Closely followed by Fulgrim, Thousand Sons and First Heretic


----------



## CaptainLoken (May 13, 2009)

Horus Rising: The seeds of heresy are sown

Is my number one as it just set's the scene and the pace (that some of the other books failed to live up to). Just thought is was a class book.


----------



## Dead.Blue.Clown (Nov 27, 2009)

Voted for _Legion_. Was great sci-fi.



Baltar said:


> With the BA (just like the SW) in HH, there is a no-lose situation, in that the events set to take place are awesome, the chapter is awesome, and the primarch is awesome. It's not possible to screw it up, but it's possible, if the right writer is set to it, to make it complete win.
> 
> Dembski-Bowden took what could have been previously described as the most boring chapter possible (the bible bashers), and actually wrote an awesome book despite not having the concrete 'no-lose' foundation that either thousand sons/prospero burns or the BA books have.


Thank you, dude. That was actually a massive, massive worry of mine, as soon as I pitched the project. I had a _"Wait, wait... why am I taking this risk..."_ moment as soon as the word *ACCEPTED* came back in my inbox.

I'm fairly honest in admitting a little jealousy that the main events and the main Legions are already booked by the other guys, but they'd been tagged long before I joined the team, so note that "confessing to a little jealousy" isn't the same as "complaining".

I was talking about the "no-lose" theory on B&C recently, so apologies for the on-topic cut and paste:

_"People's complaints about the Blood Angels novels seem to be (from what I've read in reviews and my insanely comprehensive forum journeys) mostly concerned with the first 2 novels, and way the Blood Angels were related as dealing with a Chapter-wide event that hasn't shown up anywhere else in canon. Feedback on the second duology has been much better, and Jim's Horus Heresy novels are widely regarded as pretty damn killer. 

So, if I may be irritatingly blunt, I think where Jim's concerned as a writer, there's nothing to worry about. Yes, he took liberties in the first Blood Angel duology, and yes, I avoided the novels myself for that reason, for several years. I said as much to him, one of the first couple of times we met. He gave me a knowing smile (he does those well; he's a hell of an industry veteran, with a lot of good war stories) and said he completely understood it.

In a lot ways, Black Library was a different beast even as recently as 5 years ago, which is about when those novels came out. Different editors now, different writers, different outlook, different attitude. Even the writers that were around then are doing different things now. Evolution, progress, change - all that good stuff. I can't speak for Jim, but I can say I know he loves the Blood Angels, and I think he's written some absolutely killer stuff. I loved the Death Guard's traditions so awesomely highlighted in Eisenstein. I loved the character of Nathaniel Garro. I loved the way Nemesis showed the war slowly, slowly edging closer to an Imperial world, before drowning it in the full drama of galactic civil war. It was dead clever, and a nice touch. It resonated.

I reckon I can put your doubts at ease here, with a simple mathematics equation.

The Blood Angels + Sanguinius + Signus Prime + Ka'Bandha = Awesome.

You have one of the most beloved Legions in the setting, with one of the most-liked primarchs (perhaps even the most-liked primarch overall), betrayed by Horus on a world full of daemons. Sanguinius will show up for the first real time, flying around, fighting a Bloodthirster. Chaos will go up against the freaking Blood Angels, and it will fail. The origins of one of their famously cool and popular gene-seed curses will play out before our eyes.

Let me be clear with where I'm going here:

The novel could be written by a monkey and it would still be amazing with that storyline. The fact it's written by a guy with a great Horus Heresy track record is just gravy. Jim will nail this one, and nail it hard. No doubt in my mind." _


I'd like a crack at one of those types of deals at some point.


----------



## Khorne's Fist (Jul 18, 2008)

Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> The fact it's written by a guy with a great Horus Heresy track record is just gravy. Jim will nail this one, and nail it hard. No doubt in my mind."


I have really come around to Swallow as an author. My first experience of his work was the first two BA novels, and this very nearly put me off going back to him, but _FotE_ completely changed that. One of my favourite HH novels. _Nemesis_ was a great story, if one that could have really been set at any time, and the last two BA novels are really excellent. I think Rafen could eventually rival Uriel Ventris as the most bad ass BL marine. 

Considering all of this, along with the ingredients you've mentioned, I think after this book Swallow might overtake a lot of other writers as people's favourite writer.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

I really like Flight of the Eisenstien aswell as Nemesis despite most people negative view of it. But i really disliked the entire Blood Angels series he has made and im a massive Blood Angels fan, certainly my favourite loyalist Legions (although Alpha Legion are starting to go ahead in overall terms, and the Vlka Fenryka are almost alongside the Blood Angels now) So thats where my doubts come in, like i said i really liked FotE, but then that always was one of my favourite little bits of the Heresy before the books and collected visions were made


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

Ok, my vote has been cast after finishing Prospero Burns. While I did LOVE prospero burns I went with first heretic for a number of reasons. I didn't vote legion as I have NEVER read anything else about imperial guard so felt a bit lost with the book at many stages, but did enjoy it (and ordered the gaunts ghosts omnibuses the second I put it down).

Anyway, the reason I loved the first heretic was just the beauty of it. The book took many massive risks that only the best in the series have taken. (Legion, Fulgrim, Thousand Sons)

It took a legion that was more or less hated by everyone, either because they were just the bible bashers, or the fact that they instigated the entire horus heresy. And it made the readers sympathise with them (to an extent, lets face it, they go too far with all those human sacrifices and a galactic genocide).

The journey of Argal Tal was one that I could simply could not predict. Where as many of the primarchs fates are written in stone, many of these main characters have a lot more room to play with and it was a brilliant decision to have the book mostly from Argal Tals point of view. Many of the books from the perspective of a legion falling often use the POV for those that remained loyal, such as many of the characters in the opening trilogy & fulgrim. And I really expected Argal Tal to remain loyal to the emperor and was suprised/shocked/horrified to see just how far he went down the darkest paths and yet still felt he was the 'hero' of the novel, even though I know I should have been routing for the loyalists.

I can't wait to read Aaron Dembski-Bowdens next HH novel, I can't wait to read the next world bearers novel. I ordered everything Aaron Dembski-Bowden has ever written and the next book I will read is soul hunter. The first Heretic was not only, in my opinion the best in the heresy, but one of the best books I have ever read.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

I hadn't read any Imperial Guard novels before Legion either though, what was it that left you lost?


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

Honestly nothing jumps out at me, but at the time I had just read 7 space marine novels back to back, and just think it was a bit jarring to be thrown behind the eyes of someone who wasn't a superhuman killing machine. 

I also thought that there were just too many damb characters and kept getting them confused. I will probably re read the novel at some point. But now I am up to date with the heresy, so and just dipping my toe into 40k.

Oh and Haha whoever voted for battle for the abyss.


----------



## Lupe (Jan 3, 2011)

It was a close call for me, at least.

Ended up going for _The First Heretic_ in the end. Partly because it's not from a loyalist point of view. Partly because Istvaan V. Mostly, though, because it's got those rather troublesome things called character depth, complex plot, and it leaves room for some interpretations. You know... those things that make for a great book...

Runners up were:
_Tales of Heresy_ - Just loved that book. The Last Church, Scions of the Storm and After Da'shea are absolute jewels, and the rest of the book isn't half bad either. It lacked the overall consistency to be my first choice.

_A Thousand Sons_ - Almost equal to TFH, in terms of the plot, characters and overall pensmanship. ADB's talent to tie in M31 to M41 and his very quotable... quotes pushed ATS back a notch.

_Horus Rising_ - Mostly because it centers on the man himself. Because we get a glimpse of Horus and Abbadon before the world turned upside down. Because we get to see what the world looked like, before it turned upside down, too. It didn't make the first place because Loken was a bit too... tame? for an Astartes

_Prospero Burns_ - Man, was that an epic book. Much less bolter porn than I'd have feared from the rather inauspicious title. I especially liked how the whole novel is basically a build-up of seemingly unrelated events culminating with that rather unfortunate incident with Prospero and pyrotechnics, and the startling revelation in the end. A few nice bones for us to gnaw on (like Bear's identity and Hawser's ultimate fate) too. It lost to TFH solely because I'm rather partial to the traitors.


----------



## donskar (Apr 8, 2010)

Well, someone had to vote for _Nemesis_ . . .

Haven't read _Prospero Burns _yet. Also good: _Thousand Sons_ and _First Heretic_. 

Can't think of one I won't re-read (assuming I live long enough!) Really.


----------



## forkmaster (Jan 2, 2010)

Angel of Blood said:


> I dunno, again i don't believe what the Chaos showed Horus and Argel Tal was what actually happened in the Emperors labs. I just think they should have questioned the truth of it a little more in both cases, they both realise these powers do not like the Emperor yet don't seem to wonder for a moment whether the vision that damns the Emperor so much in their eyes was real or not.
> 
> I didn't like the Word Bearers or Lorgar much before readin The First Heretic, and although i briefly sympathised with them, the dislike came back fairly quickly and if anything became even stronger. Yet most people seem to be lauding it as making them very sympathetic and full understanding why they should accept chaos so readily. I feel they were very naive and made a terrible decision and should have been alot smarter than they were, apparently though im in the minority. Ah well, can't please all i supose.


Im quite wonderous since Ive read the first part in the Word Bearers trilogy and I loved that part. Cant see why the Word Bearers are so disliked, especially when there arent much about them really.



bobss said:


> I'm actually really pleased by the result thus far. I'm delighted _Fulgrim_, _A Thousand Sons_ and _The First Heretic _all have 7 votes and are way out infront of all except_ Legion _:victory:


Im hoping for Fulgrim since that is my favorite, and Im surprised that hasnt gotten more votes.



Lord of the Night said:


> I think that James Swallow is a good author, not saying he's the best, who makes mistakes with the terminology and people use that to demonize him, again not saying that you specifically do this reader of my post but some do. But the editors are the ones who read his novels, and the other authors as well, and they see no problems with it. I enjoyed _Flight of the Eisenstein_, _Nemesis_ and the _Blood Angels_ series, im confident that ill enjoy his _Sisters of Battle_ series and the coming Blood Angels heresy novel _Fear to Tread_ and I think that James Swallow is a good author, he's in my Top 5.


I must say FotE was a really good novel, and I loved seeing the Loyalist making it out alive, not onlym making the baddies win here! Thats something he did really good actually. Nemesies did have its points, but mostly a meh ok type of novel.


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

forkmaster said:


> I must say FotE was a really good novel, and I loved seeing the Loyalist making it out alive, not onlym making the baddies win here! Thats something he did really good actually. Nemesies did have its points, but mostly a meh ok type of novel.


Yeah Garro surviving was a nice ending. The way the story was set-up you'd expect him to die delivering the message to the Emperor, at least he is alive and working on founding the Grey Knights.


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

Lord of the Night said:


> Yeah Garro surviving was a nice ending. The way the story was set-up you'd expect him to die delivering the message to the Emperor, at least he is alive and working on founding the Grey Knights.


Wow, I didn't think of that, I always assumed he was starting up the inquisition. But yeah thats a good call makes sense after listening to Oath of moment.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

It is the inquisition he begins, not the grey knights.

The Emperor would not sanction the creation of a chapter of psykers and warriors who use their faith in the emperor as a weapon to smash daemons - considering that worship of the Emperor in such a way (as divine) is 'illegal' (for want of a better word) at that time, while the Emperor is still up and around, and psykers are in the same boat.


----------



## raider1987 (Dec 3, 2010)

Baltar said:


> It is the inquisition he begins, not the grey knights.
> 
> The Emperor would not sanction the creation of a chapter of psykers and warriors who use their faith in the emperor as a weapon to smash daemons - considering that worship of the Emperor in such a way (as divine) is 'illegal' (for want of a better word) at that time, while the Emperor is still up and around, and psykers are in the same boat.


But its Malcador the Sigillite who is creating them, not the emperor. And as we know from Nemesis, Malcador is more than willing to go behind the emperors back for what he believes is the greater good. Also, if you read 'The Last Church' in tales of heresy, the emperor openly criticises the idea of an inquisition, so it is unlikely that they were created by him either.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

raider1987 said:


> But its Malcador the Sigillite who is creating them, not the emperor. And as we know from Nemesis, Malcador is more than willing to go behind the emperors back for what he believes is the greater good. Also, if you read 'The Last Church' in tales of heresy, the emperor openly criticises the idea of an inquisition, so it is unlikely that they were created by him either.


It's stated in the fluff, though strangely enough not in FotE, that Malcador is acting under direct orders from the Emperor.

The Emperor directly critcises the idea of a religiously motivated Inquisition not the concept of an organisation to root out traitors et al.

Regarding Malcador acting behind the Emperor's back- he thought he was but the Emperor knew exactly what he was doing from day one without telling Malcador that he knew.


----------



## Lupe (Jan 3, 2011)

Baltar said:


> It is the inquisition he begins, not the grey knights.
> 
> The Emperor would not sanction the creation of a chapter of psykers and warriors who use their faith in the emperor as a weapon to smash daemons - considering that worship of the Emperor in such a way (as divine) is 'illegal' (for want of a better word) at that time, while the Emperor is still up and around, and psykers are in the same boat.


Well, he never recieves the orderfrom the Emperor, does he? I mean, Malcador is pulling the strings on this one...
And he seemed rather sympathetic to the "saint" Garro brought along, didn't he?


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Malcador doesn't mention Keeler when he talks to Garro. Although he does say to him almost knowingly "the Emperor protects"


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Baltar said:


> It is the inquisition he begins, not the grey knights.
> 
> The Emperor would not sanction the creation of a chapter of psykers and warriors who use their faith in the emperor as a weapon to smash daemons - considering that worship of the Emperor in such a way (as divine) is 'illegal' (for want of a better word) at that time, while the Emperor is still up and around, and psykers are in the same boat.


Considering the plot of _Oath of Moment_ in which Garro recruits an Ultramarine to his cause, a former Librarian, and the fact that one of the origin stories of the Grey Knights is that psykers were gathered from all of the Legions, even the traitors, and became a new Chapter of Space Marines dedicated to being Daemonhunters its quite clear what is happening. Garro will recruit these psykers and become the first Chapter Master of the Grey Knights.

The Emperor would never have sanctioned the Grey Knights before the Heresy, but with the Heresy underway, Chaos traitors rampaging through the galaxy and Daemons manifesting in the Golden Palace's dungeons he has no choice but to form some kind of weapon against Chaos. That is the Grey Knights.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

Rubbish.

The Grey Knights are the chamber militant of the ordo malleus - you're trying to argue that the grey knights are founded before the holy ordos are. The holy ordos are the inquisition.

The inquisition comes first.

The entire concept of the grey knights is that they use their faith in the Emperor as a deity to destroy the demonic. This isn't going to be formed while the emperor is still around.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

I've got to say I agree with _Baltar_ (for once ). 

And as for Garro, it is by no means certain that he will become a founding member of the Grey Knight order. Some form of proto-Inquisition beyond likely, but Grey Knights? Not as likely. From what we know the Grey Knights were formed during the second founding (post-Scouring) not during the Heresy.


----------



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> I've got to say I agree with _Baltar_ (for once ).
> 
> And as for Garro, it is by no means certain that he will become a founding member of the Grey Knight order. Some form of proto-Inquisition beyond likely, but Grey Knights? Not as likely. From what we know the Grey Knights were formed during the second founding (post-Scouring) not during the Heresy.


Exactly. From what current sources show. Sources change, as the Heresy is fleshed out and warped by differing authors with contrasting views; sometimes with a positive effect, depending on opinion, sometimes negatory. 

It would suit one of the _many_ themes within the Heresy if we take what _Lord of the Night_ says, for example. We, the Astartes, everyone but the Emperor, start off blind to Daemons, Gods and the denizens of Chaos. _Horus Rising_, _False Gods_, _Flight of the Eisenstein_, _Fulgrim_, and especially _A Thousand Sons_ and _The First Heretic _narrate this stoic faith in the Emperor's doctrine; this belief in nought but scientific truth and a phobia-like distrust of religion, Gods and anything but the Emperor's 'Light'. 

But they're wrong, and the Emperor's accomplishments -his gene-sons- are intertwined with Chaos. It's not a Godless Galaxy (To rip-off AD-B) and the Astartes soon learn this.

During the Siege of Terra, after Magnus destroying the Imperial Webway, the Emperor floods his dungeons with Custodians and Sisters of Silence, against the oncoming Daemonic Incursion.

I can realistically see Garro, Qruze (I think?), Loken and others becoming the foundings of the Grey Knights. Maybe the Emperor saw his doom? Or maybe he knew his sacrifice would end the Siege; and so in order to protect humanities future from the Legions of the Dark Gods, initiated the foundings of the pseudo-Chapter. 

If Terra was a trilogy, after the Traitors crush the defenders and push them back to the Emperor's Palace, it would be really _fitting_ if notable loyalist champions are 'created' to unite the broken Legions and make a final stand to hold until relief forces arrive. I don't mean Primarchs, I mean Astartes: Sigsimund decapitating Traitor champions, Garro and Loken fighting against daemons within the Vaults, perhaps some form of White Scars champion during the Legion's infamous counterattack. Whatever, but I really think this theme of 'Rebirth', as in: The destruction of the Terra, the Emperor's material-death, Horus-defeat and the end to the Great Crusade, followed by the birth of the Grey Knights etc, would really round the series off in my mind.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

People seem to casually enjoy ignoring that the Grey Knights are, actually PART of the inquisition, being the millitant arm of the Ordo Malleus.

Considering that the Ordo Malleus hasn't been formed yet, I am really wondering how people are justifying an argument that the Grey Knights are going to be formed by Garro.

ORDO MALLEUS COMES FIRST.

THEN GREY KNIGHTS.

I will label them for you, to make it simpler.

1. Ordo Malleus (inquisition branch dealing with demons)

2. Grey Knights (part of the Ordo Malleus)

2 comes after 1.


----------



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

Baltar said:


> People seem to casually enjoy ignoring that the Grey Knights are, actually PART of the inquisition, being the millitant arm of the Ordo Malleus.
> 
> Considering that the Ordo Malleus hasn't been formed yet, I am really wondering how people are justifying an argument that the Grey Knights are going to be formed by Garro.
> 
> ...


Okay, in fairness, your self-righteousness is quite irritating. There is nothing wrong with presenting an argument, but at least don't act like a monumental ass whilst doing such. You're argument is underpinned by current fluff. However, considering the nature of Games Workshop, and more importantly Black Library this is often changed, twisted or given more depth/alternative meanings/perspectives. In short: Shit changes. Nothing is stable, and it is completely possible for things to be changed. They do it all the time - look at all the changes, purposeful-contradictions and so forth in the Horus Heresy to date. I don't see why they couldn't 'retcon' the fluff so that the Grey Knights are founded from the immediate ashes of the Heresy.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

You can't have a Baltar without the self-righteousness.

That would just be silly.


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Baltar said:


> People seem to casually enjoy ignoring that the Grey Knights are, actually PART of the inquisition, being the millitant arm of the Ordo Malleus.
> 
> Considering that the Ordo Malleus hasn't been formed yet, I am really wondering how people are justifying an argument that the Grey Knights are going to be formed by Garro.
> 
> ...


I see I see. Quick question...

What came first. Sisters of Battle or Ordo Hereticus?, I could swear I know the answer but it escapes me.

Just because they serve the Inquisition now does not automatically mean they were created for them, from the current lore that we have and what is happening with Garro at the moment indicates that he is gathering the founders of the Grey Knights chapter, who according to the lore that ive read in _Collected Visions_ will be presented to the Emperor during the Battle for Terra by Malcador and he will declare that they will form a group devoted to fighting against Chaos.

The Ordo Malleus is created afterwards according to the _Collected Visions_ lore, the Grey Knights having a similar purpose likely decided to join with them and form a full Daemon hunting organization. I may be wrong but I feel this is what is going to happen, and if it does ill be right or if it doesn't ill be wrong. Lets wait and see.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

Lord of the Night said:


> from the current lore that we have and what is happening with Garro at the moment indicates that he is gathering the founders of the Grey Knights chapter


What makes you think Grey Knights rather than just the Inquisition in general (or at least some proto form of the institution we know in 40k)?


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

People are asserting that he is gathering the 'founding members of the grey knights', and yet there is NOT ONE SINGLE SENTENCE ANYWHERE TO SUPPORT THAT specifically. I do not know where the insistence that these random people he is gathering are 'grey knights' is coming from, considering that they aren't psykers. ALL you know is that he is gathering people. That is IT. That is ALL you can gather from the books.

I could just as easily say 'gathering the founding members of the inquisition' and there would be nothing to make that any less likely than the grey knights being founded first.

In fact, fluff supports that the grey knights were founded afterwards.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Lord of the Night said:


> What came first. Sisters of Battle or Ordo Hereticus?, I could swear I know the answer but it escapes me.


The Sisters of Battle came first.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

It is an unimportant distinction because, unlike the GK, the sisters of battle are NOT officially an order millitant of any of the holy ordos - they are the chamber millitant of the Ecclesiarchy.


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

Child-of-the-Emperor said:


> What makes you think Grey Knights rather than just the Inquisition in general (or at least some proto form of the institution we know in 40k)?


Because we still have no idea what Euphrati Keeler, Mersadie Oliton, Kyril Sindermann and Amendera Kendel are doing. I think they are working to found the Inquisition by finding people like them, who will pursue the truth above all else and who will remain steadfastly loyal to the Emperor. While Garro works to find the soldiers that will support them in their cause, finding men like him who remain loyal in the face of treachery.



Baltar said:


> People are asserting that he is gathering the 'founding members of the grey knights', and yet there is NOT ONE SINGLE SENTENCE ANYWHERE TO SUPPORT THAT specifically. I do not know where the insistence that these random people he is gathering are 'grey knights' is coming from, considering that they aren't psykers. ALL you know is that he is gathering people. That is IT. That is ALL you can gather from the books.
> 
> In fact, fluff supports that the grey knights were founded afterwards


In _Oath of Moment_ the Ultramarine character Ruben is a former Librarian, it is quite likely that Garro is gathering former Librarians to join his cause since they are the closest to the Warp and any who remain loyal and connected to the Warp are the ideal warriors for an organization like the Grey Knights.



Baron Spikey said:


> The Sisters of Battle came first.


Sarcastic question but the answer is still welcome.


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

Baltar said:


> It is an unimportant distinction because, unlike the GK, the sisters of battle are NOT officially an order millitant of any of the holy ordos - they are the chamber millitant of the Ecclesiarchy.


In fact when the Sisters of Battle were first created (as in when they became more than just a cult of warrior women on a backwater world) they weren't the Chamber Militant for any organisation, they were Goge Vandire's bodyguard.

The Grey Knights have always been linked with the Inquistion, the SoB work for the Hereticus on a 'part-time' basis when their objectives coincide.


----------



## Baltar (Aug 16, 2008)

You're listing traits just as common to loyal members of the inquisition as they are to Grey Knights, frankly - so lending nothing at all to your argument.

Also, you nicely ignored the fact that bringing up the Sisters of Battle is irrelevant (irrelevant because they are not at all part of the inquisition).


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Does it ever state anywhere though that the Grey Knights were formed specifically for the Ordo Malleus. Yes they are the chamber millitant of the Malleus, but they could very easily have been created and then attatched to the Ordo some time afterwards. There isn't anything in the current fluff to negate(or agree) with this. 

For all that i still believe it is the Inquisition or a proto-Inquisition that Garro, Qruze etc are coming together to form. Garro and Qruze both having no psychic potential that we know of at all, and with Grey Knights all being pretty sufficent psykers its unlikely that Garro and Qruze are both conveneiently latent psykers


----------



## Mob (Nov 14, 2010)

re: Inquisition
Considering the little evidence we have I'm just waiting to see, although 
"hey you Space Marine form an inquisitive organisation and while you're at it, wear my symbol which happens to be a big I instead of an M or even the sigil I invented and for which I am famed as you might otherwise expect."
is rather unsubtle. Perhaps there'll be a swerve. Otherwise, retcon.

re:topic
Not voting for Legion was hard as i love it, but since I noticed it was vaguely similar to Use of Weapons by Iain M Banks (one of my favourite books) I feel weird about it. A Thousand Sons was glorious as they've been my fave legion since IA:III and the First Heretic is simply amazing.
But in the end I went for _Prospero Burns_ as I really love the style and structure and it happens to be a great story.


----------



## AK74Bob (Oct 2, 2010)

Someone needs to post spoilers for Garro's_ Oath of Moment_, since I have no idea WTF most of you are talking about.:angry:


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

AK74Bob said:


> Someone needs to post spoilers for Garro's_ Oath of Moment_, since I have no idea WTF most of you are talking about.:angry:




Basically, Garro turns up in the middle of the Calth conflict looking for some Ultramarine ex-Librarian. He recruits the individual in question into his band of _'merry men'_ (which are ultimately presented to the Emperor at the height of the Siege of Terra, suspected of being involved in the proto-Inquisition). That's pretty much it. _Garro: Oath_ was fairly shite.


----------



## AK74Bob (Oct 2, 2010)

Thanks CotE. That seems kinda random, but hopefully they will explain what happened to that old Luna Wolf (Qruze I think) and the rest of the men that were with Garro in FotE.

This is OT, but was anyone pissed like me when Dorn struck Garro in FotE?


----------



## Lord of the Night (Nov 18, 2009)

JMSwallow said:


> _Actually_, that depends on which version of the background you take as true. The original Grey Knight background text states “Most Knights have no psychic ability at all...”


Something new for the Grey Knight argument. There is every chance that Garro could be a founding member of the Grey Knights if their original members were not all psykers. True some would have to be psykers to teach the new members how to use their powers and to fight but Garro could have joined to teach them how to fight, how to recognize Chaos and treachery and more general things that he would be an expert at.


----------



## Child-of-the-Emperor (Feb 22, 2009)

AK74Bob said:


> Thanks CotE.


No worries.



AK74Bob said:


> This is OT, but was anyone pissed like me when Dorn struck Garro in FotE?


Not at all. Dorn's behaviour was understandable given news of Horus' treachery.



Lord of the Night said:


> Something new for the Grey Knight argument. There is every chance that Garro could be a founding member of the Grey Knights if their original members were not all psykers. True some would have to be psykers to teach the new members how to use their powers and to fight but Garro could have joined to teach them how to fight, how to recognize Chaos and treachery and more general things that he would be an expert at.


I don't recall that particular background myself (and would love to see a source to validate his claims), but then I wasn't in it from the beginning. _Codex: Daemonhunters_ specifically states they are all psykers however, so i'm going with that. Otherwise they wouldn't really be that effective against daemons (unless faith in the Emperor was a factor).


----------



## AK74Bob (Oct 2, 2010)

I guess Dorn's actions surprised me. I thought Dorn was supposed to be stoic like Guilliman, for example Guilliman gets his ass stomped by Lorgar and doesn't even respond. Yet Garro gives a sitrep and gets his ass kicked across the ship...


----------



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

Okay. Who voted for_ Battle for the Abyss_? *Glare face*


----------



## Brother Subtle (May 24, 2009)

bobss said:


> Okay. Who voted for_ Battle for the Abyss_? *Glare face*


everyones a joker... 

Kudos to those who also voted for Fulgrim... it was brilliant.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

I simply can't settle on a single choice.

I think the best one so far was "Legion", if for no other reason* than the fact that it was the first to make you realize that you just don't know everything that happened during the Crusade and the Heresy.

* But if you did, great writing, fun characters, and a tight plot full of mystery and intrigue might also suffice.

Along with it, I have to throw in "Galaxy in Flames" and "Flight of the Eisenstein" for epic moments and "The First Heretic" for a titanic effort in trying to get everything to make sense.

I couldn't even pick one to round off my top five... I don't actually dislike any of the books in the series (I just don't enjoy them all the same), and too many of them are too close in the race for me to single one out. Some days I appreciate "Fallen Angels" more than "Mechanicus", other days they switch places, and nowadays I think "Prospero Burns" might sneak in there.


----------



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

> "As the Emperor prepared for his final confrontation with the traitor Horus, he granted one final gift to Mankind, a safeguard and protection against the horrors of the Warp - the Grey Knights. A brotherhood of warriors as elite as they are secretive, the Grey Knights are a shining line of silvered steel that stands between humanity and the Daemons of Chaos.


For those, like me, who believed that the Grey Knights were created during the Emperor's final stand and glorious sacrifice: Fuck yes.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Where is that quote from?


----------



## Baron Spikey (Mar 26, 2008)

GW's announcement that Codex: Grey Knights is coming in April.


----------



## jasonbob (Sep 6, 2010)

bobss said:


> Okay. Who voted for_ Battle for the Abyss_? *Glare face*


I felt that it had a very strong plot that really shed light on an important aspect of the heresy. It had well rounded characters with a lot of depth. In fact im really shocked no one else voted for this amazing book.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

jasonbob said:


> I felt that it had a very strong plot that really shed light on an important aspect of the heresy. It had well rounded characters with a lot of depth. In fact im really shocked no one else voted for this amazing book.


My irony detector is going off the scale


----------



## Mob (Nov 14, 2010)

jasonbob said:


> I felt that it had a very strong plot that really shed light on an important aspect of the heresy. It had well rounded characters with a lot of depth. In fact im really shocked no one else voted for this amazing book.


5/10.

Would've been 7/10 if you hadn't said "amazing".


----------



## Bane_of_Kings (Oct 28, 2009)

jasonbob said:


> I felt that it had a very strong plot that really shed light on an important aspect of the heresy. It had well rounded characters with a lot of depth. In fact im really shocked no one else voted for this amazing book.


By chance, do you work for any of these companies: Games Workshop, Black Library, or are/or related to Ben Counter?


----------



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

jasonbob said:


> I felt that it had a very strong plot that really shed light on an important aspect of the heresy. It had well rounded characters with a lot of depth. In fact im really shocked no one else voted for this amazing book.


You're actually mad...


----------



## AK74Bob (Oct 2, 2010)

I think he is being sarcastic...


----------



## RuneGuard (Jan 10, 2011)

Hi everyone, im pretty new around here, i would have to say my favourite of the HH novels would have to be *Prospero Burns*, Dan Abnett is my favourite author for BL fiction and the way he handles the big question 'are there wolves on Fenris' is beautiful done. For me he brings out alot of depth to the astartes legions, which is why my second favourite would have to be *Legion*, know one handles Psychic's like Dan does. Third would be *Thousand Sons*, they are my favourite of the fallen legions, and to me Graham does a fantastic job of elaborating on their structure and showing us an insight into one of the greatest of the primarchs Magnus (IMO).


----------



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

RuneGuard said:


> Hi everyone, im pretty new around here, i would have to say my favourite of the HH novels would have to be *Prospero Burns*, Dan Abnett is my favourite author for BL fiction and the way he handles the big question 'are there wolves on Fenris' is beautiful done. For me he brings out alot of depth to the astartes legions, which is why my second favourite would have to be *Legion*, know one handles Psychic's like Dan does. Third would be *Thousand Sons*, they are my favourite of the fallen legions, and to me Graham does a fantastic job of elaborating on their structure and showing us an insight into one of the greatest of the primarchs Magnus (IMO).


Hey dude. Good to see more people with plenty of enthusiam about Black Library, like us geeks :victory:

I underlined what you wrote about _A Thousand Sons _as it is very well put, and you're right: Graham's elaboration of the Thousand Sons -a Legion often palmed off as mere, uncontrolled Witch-spawn (I... think?) into a very powerful Legion due to their surpressed psychic potent is portrayed fantastically Also, I was more moved my Magnus' tragedy than perhaps all Primarchs except Fulgrim - for Fulgrim's belief and self-righteousness in himself, his sense of duty and ultimately fall, surpasses even _A Thousand Sons_. That said, I'm a pretty big Emperor's Children fan


----------

