# The sword that turned Horus.



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

I may have missed a bit of fluff somewhere, but how did Fabius have the sword to torture Cassander, and around the same time Erebus got it and broke it into several pieces? The last I had read Horus gave it to Fulgrim, who in turn gave it to Fabius. How did Erebus get it back?


----------



## Brother Lucian (Apr 22, 2011)

http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Anathame

Fulgrim allowed Erebus to take it.

But the Emperor's children eventually regained one of the anathame shards created by Erebus.


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

Brother Lucian said:


> http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Anathame
> 
> Fulgrim allowed Erebus to take it.
> 
> But the Emperor's children eventually regained one of the anathame shards created by Erebus.


When did Fulgrim give it to Erebus? I do not like Abnett's writing (and refuse to read him), so I assume it had to be in one of his books.

I must have missed a bunch, what book do the Emperor's Children get one of the shards?


----------



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

Zooey72 said:


> I do not like Abnett's writing (and refuse to read him),


Very foolish, considering how big a part his books play in the HH series. You may as well not read the series at all.


----------



## Vitarus (Apr 9, 2012)

Also considering Abnett's writing is excellent.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

The Shard of Erebus is stated as being on Calth somehow. Apparently, Mkar was given the blade. My source for this is the Ultramarine series. I also heard the shard was used by Fulgrim, however I cannot confirm that. The thing is I find McNeil's fluff to be less credible.


----------



## Brother Lucian (Apr 22, 2011)

Maloq Karr was given ONE of the shards of Erebus. But he lost it as he ascended to daemonhood, and Remus Ventanus picked it up.

On a related note. In the Tallyman 40k Story, Marduk and a few of his gang finds themselves teleported to Calth after escaping the Garden of Nurgle. Marduk remembering it from the Horus Heresy. I cant shake a feeling that he is looking for the shard held by the Ultramarines.


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

Khorne's Fist said:


> Very foolish, considering how big a part his books play in the HH series. You may as well not read the series at all.


Can't stand Abnett's writing, I go to this board and others and get a review of what happened in whatever garbage he wrote so I can follow the over all HH. The only book of his I will read is if he does any of the attack on Terra, other than that you couldn't pay me to read him. "Legion" is easily the worst book I have ever read.


----------



## Roninman (Jul 23, 2010)

Zooey72 said:


> Can't stand Abnett's writing, I go to this board and others and get a review of what happened in whatever garbage he wrote so I can follow the over all HH. The only book of his I will read is if he does any of the attack on Terra, other than that you couldn't pay me to read him. "Legion" is easily the worst book I have ever read.


Let me guess, Grahams books gets you dropping pants everytime...


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Zooey72 said:


> Can't stand Abnett's writing


Then why not just read synopses online and spare yourself the pain while still maintaining knowledge of key plot developments?


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

Not the point of my post, but ok.

My favorite author is Aaron.

The level of stupid that was "Legion" I am not a good enough writer to put into words. Most of the traitor primarchs had tragic falls. Alpha Legion took the short bus to corruption. I am not an Alpha Legion hater, I liked them in "Deliverance lost". I respect Thorpe because he had the back drop of Dan's brain farts and still managed to make a good book.

It annoys the hell out of me that this "perpetual" thing will end up being part of the final story. I just hope that like in "Deliverance Lost" a better author can take the reigns and not write a story that is as moronic as most of Abnett's crap.

That being said. I will give the man a bit of credit. The one good book he did do was "Horus Rising". It was the first book I read from HH, and Loken is a great char. Kudos to him for coming up with that. I also read "Know no Fear", and while I got sick of his writing - he did have his moments (I liked the Eldar thing).

I have also read "Legion", and I am thinking about suiing him because I want those hours of my life back.

-


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Zooey72 said:


> Not the point of my post, but ok.
> 
> My favorite author is Aaron.
> 
> ...


In DL Corax became Indiana Jones and Alpharius had a talking fishbowl IIRC in a secret wooden chamber aboard his ship.

There is no comparison between Legion and DL.


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

ntaw said:


> Then why not just read synopses online and spare yourself the pain while still maintaining knowledge of key plot developments?


For the same reason anyone reads a book. I like them. I do not like Abnett, but he is not the only author. If all of the HH books were written by him I would stop reading them.

As far as talent goes, I think he should be flipping burgers somewhere. My fish tank could come up with better plots.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

I bet you liked Fear to Tread as well.


----------



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

That attitude is holding you back from great books like Prospero Burns and Know No Fear. It's very blinkered to let just one book taint the rest of a writers work in a particular series. 
Reading synopses online will never fill the gaps you're missing.

I'm wondering what you thought of Horus Rising, the book that started it all? Surely you enjoyed that one, or you wouldn't have read Legion if you found his writing so repellant.


----------



## forkmaster (Jan 2, 2010)

Sounds like a small miss with where and how the sword ended up when it actually did.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Damn. I loved Legion...


----------



## Vitarus (Apr 9, 2012)

I liked Legion, too. More important, Eisenhorn and Ravenor are among the very best BL books ever.


----------



## Anakwanar (Sep 26, 2011)

* Zooey72*



> I respect Thorpe because he had the back drop of Dan's brain farts and still managed to make a good book....... It annoys the hell out of me that this "perpetual" thing will end up being part of the final story. I just hope that like in "Deliverance Lost" a better author can take the reigns and not write a story that is as moronic as most of Abnett's crap.


Really? Are you on drugs? 

Have you been drinking a lot? 

In what Universe Thorpe's prose became better than Dan's correct, stylish, smart, strict, and without errors writing? 

Is your second best writer a Nick Kyme?

And 'Fear to Thread' with 'Battle for the Abyss' - are the best HH novels to date for you? 

Right?


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

"First Heretic" and "Thousand Sons" are the one I liked the most with "Fulgrim" being a close 3rd (and I never liked the Emp's Children until than).

"Deliverance Lost" was not my favorite book, but it was a save from Abnett's brain farts. The "Indiana Jones" part of it was not the thing I liked the most, and will admit it was a bit stupid. It was a stretch to say the Emperor couldn't shut down that stuff, or for that matter why put it there? Wouldn't the safest place in the Galaxy be in the Palace?

That being said I liked how the Alpha Legion spies didn't know a damn thing. They had a mission and any past life that they may have had didn't matter. Some even felt a bit of remorse for what they were doing because the Ravens Guard was their adopted legion. It didn't stop them from doing their duty, but it was cool. I liked the smack talk that Alpharius had with Horus and how he made the all powerful Warmaster nervous (if they can infiltrate them, how do we know we are not being infiltrated?) The blood thirsty way Corax killed that Word Bearer who was interned (who very well could have been a loyalist) showed how crazy I5 had made him. That craziness later showed itself in the fact Corax thought "oh man, dad made these astartes all wrong... I can do it better".

The fish bowl thing I never liked but took it with a grain of salt because the Cabal concept was forced on him from Abnett's brain fart of "Legion". Even that though had some great merit to it... not the fish bowl, but how they corrupted the Gene seed was warp tainted. It shows Alpha Legion putting one foot in the grave as far as falling to chaos.

Those are just off the top of my head as good points to that book. Hell, I really liked Corax telling Dorn to go piss up a rope if he thought he was going to leave his few remaining warriors on Terra as some kind of reserve for Dorn's Legion. The way that the newly made Raven's guard both corrupt and pure were noble (and what that later means for Corax and his promise to the Emp).

"Battle for the Abyss" was meh to me. I think the best part of that book was the turmoil on the loyalist side. They only knew for certain that the Ultramarines were loyal because it was their ship that the Word Bearers attacked. Everyone else looked at each other with a big "Your primarch is a traitor". I also liked the Emotep 1000 son getting information from that Word Bearer after the Space Wolf couldn't beat it out of him. The ending was predictable (we all knew they would kill the Abyss). Not a great book, and I won't read it again - but it wasn't a waste of time to read it. I have more respect for that book now after getting further into the series and reading how Lorgar's kingships are going to play a major role.

The only 2 books I have not read from Abnett are "Prospero Burns", (70 pages into it I could not stand it any more) and "Unremembered Empire" (didn't even try although I guess there was some revealing fluff in it). I read "Know no Fear" because it is an important part of the Heresy and it wasn't all bad. I do think Papa Smurf being exposed to the near vacuum of space for hours w/o dying was a HUGE stretch. The "perpetual" plot got pushed further which I never liked. And just his general writing style annoyed the hell out of me.

"Horus Rising" was his only good book, but out of the first 3 it was the least good IMO.


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

Anakwanar said:


> * Zooey72*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


"Fear to Tread" I am not sure about. What I learned from it was that when possible read the book instead of getting the audio version. I listened to it on a 10 hour road trip and it had some good points but it was hard to concentrate on it while driving and the voices they did from the different char distracted from the storyline. I did like the start of it (when my wife was driving and I could focus more on the book). The Blood Angel's secret and Horus knowing about it. I think that ties in really well in "Betrayer" how Lorgar calls Erebus a fool because he thinks can turn Sanguines (sp, sorry). Lorgar's explanation of how he views his brother perfectly fits into how Sanguines feels, and how the 'curse' effects the Blood Angels.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Zooey72 said:


> Not the point of my post, but ok.
> 
> My favorite author is Aaron.
> 
> ...


The Alpha Legion is a good example of BL trying to appeal to different audiences. I think the problem that gets into play is when they combine the stories with other legions and then it just makes the Alpha Legion look ridiculous. I wasn't the biggest fan of the Alpha Legion story, but it is what a lot of people like. As such, I don't like the cold nature of some of the primarch stories, but hey, they are supposed to all be unique and capture different audiences. _Betrayer_ was also a story I had a hard time gulping down. It was a different story arch than I expected, but I wouldn't say I didn't see it coming. As so, I think its best to appreciate the plot and style of the writing instead of not liking on taste. If you do, there will be several legion stories you will probably not like.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

Zooey72 said:


> The level of stupid that was "Legion" I am not a good enough writer to put into words. Most of the traitor primarchs had tragic falls. Alpha Legion took the short bus to corruption. I am not an Alpha Legion hater, I liked them in "Deliverance lost". I respect Thorpe because he had the back drop of Dan's brain farts and still managed to make a good book.


LOL...would have to totally disagree. I was lukewarm to _Legion_ upon my first reading. I liked it more upon re-reading, probably because so many bad HH novels had been released during the time before re-reading and after first reading. 

_Legion_ doesn't "wank" the AL. Subsequent stories do. _Deliverance Lost_ is just poorly written regardless of the AL's competence level in that novel.


----------



## Stephen74 (Oct 1, 2010)

Zooey72 said:


> Not the point of my post, but ok.
> 
> It annoys the hell out of me that this "perpetual" thing will end up being part of the final story. I just hope that like in "Deliverance Lost" a better author can take the reigns and not write a story that is as moronic as most of Abnett's crap.
> -


:nono: Gav Thorpe better than Dan Abnett ??? 
Hang on, I have to say that again, Gav Thorpe better than Dan Abnett ???

:search: 
Nope, no taste found here.


----------



## Stephen74 (Oct 1, 2010)

Khorne's Fist said:


> That attitude is holding you back from great books like Prospero Burns and Know No Fear. It's very blinkered to let just one book taint the rest of a writers work in a particular series.
> .


 "Prospero burns was horrible", he said in a voice like a wet leopard growl uke:


----------



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

Stephen74 said:


> "Prospero burns was horrible", he said in a voice like a wet leopard growl uke:


Far from it IMO. Once I reread it and got over the fact that Prospero was only going to burn in the last ten pages I realised its one of the best in the series. It completely turned on its head the long held vision of the SWs being jolly drunken space Vikings.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Khorne's Fist said:


> Far from it IMO. Once I reread it and got over the fact that Prospero was only going to burn in the last ten pages I realised its one of the best in the series. It completely turned on its head the long held vision of the SWs being jolly drunken space Vikings.


This.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

the first three books, awesome, legion read better sencond time round, thousand sons and Prospero burns, two of the best in the series along with the Lorgar books.


----------



## Stephen74 (Oct 1, 2010)

No no no. Prosporo Burns was awful. Longwinded, patronising, sub plots that went no where and barely touched on prosporo actually burning.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

Khorne's Fist said:


> Far from it IMO. Once I reread it and got over the fact that Prospero was only going to burn in the last ten pages I realised its one of the best in the series. It completely turned on its head the long held vision of the SWs being jolly drunken space Vikings.


this says it all


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

I only attempted to read "Prospero Burns" because it was the follow up to "A Thousand Sons" (which rocked). I had one big question that made me want to read "Prospero Burns" that I found out later didn't get answered (why did Magnus really turn). I got 70 or so pages into it and I couldn't go any further. I have passed kidney stones that were less painful than reading Abnett's ramblings. Thankfully I have a friend who is reading the HH books and he finished it and informed me that I wasn't going to get an answer to my question.

I am in the minority on 1000 sons, but I think The Emperor told Magnus to turn. They telegraphed how well the Emp could see into the future by naming them "Thousand Sons" when their numbers dropped that low before Magnus "saved" them. Than at the end of the book the numbers are roughly at 1000 again.

Throw on top of that how Magnus 'defended' Prospero. He would not turn from the Emperor despite seeing him and his Legion going to be destroyed. He even deceived his own sons by letting the Space Wolves surprise attack. Than he refuses the temptations of a god...

Than for no good reason at all he changes his mind and comes down to fight Russ? Huh? He was willing to sacrifice himself and his legion. He told a god to go piss up a rope. He will let his entire world burn... and than think "Nah, probably not a good idea"?

There is only one person in the Galaxy that could have made him turn at that point, and that is the Emperor.

I think Magnus was too smart for his own good. He may not have been Dad's favorite, but he had a knack for figuring things out. The Emp told no one about his Webway plans but Magnus found out on his own. I think after he was tempted by a god and refused he got visited by the Emperor. Dad had probably anticipated Magnus turning w/o his direct interference, but he didn't. So grudgingly he had to let Magnus in on his grand plan.

I don't mind if Magnus goes total traitor and becomes as crazy as Fulgrim or Angron, but they have a lot to explain as to how he gets to that point.

I am rather sure they will. In "Betrayer" Magnus has not committed to the traitors (he even is mad at Lorgar for starting all of this). 

To the people who think he became a Daemon Prince just because he has no physical body - pfft. He is sane. We have seen 2 primarchs become Daemon princes and they are both nutty as hell. Magnus having his back broken is not on the same level as most of an entire race dying, or a sun being destroyed.

Sorry for the derail. To sum up -Abentt sucks. lol.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Zooey72 said:


> I only attempted to read "Prospero Burns" because it was the follow up to "A Thousand Sons" (which rocked). I had one big question that made me want to read "Prospero Burns" that I found out later didn't get answered (why did Magnus really turn). I got 70 or so pages into it and I couldn't go any further. I have passed kidney stones that were less painful than reading Abnett's ramblings. Thankfully I have a friend who is reading the HH books and he finished it and informed me that I wasn't going to get an answer to my question.
> 
> I am in the minority on 1000 sons, but I think The Emperor told Magnus to turn. They telegraphed how well the Emp could see into the future by naming them "Thousand Sons" when their numbers dropped that low before Magnus "saved" them. Than at the end of the book the numbers are roughly at 1000 again.
> 
> ...


I think an interesting way of viewing Magnus is the idea that he has his own opinion about many things. Not only does he have his own opinion about things, but it seems like he is also surprised by the outcomes of his actions. Magnus is one of the personalities who attempts to do good but has little knowledge that he himself has been tainted and perverse by Chaos. I saw his defense of his legion as something more in the lines that he saw the size of what was left of it and remembered his beginning. Not sure if doing this for the Emperors carries weight. Remember the warp corrupts the mind. There really isn't way to have an agent remain loyal while being in league with the forces of Chaos. 

Magnus' actions and views are already corrupt by this time. One good example is in _A Thousand Sons_ where he explicitly states he stopped the Wolves from burning down the library but at the same time says he didn't initiate the confrontation. This is very telling from a primarch that is probably one of the most intellectual and probably philosophical to depict a situation in such a biased form.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I'd also like to mention. I know that many are critical of some of Dan Abnett's work. I think its interesting because I noticed in one instance, people may like one of his novels that other people find critical but then dislike a book that other people like. I think thats actually a pretty interesting and even cool aspect of his books. 

I would also add that Dan Abnett's Horus and Loken are probably the best and intriguing characters in the novels.


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

ckcrawford said:


> I think an interesting way of viewing Magnus is the idea that he has his own opinion about many things. Not only does he have his own opinion about things, but it seems like he is also surprised by the outcomes of his actions. Magnus is one of the personalities who attempts to do good but has little knowledge that he himself has been tainted and perverse by Chaos. I saw his defense of his legion as something more in the lines that he saw the size of what was left of it and remembered his beginning. Not sure if doing this for the Emperors carries weight. Remember the warp corrupts the mind. There really isn't way to have an agent remain loyal while being in league with the forces of Chaos.
> 
> Magnus' actions and views are already corrupt by this time. One good example is in _A Thousand Sons_ where he explicitly states he stopped the Wolves from burning down the library but at the same time says he didn't initiate the confrontation. This is very telling from a primarch that is probably one of the most intellectual and probably philosophical to depict a situation in such a biased form.


I think that Magnus becomes corrupt, but he isn't really there this far into the series. His Legion is the only neutral one in the Galaxy. Chaos may have saved his legion on Prospero, but if he was full in the tank he would not be sitting on the fence, nor would he be telling Lorgar that what he did was a mistake.

I can't see any other rational reason for his about face than the Emperor telling him to do it. The Emp. named the 1000 sons and the name was well suited twice in the future. That is way too much to just be a coincidence. Why he needs Magnus to fall (or the Heresy for that matter) I have no clue. But Lorgar said he saw "our father a corpse sitting on a throne screaming into the void for eternity" I am sure the Emp had to have some clue as to what the future held, and how he was going to shape it.

Magnus's fall is not complete (nor is Mortarion's). They just need to follow up on these 2 because I assume they will be Daemon Princes by the attack on Terra.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Zooey72 said:


> I think that Magnus becomes corrupt, but he isn't really there this far into the series. His Legion is the only neutral one in the Galaxy. Chaos may have saved his legion on Prospero, but if he was full in the tank he would not be sitting on the fence, nor would he be telling Lorgar that what he did was a mistake.
> 
> I can't see any other rational reason for his about face than the Emperor telling him to do it. The Emp. named the 1000 sons and the name was well suited twice in the future. That is way too much to just be a coincidence. Why he needs Magnus to fall (or the Heresy for that matter) I have no clue. But Lorgar said he saw "our father a corpse sitting on a throne screaming into the void for eternity" I am sure the Emp had to have some clue as to what the future held, and how he was going to shape it.
> 
> Magnus's fall is not complete (nor is Mortarion's). They just need to follow up on these 2 because I assume they will be Daemon Princes by the attack on Terra.


I don't think thats a good analogy. In that case any tainted legion is a "neutral" force. No chaos force except for the gods and maybe (however unlikely) some greater daemons or daemon princes, are pawns of the Chaos Gods. Magnus was definitely a pawn. Its hard to take your comment to face when you realize that he actually destroyed the web way. He destroyed the future and ultimate weapon for mankind. I assume you are saying theres a difference... it doesn't really matter though does it? As far as I am concerned he pretty much did as much damage being "kinda" tainted then he ever did as a Daemon Prince. Even in the 40K realm, the Imperium is such a warped form of its past glory that I'm not sure what he could really do to make it nastier.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

ckcrawford said:


> I don't think thats a good analogy. In that case any tainted legion is a "neutral" force. No chaos force except for the gods and maybe (however unlikely) some greater daemons or daemon princes, are pawns of the Chaos Gods. Magnus was definitely a pawn. Its hard to take your comment to face when you realize that he actually destroyed the web way. He destroyed the future and ultimate weapon for mankind. I assume you are saying theres a difference... it doesn't really matter though does it? As far as I am concerned he pretty much did as much damage being "kinda" tainted then he ever did as a Daemon Prince. Even in the 40K realm, the Imperium is such a warped form of its past glory that I'm not sure what he could really do to make it nastier.


wasn't he actually supposed to have sat on the Golden Throne? or have they retconned that too?


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

ckcrawford said:


> I don't think thats a good analogy. In that case any tainted legion is a "neutral" force. No chaos force except for the gods and maybe (however unlikely) some greater daemons or daemon princes, are pawns of the Chaos Gods. Magnus was definitely a pawn. Its hard to take your comment to face when you realize that he actually destroyed the web way. He destroyed the future and ultimate weapon for mankind. I assume you are saying theres a difference... it doesn't really matter though does it? As far as I am concerned he pretty much did as much damage being "kinda" tainted then he ever did as a Daemon Prince. Even in the 40K realm, the Imperium is such a warped form of its past glory that I'm not sure what he could really do to make it nastier.


I think intent means a lot as far as corruption goes. Magnus was incredibly negligent, but that does not nec. mean he was corrupt. When you compare him to (even before their princedom) Fulgrim or Angron you can't help but seeing there be a huge difference.

You can argue that he was corrupted when he first made the deal to 'save' his sons, and it would be a valid one, my point is the level of corruption. Saying all levels or corruption are the same is a real reach. Every single one of us has felt horny, angry, slothful, and restless. That does not make us porn stars, killers, bums, or revolutionaries.

Was Magnus influenced before he destroyed the webway... sure. But to say he was corrupted just doesn't make a lot of sense. What he did was horrible but to say he was corrupted is like comparing someone who is texting while driving and gets into an accident that kills someone is the same thing as a serial killer.

And as of right now (2014) the Webway exists. It is in Orlando.

http://www.wdwthemeparks.com/photos-disney/2013/04/07/r-1365389839-WEDWayPeopleMover3.jpg


----------



## Zooey72 (Mar 25, 2008)

I wanted to add I found the perfect description of Abnett's writing. This describes "Legion" to a T.


----------

