# The Dark Angels and their Fear



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Halleck#.UaQAq0DI0WY

Why are the DA so terrified of the betrayal that took place within their ranks after the Heresy to the point where they've abandoned missions, leaving regiments of IG and brother chapters to fend for themselves?

Countless chapters have lost some of their members to Chaos.

The Badab War was full of chapters that transgressed against the Imperium and yet were forgiven.

There are so many other examples. I don't see why the DA have so much to fear from something that happened 10,000 years ago and when only a portion turned.


----------



## Rems (Jun 20, 2011)

Because it's become their obsession. If it had happened now in the 41st millenium it would be different. But it happened in the 31st, in the wake of the Heresy. 

Think of the original context in the aftermath of the Heresy. The Imperium has been sundered by a civil war. Half the legions have turned traitor, have committed the ultimate betrayal and stand damned forever. 

All the loyalist legions remained loyal. Except one. Except the Dark Angels, the First Legion. Alone of the loyalists they had brother fall to Chaos. They alone proved to be less than loyal, less pure. It became their great shame and terrible secret. A singular stain on their honour, one which only they suffer.

Then think of the danger this secret represented. The sundered Imperium is slowly rebuilding through the fire and pain of the Scouring as traitors are rooted out and purged. The nascent Inquisition is establishing its overwatch and there is a hypersensitivity to betrayal. There's nearly a second civil war over Guilliman's reforms. Now what would the reaction of this wounded, paranoid Imperium be if they found out the Dark Angels had failed, were tainted? 

The Dark Angels themselves stood lost and alone. They had lost their home and their father. They had played no part in defending the Emperor. In mankind's moment of need they had been found wanting. So in this climate of fear of uncertainty the Dark Angels make it their mission to find and redeem their fallen brethren, to never let their terrible shame be known.


----------



## Reaper45 (Jun 21, 2011)

Perhaps the current dark angels are actually traitors and the fallen are the real loyalists.

Consider this all primarchs were scattered by chaos. Not all turned to chaos.
So why couldn't loyal marines have the same thing happen.

Aside from the lion and cypher who else can we confirm is loyal?

If they were trying to hide their traitor status wouldn't you kill off anyone who might call their loyalty into question?


Or perhaps the alpha legion is behind the entire notion of the fallen.


----------



## Deneris (Jul 23, 2008)

Afraid? No. Just VERY determined to round up their Fallen and escort them back to The Rock for absolution and "redemption"...


----------



## Ddraig Cymry (Dec 30, 2012)

I still hold to the belief that the 'loyalist' Dark Angels are in fact misguided traitors, who held off their aid to The Emperor when it was needed. So the higher ups need to destroy all the 'traitor' legionaries stems into a fear that their lies will be exposed. Will it be canon? Probably not, but I'd like to imagine.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Rems put it exactly as I was going to; it all stems back to when their greatest mark of shame occurred. Keep in mind that the Dark Angels are one of the first founding chapters, their name is one of the nine loyalists that can date their history and triumphs back to the golden age of the Imperium. Letting the ruling bodies of the Imperium know that they came that close to falling so far would do nothing but hurt them.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

I think it's rather more than the fact that they alone had members of their Legion turn traitor. Right off the top of my head, for instance, one of the Garro audio dramas has traitor White Scars. I would be shocked if they were unique in this.

The larger issue, I believe, is that the time after the Heresy was defined by paranoia and an attempt to maintain a delicate balance of power. Dorn and Guilliman almost went to war, and there was a deliberate effort to take away power from those that couldn't be trusted.

During this time period, the Dark Angels had lost their Primarch and had been forced to destroy (for all intents and purposes) their home planet. This, after their Legion's nominal second-in-command had turned traitor and subverted Caliban to create his own mini-Legion*.

In this sense, one can understand why the Dark Angels were keen to keep a secret. They might have had skeletons in their closet, but they had no reason to fear anyone discovering them. That changed when they discovered the Fallen still existed.

The Codex reinforces that, initially, the Chapters that would become the Unforgiven were among the hardest-fighting forces of the Imperium. But that would have meant nothing in M31 if the Fallen were discovered by outsiders. Would the nascent Inquisition and High Lords have accepted the Dark Angels' lies as justified given the purges and infighting going on at the time? Who knows. The Dark Angels don't seem to have thought that would be the case.

The problem is that, since then, the Dark Angels have simply upped the ante where keeping the secret safe is concerned. Any chance of being let off has sailed, given their litany of sins in pursuing the Fallen. The Imperium would not destroy the Unforgiven, of course, but they would put them on some sort of horrific Penitent Crusade, and they would certainly swamp them with Inquisitorial overseers.

* In this sense, it's actually kind of a misrepresentation to assert that "half the Legion" (a number that has no real basis) turned traitor. Point of fact, Luther was training recruits who were shipped off to the Legion. When he decided to turn traitor, he might have had a handful of Chapters besides his initial training cadre of five hundred Astartes. Either way, once he turned on the Lion, it's likely that none of his warriors considered themselves Dark Angels - or, at any rate, a part of the Legion (since the Legion would have been representative of the Imperium they were rebelling against).


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

Phoebus said:


> In this sense, it's actually kind of a misrepresentation to assert that "half the Legion" (a number that has no real basis) turned traitor. Point of fact, Luther was training recruits who were shipped off to the Legion. When he decided to turn traitor, he might have had a handful of Chapters besides his initial training cadre of five hundred Astartes. Either way, once he turned on the Lion, it's likely that none of his warriors considered themselves Dark Angels - or, at any rate, a part of the Legion (since the Legion would have been representative of the Imperium they were rebelling against).


Interestingly, if you read Milton's 'Paradise Lost', Satan claims to have turned half the angels in Heaven to his cause, during the War in Heaven, when actually this number was far less. A distinct similarity to here, no? Though also intriguingly, Belial is the name of one of the angels who was cast down to Hell...


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Great reference, spanner. 

Of course, the Dark Angels have had a number of biblical names associated with them - some with good origins, some with evil ones, and some that are just made up and meant to sound like they are angelic. I think this practice goes hand-in-hand with the general theme of the Dark Angels: they are supposed to be "good guys" within this milieu, but they do terrible things in secret, for their own purposes.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

the other one being Abaddon who a name of the devil or deamon.....and funnily enough Abaddon in latin/Greek means Destroyer....how ironic


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Reaper45 said:


> Perhaps the current dark angels are actually traitors and the fallen are the real loyalists.


That's fanfiction you are going up against fluff there.


----------



## Reaper45 (Jun 21, 2011)

Beaviz81 said:


> That's fanfiction you are going up against fluff there.


Fluff changes.

Allot.


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

Aye, and it changed to confirm (can't remember which novel, I'm sorry - my HH knowledge is often rusty), that the loyalist DA were in fact loyalist, and that Astelan is either deceived or lying.

Hoping someone can back me up here, seeing as I'm far from the most reliable person for fluff.


----------



## NiceGuyEddy (Mar 6, 2010)

spanner94ezekiel said:


> Aye, and it changed to confirm (can't remember which novel, I'm sorry - my HH knowledge is often rusty), that the loyalist DA were in fact loyalist, and that Astelan is either deceived or lying.
> 
> Hoping someone can back me up here, seeing as I'm far from the most reliable person for fluff.


Yes _Savage Weapons_ confirmed that the Lion always intended to stay loyal to the Emperor.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Reaper45 said:


> Fluff changes.
> 
> Allot.


Yeah but not this much and the Dark Angels have always been loyal, at least the ones staying with their Primarch there just ain't no two ways about it as proof from traitors are POV and very unreliable, while cold facts state that the Dark Angels are loyal. Of course the Dark Angels suffer from being Scrappies. People in general doesn't like them, much like Millwall.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

got to admit though, until the Heresy came out those little words "he was waiting to see who won" certainly made people wonder for a long time about the Lions motives. Until a decent HH Dark Angels novel comes out, i don't think the Lion was a traitor in waiting vs he was one of the good guys is going to go away. 
Gotta give Gav Thorpe credit for that one. 

I suppose if only half of all the Legions turned following either thier Primarch or the Primarchs adoptive father/leader of the rebellion then what happened with the Dark Angels would not be so controversial, but as it was, with the purging of the Legions at Istvaan and with a few notable exceptions those Astartes not loyal to the Warmaster and his brothers in heresy were dealt with. The Dark Angels didn't really get much of a chance to do that.

They had to loose thier father, destroy thier beloved homeworld and still the Traitors are at large....what i find interesting is that Luther is still alive and what he has in store for the future of the Dark Angels, more to the point why the hell did they keep him alive, he divided a Legion, aided in the destruction of Caliban, why would they want him kept alive?


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

He is an oracle leading them to the Fallen, but good point, why the hell Luther is alive is a bit baffling as he is the Arch-Traitor who corrupted every man under his command. I also questions having him in the room next to the Lion, I mean what if he would want to finish the job one day?


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

The Chapter don't know that the Lion's sleeping on the Rock. Nor is Luther "in the room next to him". :laugh:


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I was certain I read it somewhere, and would be fun if the Dark Angels suck that bad at security.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I would say it has largely to do with the fact that the Dark Angels under the Lion were suppose to be a loyal legion to the Emperor. The fact that half the legion including the home world turned traitor sits very ill with the loyalist Dark Angels. After the Caliban incident, the Dark Angels were also probably the last legacy to the Emperor's dream and will. Guilliman and the Ultramarines essentially became the last Primarch and Legion to be close to full strength and essentially changed the course and future of the Imperium forever. In a way, the Emperor's legacy and Dream was destroyed with the failure of the Dark Angels to be united.


----------



## HOGGLORD (Jan 25, 2012)

Beaviz81 said:


> I was certain I read it somewhere, and would be fun if the Dark Angels suck that bad at security.


I think I read that too, but DA security's great, they infrequently have a chaplin wander past and check through the window to make sure he's still babbling and insane in the corner of his room. But to make sure there are no security breaches, about twenty Dark Angels know he's there at any one time. So, minimal security, no one would recognise him if he escaped and they are leaving a mentaly unstable genetically engineered super human who tried to kill their primarch chill out next door to said primarch whilst he's taking a nice nap.

Slightly off point, but wouldn't all the primarchs in stasis or who wandered off into nowhere land get the surprise of their lives when they woke up/got home. I mean for starters, the emperor's definately a god now, but he's also dead, so be careful around that touchy subject. We've been doing OK without you, as Matt Ward made sure that a couple of Grey Knights (we'll fill you in later) easily outstrip any of your feats without breaking sweat. Psykers are OK now, but we still have dudes wandering around purging them for good measure. Have fun piecing all this together.

Don't worry though sir, not everything's changed. You remember Angron, Fulgrim, Mortarion, Perturbo and Lorgar? They're still around, but they're ultra powerful daemon entities chilling in the warp right now. 

Oh, P.S. your awesome, huge legions have been split into many tiny little chapters and we ran out of gene-seed whilst you were gone, you could have picked some spare ones up with the milk. (Only one or two would need this heads up) and Abbadon's still around, he's the one of the only ones with a force the size of the old legions, but he's bent on the complete destruction of the imperium right now, so we can't ask him for help.

and P.S.S. look up Tau, 'nids and necrons, welcome back sir :wink:.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Hahaha. I still like it. I mean that's pretty much Deathstar-security, with a twist. We will bury the Primarch in the heart of our keep which can treat Eldar fleets as target-practice, even the Necrons have no chance against it, then in the cell next to the sleeping Primarch we have Luther who once tried to kill him. Do you think any have thought of bringing him into the same room as the Primarch to see if the Primarch wakes up. And I thought only the Chapter Master knew. That would be a pretty big hole in their security, and how is new Chapter Masters learned of it? Shown by the Watchers of the Deep?

At least compared to the Ultramarines or the Space Wolves the Dark Angels are relatively gathered, and the Chapter Master can notify the High Lords whenever he thinks his new chapter. So his shock would be not so great as the shock of f.ex. Sanguinius, Vulkan, Corax, Guilliman, Mannus and Dorn but I still think he could have a great Primarch-heartattack? I mean I have read fluff where Primarches have been killed stupidly including that Guilliman should have been devoured by the Tyranids, but they retconned that on the spot in a WD.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

When Dorn returns, things will be interesting.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

not unless the Emperor wakes up (not going to happen this side of the eye) and suddenly does a paul daniels or sooty "Izzy whizzy lets get busy" and hey presto all DEAD Primarchs are miraculously returned to life. 

Gulliman - DEAD
The Lion Sleeping
Russ Unknown
Corax unknown
Vulkan unknown
Khan unknown
The Twins Unknown
Horus DEAD
Ferrus DEAD
Curze DEAD
Angron Deamon
Fulgrim Deamon
Mortarion Deamon
Perturabo Deamon
Lorgar Deamon
Sanguinius DEAD
and Dorn...lemme think now ,,,, um,,,errrrr,,,DEAD, DECEASED, Hes bleeding singing with the Feords....DEAD DEAD DEAD DEAD...and just for good measure DEAD,


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

Guilliman is technically still alive and it has never been implied that the missing primarchs are twins. 

We don't know how Dorn died other than something about a thousand screaming voices so I'd like to think he pulled a Corax despite what has been stated and despite losing a hand. Apparently there is a fluff inconsistency regarding his death as well.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> Guilliman is technically still alive and it has never been implied that the missing primarchs are twins.


i was referring to the alpha legion and even though Gulliman is in stasis, from my understanding he is still dead, just the stasis chamber is holding off the decay of death. No one knows if Alpharius and Omeagon are alive dead or something else entirely..


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

gothik said:


> i was referring to the alpha legion and even though Gulliman is in stasis, from my understanding he is still dead, just the stasis chamber is holding off the decay of death. No one knows if Alpharius and Omeagon are alive dead or something else entirely..


My bad, I thought I saw Alpharius in the list.

The naysayers say Gully is dead. The rest say he's a heartbeat away from death. 

I'm of the opinion that given time out of stasis, his primarch physiology would recover from his wound.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I'm not of that opinion, but it proves if you likes the Ultras or not. That simple thingy, it just boils down to that.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

Dorn being dead or not dead is up for opinion, the newest sourcse regarding Dorn states two things.

1) Dorn would be dragged down beneath a sea of a thousand screaming voices and hands (Curze's vision of his brothers upon meeting them)
2) After the assault aboard the bridge of the chaos ship they found an escape pod with Dorn's full battle armor, his wargear, and one of his skeletal fist. Nothing else.

The novel "Space marine" of ian wattson is older, for the most part is non-canon. As many of the elements in it have been removed from the 40k mythos entirely, such as squats, zoats, etc. 

So tell me, why is it you believe Dorn is "dead" and not simply missing as most of the others are?

P.S. I also am of those that believe Gullieman is alive within stasis and if removed would survive, or has been healing.


----------



## spanner94ezekiel (Jan 6, 2011)

Malus Darkblade said:


> I'm of the opinion that given time out of stasis, his primarch physiology would recover from his wound.


Which would beg the question "then why not just break the stasis field?"

To me, Guilleman is like Schrodinger's Cat - completely fucked.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Dorn is dead I guess if not he is without hands, which is a pretty pointless living unless you have them replaced. Still I go for the old thingy as it's better than stupid speculation. Dorn is dead kept in alabaster, and his hands is kept in alabaster. It's just better than the other ideas about him combined. Of course I was speculating with the Primarchs all suddenly coming back to life.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

Lux said:


> Dorn being dead or not dead is up for opinion, the newest sourcse regarding Dorn states two things.
> 
> 1) Dorn would be dragged down beneath a sea of a thousand screaming voices and hands
> 2) After the assault aboard the bridge of the chaos ship they found an escape pod with Dorn's full battle armor, his wargear, and one of his skeletal fist. Nothing else.
> ...


i am guessing seeing as the currant fluff states that his hand is encased in Amber aboard the Phalanx is a pretty good clue, plus the last time a Dorn is alive thread started the general conscencious is that he is dead. 

and i also believe that if Dorn was stiill alive then he would have made some sort of appearance before now, he was the Emperors original Champion, the Praetorian, with the death of the Emperor, almost entering into a second civil war and his anger towards Perturabo there is no way he would allow himself to be dragged kicking and screaming into some dark abyss. 

IF they retconn it and say that he simply is somewhere else, or that he is alive and living in some isolation away from the trials of the Imperium, which seeing as its become some sort of Despot dream far removed from the dream of the Emperor i doubt Dorn would have deliberatly stayed away, no matter where he was sent, then i will appologise.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

Beaviz81 said:


> Dorn is dead I guess if not he is without hands, which is a pretty pointless living unless you have them replaced. Still I go for the old thingy as it's better than stupid speculation. Dorn is dead kept in alabaster, and his hands is kept in alabaster. It's just better than the other ideas about him combined. Of course I was speculating with the Primarchs all suddenly coming back to life.


Except he is not without hands, they found an escape pod with his wargear, his empty armor and a single skeletal fist. They never found his body, or his other fist, additionally the source you are using that states he is dead "Space marine" is non-canon in present day.

While other canon sources leave his fate open ended and do not pronounce him dead or found for that matter.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

gothik said:


> i am guessing seeing as the currant fluff states that his hand is encased in Amber aboard the Phalanx is a pretty good clue, plus the last time a Dorn is alive thread started the general conscencious is that he is dead.
> 
> and i also believe that if Dorn was stiill alive then he would have made some sort of appearance before now, he was the Emperors original Champion, the Praetorian, with the death of the Emperor, almost entering into a second civil war and his anger towards Perturabo there is no way he would allow himself to be dragged kicking and screaming into some dark abyss.
> 
> IF they retconn it and say that he simply is somewhere else, or that he is alive and living in some isolation away from the trials of the Imperium, which seeing as its become some sort of Despot dream far removed from the dream of the Emperor i doubt Dorn would have deliberatly stayed away, no matter where he was sent, then i will appologise.


By that logic, corax, russ, vulkan and every missing primarch is dead. You are specifically singling out Dorn from the rest of them and pronouncing him dead, when you have no sources to back up your claim aside from your guessing.

It is your opinion, not fact. Please do not spread it as though it were fact, when it is indeed just your own theory/belief.

Thank you.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I'm a fan of the Imperial Fists, and I think he is dead. I mean they are the posterboys of being boring yet practical in the field. They shall be predictable yet always competent in the field. But I hate the speculation about Dorn being alive and not doing anything. We already have too many Primarches who are that already we don't need any more. I don't like the thought about just adding baseless speculation just because something in general have been withdrawn and is considered non-canon. I prefer Dorn being dead, he beside Guilliman and maybe the lion could turn the IOM around and turn it into a second golden age.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

this coming from someone who states wildcard theories? wow pot and kettle springs to mind. everything i have ever read on the subject be it in books, on other sites or in GW cannon say that Dorn is dead. 

You can believe Dorn is alive all you want that is your opinion but i believe he is dead, and it is not anything of the sort. It is stated that Russ, Corax, Vulkan and the Khan are in the eye somewhere. 

Nowhere does it state that Dorn is missing or anywhere else Lux, it is widely believed that he, like most of the other Primarchs by the general populace of the Imperium is dead, and as for spreading what is fact and not. i think maybe you need to take a look at some of your own posts, which in thier constuct are YOUR beliefs but not fact. 

I am stating my opinion and others are free to agree or disagree with it and i was not spreading it as fact, it is a general held consensace that Dorn, unlike the missing Primarchs is dead...something that is fact not a wild belief


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

gothik said:


> this coming from someone who states wildcard theories? wow pot and kettle springs to mind. everything i have ever read on the subject be it in books, on other sites or in GW cannon say that Dorn is dead.
> 
> You can believe Dorn is alive all you want that is your opinion but i believe he is dead, and it is not anything of the sort. It is stated that Russ, Corax, Vulkan and the Khan are in the eye somewhere.
> 
> ...


It is comical...tell me what source, what line are you using from what book to back up your "Facts" that Dorn is objectively dead? I will tell you this right now you wont be able to provide a quote, and or line from any canon book that states he is dead.

It is purely your opinion, and you seem to have an issue accepting that it is purely just an opinion and not fact.

I once again ask you, provide a source, provide a quote from a canon book stating he is dead. You can't.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

We are all three conflicting opinions about fluff Lux, it's leads nowhere as neither can prove or disprove the other guy(s), lets just move on with it and agree to disagree.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

Beaviz81 said:


> We are all three conflicting opinions about fluff Lux, it's leads nowhere as neither can prove or disprove the other guy(s), lets just move on with it and agree to disagree.


This is likely the best course of action, thank you for mentioning this.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

i suspect you are quoting from a story named Rise of the Tau, also going off other rumours that he is a member of the Companions who guard the Golden Throne, so if Dorn is still alive as you seem to believe yourself then why would he let the father he so loved die? why would he have let the Imperium decay into what it is, 

dear me.

Rogal Dorn - + INDEX ASTARTES + - The Bolter and Chainsword

Rogal Dorn

from Lexicanum:

Rogal Dorn died fighting on board a Chaos ship, after attacking a Black Crusade fleet with a vastly outnumbered force. Seeing the importance of attacking the enemy fleet while they were still preparing he relied on hit-and-run attacks until his reinforcements could arrive. Dorn died on board the Despoiler Class Battleship Sword of Sacrilege after leading a desperate attack on its bridge. His remains were recovered and his engraved skeletal hand is kept in stasis by his chapter.[2]
Dorn's skeleton without his hands is kept within a chapel, and embedded in clear amber contoured to the body form of the Primarch himself. Dorn's skeletal fists are kept within two shrines, the bones intricately engraved with the heraldry of all the Chapter's previous Masters. Only the Chapter Master has the right to engrave his name upon the bones. Each bone corresponds to former commanders. Left hand, the first metacarpal: Lords Bronwin Abermort, Maximus Thane, Kalman Flodensbog, the first phalanx of the thumb, Ambrosian Spactor, etc.[5]


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

No need to flame Gothik, I respect the opinion of Lux, I don't agree with it, but I respect that he think Dorn is still alive, and we can't disprove it. So let it sail. Everyone have their opinion of fluff f.ex. if you want me to brand you an idiot tell me the wolves on Fenris was humans once. He has his opinion, I respect it.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

gothik said:


> i suspect you are quoting from a story named Rise of the Tau, also going off other rumours that he is a member of the Companions who guard the Golden Throne, so if Dorn is still alive as you seem to believe yourself then why would he let the father he so loved die? why would he have let the Imperium decay into what it is,
> 
> dear me.
> 
> ...


You're quoting Bolter and Chainsword....I don't know if this is serious or very skilled humor. Additionally as I stated before, that website is sourcing Ian Wattson's "SPACE MARINE", which is NON CANON.

But I suppose you just choose to read what you want right?


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

i wwas doing nothing of the sort, he asked me to prove a quote that is what i did sorry if it was seen as something else


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

There is definitely wiggle room to think most of the primarchs are still alive, but more so that they are dead. Based on the fact that Black Library has conjured many "interesting" aspects to the lore... it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility that an author or even more directly by GW that they all of a sudden make fluff support their living status.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

gothik said:


> i wwas doing nothing of the sort, he asked me to prove a quote that is what i did sorry if it was seen as something else


You quoted a website, that sourced Ian Wattson's non canon "Space marine" for the quote. 

But yeah, I disagree with you as that source is no longer canon and is in conflict with newer sources that state they only ever found his fist.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Some dogs are best to not awaken, the Primarches is such a thingy.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

anyway...back to the OP, i was wondering a few moments ago that if only Azreal and a few select members know about the Lion sleeping in the rock, why keep it from thier brothers?, after all surely the knowledge that the Lion is not missing or deceased but merely in a coma and asleep would bolster thier spirits? i can see why they won't say that Luthor is a mumbling wreck crying for the Lions forgiveness deep in the rock but why keep the Lion secret? surely with all they have been through the Dark Angels need that kind of Morale booster.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Yeah that would be wise spread the knowledge so that the ones that threads away from the light of the Emperor even amongst the Dark Angels. That's the equal of shooting yourself in your foot and giving very good information to the enemy. They are secretive for a reason.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

Beaviz81 said:


> Yeah that would be wise spread the knowledge so that the ones that threads away from the light of the Emperor even amongst the Dark Angels. That's the equal of shooting yourself in your foot and giving very good information to the enemy. They are secretive for a reason.


True and when it comes to the hunt for the fallen, they have been known to desert those they were working with to get thier quarry. Is it true that they also ummmm how to put this, get rid of those outside of the DA who stumble upon thier hunt for a fallen. 

For example i read somewhere that whilst working with the Black Templars they discovered a fallen and to stop news of this reaching other chapters/high lords they destroyed a Black Templars ship? If this is true then wouldn't that make them boarderline between what the Inquisition would class as loyal and heretic? 

Just when the powers on Terra or the Inquisition think they have enough to investigate the Angels per sa something happens to the evidence....maybe they have just become so paranoid about keeping secrets within secrets they seem to have lost the essential essence that made them the First Legion originally


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I don't doubt the loyalty of the DA for one bit. They are basically the trope-namer of good is not nice, that much I'm certain of. And yeah Gothik we seem to basically view the fluff in the same way. Sleeping dogs shall lie, speculation is just that and so on. I suspect we could gladly and giddily drink together for hours while discussing fluff with only minor differences, if we were to meet and so on.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

Beaviz81 said:


> I don't doubt the loyalty of the DA for one bit. They are basically the trope-namer of good is not nice, that much I'm certain of. And yeah Gothik we seem to basically view the fluff in the same way. Sleeping dogs shall lie, speculation is just that and so on. I suspect we could gladly and giddily drink together for hours while discussing fluff with only minor differences, if we were to meet and so on.


LOL when i lived in York a couple of the lads at GW York came to the pub i drank in and i think we did that, although no one else knew what we were talking about, its thank to them and the people on here that what knowledge i have has been expanded, I started the hobby back in the 80s and was a fantasy fan its only been the last 15 years that i got into 40K.

So if u ever come this way and head to Kent lemme know, will take u up on that offer. would be an interesting discussion night thats for certain.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

gothik said:


> LOL when i lived in York a couple of the lads at GW York came to the pub i drank in and i think we did that, although no one else knew what we were talking about, its thank to them and the people on here that what knowledge i have has been expanded, I started the hobby back in the 80s and was a fantasy fan its only been the last 15 years that i got into 40K.
> 
> So if u ever come this way and head to Kent lemme know, will take u up on that offer. would be an interesting discussion night thats for certain.


I will gladly take you both up on that offer, let us converge at the local pup where we may engage in menial banter while discussing 40k lore with one another over brews and ciders.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I would be honored to. Hehe, maybe first a match with Kent then discussing a combination of football and WH40k at the local pub. I have always been very including if someone else overhears and barges in when discussing either subject, even if a total stranger.

My background is I'm a child of the 90's so defense is key for me either in fluff or in football (I saw Germany win the WC in 1990 with Andreas Brehme as my first idol) and I fancy boring and practical ideas over anything. I mean fancy and practical and I suspect a major weakness, as you can't be awesome without risk.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

being the only girl in my year at school that turned up for a sports day wearing a rangers kit, when everyone else was wearing girly girly stuff i had some interesting dscussions with one of the PE Teachers who was an avid Leeds fan and wanted to know why i supported a scottish team and not an english team.

One of the best nights i had was with my "Bro" who has emigratted to Canada now but in a Bar in Glasgow, cheering the Gers on, then sitting down after having a heated but friendly discussion with some German fans...was fun.

Like i said anytime, PM me details and as and when we will sort summit out could be an interesting evening to say the least, seeing as i got my other half to wear a Rangers shirt to her works comic relieff day and she is showing an interest in 40K i could be on a winning streak


----------



## Malus Darkblade (Jan 8, 2010)

spanner94ezekiel said:


> Which would beg the question "then why not just break the stasis field?"
> 
> To me, Guilleman is like Schrodinger's Cat - completely fucked.


Because you're not going to risk your most precious possession especially when no one other than the Emperor knows of what a Primrach is capable of. 

But we as readers have somewhat of a clue.

Also I am glad I could do some of cupid's work with this thread.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I often wear football-jerseys at schools. The only stuff I won't wear is Manure-jerseys and I won't crossdress for obvious reasons.

I faced a case where I wondered if my first cousin was a traitor due to him being trained by Vålerenga and not Strømsgodset and I felt he should have loyalty to the latter. He showed loyalty to the former and is now a fan. I can understand that.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

Malus Darkblade said:


> Because you're not going to risk your most precious possession especially when no one other than the Emperor knows of what a Primrach is capable of.
> 
> But we as readers have somewhat of a clue.
> 
> Also I am glad I could do some of cupid's work with this thread.


LOL lolol yeah new name for you Malus lol.

I think perhapes some UMs hope that he is slowley healing but deep down know he is not....still the many pilgrims that come to Macragge to see the Primarch, they believe it and maybe the UMs foster that belief because it gives mortals hope


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

gothik said:


> got to admit though, until the Heresy came out those little words "he was waiting to see who won" certainly made people wonder for a long time about the Lions motives. Until a decent HH Dark Angels novel comes out, i don't think the Lion was a traitor in waiting vs he was one of the good guys is going to go away.
> Gotta give Gav Thorpe credit for that one.


Problem is, people often focus on that one line to the exclusion of the rest of the book.

Astelan doesn't come off as a dependable narrator. He is inconsistent, prone to changing the subject when cornered by Boreas, bases his most damning decisions on rumor, and ultimately condemns the Lion for the same actions that he claims he is within his rights to commit at the very beginning of the book.

I'll be more than glad to provide specific citations if anyone is truly interested.  



HOGGLORD said:


> Oh, P.S. your awesome, huge legions have been split into many tiny little chapters ...


Ironically, the newest Codex implies that the reason why the High Lords don't use Dark Angels Gene-seed is because they suspect them of operating as a secret Legion.




gothik said:


> anyway...back to the OP, i was wondering a few moments ago that if only Azreal and a few select members know about the Lion sleeping in the rock, why keep it from thier brothers?


That's the problem: no one knows the Lion is still alive. Both the 2nd edition and 6th edition Codices made this explicitly clear, I would think.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

thanks Phoebus


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Beaviz81 said:


> I don't doubt the loyalty of the DA for one bit. They are basically the trope-namer of good is not nice, that much I'm certain of. And yeah Gothik we seem to basically view the fluff in the same way. Sleeping dogs shall lie, speculation is just that and so on. I suspect we could gladly and giddily drink together for hours while discussing fluff with only minor differences, if we were to meet and so on.


Thats pretty dogmatic I think. Afterall, half the Dark Angels turned traitor. Chaos used cultural influences to seperate the traitors from the Imperium. I am unsure about the loyalty that the Lion and the Dark Angels truly have for the Imperium. The Lion is after all independent minded, and I'm not sure how it ultimately benefited the Lion in remaining loyal to the Imperium, other than he had a good heart. The other loyalist primarchs believed in something more than themselves. Even Guilliman destroyed his empire for the sake of Imperial justice and adherence to limiting any power in the Imperium. The Lion desired power... this much is true at least before the true magnitude of the Heresy unfolded. Though there is nothing that limits the Lion's vision of the Imperium there also nothing that supports or shows his vision of the Imperium. 



Phoebus said:


> Astelan doesn't come off as a dependable narrator. He is inconsistent, prone to changing the subject when cornered by Boreas, bases his most damning decisions on rumor, and ultimately condemns the Lion for the same actions that he claims he is within his rights to commit at the very beginning of the book.


Astellan uses his view of the Lion during the Great Crusade (one of his primary examples is the Lion's use of cold tactics to win a battle against the greenskins). I'm surprised you use rumor as his primary bases. When it comes to the subject of a narration I think its fair to say any narrator is inconsistent, or not dependable. And with this current subject I think it is done purposely for either side to claim that. The Lion had lived next to the influence of chaos since he was born. 

As a Dark Angels fan, I actually enjoy the idea of both possible sides to the Lion. :grin:


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

As a side note. I think the ending of _Angels of Darkness_ is interesting. It doesn't prove anything regarding the Lion, however it gives people an idea of the direction of the Dark Angels during the 40K time period. Though they are considered loyal, they have their own agenda, which seems to be more important and an obsession for them. The part where the loyal Dark Angels turn upon one another is a good indication of how the chapter would be if the chapter as a whole learned about the truths and secrets of their chapter.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Lux said:


> Additionally as I stated before, that website is sourcing Ian Wattson's "SPACE MARINE", which is NON CANON.


See I find this to be rather funny, as you throw the entire book out as non canon. However, doing that is your choice and done only to strengthen your opinion. How many sources have you cited to counter it? One? None?



Lux said:


> But I suppose you just choose to read what you want right?


And this I find hilarious, coming from someone who generates absolute shit 'theories' based off nothing and can never back anything up with sources.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Well some people just provokes. I mean I have had plenty of run-in with people that thinks the Dark Angels are secretly traitors, people that thinks Dorn is alive, people that thinks wolves on Fenris was once people, people who thinks the IOM as stupid evil, people that give harsh reviews without good reason and such. Plus what you like is the berserk button of someone else.

F.ex. I like to think you can interpret codexes, not everyone is of that belief. That might lead to trouble.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

darkreever said:


> See I find this to be rather funny, as you throw the entire book out as non canon. However, doing that is your choice and done only to strengthen your opinion. How many sources have you cited to counter it? One? None?
> 
> 
> And this I find hilarious, coming from someone who generates absolute shit 'theories' based off nothing and can never back anything up with sources.


Darkreever did you know it is not nice to flame others, or to use profanity? Is against the TOS...you being a mod I thought you would know this.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

in think it might be common knowledge that the Lion had aspirations of being Warmaster, and i am not a big fan of the Lion, to be honest for a long time i thought he might have gone the other way, but saying that i do like the way they have developed the Dark Angels as a Legion with secrets among secrets and i was wondering if when a young aspirant become a full Dark Angel, are they let into the secret of the Fallen or is that left to the First and second companies?


----------



## Over Two Meters Tall! (Nov 1, 2010)

gothik said:


> in think it might be common knowledge that the Lion had aspirations of being Warmaster, and i am not a big fan of the Lion, to be honest for a long time i thought he might have gone the other way, but saying that i do like the way they have developed the Dark Angels as a Legion with secrets among secrets and i was wondering if when a young aspirant become a full Dark Angel, are they let into the secret of the Fallen or is that left to the First and second companies?


I would think your First or Second company theory is more accurate for the Dark Angels, if the legion/chapter followed The Order as was written in Descent of Angels. Most of the lower-level knights seemed to be on a need-to-know basis about everything.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

gothik said:


> in think it might be common knowledge that the Lion had aspirations of being Warmaster, and i am not a big fan of the Lion, to be honest for a long time i thought he might have gone the other way, but saying that i do like the way they have developed the Dark Angels as a Legion with secrets among secrets and i was wondering if when a young aspirant become a full Dark Angel, are they let into the secret of the Fallen or is that left to the First and second companies?


It's fluff that states the secrets of a chapter will become more and more clear to an initiate the deeper he gets. At scout level the initiate gains a set of keys, at Space Marine-level, he is to know that some of his chapter betrayed Empy (speculation), at sergeant he is to know the Fallen exists (more speculation), at lieutenant he is told that half the chapter once split and so on.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

figures....keep the secrets in house and at the top, loose tounges and all that


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Yeah which is why when heresy happens it's so terrible, you can commit from the top down.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Lux said:


> Darkreever did you know it is not nice to flame others, or to use profanity? Is against the TOS...you being a mod I thought you would know this.


Using profanity on Heresy against our rules? Lux have you ever read the Heresy rules?

Ive most definitely not been 'flaming' you, I find your wild theories to be shit, especially because you never actually support them with facts, merely your opinion.


However, as far as how I, or any other member of the Heresy staff should act, well I made a thread about that, perhaps you would like to contribute your opinion to it.


----------



## locustgate (Dec 6, 2009)

darkreever said:


> Using profanity on Heresy against our rules? Lux have you ever read the Heresy rules?
> 
> Ive most definitely not been 'flaming' you, I find your wild theories to be shit, especially because you never actually support them with facts, merely your opinion.
> 
> ...


Just make a rule saying people can't respond to lux. Eventually she will starve and must migrate to another forum or starve.


----------



## High_Seraph (Aug 28, 2009)

Beaviz the information about the Fallen is only revealed to the Ravenwing and Deathwing. Everyone below that, who is not a Master, is not allowed anything in relation to them excepting Interrogator-Chaplains and Librarians who are special cases. 

The Ravenwing itself does not know about the Fallen only the Master and his Black Knights are privy to that knowledge and they guard against it spreading as the men making the bulk of the Ravenwing think they are just traitors that need to be caught and interrogated. 

You only really learn of the in the Deathwing when you are inducted to those ranks.

Interrogator-Chaplains only gain that rank when they have borne witness to the Fallen and are judged worthy by Librarians and others fit to bear that knowledge. Librarians know about them as they help the Interrogator-Chaplains in weakening the mind and sifting truth from fallacy in the Fallen's mind. Sources are in the 6th ed Codex.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

they go a long way to keep thier in house secrets, so it really is a fear that has become one of two things, obsession and paranoia, Obsessed that they find all those responsible for the fall and paranoid about anyone outside the ecehlons thaty High Seraph stated finding out. 

What happens when they finally capture every Fallen on thier list? that would be an interesting answer as to what direction they would then take


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

They would likely try to function like a normal, chapter. An interesting question would be if they would come clean or not. I guess not, as that's not in their interest.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

ooooo sounds like conspiracy will be with them for a long time


----------



## MEQinc (Dec 12, 2010)

gothik said:


> What happens when they finally capture every Fallen on thier list? that would be an interesting answer as to what direction they would then take


Do they actually have a list? In other words, will they ever be truly certain that their are no more Fallen out there? I think the answer to that is no, such is the secrecy and paranoia of the Dark Angels that their hunt will never end, even if the prey ceases to exist anymore.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

You know what happens to predators which prey doesn't exist anymore?


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

darkreever said:


> Using profanity on Heresy against our rules? Lux have you ever read the Heresy rules?
> 
> Ive most definitely not been 'flaming' you, I find your wild theories to be shit, especially because you never actually support them with facts, merely your opinion.
> 
> ...


As far as I know, this website and the forums that compose it are suppose to be welcoming to all genres of mindsets as long as they do not violate the TOS.

Yet you are openly claiming my theories are "shit", how does that reflect onto the Heresy Forums as a whole? You are not a mere poster, you are a "Senior Moderator" and yet you interact with the posters in such a manner as this?

You do not have to like, agree or even respond to my post/theories yet you do. Furthermore you as a senior moderator respond by calling my theories "shit", one would think that the level of professionalism displayed by administration staff of this website would be higher.

Truly one would think that an individual who is appointed to be a representative of the Heresy Forums image would take better care in how they present their self, rather then calling the very posters that keep this forum alive "shit".


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Lux said:


> As far as I know, this website and the forums that compose it are suppose to be welcoming to all genres of mindsets as long as they do not violate the TOS.


Indeed Heresy is supposed to be a welcoming place, and as far as I have ever seen it is. We do not limit people in what words they can use like other forums do, we have specific sections that allow members to approach rather taboo topic (there aren't any other 40k forums I have seen that allow for some of the shit that goes on in World News or The Endgame), the staff is relatively lax, and members are generally treated as adults until they decide otherwise.



Lux said:


> Yet you are openly claiming my theories are "shit",


Yes I am, because I do not agree with your 'theories' nor the way in which you claim to support them. Your theories are your opinion, I and any other member are more than allowed to disagree with them or find them to be utter shit.



Lux said:


> how does that reflect onto the Heresy Forums as a whole?


What? That I do not agree with your opinions and find the theories your claiming to be rather bad?



Lux said:


> You are not a mere poster, you are a "Senior Moderator" and yet you interact with the posters in such a manner as this?
> 
> You do not have to like, agree or even respond to my post/theories yet you do. Furthermore you as a senior moderator respond by calling my theories "shit", one would think that the level of professionalism displayed by administration staff of this website would be higher.


Being a member of the staff does not preclude me from giving my honest opinion. You are not a member of the Heresy staff nor are you in charge of how we are supposed to act or present ourselves, so please don't try to act as though you do know.



Lux said:


> rather then calling the very posters that keep this forum alive "shit".


Now your being a bit obtuse; I never called you shit, I called your theories shit and there is a huge difference. By calling your theories shit, I am making it known that I do not agree with them, and from that I do not agree with your opinion. If I called you shit, then I would be insulting you; you can take me not agreeing with your theories as an insult, but that is clearly not the case.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

darkreever said:


> Indeed Heresy is supposed to be a welcoming place, and as far as I have ever seen it is. We do not limit people in what words they can use like other forums do, we have specific sections that allow members to approach rather taboo topic (there aren't any other 40k forums I have seen that allow for some of the shit that goes on in World News or The Endgame), the staff is relatively lax, and members are generally treated as adults until they decide otherwise.
> 
> 
> Yes I am, because I do not agree with your 'theories' nor the way in which you claim to support them. Your theories are your opinion, I and any other member are more than allowed to disagree with them or find them to be utter shit.
> ...


You are a moderator, and I do speak with the pretense that I do "know" how you are suppose to act as a moderator on this forum. So I'm going to ask you again darkreever, do you in your opinion believe that it is acceptable for you as a Senior moderator to "disagree" with another Heresy Forum member's post by calling "it" "shit"?


----------



## normtheunsavoury (Mar 20, 2008)

Lux said:


> You are a moderator, and I do speak with the pretense that I do "know" how you are suppose to act as a moderator on this forum. So I'm going to ask you again darkreever, do you in your opinion believe that it is acceptable for you as a Senior moderator to "disagree" with another Heresy Forum member's post by calling "it" "shit"?


I am surprised you came to that conclusion Lux, through my own Inquisitorial research of the document, which I have studied for many years now, I came to a very different conclusion, I think you may be.... losing your ability to.... read between the.... lines.


----------



## zerachiel76 (Feb 12, 2010)

Lux said:


> You're quoting Bolter and Chainsword....I don't know if this is serious or very skilled humor. Additionally as I stated before, that website is sourcing Ian Wattson's "SPACE MARINE", which is NON CANON.
> 
> But I suppose you just choose to read what you want right?


To be fair, the thing about Dorn about the Despoiler Battleship is taken from Index Astartes II which is still Canon. Ergo you're wrong Lux.

The passage quoted directly from IA II reads:

"The final report by, the serving Chief Librarian commended their souls to the Emperor before Dorn led a desperate attack on the Sword's bridge. There was no Chaos attack on Cadia. The Imperial Navy arrived in force while the traitors were licking their wounds. Released by the sudden disappearance of Ulthwe, Phalanx and the Imperial Fists led the Imperial Counter Strike. They caught the Chaos fleet in the midst of repairs and routed it decisively. Even without their Primarch the Imperial Fists were able to get to the right place at the right time. They boarded the Sword of Sacrilege before it could flee and _recovered what remained of Rogal Dorn. His engraved skeletal hand continues to be maintained in stasis._"

Now I appreciate that not all IA articles are still canon having been superceded by the HH books but this article is still canon as non of the HH stories covering the Imperial Fists contradict the IA article.

If you want to argue that it doesn't say for certain that he's dead consider this: Would a fleet just sit there in space casually making repairs with a live enemy Primarch on board? Ok possibly Corax would have hidden as this was his style but none of the others would have. They would have rampaged through the traitor fleets until either they were dead or the enemy was. I doubt therefore that Rogal Dorn was alive at this time.

In addition the article specifically says that they recovered what remained of him. Would a live Primarch only have remains on board an enemy vessel? If he'd been so badly injured his could be described as remains on board a friendly vessel then yes I could possibly accept he was alive but badly injured. The way it is worded however clearly shows that "what remained" means he was dead and had been mutilated, possibly dismembered.

I don't know why you felt that you had to become so trolly about this Lux considering your many theories are often far more far fetched than this.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

zerachiel76 said:


> To be fair, the thing about Dorn about the Despoiler Battleship is taken from Index Astartes II which is still Canon. Ergo you're wrong Lux.
> 
> The passage quoted directly from IA II reads:
> 
> ...


IT actually does contradict the newest sources which detail Dorn's fate, in the article you are referencing it states they only found his Fist aboard the ship and nothing else. Even in this example it does not state in any way he is dead, merely all they found was a skeletal fist and nothing else. The issue of if he is dead is merely left open to the reader, there is no objective answer here.

As for why your example is in conflict with newer sources, is that the newest source states they recovered an escape pod from one of their downed ally cruisers. In that escape pod they found all of the primarchs armor, wargear, and a single skeletal fist. So yes it is in conflict with a newer source in regards to what happened to Dorn, either way neither confirms him dead but rather missing.


----------



## zerachiel76 (Feb 12, 2010)

Lux said:


> IT actually does contradict the newest sources which detail Dorn's fate, in the article you are referencing it states they only found his Fist aboard the ship and nothing else. Even in this example it does not state in any way he is dead, merely all they found was a skeletal fist and nothing else. The issue of if he is dead is merely left open to the reader, there is no objective answer here.
> 
> As for why your example is in conflict with newer sources, is that the newest source states they recovered an escape pod from one of their downed ally cruisers. In that escape pod they found all of the primarchs armor, wargear, and a single skeletal fist. So yes it is in conflict with a newer source in regards to what happened to Dorn, either way neither confirms him dead but rather missing.


I quoted the article by reading it and typing exactly what it says:

".. and recovered what remained of Rogal Dorn. His engraved skeletal hand continues to be maintained in stasis..."

This does not state they only recovered his hand, it quite clearly states they recovered his remains. It's in black and white, no wiggle room, no room to argue. It states they recovered his remains. 

It doesn't state that these remains are limited to his skeletal fist, only that this particular body part has been maintained in stasis.

Also please confirm what these newer sources are? Book names or articles please otherwise I'm quoting from published GW canon material and you're trying to disagree with it by using your opinion. Not the best move you could make to try to get people to agree that your point is correct.


----------



## Protoss119 (Aug 8, 2010)

“The Primarch [Rogal Dorn] fell in battle against the forces of Chaos, resisting a Black Crusade – one of the periodic and devastating incursions by the Traitor Legions from their hellish sanctuary worlds within the Eye of Terror. Dorn and three companies of the Imperial Fists mounted a masterful series of boarding actions against the crusade’s warships, crippling drives and life support systems and even capturing weapons batteries and turning them against other Chaos vessels. Eventually however, the enemy cornered Dorn and his warriors as he launched a final attack on the bridge of the Chaos flagship. None survived to tell the glorious tale of the Primarch’s last stand. The Chapter’s Chief Librarian found his Primarch’s body on the bridge in a chilling reprise of Dorn’s discovery of the wounded Emperor, and bore him away before the stricken flagship escaped back to the infernal realm of the Eye of Terror.” –Deathwatch: Rites of Battle, pg. 45

He's dead, Jim.


----------



## zerachiel76 (Feb 12, 2010)

Protoss119 said:


> “The Primarch [Rogal Dorn] fell in battle against the forces of Chaos, resisting a Black Crusade – one of the periodic and devastating incursions by the Traitor Legions from their hellish sanctuary worlds within the Eye of Terror. Dorn and three companies of the Imperial Fists mounted a masterful series of boarding actions against the crusade’s warships, crippling drives and life support systems and even capturing weapons batteries and turning them against other Chaos vessels. Eventually however, the enemy cornered Dorn and his warriors as he launched a final attack on the bridge of the Chaos flagship. None survived to tell the glorious tale of the Primarch’s last stand. The Chapter’s Chief Librarian found his Primarch’s body on the bridge in a chilling reprise of Dorn’s discovery of the wounded Emperor, and bore him away before the stricken flagship escaped back to the infernal realm of the Eye of Terror.” –Deathwatch: Rites of Battle, pg. 45
> 
> He's dead, Jim.


Excellent, some more recent canon fluff on this subject to discuss rather than simply Lux's opinions. We know that the Imperial Fists found his body in an unknown state, and not just his fist and his armour.

One thing I wonder is to do with this line: " in a chilling reprise of Dorn’s discovery of the wounded Emperor,". Since the Emperor wasn't dead when Dorn found him, does the fact this is a reprise (a repetition) imply Dorn wasn't dead either, since if Dorn was dead it couldn't have been a reprise as the circumstances were different.

This could have simply been a grammatical error in using the word reprise, or it could mean that the circumstances were exactly the same in that they found Dorn's badly wounded body and escaped with it before the Sword of Sacrilege escaped back to the warp, just as Dorn did with the Emperor's body aboard the Vengeful Spirit.


----------



## Galahad (Dec 21, 2006)

Lux said:


> You are a moderator, and I do speak with the pretense that I do "know" how you are suppose to act as a moderator on this forum. So I'm going to ask you again darkreever, do you in your opinion believe that it is acceptable for you as a Senior moderator to "disagree" with another Heresy Forum member's post by calling "it" "shit"?


Let's settle this so the thread can continue.
I'm an admin, if you don't know, that means the mods are essentially answerable to me.

*I* believe that it is acceptable for my moderators to disagree with another forum member's post, and that if they believe something is shit they have the right to express that opinion, so long as it isn't a direct attack against a member.

Heresy welcomes everyone, but that doesn't mean we're obliged to be cuddly. We don't filter profanity because we treat our members as adults and expect them to behave as such. This means besides expecting them not to attack each other pointlessly, that we also expect you to be able to deal with people who don't agree with you and voice their opinions in the language and manner of your average adult.

Adults don't always use nice language to describe things they disagree with. 

There's a world of difference between attacking a person and using bad language to describe their opinions. He can call your opinions shit, but can't, for example, call you a shithead.

As far as I'm concerned, this part of the discussion is over and the thread should continue on its original subject. If you would like to continue this conversation, please feel free to PM me.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

If the Dark Angels maintain the secrecy about thier past and the acts of half thier legion i suppose it begs the question, what is going to happen if and when the Lion wakes up, aside from the Chapter Master and maybe a couple of others....no one else in the Dark Angels and thier successors know this and believe that the Lion is either possibly missing or more than likely dead.....how do those who they trusted with the intergrity of the First explain that one away...."Yeah well my brothers it was decided that for your own good we keep it away from you" thats one conversastion that i would love to be a fly on the wall for


----------



## MEQinc (Dec 12, 2010)

gothik said:


> aside from the Chapter Master and maybe a couple of others....no one else in the Dark Angels and thier successors know this


It`s been mentioned a couple of times in this thread already but it bears repeating. No one in the Dark Angels knows about the Lion. The *only* 'people' who know about it are the Watchers (and possibly Cypher but that's just speculation). The Chapter Master would be just as shocked as everybody else should the Lion wake up/be awoken.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

ckcrawford said:


> Thats pretty dogmatic I think. Afterall, half the Dark Angels turned traitor.


This might just be a technicality, but half the Dark Angels did not turn traitor. The training cadre (500+ Space Marines) that went with Luther, plus the 4,212 recruits that had been certified during the events of 'Fallen Angels', turned traitor. Treason is a conscious choice to go against the state/group/whatever that you had sworn allegiance to. No one that was trained after 'Fallen Angels' could have considered themselves either a member of the Legion, or a warrior sworn to the Emperor and the Lion.



> I am unsure about the loyalty that the Lion and the Dark Angels truly have for the Imperium.


I really don't get this. The Lion expresses his loyalties quite clearly in 'Fallen Angels', 'Savage Weapons', and 'The Lion'. His issue is that he's not sure his _other brothers_ can be trusted. Other loyalist Primarchs, such as Sanguinius and Corax, might be more idealistic; Guilliman might be more active in bringing about a different vision of the Imperium; and Dorn might be more vocal and passionate in expressing his loyalty to the Emperor. None of this, though, negates the stated loyalty of the Lion.



> The Lion is after all independent minded, and I'm not sure how it ultimately benefited the Lion in remaining loyal to the Imperium, other than he had a good heart. The other loyalist primarchs believed in something more than themselves.


How does it benefit the Khan, or Russ, or Vulkan? Why is it that we approach the Lion from a completely different perspective than other loyalist Primarchs?



> Even Guilliman destroyed his empire for the sake of Imperial justice and adherence to limiting any power in the Imperium.


No he didn't. He simply accepted the Emperor as his sovereign, which is precisely what each and every other Primarch did. The only difference is that he had Ultramar, whereas the rest (minus Dorn and Alpharius/Omegon) had individual planets. And, as we saw, Guilliman maintained control over Ultramar to the point where its contrast to the rest of the Imperium is _specifically qualified._ The fact that he didn't in any way, shape, or form "destroy" his empire is made abundantly clear by the fact that, post Calth, he is ready to declare independence and bring about "Imperium Secundus".



> The Lion desired power... this much is true at least before the true magnitude of the Heresy unfolded. Though there is nothing that limits the Lion's vision of the Imperium there also nothing that supports or shows his vision of the Imperium.


Sure there is. He qualifies it in 'The Lion'. He expressly rejects the idea that any Primarch rule in the place of the Emperor. His vision was the status quo.

You say that he desired power, but that was simply Horus' opinion. He also held the same opinion for Guilliman, but as we saw Roboute was in fact eminently pragmatic. He also held incorrect opinions about Russ. So why is it that he's right about the Lion? Isn't it just as easy to say that Horus, being burdened by his position, felt threatened by those Primarchs that were closest to him in ability, and that he saw threats in places where there might not be any? Isn't it interesting that the only true friend he had among the Primarchs, and the only one he is willing to accept as his better is the only one who doesn't display ANY ambition (and thus poses no threat to him)?



> Astellan uses his view of the Lion during the Great Crusade (one of his primary examples is the Lion's use of cold tactics to win a battle against the greenskins). I'm surprised you use rumor as his primary bases. When it comes to the subject of a narration I think its fair to say any narrator is inconsistent, or not dependable. And with this current subject I think it is done purposely for either side to claim that. The Lion had lived next to the influence of chaos since he was born.


No offense, but I don't see how you arrived at your conclusions.

His double standard has to do with his justifications for what he did on Tharsis versus what the Lion had to do during the Great Crusade. Astelan excuses his actions - which reduced a world from eight hundred million to two hundred million - as being within his rights as a Space Marine sworn to the Emperor. This was to _maintain his rule._ He passes judgment on the Lion for sacrificing half a million lives in order to finish a war against orks. You can certainly argue that Lion El'Jonson was cold-hearted, but you can't do so if you're Astelan. Not without coming off as an utter hypocrite.

Where the rumors are concerned, that is _precisely_ the justification he gives for attacking his fleet as it came over Caliban. He admits they had no real idea of what had happened during the Heresy, but claims they heard "rumors" that the Lion turned.

Sorry, but Astelan is simply not an objective or dependable narrator.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## High_Seraph (Aug 28, 2009)

MEQinc is correct. No one in the Chapter or its successors knows that Lion is sleeping there. The only one they know of who is hidden in The Rock Luther who ONLY the Supreme Grand Master's are aware of and whose very sword acts as the key to his cell where they try to gan a confession from him who refuses saying only the Lion can forgive him and he is already close. Page for the Dark Oracle and page 20 for the information about the ravenwing from the 6th ed codex.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

gothik said:


> in think it might be common knowledge that the Lion had aspirations of being Warmaster, ...


That's simply what Horus thought. See my response to ckcrawford, above.



> ... and i was wondering if when a young aspirant become a full Dark Angel, are they let into the secret of the Fallen or is that left to the First and second companies?


Here's how it works.

When you get into the Ravenwing (the Second Company), you are made privy to some secrets (it's not clarified which ones) regarding the Chapter's past. The Ravenwing are meant to hunt the Fallen, but they don't actually know this. The members of the Inner Circle within the Ravenwing (most notably, Grand Master Sammael) are the ones that do the actual capturing. Note that it's not actually a prerequisite to serve in the Ravenwing before you can serve in the Deathwing.

When you get into the Deathwing (the First Company), you learn about the Fallen. You find out that Luther and his followers turned against the Lion and the Emperor. The Deathwing, too, is focused on the Hunt, but they actually know what's going on and who their prey is. Past fluff, including the novel 'Ravenwing', has shown that Dark Angels who accidentally find out about the Fallen are recruited into the Deathwing. Personally, I think that's a stupid bag of shit that ignores the need for members of the First Company to, I don't know, be the Chapter's best and thus be able to battle centuries-old (if not millennia old) servants of the Ruinous Powers. I guess mind-wiping was not an option. 

Company Masters and the Grand Masters of the Chapter are always members of the Inner Circle.

Interrogator-Chaplains (not normal Chaplains) and Librarians are always members of the Inner Circle.

The level of knowledge afforded to a member of the Inner Circle varies by their position and experience. For instance, only a handful of individuals are supposed to know of Luther's continued existence (it used to be just the Supreme Grand Master of the Dark Angels, but Gav Thorpe has expanded that circle of trust... with every novel he wrote about this Chapter).

Note that members of the Inner Circle don't always wear obvious rank or colors. The Inner Circle can place its members to serve as Apothecaries, or as Sergeants within the Companies. They can thus monitor the ranks and ensure that the regular forces don't get too close to the truth.



Beaviz81 said:


> They would likely try to function like a normal, chapter. An interesting question would be if they would come clean or not. I guess not, as that's not in their interest.


For whatever reason, the Dark Angels go about calling themselves "Unforgiven"... which isn't exactly logical when you serve a paranoid Imperium that already distrusts you as an institution. I suppose if they really wanted to function as a normal Chapter they would simply drop the label and call it a day.



MEQinc said:


> Do they actually have a list? In other words, will they ever be truly certain that their are no more Fallen out there? I think the answer to that is no, such is the secrecy and paranoia of the Dark Angels that their hunt will never end, even if the prey ceases to exist anymore.


The only list they have is mentioned in 'Angels of Darkness': the 136 Space Marines who first swore allegiance to Luther.

I suppose if they really want to go into math-rage, they could always extrapolate the maximum number of recruits Luther could have generated between the Diamat Crusade and their return to Caliban. 4,712 plus Luther, plus however many they could crank out per training cycle. Then they could come up with the most conservative estimate for the traitors' casualties when they were bombarded on Caliban. And then, when the Dark Angels reach the magic number of captured Fallen (say it's 10,000), they call it a day. :wink:

But, in all honesty, it's not as if they catch Fallen that often. Remember this part from 'Angels of Darkness'?



> _"Underfoot, the dust was thick, having lain undisturbed for many years, perhaps decades or centuries."_


That's Astelan, being taken past the Memorial Gates on the Rock, enroute to the interrogation cells. Ergo, it's not like the Dark Angels have a reason to use this passage very often. My guess is, they're lucky to have caught a thousand Fallen since the end of the Heresy.


----------



## gothik (May 29, 2010)

MEQinc said:


> It`s been mentioned a couple of times in this thread already but it bears repeating. No one in the Dark Angels knows about the Lion. The *only* 'people' who know about it are the Watchers (and possibly Cypher but that's just speculation). The Chapter Master would be just as shocked as everybody else should the Lion wake up/be awoken.


Ahh for some reason i was always under the impression Azreal knew about the Lion....must remeber that for future referance....yes i suppose he would be and thanks for setting me straight....


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Phoebus said:


> This might just be a technicality, but half the Dark Angels did not turn traitor. The training cadre (500+ Space Marines) that went with Luther, plus the 4,212 recruits that had been certified during the events of 'Fallen Angels', turned traitor. Treason is a conscious choice to go against the state/group/whatever that you had sworn allegiance to. No one that was trained after 'Fallen Angels' could have considered themselves either a member of the Legion, or a warrior sworn to the Emperor and the Lion.


I don't believe thats a fair argument to conjure. Fallen Angels have been hunted and purposely hidden from mainstream imperium because they represent a corrupted part of the Dark Angels. Thats like saying my legs were corrupted with some disease. The cells that have been reproduced hence forth are not part of my body? Thats not true. They are indeed part of my body. The moment that I severe them from my body, I make the choice to save my body from the corruption. The traitors were not Fallen until they opened fire on the Lion and his fleet. It was at that moment a seperation was created to distinguish one from the other.




Phoebus said:


> I really don't get this. The Lion expresses his loyalties quite clearly in 'Fallen Angels', 'Savage Weapons', and 'The Lion'. His issue is that he's not sure his _other brothers_ can be trusted. Other loyalist Primarchs, such as Sanguinius and Corax, might be more idealistic; Guilliman might be more active in bringing about a different vision of the Imperium; and Dorn might be more vocal and passionate in expressing his loyalty to the Emperor. None of this, though, negates the stated loyalty of the Lion.


Thats very interesting how you say it. "His loyalty," in the 40K world we consider Guilliman and the Ultramarines to be the most loyal of chapters and so forth yet we forget the limits he set on the Imperium. Loyal is a very broad word. I'm sure Guilliman and most of the Imperial citizens deny his will against the Emperor's... and yet... the Emperor's will was so much grander. You say "different visions..." yet... how pissed would the Emperor be to learn of his son's with these "different visions," as you put it. I include the Lion because his mentality about his view of the Imperium is very interesting because we don't exactly know what he invisions. He believes he is loyal... So what? Magnus also believed he was loyal... however, does his will defy the Emperors? That is the question. The Lion's cold tactics are questionable indeed. Astellan may be full of shit... but if his will contradicts the Emperor's... The reason his tactics might be considered questionable is because of what I think about Dorn's reaction to Curze's execution towards traitors... He was appalled... and amazed at such horrible actions.... and yet they were traitors... think about Dorn's reaction against a primarch who sacrificed a city of loyalists... to pretty much make his record superior. Astellan defied the Lion and was sent to Caliban. What I take from this... is that the Lion seemed okay sacrificing the population to make himself look better. This is just an assumption, but the fact he was planning on gaining support for warmaster would support this. 

So you have the Lion's... "coldness..." as well as his tendency to mistrust practically everyone. As you said, he didn't know who to trust... which is oddly the same way he is with his legion. When thinking about his faults as a primarch and the fact that he considers himself loyal. One wonders what direction he would chose to lead the Imperium. Especially with the fact that the Emperor would have no say about the Imperium's direction after the Heresy. I assume that because he was nearly at full strength many would just accept his direction as the "view of the emperor." 

Same could be said about Guilliman too. The Emperor made Dorn commander of his armies... many will pause you there and claim that Dorn went mad with anger. However... does that truly make it right for someone to completely change the direction of the Emperor's dreams and will? There was a reason for it.




Phoebus said:


> How does it benefit the Khan, or Russ, or Vulkan? Why is it that we approach the Lion from a completely different perspective than other loyalist Primarchs?


Russ and Vulkan have a bond with the Emperor unlike other primarchs, as well as beefs against some or all of Horus' allies. Its funny you mention the Khan, because I believe Horus did mention he believed Khan would join him somewhere in the first four novels. Khan's motives though I completely agree are questionable.



Phoebus said:


> No he didn't. He simply accepted the Emperor as his sovereign, which is precisely what each and every other Primarch did. The only difference is that he had Ultramar, whereas the rest (minus Dorn and Alpharius/Omegon) had individual planets. And, as we saw, Guilliman maintained control over Ultramar to the point where its contrast to the rest of the Imperium is _specifically qualified._ The fact that he didn't in any way, shape, or form "destroy" his empire is made abundantly clear by the fact that, post Calth, he is ready to declare independence and bring about "Imperium Secundus".


Thats just not true. He lost a lot of himself as a "primarch" by splitting his legion, let alone making the realm of Ultramar a handful of planets. How can this not be a loss of power as a primarch? His legacy of the Ultramarines and the might empire of Ultramar were sacrificed. I just don't understand your logic. Are you saying that because he inherited the Imperium, the different names chapters got and the division of his empire into different empires makes it okay to say it doesn't matter anymore? Do you prefer the word "change" perhaps? Either way, the result is still the same, the Ultramarines and Ultramar are but a fraction of what they once were. 



Phoebus said:


> Sure there is. He qualifies it in 'The Lion'. He expressly rejects the idea that any Primarch rule in the place of the Emperor. His vision was the status quo.


Yet that is not very specific and very broad, especially when considering he wants to become Warmaster of the Imperium. The Lion may consider his intentions the same as the Emperor's or even say he is loyal to the Emperor, but when it comes down to it, is his vision the same as the Emperors?




Phoebus said:


> You say that he desired power, but that was simply Horus' opinion. He also held the same opinion for Guilliman, but as we saw Roboute was in fact eminently pragmatic. He also held incorrect opinions about Russ. So why is it that he's right about the Lion? Isn't it just as easy to say that Horus, being burdened by his position, felt threatened by those Primarchs that were closest to him in ability, and that he saw threats in places where there might not be any? Isn't it interesting that the only true friend he had among the Primarchs, and the only one he is willing to accept as his better is the only one who doesn't display ANY ambition (and thus poses no threat to him)?


Not really friend. It should be a fact considered by his own actions and not by Horus' opinion. He wanted to become Warmaster even though the Emperor gave Dorn control of his armies. The Lion assumed a lot about his ability to become warmaster, and yet is interesting is what the Emperor's view of the Lion actually was. The Emperor was known to bestow power on his favorite sons, and yet I've never seen the Emperor give him the respect he gave Dorn, Horus, or even Guilliman.



Phoebus said:


> No offense, but I don't see how you arrived at your conclusions.


I can't help but feel a bit slighted. I believe you do. I know your smart enough to see why I said this is a story about his opinion. Was it not Astellan's view of what happened? Was it not Astellan's view of the Lion? I don't understand why you think I've made a "conclusion." Are these not his opinions or views? 



Phoebus said:


> His double standard has to do with his justifications for what he did on Tharsis versus what the Lion had to do during the Great Crusade. Astelan excuses his actions - which reduced a world from eight hundred million to two hundred million - as being within his rights as a Space Marine sworn to the Emperor. This was to _maintain his rule._ He passes judgment on the Lion for sacrificing half a million lives in order to finish a war against orks. You can certainly argue that Lion El'Jonson was cold-hearted, but you can't do so if you're Astelan. Not without coming off as an utter hypocrite.
> 
> Where the rumors are concerned, that is _precisely_ the justification he gives for attacking his fleet as it came over Caliban. He admits they had no real idea of what had happened during the Heresy, but claims they heard "rumors" that the Lion turned.
> 
> ...


And yet that is what makes the book so controversial. You make it sound like Astellan's actions were the same as the Lions... but they aren't. The Lion had a choice, and he chose to make himself look better by using bait and looking like the battle was easy with very little loss. Almost a superfiscial win, its curious to how you say... "he had to..." What does that mean? Would the Dark Angels Legion be massacred if it had not done so? Well... they weren't, they just suffered losses. Astellan killed in order for an idea, in this case to maintain Imperial Ideology in the world he conquered. Hardly the same, and the fact you look at them the same shows you have a strong bias. You are not one to glance over such a difference so easily. An interesting part of this novel... because it also has the chaplains view... is that it shows no where that Astellan was tainted by chaos. 

The fact that you say he is an objective and not dependable may hold water, however does not make your statement fact. I can say that about any Dark Angels character or Fallen Angel and have a valid argument. Unfortunatley that means that your statement doesn't really mean anything. 

It is clear you have a strong bias with the Dark Angels as seeing them as the noble knights. I sympathize with you... however, they are the Dark Angels... I don't believe they were meant to have conclusions made of them. The fact that the Lion has changed character, can be attributed to the many author's writing about him, but also because of that legacy of what the Dark Angels have been for a long time. I do love that about the Dark Angels, and I'm glad I can talk about their lore and see it through both perspectives.


----------



## MEQinc (Dec 12, 2010)

ckcrawford said:


> Thats just not true. He lost a lot of himself as a "primarch" by splitting his legion, let alone making the realm of Ultramar a handful of planets. How can this not be a loss of power as a primarch?


Guilliman chose to split the Legions and at the point where he did it he had far more power than he'd ever had. He still controlled the entirety of his legion. He just didn't do so directly. He limited his brother's powers, and even the power of the High Lords, in favour of himself.

On the other hand he didn't make the realm of Ultramar a handful of worlds, Lorgar and Angron did that. 



> His legacy of the Ultramarines and the might empire of Ultramar were sacrificed.


The Ultramarines didn't exist (and so didn't have a legacy) until Guilliman joined the Imperium. Ultramar gained it's legacy as a shinning beacon of hope for humanity because it joined the Imperium. It was still a self-sufficient mini-empire though, it didn't lose anything joining the Imperium.

The splitting of the Legions didn't damage the Ultramarines legacy, indeed it furthered it by also giving them the legacy of being the original Legion of many chapters.



> Either way, the result is still the same, the Ultramarines and Ultramar are but a fraction of what they once were.


They are far more that they were before Ultramar joined the Imperium and the loses they have suffered since had nothing to do with his choices or deeds. Ultramar suffered in a war, that happens, but not because Guilliman had to sacrifice it for the Imperium.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Hey ckcrawford,

I think our back-and-forth can probably be divided in three main topics. The first is to what degree the Dark Angels Legion went traitor during the Horus Heresy. The second is about how loyal to the Emperor the Lion was, to what extent his ambitions trump that loyalty, and what his "vision" would have been had he been in charge.

Hopefully I haven't unnecessarily truncated any of your points, but I was hoping to avoid typing up repetitive paragraphs. I apologize for any confusion! 



ckcrawford said:


> I don't believe thats a fair argument to conjure. Fallen Angels have been hunted and purposely hidden from mainstream imperium because they represent a corrupted part of the Dark Angels. Thats like saying my legs were corrupted with some disease. The cells that have been reproduced hence forth are not part of my body? Thats not true. They are indeed part of my body. The moment that I severe them from my body, I make the choice to save my body from the corruption. The traitors were not Fallen until they opened fire on the Lion and his fleet. It was at that moment a seperation was created to distinguish one from the other.


Oh, absolutely. The Dark Angels have certainly found Fallen who were veterans of the Great Crusade and make claim of being betrayed by the Lion or the Emperor, etc. That goes hand in hand with the list Boreas refers to in 'Angels of Darkness' (of the 136 Space Marines who first swore allegiance to Luther), and with the individuals exiled to form a training Chapter in 'Fallen Angels'. Would those individuals consider themselves a part of what had once been the Dark Angels Legion? Sure - no disagreement there. What I'm talking about, though, is that these Fallen constituted a minority within the actual, larger, force that fought against the Dark Angels when they returned to Caliban.

Here's what I mean. At the beginning of 'Fallen Angels', we learn that Luther was sent home with five hundred Space Marines. Shortly after, we discover that the last batch of Space Marines they trained on Caliban numbered 4,212. Those five hundred members of the training cadre undoubtedly thought of themselves as Dark Angels, members of the first legion of the Legiones Astartes. That last batch of recruits - who never get sent out - were trained to think of themselves as Dark Angels as well. The 4,212 Space Marines Zahariel references represent the maximum output they can generate within a 24 month period. He reports this right as the Heresy breaks out, which lasts for seven years. Figure as much as another year's travel from Terra to Caliban, and that makes for four additional training cycles.

Would the products of those additional training cycles (theoretically totaling as many as 16,848 Space Marines) be taught to think of themselves as Dark Angels, or as part of the Legion? No. The idea of "half the Legion turning" has always been a theme, not an exact - or even proper - mathematical division. It reflects how the loyalist Dark Angels felt when they realized they had been betrayed. The majority of Luther's force - the ones recruited and trained after the events of 'Fallen Angels' - would have been trained to think of themselves as free Calibanites. They most likely were indoctrinated to believe that the Lion and the Emperor concealed a horrible secret that would have destroyed their planet. How would they have considered themselves part of the Legiones Astartes?

All of this is simply an exercise at reconciling various novels and short stories, of course. I'll certainly grant you that I'm arguing technicalities. The fact of the matter is that most of these concepts and ideas were never really advanced past a certain point. They were thematic, at best. When the Horus Heresy series began, and these themes were explored, the authors decided to go in directions that didn't completely match up with the original themes. Such is life.



> Thats very interesting how you say it. "His loyalty," in the 40K world we consider Guilliman and the Ultramarines to be the most loyal of chapters and so forth yet we forget the limits he set on the Imperium. Loyal is a very broad word.


Loyalty as a concept might be broad, but its applications are actually quite specific.

As such, Guilliman is an interesting choice to cite. Post-Calth, Guilliman found himself in command of Legion a little less than a third the size it had been. The Raven Guard and Salamanders had functionally ceased to be Legions. The Iron Hands were leaderless and without Veterans. Lion El'Jonson, Jaghatai Khan, Leman Russ, and Sanguinius were scattered to the fringes of the Galaxy. Like the Lion, Guiliman is pragmatic - but the Primarch of the XIII Legion is pragmatic to the extreme. Theoreticals govern his frame of mind. He took in the strategic picture of the post-Calth situation and unilaterally decided that the Imperium could not be salvaged. He made the decision to write it - and the Emperor - off in favor of establishing a new Imperium, which he would rule. He makes it clear he knew how this decision would be interpreted in 'Rules of Engagement':

_"When the time comes, you will be called traitors, cowards and faithless weaklings, but nothing could be further from the truth. I can see no hope in the times ahead for the Imperium as we know it ..."_

Is Guilliman disloyal? Not in the "conventional" sense. It's clear that he's not turning on the Emperor out of personal ambition. Guilliman simply doesn't think the Emperor can win. From the second that he has arrived at this conclusion, he believes it's pointless to continue fighting for the Imperium and waste men and resources in its name.

But the Lion also saw that same strategic picture. Without getting into a "which Primarch is better" debate, I think 'Fallen Angels' makes it obvious that El'Jonson has a good grasp of large-scale strategy: his campaign to Diamat was all about preventing Horus from possessing a strategic asset necessary for a siege against Terra that was unavoidable if he was to win. With that in mind, I don't think that the Lion was somehow naive when he decided - unlike Guilliman - to continue fighting against the rebels. Thus, in hindsight, it's obvious which Primarch was wrong and which one was right. Hindsight is obviously 20/20, but the question stands: how does the Lion somehow get misconstrued as "less loyal" than a Primarch who decided his strategic call sat higher than his obligations to his sworn liege?

As an aside, it will be interesting to see how Guilliman keeps his aborted "Imperium Secundus" a secret following the Heresy, but I imagine Sanguinius' refusal to join him to go fight what Roboute believed a certain defeat was (A) an eye-opener and (B) a slap in the face.

So when you say "He believes he is loyal... So what?" I think it's important to remember that the Lion didn't just "talk the talk" as it were. He also walked the walk. He fought against Horus pre-Isstvan. He fought against the Night Lords at Thramas, and refused Konrad Curze's overtures. When knowledge of Isstvan V and Calth became known, he continued fighting against the traitors. Most tellingly, he refuses Guilliman at the end of 'Savage Weapons', even though a coalition of the Dark Angels and the Ultramarines would have been potent, indeed. Why did he not do so? From 'The Lion':

_"There is only the Emperor, none is worthy of inheriting that mantle. ... Faced with the prospect of mutual annihilation, my brothers may come to terms. Horus will be forced to acknowledge the Emperor again, and Guilliman and the others will not usurp their true master."_

Going back to Guilliman...



> Thats just not true. He lost a lot of himself as a "primarch" by splitting his legion, let alone making the realm of Ultramar a handful of planets.


You're conflating two different points in time, though. Your arguments regarding the Lion are based on what we know of him during the Great Crusade and the Horus Heresy. During those time periods, everything I said about Guilliman is true. 

Ultimately, the biggest difference between the Lion and Guilliman is this. The Lion chose to stay loyal in the most literal sense of the world - against everyone but his father/master. Guilliman turned his back on his father/master at his greatest time of need but was afforded the opportunity to help the Imperium after it managed to win against his expectations. The sacrifices that you mention are ones Guilliman made _after_ the Heresy, _after_ he first decided to let the Imperium fall. Even then, the sacrifices he made (breaking up his Legion) still led him to assuming the most powerful office in the Imperium (Lord Commander of the Imperium). So it's not as if Guilliman lost out in the bargain. His Legion might have been turned into a bunch of Chapters, but he became the commanding officer _of all military forces in the Imperium._

Bottom line, we're very much beyond "so what?" with the Lion. He has made his loyalties very clear, and I think we can plausibly infer what drives that loyalty. If one is to argue against his loyalty, one has to present some sort of proof against it. And thus far, the only consistent argument I've seen boils down to the Lion's purported ambition to become Warmaster.

On that note, allow me to shift to your latter points on the office of the Warmaster, etc.:



> What I take from this... is that the Lion seemed okay sacrificing the population to make himself look better. This is just an assumption, but the fact he was planning on gaining support for warmaster would support this.


My issue with this is that you're juxtaposing a sentiment expressed by the Lion _after_ Horus went traitor into an inapplicable point in time (what he was doing prior to the Heresy).

Meaning, Horus only became Warmaster a year or so before the events of 'Horus Rising'. His appointment - and the return of the Emperor to Terra - was a shock and a surprise to everyone, Horus included. As such, there was nothing for the Lion "to make himself look better" for. Until the Emperor decided to go back to Terra, he was the undisputed commander in chief, with no intermediate rank between him and the other Primarchs. I have no doubt that most of the Primarchs were driven to win more and better victories than their brothers out of pride and sibling rivalry, but there was nothing else for them to win.



> Yet that is not very specific and very broad, especially when considering he wants to become Warmaster of the Imperium. The Lion may consider his intentions the same as the Emperor's or even say he is loyal to the Emperor, but when it comes down to it, is his vision the same as the Emperors?


It really doesn't matter what the Lion's vision was. His perspective on the Imperium is as recent as the events shown in 'The Lion'. El'Jonson doesn't need to worry about his vision being in conflict with the Emperor's because his _fundamental assumption_ is that the Emperor will remain in power. His _fundamental belief_ is that no Primarch should be a match for the Emperor's power. See the quote from 'The Lion', 3-4 paragraphs above.



> Not really friend. It should be a fact considered by his own actions and not by Horus' opinion.


The problem is that the Lion's sole "action" related to trying to become Warmaster occurred _after_ Horus turned traitor. And even then, the Lion's actions do not conflict with his duty or his obligations to the Imperium. This is an assumption on my part, but I think it's fairly obvious that the Lion believes the office of Warmaster has only been temporarily given to Dorn out of strategic necessity, and that it will be re-assigned following the end of the rebellion. See below...



> He wanted to become Warmaster even though the Emperor gave Dorn control of his armies. The Lion assumed a lot about his ability to become warmaster, and yet is interesting is what the Emperor's view of the Lion actually was. The Emperor was known to bestow power on his favorite sons, and yet I've never seen the Emperor give him the respect he gave Dorn, Horus, or even Guilliman.


Well, first of all, what unique respect did he afford those three?

Horus was given the title of Warmaster. Several other Primarchs believe that Horus was the best of them. Others would probably point out that Horus was better than some (especially the more "broken" and deviant ones), but only "first among equals" where they rest were concerned. Horus himself, in a moment of touching humility, points out that he didn't think himself to be the best. The Lion, quite soberly, posits that Horus was afforded this office because he was the first found - he had the longest relationship with the Emperor, the most experience, etc. As such, it was logical that the most senior and experienced Primarch would - absent any flaws - be given overall command in the Emperor's absence.

Did Guilliman receive any unique honours or respect from the Emperor? I'm not sure that this is the case. Don't get me wrong, I think Guilliman was certainly _more important_ in the Imperium's eyes thanks to the contributions of Ultramar, but I can't think of a source that states the Emperor granted him offices, honours, and distinctions not afforded to other Primarchs. That doesn't surprise me, incidentally. Only two Primarchs were lucky enough to land on planets that were part of an interstellar mini-empire. Those who hadn't might have been cross at their brothers for getting privileges based on a fluke of luck! :biggrin:

Which brings us to Dorn, who received the office of Warmaster when Horus turned. But does that appointment reflect the Emperor's reliance on Dorn specifically? Or the best choice given the situation? Let's go through the sixteen Primarchs that were believed to be loyal prior to the events of Isstvan V:

The Lion, the Khan, and Sanguinius were too far off, courtesy of Horus himself. Point of fact, Sanguinius probably wasn't even reachable by communications. Even if he had been, though, would it have made sense for the Emperor to appoint Warmaster a Primarch who was neither in close vicinity to Terra or to the Primarchs he would have commanded? During the most critical operation in the history of the Imperium?

Perturabo, as we know, at the very least was bitter and disillusioned. 'Angel Exterminatus' makes it clear that he had the genius and the qualifications to be a great commander and strategist, but I wonder to what extent his volatility and isolation might have compromised him as a choice. Still, I think it's secondary to the point I will make about Dorn, below.

Russ was on his way to take down Magnus. He was already engaged in a specific campaign, and thus couldn't be recalled to suppress Horus' rebellion.

Konrad Curze could be rejected out of hand for his instability. Ferrus Manus was almost certainly seen as too hot-headed. My personal opinion (which isn't really supported by anything in writing) is that Ferrus used his seniority (fourth found) to take command of the punitive mission being sent to Isstvan V even though he had a a lack of assets (he had left the majority of his Legion behind). This, especially given that his agenda of revenge was clearly infringing on his military logic. Corax was probably too junior and cautious to challenge him, and unfortunately Vulkan was too reserved (even though he might have only been slightly junior to Ferrus).

Guilliman was on the other side of the Galaxy (and, hilariously, would shortly afterwards write off the Imperium altogether).

Lorgar was still not a proper leader in his brothers' eyes. We see that's the case among both his treacherous allies and his loyalist enemies.

Magnus had been basically written off. Even if the debacle with his psychic sending had never happened, there is absolutely no way he would have commanded other Primarchs - if he ever had to begin with. 

Vulkan had one of the three smallest Legions. He is also described as reserved and introspective, which is probably the reason a reckless Ferrus Manus was able to take charge of the punitive expedition being sent to Isstvan V.

Corax and Alpharius were also the most junior Primarchs, and naming either of them wouldn't have made the most sense. In addition, Corax had one of the three smallest Legions.

Who does that leave us with? Dorn, who doesn't just have a remarkable campaigning record of his own, to say nothing of his demonstrated integrity and relative seniority. _He was already enroute to Terra,_ to boot! If you are the Emperor and you don't have the time to crush this rebellion, why _wouldn't_ you pick Dorn? It makes total sense. You have a commander who you can easily give direction to, who can in turn delegate to his subordinates to wage the actual war.

But that doesn't mean that other Primarchs couldn't have been chosen in his stead in the same situation. Had Sanguinius been heading to Terra instead of Dorn, would the Emperor have chosen someone else? No, of course not. He probably would have been chosen even if Dorn had been on the vanguard of the attack against Isstvan V.

Going back to my assumption, that the Lion believes the office of Warmaster has only been temporarily given to Dorn out of strategic necessity, does he have reasonable cause to think of himself as a candidate? I think so. The Lion could probably count on Perturabo (per 'Fallen Angels'), Vulkan (per 'Betrayal'), and perhaps even Konrad Curze (he references a close bond in 'Savage Weapons') among those who would vouch for him. Maybe that wasn't enough (I personally think Guilliman - assuming he hadn't pulled his stunt - and Sanguinius would have had the best chances), but I think it's safe to say that the Lion wasn't either naive or a megalomaniac... so he must have had reason to think it'd be worthwhile to court Perturabo.



> Magnus also believed he was loyal... however, does his will defy the Emperors? That is the question.


Magnus may have believed he was loyal, but he was _actively defying the Emperor_ by doing things he was _explicitly_ commanded not to do. As such, how can this comparison with the Lion stand?



> Russ and Vulkan have a bond with the Emperor unlike other primarchs, as well as beefs against some or all of Horus' allies.


What bond does Vulkan have with the Emperor that the Lion doesn't, though? I'm not being snarky, I just haven't read the Vulkan novella Nick Kyme wrote, so I don't want to write off the possibility out of hand.

Beyond that, though, why is it that overcoming a personal grudge somehow constitutes having more of a stake in the well-being of the Imperium than someone explicitly stating that they are concerned for the well-being of the Imperium, period, and that they hold the Emperor as the only proper leader?



> So you have the Lion's... "coldness..." as well as his tendency to mistrust practically everyone. As you said, he didn't know who to trust... which is oddly the same way he is with his legion.


I think you're misinterpreting what I said. I was specifically talking about other Primarchs.

But all the same, trust has become quite the topic with the Lion of late. There's no denying that it is an issue with him. Gav Thorpe, in 'The Lion', writes:

_"Trust was not a natural state for the primarch."_

That's fair. It's safe to say that trust wasn't a natural state for most Primarchs raised in a hostile world or similar circumstances. It wasn't for Perturabo, Curze, Ferrus, Angron, Mortarion, Corax, or Alpharius and Omegon. Obviously their personalities different, and their distrust toward others manifested in different ways. Perturabo was merely cold and distant, and easily offended. Curze was probably a sociopath of some sort. So on, so forth.

Where the Lion's relationships in general are concerned, though, for some reason people cling to a single damning statement written by Mike Lee to be Gospel, just as they did about him being a fence-sitter in Thorpe's earlier novel. This, even though the larger context and body of evidence renders those statements completely meaningless.

What do I mean by this? Nemiel thinks that the Lion "can't read people" on account of the fact that his Primarch solicits what amounts to a second opinion from him. This is taken as proof-positive, even though it's a known fact that Horus himself maintains a _quartet_ of officers meant to keep him level and provide him with advice.

The worst part of this theme is that, in order for Nemiel to arrive at his conclusion, he - _as a character in the novel_ - has to ignore context explicitly delivered by the author! Chapter One of 'Fallen Angels' begins with the Lion specifically reminding his subordinates that several systems have declared for Horus, and that his agents are spread across, helping fuel dissent. Yet when they arrive at Diamat, Nemiel thinks it's bizarre that his primarch doesn't take everyone's loyalty for granted. But if these concepts are too obscure or nuanced for Nemiel to graso, then how about the glaringly obvious? The Lion's "trust issues" can't be _that_ crippling when he's willing *to have a conversation with you on that very subject!* :biggrin:

And it goes beyond that, too. On a personal level, the Lion trusted Alajos and Corswain with the safety of his life. On a broader level, he trusts Stenius - the captain of his flagship - with strategic details and knowledge above and beyond anything he would need to know. At any rate, if the Lion was as paranoid as so many posters assert he is, he wouldn't be able to function as a proper commander. Given that he's actually _qualified_ as being one of the best warlords the Imperium produced, I'd say the evidence points to the contrary! :wink:

Such are my points on the Lion's loyalty and state of trust. Let's move on to Astelan and his lack of reliability as a narrator. First, a little background, so that we're all on the same level:

When 'Angels of Darkness' kicked off, Gav Thorpe offered in interviews that Astelan's infamous line ("he waited to see who would win") surprised even himself. That's sentence got all the attention, to the point that Astelan's testimony coasts by as a given, despite the fact that it varies from being contradictory to relying on rumor and conjecture. The story was probably as popular as it was because it bucked the trend of the long-standing fluff, which had the Lion as a loyal primarch who also happened to be mercurial and wrathful once his anger got going. Then the Heresy series started. 

Mitch Scanlon's 'Descent of Angels' went with the "original" fluff approach, which is that Luther turned on the Lion due to envy.

Gav Thorpe wrote the short story 'Call of the Lion', which was informed by the themes of 'Angels of Darkness' rather than the "original" fluff or Scanlon's novels.

Mike Lee's 'Fallen Angels' went with the themes shown in 'Descent of Angels', and had the Lion as a loyal Primarch. Like Scanlon, he attempted to maintain Luther as a semi-sympathetic figure caught in larger events.

Aaron-Dembski Bowden basically put the final nail on the "loyalty coffin". He had the Lion explicitly state his loyalties. He also had both Curze and El'Jonson come as close to breaking the "wall" with the audience as one can - with the former mentioning the theme that the Lion would be seen as a traitor, and the latter providing an explanation as to why he was out of touch and unable to respond to the larger Heresy.

Gav Thorpe's 'The Lion', was the latest entry in the Dark Angels saga within the Heresy.

So, with all that in mind, let's talk about Astelan. Is he reliable narrator? In my opinion, no, he is not.

The main inconsistencies in Astelan's narration may be reconciled, in all fairness, to differences between authors. Gav Thorpe describes Astelan arriving in the 41st Millennium and, after some time, making his way to Tharsis. There, he takes it on himself to rule the planet after helping suppressing a rebellion. He justifies his choice to do so on the fact that he is a Space Marine sworn to the Emperor's service. The way Mike Lee describes it, there is no way that Astelan would still consider himself a Space Marine sworn to the service of the Emperor. He has taken the side of Luther, who has made it clear he seeks to make Caliban a free world. Furthermore, it's clear by the closing chapter the Luther sees Horus' rebellion as an opportunity for Caliban to remain independent. It's a completely different description what we see in 'Angels of Darkness', wherein Astelan claims loyalty and the belief that it was _the Lion_ that had turned.

More below on that.

Astelan then describes the process of training his "sacred bands". He goes over what appears to be a highly rigorous (even deadly) training regimen, and describes how they expanded the industrial infrastructure. More importantly, though, he describes a self-fulfilling prophecy, wherein his brutal methods breed more and more rebellion. The most damning statistic is provided by Boreas: while Astelan maintains that losses were necessary to suppress the revolt, the Interrogator-Chaplain points out that just as many Tharsians (roughly three hundred million) were killed _after_ the war as there were during it.

This, of course, flies in the face of his accusation against Lion El'Jonson - of needlessly sacrificing half a million people.



> The Lion's cold tactics are questionable indeed. Astellan may be full of shit...


Yes, he is. It's complete and utter hypocrisy to cry foul when someone sacrifices a city to end the threat of ork invasion, only to justify overseeing the systematic murder and oppression of over a thousand times that many people in the name of retaining personal power. See more on this below.



> The Lion had a choice, and he chose to make himself look better by using bait and looking like the battle was easy with very little loss. Almost a superfiscial win, its curious to how you say... "he had to..." What does that mean? Would the Dark Angels Legion be massacred if it had not done so? Well... they weren't, they just suffered losses. Astellan killed in order for an idea, in this case to maintain Imperial Ideology in the world he conquered. Hardly the same, and the fact you look at them the same shows you have a strong bias.


This is probably the bit that I most disagree with. You're right in one thing, though - their actions are not at all the same.

Astelan did kill in the name of an idea. His idea was that, as a former Chapter Commander, he had the right to do anything in the name of maintaining power. He explicitly qualified that, in the process of suppressing the revolt on Tharsis, he killed innocents, razing population centers, and killing even those who supported the rebels "through inaction". Numbers of innocents slain aren't given, but given that _three hundred million_ individuals died during the revolt (with almost another three hundred million dying during his reign afterwards), we can plausibly assume an absolutely horrifying scenario.

The Lion sacrificed a city of five hundred thousand people in order to end orkish presence on the world of Altyes. His reasoning, as stated to Astelan, was that "the enemy would have a chance to scatter or retreat, costing us many more months of fighting, as well as many more Space Marine lives." Given the established fluff/lore surrounding the orks, and how fast they're able to reproduce and become a threat again, that's very viable reasoning. Is it pragmatic to the point of being cruel? Of course. Was the Lion out of line for making that call? Within the context of the Great Crusade, not at all. You offer one example to the contrary...



> The reason his tactics might be considered questionable is because of what I think about Dorn's reaction to Curze's execution towards traitors...


... but you're citing one example featuring one Primarch, though. In addition, it's the exception to the rule. Even more importantly, Dorn's reaction was due to the fact that hostilities _had already ended._

Take in the larger body of evidence, though, and that argument crumbles. Astartes warfare is consistently characterized as brutal and devastating. Forget sacrificing a civilian population center in order to eliminate an enemy who will continue regenerating its ranks from the spores shed from its members' bodies. It's _explicitly qualified_ that the, during a Compliance, Legiones Astartes will absolutely devastate civilian population centers if their governments refused Compliance. I don't think a single Heresy story has shown the Imperials actually worry if the people below agree or disagree with their government.

Bottom line, the Lion's decision is no worse than countless similar ones made in real life during the 20th century - never mind in the fictional Great Crusade. Astelan's accusation is hilarious in that context. It boils down to this:

"I'm entitled to kill innocents in order to suppress a revolt that I'm probably in large part responsible for. I won't stand for someone sacrificing humans totaling up to 0.1% of my victims in order to stop aliens, though. Not even if said aliens procreate by releasing spores, can regrow their numbers in short order, and can only be defeated by being completely killed off."

Some closing points...



> I can't help but feel a bit slighted. I believe you do. I know your smart enough to see why I said this is a story about his opinion. Was it not Astellan's view of what happened? Was it not Astellan's view of the Lion? I don't understand why you think I've made a "conclusion." Are these not his opinions or views?


I do apologize for causing offense. But what this conversation ultimately comes down to, then, is whether opinions are valid in and of themselves. The obvious answer to that is "no". Just because someone thinks a thing doesn't make that thing true or right.

This is especially true in Astelan's case, where opinion isn't supported by fact. The only "evidence" of anything undue that Astelan presents in his account was the fact that the Lion didn't trust his Terran commanders, and paired up "shadow Chapters" of Calibanites to "mirror" them.

Absent any other reason, though, does this constitute reason to attack your commander? I think any military person would tell you the answer to that is no.



> You are not one to glance over such a difference so easily. An interesting part of this novel... because it also has the chaplains view... is that it shows no where that Astellan was tainted by chaos.


Well, taint by Chaos is hardly a universally obvious phenomenon. That's neither here nor there, though. My argument isn't that Astelan was necessarily a thrall of Chaos. It's that he's unreliable as a narrator. For all I know, he might be traumatized by the chain of events that led him from the Great Crusade to Caliban and through a time-space rift in the Warp to the 41st Millennium. He might have been rendered insane by Chaos, or had his memories altered as part of their sadistic jokes. He might just be deluded and constructing convenient memories in the way many mentally ill individuals are. I don't know.

I do find it interesting, however, that Boreas himself says as much to Astelan: that his sins might have caused him to become unhinged. And, in all honesty, that may very well be the only way to reconcile 'Angels of Darkness' with the Horus Heresy storyline. Otherwise, 'Angels of Darkness' simply cannot co-exist with 'Descent of Angels', 'Fallen Angels', 'Savage Weapons', and 'The Lion'.

Either way, though, Astelan is _not_ a reliable narrator. This is either because the novel he was introduced in has been rendered irrelevant by newer books, or because he is - one way or another - mistaken about fundamental things. That is, one war or another, Astelan in M41 thinking he's a loyal warrior of the Emperor can't be reconciled with Astelan in M31 taking the side of a guy stating his intent to rebel against the Imperium.



> The fact that you say he is an objective and not dependable may hold water, however does not make your statement fact. I can say that about any Dark Angels character or Fallen Angel and have a valid argument. Unfortunatley that means that your statement doesn't really mean anything.


This whole conversation started regarding the loyalty - or lack thereof - of the Lion. Your argument was in large part based on the accusations Astelan makes in 'Angels of Darkness'. If pointing out the unreliability of the Lion's only meaningful accuser and citing the Lion's own sentiments regarding loyalty doesn't "really mean anything"... then I'm kind of at a loss as to how one is to offer a counter-argument to your points. :wink:



> It is clear you have a strong bias with the Dark Angels as seeing them as the noble knights. I sympathize with you... however, they are the Dark Angels... I don't believe they were meant to have conclusions made of them.


That's just the thing - I don't think that at all.

What I do think is that the Dark Angels _used_ to be "noble knights" with a leader who was a brilliant commander but was obviously affected to some degree by his initial isolation and being betrayed by his adoptive father figure. In his absence, the Dark Angels did horrible things to keep knowledge of the Fallen secret. That having been said, the accusations the Fallen make - however sincerely they might believe in them - are at least disingenuous. Astelan falls under that category in my eyes.

Anyways, I know that was intensely long! Also, sorry about taking so long to respond.

Cheers,
P.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Where did you get one third from? That seems like an ass-pull. If anything I go for what Dan Abnett said in his interview about the Ultras, plus originally they seem to have split 23 times, that I take to mean 230.000, not one third of 250.000, but Dan Abentt said that was without support-personnel. Of course I admit to guessing a little there, but the Ultras got off light compared to the other chapter as that's a basic for the entire concept of 40k.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Phoebus, as always you've summed it up perfectly imo. Just a little more for you on the latest Heresy info regarding the Lion. This is a quote from the short story _By The Lions Command_, featured in the Heresy weekender anthology _The Imperial Truth_, from the perspective of Corswain.



> It had been hard to watch him leave, but the seneschal had understood, as best he could, the reasons for the primarch's departure. Events unfolding on the Eastern Fringe could not be ignored, and maybe presented as much of a threat to the Emperor as Horus's own treachery. Or so the Lion had implied.


From this we can see that not only did the Lion refuse to join Guillimans idea of a new Imperium, but also saw it as a threat to the Emperor. It would appear that due to the Thramas campaign however, he couldn't do anything about it. With the Night Lords defeated as of _Prince of Crows_ and Thramas over, he has now taken it upon himself to go to Ultramar. I'm curious to see how hostile his approach will be when he gets there, but I'm certain that it will play a large part in Guilliman not continuing with his Imperium Secundus, Sanguinius being able to return to Terra(via the Lions xenos device) and prove his loyalty even more to the doubters. _Unremembered Empire_, should be rather epic.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I thought the ratifications of legions into chapters didn't happen until after the Horus Heresy, so the lion's position of it would be unknown as he was comatose when the ratifications of the Legions happened, and the chiefs of the Dark Angels agreed to the split since they didn't want to be investigated by the newly formed Inquisition about what had happened to the. As that's known only to them and Empy on his Golden Throne.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Beaviz81 said:


> Where did you get one third from? That seems like an ass-pull. If anything I go for what Dan Abnett said in his interview about the Ultras, plus originally they seem to have split 23 times, that I take to mean 230.000, not one third of 250.000, but Dan Abentt said that was without support-personnel. Of course I admit to guessing a little there, but the Ultras got off light compared to the other chapter as that's a basic for the entire concept of 40k.


I never guarantee that my conclusions will be right, but I try my best to cite my arguments from the novels, stories, audiobooks, and codices themselves. If I'm making an assumption (typically about a character's motivations, and then typically only when the author doesn't qualify them), I say as much. 

In this case, in "Know No Fear", Dan Abnett tells us that the Ultramarines had 25 Chapters - each of them numbering 10,000 warriors. Yes, that's larger than the traditional Chapter size. He describes how Roboute Guilliman brings twenty of those Chapters (ergo, roughly 200,000 warriors) to Calth for a campaign Horus has assigned him to fight alongside the Word Bearers. That leaves 50,000 Ultramarines elsewhere.

Near the end of "Know No Fear", Abnett writes that there are roughly 30,000 Ultramarine survivors on Calth. Assuming these warriors made it through the remainder of the battle (the Calth defense systems kick in around that time, and begin massacring the Word Bearers) and the events described in 'The Mark of Calth' (which I haven't read yet), this means that there would be 80,000 Ultramarines left.

80,000 is a little less than a third of 250,000. Hence, my statement that, post-Calth, Roboute Guilliman found himself in command of a Legion roughly one third of its original size.

The Ultramarines may have regained some of their numbers before the Second Founding. Or they may have regained all their numbers. Or their numbers may have shrunk*. I don't know. Either way, though, I didn't pull that figure out of my ass. :wink:

* I doubt their numbers shrunk. The original fluff had the Ultramarines dividing into 23 Chapters during the Second Founding, but the newest fluff (Codex: Grey Knights) talks about _four hundred_ Chapters being created during that time (from all the Legions, not just the Ultramarines). Even allowing for the Chapters bring created with only half-combat strength, that's still about 200,000 warriors. Most of the Legions would have been far below their original combat strength, so the Ultramarines probably regained a good deal of their strength between their war against the Word Bearers (see 'Betrayer') and the Second Founding.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Yeah and we can just pull in the support-personnel (which seems to be larger at the Ultras due to them being such active rulers as even super-filing would still take tremendous amounts of time). And they had hundreds if not thousands of planets to recruit from then, which would to certain degrees swell their number, especially if they rushed the recruitment-policy a little, which is an excellent handwave to explain the many differencing chapter their produced as they are the Imperial favorites as without the Space Marines, the IOM looses all the possibility to launch offensives and that the Ultramarines provides the IOM with the backbone of. So I'm willing to pay them tremendous honor were it's due. Of course it's my sentiment, and up to interpretation or outright rejection, but Guilliman was quoted saying one day his sons would number one million and each would have his own planet. That was his plan for after the Great Crusade.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Beaviz81 said:


> Yeah and we can just pull in the support-personnel (which seems to be larger at the Ultras due to them being such active rulers as even super-filing would still take tremendous amounts of time).


I'm not sure how that would play a role. While the Ultramarines were a larger Legion, the support structure of every Legion was comprised almost entirely of normal humans (Apothecaries, Librarians, and Techmarines still having a battlefield role of their own).



> And they had hundreds if not thousands of planets to recruit from ...


Five hundred, actually. At least immediately after Calth. :wink:

Of course that number dropped drastically. During 'Betrayer' alone, a hundred of those worlds are devastated by the Word Bearers and the World Eaters. And it's not as if that novel ends with those two Legions running off.

Bottom line, I'm not sure how many worlds they'll be left with. I don't think their empire will be wiped out, though, since 'The Unremembered Empire' has to be based on _something_. That much is implied in 'Rules of Engagement' as well. There will be enough left for Guilliman to (A) try his "Imperium Secundus" bit and (B) for his Legion to turn into a whole lot of Chapters (per Codex: Grey Knights).


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I think I read thirteen, that seems to be a fair number as thats the Ultramar-system. And they have a nasty tendency to store anyone who rubs hair the wrong way in the Deathwatch.

As for role, Dan Abnett AKA God said that that was the Space Marines involved in combat, he means many more were in more indirect roles, which explain how good the worlds the Ultramarines were at that, of course they hold an idealism only the Tau can match, and I fucking hate the Tau as they are the lamest thing since the Ultramarines ever in this grimdark future.

Also I have no trouble seeing that over 400 fully staffed chapters were formed after the HH. The IOM was only left fatally wounded not quite dead yet. Most of that seem to come from the Ultras.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

I suppose that could be the case (re: Ultramarines in indirect roles). I thought it had more to do with Chapters that aren't in "Crusading mode", but 'Betrayer' does show a large number involved with academies, etc.

Do you have a link to the specific interview you were talking about? I'd love to watch it.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

The link is here, I must admit it support your argument 



 he discusses it briefly there and mentions ancillaries about the seven minute mark.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

I guess it comes down to how Abnett qualifies "ancilliaries". If he means what he describes in 'Know No Fear', for instance...

“Amidst that outermost sphere waited the Evocati fleet. While the Legion mustered at Calth, the XIII Legion’s war-world could never be left undefended. The Evocati was comprised of several thousand Ultramarines drawn from a dozen Chapters, awarded the highest honour of all: overseeing the operations of Armatura and the training of new recruits, commanding an Imperial fleet to rival any other.”

... then they count against the roughly thirty thousand who survived Calth and the remaining fifty thousand that weren't there.

The more I think about it, that makes sense. Look at it this way: Abnett says that 50-60,000 Word Bearers showed up for Calth, and they were joined by the World Eaters - who probably numbered another 100,000 or so. 2-1 odds would allow them to go on a tear like they did in 'Betrayer'. But if there were more than a hundred thousand Ultramarines, I don't think the Traitors would be able to destroy _one hundred_ worlds of Ultramar.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

So of the original 250,000 Ultramarines how many died at calth? How many died during the events of "betrayer", and finally how many were standing after the siege of ultramar by the word bearers + world eaters?

Was there at least 100,000 left?


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Phoebus said:


> the World Eaters - who probably numbered another 100,000 or so.


I severely doubt they had those kind of numbers. Remember that they took particularly heavy losses on Istvaan III and more during the Dropsite Massacre (I think while the initial traitors took one third losses the World Eaters were noted to have lost at least half their number.)



Lux said:


> Was there at least 100,000 left?


Most likely, if the Ultramarines, Dark Angels (who did not bring their full strength), and Space Wolves (noted as not being that large a legion to begin with) arriving was as big a threat to the traitor legions plans on Terra than they had to arrive with quite a few ships/astartes.

Plus, for the Ultramarines to be the mainstay of the loyalist forces during The Scouring they would again have had to have quite a few of their number alive (at least in the beginning since they were brought down toa tenth of their greatest strength.)


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I had always been under the assumption the Ultramarines due to their flexible tactics suffered lightly even on Calth. But it seems more and more likely I have to get rid of my ridiculous 23 times split unless the number maybe was split by five (bonus-point for being the size of an actual legion of Rome) as that actually meakes perfect sense. First Guilliman split them into proto-chapter-size (I admit that is a fan-name), then he found that to be inflexible and further downsized it to 1000 (enough to hold a planet).


----------



## Rems (Jun 20, 2011)

Beaviz81 said:


> I had always been under the assumption the Ultramarines due to their flexible tactics suffered lightly even on Calth. But it seems more and more likely I have to get rid of my ridiculous 23 times split unless the number maybe was split by five (bonus-point for being the size of an actual legion of Rome) as that actually meakes perfect sense. First Guilliman split them into proto-chapter-size (I admit that is a fan-name), then he found that to be inflexible and further downsized it to 1000 (enough to hold a planet).


The suffered terribly at Calth. As Pheobus has already pointed out only a third survived _Know No Fear_. 

The 23 successor chapters bit was written before the legions were 100,000 strong. It was back when they were assumed to be 10,000 in size. I expect it will be retconned in the next Space Marine codex. The Grey Knights one already has, stating there were 400 or so Second Founding Chapters. 



> I severely doubt they had those kind of numbers. Remember that they took particularly heavy losses on Istvaan III and more during the Dropsite Massacre (I think while the initial traitors took one third losses the World Eaters were noted to have lost at least half their number.)


It's possible. _Betrayal _notes them to be at 160,000 or so pre Istvaan. Suffering heavy casualties puts them at lets say half strength. With some accelerated recruiting they could be near the 100,000 mark for _Betrayer_.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Lux said:


> So of the original 250,000 Ultramarines how many died at calth? How many died during the events of "betrayer", and finally how many were standing after the siege of ultramar by the word bearers + world eaters?
> 
> Was there at least 100,000 left?


Having started up with 'Mark of Calth' again, Ventanus makes mention that he was able to rally roughly 40,000 Ultramarines _after_ the main battle was over. I'm not done with the book yet, so I don't know if they suffer some terrible reversal. That having been said, as of halfway through Graham Mc'Neil's novella in 'Mark', there would be roughly 90,000 Ultramarines throughout Ultramar (the 40,000 on Calth and the 50,000 that were kept away from the battle).

Those 90,000 would in turn suffer pretty terrible casualties when the Word Bearers and World Eaters began their "Shadow Crusade". "Several thousand" must have died on Armatura alone (per 'Betrayer').

Could they recover in time to have more than 100,000 by the end of the Heresy? I guess. By the end of 'Betrayer', a hundred worlds have been destroyed, but Lorgar states that the Word Bearers and the World Eaters are to leave to join Horus. Plus, I doubt Guilliman's plans would be viable if all of Ultramar was a wreck and he was unable to reconstitute his Legion.

My guess is that Ultramar numbers so few planets today because of administrative divisions after the Heresy, not because all but a handful of planets were destroyed. As the Ultramarines Legion was split into Chapters, each of those Chapters probably got to inherit one of the Five Hundred Worlds.


----------



## Lux (Apr 17, 2010)

From the 250000 how did it drop to 90000? I imagine that the 90000 was likely reduced by more than half, due to the word bearers and world eaters targeting the most heavily defended worlds.


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Per earlier posts, prior to the Battle of Calth there were 250,000 Ultramarines.

200,000 of those went to Calth. 50,000 remained stationed elsewhere or were crusading in different locales.

The Word Bearers and their cultists used the element of total surprise, sabotage, fleet attacks, sorcery, etc., to kill all but 40,000 of the ones on Calth. The Ultramarines were caught completely unprepared. This is all described very well in 'Know No Fear'. In the initial phase, the Word Bearers were - in some cases - able to quite literally start shooting at Ultramarines standing right next to them. The Ultramarines were only able to survive after regaining control of their orbital defenses and what was left of their fleet. By then, though, Erebus had completed his rituals and ensured Calth (or, rather, its surface, all its industry, and most of its population) would be destroyed.

Thus, immediately after 'Know No Fear', there were about 90,000 Ultramarines left - 40,000 on Calth, and 50,000 everywhere else.

During 'Betrayer', a hundred worlds of Ultramar are destroyed. On Armatura alone, as many as "several thousand" Ultramarines are killed. At the end of that novel, the Word Bearers and World Eaters leave.

The endstate should reflect something like this: 90,000, minus losses during the Shadow Crusade waged by the XII and XVII Legions during 'Betrayer' = manpower available to Roboute Guilliman at the beginning of 'Rules of Engagement' (which should also roughly reflect his power during the events of 'The Unremembered Empire'). His ability to reconstitute his Legion will depend on the state of Ultramar.

Cheers!


----------



## Achaylus72 (Apr 30, 2011)

I know i am coming in late to this but what i gater from readings is that the Dark Angels are a dying Chapter/Splintered Legion, what i gather from a gut feeling is that the Dark Angels will lead a second schism against the Imperium (this is the ultimate truth to their destiny) and that they will lead the rest of the non-Ultramarine chapters into a final civil war against the Ultramarines who are poised to displace the Emperor with Marneus Calgar as the new Imperial Emperor


----------



## Lost&Damned (Mar 25, 2012)

Achaylus72 said:


> I know i am coming in late to this but what i gater from readings is that the Dark Angels are a dying Chapter/Splintered Legion, what i gather from a gut feeling is that the Dark Angels will lead a second schism against the Imperium (this is the ultimate truth to their destiny) and that they will lead the rest of the non-Ultramarine chapters into a final civil war against the Ultramarines who are poised to displace the Emperor with Marneus Calgar as the new Imperial Emperor


Is that you Lux?
:grin:


----------



## Phoebus (Apr 17, 2010)

Achaylus72 said:


> I know i am coming in late to this but what i gater from readings ...


What readings? I ask because...



> ... is that the Dark Angels are a dying Chapter/Splintered Legion, ...


... the consensus of the various codices, novels, short stories, and audiobooks is pretty much the opposite. They describe a Legion that has retained a covert sort of unity while every other one genuinely divided into Chapters.

As for dying? The same sources describe a Chapter that is probably more powerful than even one of the First Founding should be. The Dark Angels are one of a very few Chapters that is able to maintain manpower implied to be greater than what the Codex allows. It possesses a fleet whose total strength is never revealed, but whose _known_ numbers already exceed those of other Chapters. It has a flagship in the Rock that is a super-vessel in its own right.

The remarkable thing about this is that the Dark Angels have maintained this level of power even though the High Lords of Terra themselves don't trust them. And in Azrael, their latest Supreme Grand Master, they have the most dynamic leader they've had in a long time.



> ... what i gather from a gut feeling is that the Dark Angels will lead a second schism against the Imperium (this is the ultimate truth to their destiny) and that they will lead the rest of the non-Ultramarine chapters into a final civil war against the Ultramarines who are poised to displace the Emperor with Marneus Calgar as the new Imperial Emperor


There's zero indication of a schism that could lead to civil war between the Adeptus Astartes. There's even less that Calgar wants to become Emperor. And there's still less that the Dark Angels are somehow looked to as the leaders of non-Ultramarine chapters.

Cheers!


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

I always thought Ultramar was just a small system with a few stars. I mean Empy came across Guilliman and I always thought that to be that Guilliman's empire was sprawling across the Ultramar sector or maybe a few other systems, but they weren't allowed for obvious reasons to keep a vast empire after making contact with the IOM. At least that was what I thought happened. I know it's peculation but it seems to be the most sensible theory.


----------



## Rems (Jun 20, 2011)

Beaviz81 said:


> I always thought Ultramar was just a small system with a few stars. I mean Empy came across Guilliman and I always thought that to be that Guilliman's empire was sprawling across the Ultramar sector or maybe a few other systems, but they weren't allowed for obvious reasons to keep a vast empire after making contact with the IOM. At least that was what I thought happened. I know it's peculation but it seems to be the most sensible theory.


Modern Ultramar (and the original) is the 8 systems. Maccragge, Iax, Calth etc. During the Great Crusade Guilliman then created/expanded/conquered the 500 Worlds of Ultramar. 

I would posit he was allowed this unique freedom because a; he was the only one of the primarchs who actually engaged in world building and was rather good at it and b, the eastern fringe is a massive area where the Imperium was and still is spread thin.

It was likely easier (and more beneficial) to let Guilliman build his 'empire' than it would be to stop him. He delivered loyal, prosperous, secure worlds to the Imperium. Ultramar perhaps best expressed the ideals of the Great Crusade.


----------



## mcain31 (Jul 8, 2013)

This thread was very enlightening. I had to read Rules of Engagement and Savage Weapons thanks to this thread. I would've never guessed the Guilliman betrayed the Emperor in his heart. Phoebus thanks referencing all the books. It's very helpful for guys like that are late to the 40K party.


----------



## Beaviz81 (Feb 24, 2012)

Robute's attitude to Empy can pretty much be summoned up by this 



 just exchange Joe Thornton for Robute and Slappy for Empy. 

At least that's in my opinion.


----------

