# Talos the Mary Sue? (please read before you stone me)



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

I have nothing personal against the authour and I actually enjoyed Soul Hunter for its quality of writing. I'm aware that almost all the members of this site adores the book. It's strange, because though I really like the authour's style of writing, I'm frustrated by certain aspects of the story. 

One of my major criticisms (perhaps my only major criticism, really): 
Talos and First Claw come off as too unstoppable. At first I thought "well of course, the loyalists are going to take a thrashing in a chaos book"...but even other chaos factions (indeed, even other Night Lords) don't fare much better against Talos and company. Later on in Blood Reaver, First Claw wipes out Third Claw without suffering any loss. For lack of a better word, I found that to be rather Mary Sue-ish.

Sure, ADB is trying to convey a sense of how desperate and rag-tag First Claw is, how Talos and his mates can just barely edge their victories. The problem is that they're always "just barely" beating the odds. For me, this results in a lack of genuine threat in that yeah, the Night Lords in the novel (especially First Claw) are often described as taking crippling damage, but they tend to recover all too easily. 

The authour was often _telling_ me that First Claw was in grave peril, but I never felt real suspense because he wasn't actually _showing_ me that First Claw was in mortal danger. 
It's one thing to use words like "suicidal" but without appropriate consequences, the word is meaningless. 

I agree with most of the points made in the following review (*except (1) I don't share the reviewer's opinion that Soul Hunter is a "bad" book, indeed I concede that Soul Hunter is a cut above most BL fare and (2) I don't think suspense is necessary for a book to be entertaining*)


...Unlike other Warhammer 40K books where the hero is trying to overcome challenges and often needs outside help to survive or be rescued, Talos needs no saving, instead, he saves everyone else. Talos...succeeds without any outside help.

Nonetheless, [fans] will rejoice over Chaos Marines easily defeating every challenge from Imperial Forces and rival Chaos factions. If the Chaos Marines do die, it is a mere passing by some random event like being hit by a broadside from a starship gun battery.

To be honest, it felt like the enemies of these Chaos Space Marines were led by Dr. Evil from Austin Powers movies, "I shall place you in an easily escapable situation".

Example, the main character, Talos, aka Soul Hunter, is taken prisoner by Chaos Lord Abaddon in the attempt to unite him with the demons and convert him to his faction. But since Talos is the hero of this storyline, he rapidly sees through the attempt and easily kills three human cultist acolytes watching over the ritual. No other Chaos Marines from Abaddon's Legion, or lesser demons, oversee this ritual to ensure his successful conversion or execution. Simply insulting to the reader that Chaos forces would be so blatantly stupid. They tried to convert him, if it failed, Talos would be executed, such is the nature of Chaos. At least Seth Green would have watched over the trap and capped him with a bolt pistol. It would have been more enjoyable if his squad had attempted to fight and rescue him. But no, Talos does everything himself, to include rescuing his injured and captured Serfs.

What is infuriating is that Talos or his squadmates do not plan any retribution against the Chaos factions that tried to subvert him. Even when they awaken the Chaos Dreadnaught, the Exalted (Demon controlled Space Marine) were suppose to be afraid. But nothing is done to realize the fear, the Dreadnaught simply obeys and goes off on a suicide mission, but of course, it will survive undamaged.

There is no suspense in this book [I wouldn't say zero suspense, but close to none]. Every character aligned with the hero (Talos) ridiculously survives and follows his lead. When a released murders attack Talos' loyal serf and he is hacked to pieces, he's not really dead, he's still alive and will make an instantaneous and miraculous recovery. Every plot line is simple and neat for the hero.

Another problem with this novel is that the author describes how damaged and decaying their ship is. But yet, somehow, it was like a Star Trek episode, the Enterprise gets hit and damaged, but miraculously at the end of the episode, it is fully functional with no damage. This is the same for the Chaos vessel in this book. 

Example is in the first big space battle, where the ship is already old, underpowered, understaffed and gets hit by a broadside of Imperial spaceship gun batteries in what the author describes as a "suicidal" maneuver.

Not only do the Chaos Marines board and destroy the larger Imperial vessel, the next chapter of the book has the Chaos vessel operating with no damage, with the only casualties having been due to a boarding pod hit by a gun battery.

After the "suicidal" attack, the exact next sequence of the book describes no damage to the ship, it is fully functional, no structural damage needing repairs, or crews to be replaced.

Then we go to a planetary battle. Yes, there is the Warhound Titan (AT-AT) marching along, after having stomped and destroyed a Chaos Rhino (snowspeeder), a lone Chaos transport dives in to attack and flies around in circles to distract it, just like another snowspeeder did in Return of the Jedi. And yes, on the ground are Chaos marines who place blasting charges onto the foot of the Titan to cripple it, similar to Luke against the AT-AT.

Ok, the logic of the author escapes me. A Space Marine Rhino has a lot of fuel and ammunition, as the Titan crushed it and it exploded, its foot was not destroyed. So how on earth would a handful of charges be expected to cripple its foot? Not logical.

Then their is the battle against the Mechanicus forces where the Chaos Marines not loyal to Abaddon are launched into "suicide" attacks with low chances of survival. 

But to the author, Talos and his entire squad yet again survive unharmed from this "suicidal" attack. Not sure if the author understands the definition of suicidal in being that no one returns. 

In summary, this book has no suspense, is very predictable where the hero always succeeds. One of the Talos' serfs is captured, he will rescue him/ her and they will be fully healed. As soon as the reader finds out that there is a Titan attacking the Chaos Space Marines, we know it will be destroyed by the hero. Imperial Forces killing Chaos Marines, no worries, Talos will arrive and save the day and they will all survive. 
- earliest Amazon customer review


Right, you may start pelting me now


----------



## OIIIIIIO (Dec 16, 2009)

That is what makes Talos so wonderful. The simple fact that he has faced suicidal odds many times and has come through unscathed ... that and his psyker powers of foresight.


----------



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

MontytheMighty said:


> Right, you may start pelting me now


No need. Everyone's allowed their opinions. This one comes up once in a while, though it's always refuted by pretty big odds and explanations. It all comes down to perspective. I look at every incident of those listed, and I see factors that simply don't present it in the same terms as the reviewer there. It's something that's come up in a couple of forum debates before, so I'm not going to go into it all again - it'd take ages. But even the Abaddon example. It's clear from the text that Abaddon has almost no interest in the proceedings. It's not some suicidal trap. It's Abaddon spending five minutes to do a favour for another warlord, and leaving it to a lieutenant who is compromised by his own hubrus and bias. Abaddon doesn't give a toss either way. The reviewer calls the ship "old, underpowered" etc. forgetting that a Chaos warship from the Heresy era still eclipses most Imperial ships by a huge, huge measure. Similarly, he decides that a Titan stepping on a Rhino would detonate a Titan's foot from the tank's engine explosing. Having seen how crappy APC engines are, and how a car/truck/tractor engine explosion is, I find it immeasurably more realistic that melta-bombs (designed specifically to rape armour) would do much, much more damage than a combustion engine going pop. I don't even understand the AT-AT reference. It's nothing like what he's talking about.

See? It's all perspective. I don't recall "telling" anyone First Claw was in danger. *They're cowards who often think they're fucked... then realise they weren't.* Until _Void Stalker_, of course. But then, no one gets out of life alive.

Also, that's not what Mary Sue means. There's a difference between what you're describing and what a Mary Sue character is. Either way, I don't see it; thankfully, 99.9% of reviews don't either. It's all good.

EDIT: I should also note, I tend to think it has very little validity not only because it's so based on perspective, but also because if it was really as forefront and true as stated once in a rare while, more people would notice it, and _Soul Hunter_ and _Blood Reaver_ wouldn't review so highly. I find it difficult to believe the 4 or 5 instances of this topic mentioned in two years, compared to the countering opinions, are some awesome truth that only a rare handful are able to see, as if everyone else was retarded or something.


----------



## deathbringer (Feb 19, 2009)

I think there is a certain amount of what your describing in any novel, I mean put the main charactor in mortal peril with 300 pages to go and odds are he will come out of it unscathed.

Take Eisenhorn or Gaunts Ghosts, both Abnett novels, with critical acclaim and two of my favourite novels ever, Eisenhorn is being forced to put a gun to his head by a psyker and another one stops the bullet, Gaunt and his cronies survive horrific odds time and time again. If authors did a true vision of war, especially with IG novels which is mindless bloody slaughter against horrific odds, we would have a constant regurgitation of new charactors that we could never engage with or learn to adore, plus the hit when one of the bastards finally hits the dust would be minimal.

When bequin went down in Eisenhorn, I was crushed, when Torgadden and Loken went down in the heresy I was absolutely gutted and even more gutted to learn the latter wasn't truly dead. 

I think there has to be a certain invulnerability about the charactors otherwise you would never get the badass aura that makes black library novels so engaging and entertaining or any form of engagement.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I think you should check out Graham McNeil's Uriel. That character seriously pisses me off. Talk about escaping impossible (LITERALLY) odds, and just getting out of it unscathed. I hope he dies with the shard of Erebus getting shoved up his ass.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

deathbringer said:


> I think there is a certain amount of what your describing in any novel, I mean put the main charactor in mortal peril with 300 pages to go and odds are he will come out of it unscathed.
> 
> Take Eisenhorn or Gaunts Ghosts, both Abnett novels, with critical acclaim and two of my favourite novels ever, Eisenhorn is being forced to put a gun to his head by a psyker and another one stops the bullet, Gaunt and his cronies survive horrific odds time and time again. If authors did a true vision of war, especially with IG novels which is mindless bloody slaughter against horrific odds, we would have a constant regurgitation of new charactors that we could never engage with or learn to adore, plus the hit when one of the bastards finally hits the dust would be minimal.
> 
> ...


This. Like deathbringer says, you'll find the majority of the most popular main characters are quite the Mary Sue's.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

Thanks for the reply Mr. Dembski Bowden.
Another criticism of mine is that I never got a sense of what a deadly enemy the BA were. Allow me to explain...

When the Night Lords and the Blood Angels duke it out on the Covenant of Blood in Soul Hunter, we have descriptive scenes showing Talos and co. offing hapless BA.

While I was reading the passages describing struggle, I got no sense that the BA were just as deadly as their Night Lord cousins. The BA appeared to be doing only two things: killing human serfs and getting massacred by First Claw. 
Only later on in Blood Reaver did I find out that the BA killed "almost thirty of our [Night Lord] warriors"...and then I was like "ah I see, I suppose they did manage to give as good as they got"

But my point is...wouldn't it be more effective to actually show them killing a few Night Lords, rather than just mentioning those deaths in passing? After all, the BA are the main antagonists and should be the toughest challenge so far for the NL. It's rather hard to paint the BA as these deadly foes if you gloss over the serious casualties they've inflicted, rather than describing a few in detail. I thought it was a missed opportunity to really highlight what lethal enemies the BA were. Anyway, that's just how I felt. 



Dead.Blue.Clown said:


> that's not what Mary Sue means. There's a difference between what you're describing and what a Mary Sue character is.


I suppose that Mary Sue is poor word choice on my part. I did not pick it to offend. It should be painfully clear from the OP that I think you're a talented authour. 

To draw a parallel, I'll point out that the Gotrek and Felix novels have a similar "problem" (in my opinion of course)...don't know if you've read the William King series. 

Gotrek and Felix never win "easily" (and can thus, I suppose, avoid the abominable label of "Mary Sues"), but the two constantly manage to beat stacked odds and pull off unlikely victories. After a few repetitions, their "unlikely" victories become mundane and expected. Admittedly, the "problem" is more pronounced with the Gotrek and Felix novels because that series has been going on for many more installments than the NL series. 

That said, Talos and First Claw remind me more of Gotrek and Felix than of your typical Ultramarine-style Mary Sues. Your typical Mary Sue has the annoying tendency to win regularly with effortless ease. 
On the other hand, Talos and co. (like Gotrek and Felix) consistently pull off victories by the skin of their teeth. The effect on my level of suspense, however, is the same. 



> It's clear from the text that Abaddon has almost no interest in the proceedings. It's not some suicidal trap. It's Abaddon spending five minutes to do a favour for another warlord, and leaving it to a lieutenant who is compromised by his own hubrus and bias. Abaddon doesn't give a toss either way.





> The reviewer calls the ship "old, underpowered" etc. forgetting that a Chaos warship from the Heresy era still eclipses most Imperial ships by a huge, huge measure.


good to hear your explanations, thanks



> Similarly, he decides that a Titan stepping on a Rhino would detonate a Titan's foot from the tank's engine explosing. Having seen how crappy APC engines are, and how a car/truck/tractor engine explosion is, I find it immeasurably more realistic that melta-bombs (designed specifically to rape armour) would do much, much more damage than a combustion engine going pop.


to be fair, there's a lot of explosive ammunition in a rhino
but as you've pointed out, melta-charges are specifically designed to rape armour 



> I don't even understand the AT-AT reference. It's nothing like what he's talking about.


not really a Star Wars fan myself

@ deathbringer, ckcrawford, and Angel of Blood
points taken


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

MontytheMighty said:


> But my point is...wouldn't it be more effective to actually show them killing a few Night Lords, rather than just mentioning those deaths in passing? After all, the BA are the main antagonists and should be the toughest challenge so far for the NL. It's rather hard to paint the BA as these deadly foes if you gloss over the serious casualties they've inflicted, rather than describing a few in detail.


The problem with something like that is in doing so you risk boxing future actions in.

Plus, it was a rather large ship all things considered and there are only so many claws. They each would have had to spread out to engage all the boarders, since it would be a bad idea to concentrate everything in one area. (Divide and conquer and whatnot.)




MontytheMighty said:


> Gotrek and Felix never win "easily" (and can thus, I suppose, avoid the abominable label of "Mary Sues"), but the two constantly manage to beat stacked odds and pull off unlikely victories.


In the defense of Gurnisson and Jaeger, always keep in mind that the first is a slayer wielding an enchanted rune axe made of material not of that world. For the likes of him, nothing short of batting a comet back into orbit is unlikely.

The other is, all things considered, an accomplished swordsman who (and this is only going on the early books mind you) wields an enchanted sword that is a relic for a knightly order.

I know the early novels don't so much have them going up against unlikely odds. (I do not consider Gotrek facing off and defeating a warpstone infused troll in trollsalyer to be unlikely odds, since thats kind of what he does.) Some of those stories actually have them fighting rather pathetic odds, and some more even odds.


----------



## Xisor (Oct 1, 2011)

For what it's worth, the choice of the *phrase* Mary Sue here to mean something (which has since been pointed out) that it does not _deeply offends me_.

But that's beside the point.

If I had to pick a serious flaw with the Night Lords books, I'd look squarely at the same problem which, for me, appears in _The Tome of Fire_ books by Nick Kyme...

---

*You're a Wizard, Harry*

Both Hazon Da'kir and Talos suffer, by their preordained 'arc'/nature, from being a little too special. I think both would sincerely benefit from not being 'the son of a prophecy' and 'the prophet' respectively. Their roles in the story don't require these 'extra super special' bonuses, but we have them. It's not a huge point, but when it comes to the integrity of the story, I think Hazon's arc would be improved by him not being the inexplicably obviously critical fulcrum of prophesy, instead coming off as more of an incidental/reactionary figures than a ... whatever he is. A wizard, the Ignean who lived (to become an Astartes).

I don't mind Hazon Da'kir becoming a Psyker either, that could've been 'prompted' by exposure to an artefact. 

Similarly, Talos as a character is sly, witty and competent enough to have been a senior figure in the Legion without also being a super-psychic bearer of the Primarch's curse. Of course, he's not, but it strikes me (repeatedly) as the only real glaring problem with an otherwise tremendous series. I can accept huge swathes of convenience and coincidence, but this 'extra special' bit has for a while struck me as a little too much.

(In a manner, it's the same problem I have with Kai in _The Outcast Dead_ being the best Astropath available rather than just a senior astropath in the middle of a serious situation...)

Edit: I'm not sure that earliest review needs to be considered/referenced. Bleargh.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

Xisor said:


> For what it's worth, the choice of the *phrase* Mary Sue here to mean something (which has since been pointed out) that it does not _deeply offends me_.


right...no offense intended
Talos and co. pull through by the skin of their teeth _too often_ (perhaps I should invent a new term for this type of character). "Jus barely" winning has almost become a predictable habit of theirs. 
They suffer supposedly crippling setbacks but their rather convenient recoveries often render those setbacks to be inconsequential 
this dynamic reminds me of Gotrek and Felix...and those two characters strike me as rather unstoppable/Mary Sue-ish 



> Edit: I'm not sure that earliest review needs to be considered/referenced. Bleargh.


I believe it does because it saves me the time of having to type out the same points
I mean, I did hide it between spoiler tags to save space...

Here's a good discussion about the "Mary Sue" issue from another 40k board. Some good points and counterpoints are made:




T said:


> I hate to use the term "Mary Sue" because this isn't fanfiction...well, not really. However, the way the Night Lords were presented in "Blood Reaver" really does make the legion (or at least First Claw) on a whole a little M.S.-esque.
> 
> Talos is a seer, but apparently not a psychic or corrupted at all. Unlike everyone else, he seemingly has no desire for authority but he's just so awesome he winds up in positions of authority. He's good to his slaves. He never puts a foot wrong. He has an awesome nickname given to him by the Primarch (but he doesn't like to use it.) He was the smartest kid in the room in school, but he wasn't popular and everyone thought he was a dullard, but he sure showed them. He's a space marine now. He's even fighting to reject his own gene-seed? Wouldn't that kill him a week after implantation? Where's the character flaw? A real flaw, not "he saw the best and brightest aspects of his tortured primarch, willfully ignoring his madness".
> 
> ...





K said:


> You do realize that by the standards you've just laid down, it's impossible to even have a protagonist in a multi-part story that wouldn't be classified as a Mary Sue, right?





T said:


> Not my standards: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_sue (I'm going by that one, since there are a lot of definitions out there.)
> 
> The parallel I would like to draw is to Anthony Reynolds's "Dark [X]" Word Bearers series. That is another series where there are no truly good guys. The protagonist, Marduk, has plenty of flaws and it is left to the reader whether to cheer for him or hope he gets his what-fer in the end. Marduk is a bad guy. Sure, he's doing wrong to other bad guys, but he generally does it in such a fashion that the reader can't feel good about enjoying his triumphs.
> 
> ...





A D-B said:


> In a move that will shock no one, I can't reeeeally say I agree. See, my pet hate with fiction is characters whose flaws do nothing but make them more badass. I loathe Blade, I think Wolverine is awful, and I can't stand Drizzt Do'Urden. They're all characters whose curses and flaws do nothing but make them cool, attractive, and more badass than anyone else. It's literally the one thing I hate most in fiction, designed purely to appeal to the basest, most shallow engagements with a story.
> 
> And I don't really see First Claw like that. Talos is a seer that only ever sees bad stuff, and it doesn't always come true. He's not a particularly great leader. He's not brilliant at controlling his own squad, let alone (as we'll see) a battle company. He's deluded, which earns him more enemies than friends. He's good to his slaves, which will come back to bite him on the arse soon enough, like all of his "nobler" decisions. He has practically no friends, no comfort, and he's pretty much living with a dull sense of maudlin spite colouring everything he does. His one plan to get the Legion two ships and increase the warband's supplies exponentially ended up losing them the Covenant of Blood, and their commander, because Talos's "great" find in another Navigator is pretty bad at her job a lot of the time.
> 
> ...





T said:


> With all due respect (and I know this is a fight I can't possibly win:
> 
> I see Talos as exactly like that. Talos is as grimdark as it gets and is probably one of the most 'good' characters I've ever read in 40k fic. He's from the scariest of the scary legions, he's spend millennia torturing his way across the galaxy yadda yadda. Why then, does he come off as such a cool guy who doesn't afraid of anything?
> 
> ...





K said:


> Painting Mary Sue over protagonism is a mistake, and Mary Sue is used entirely too often as an excuse to accuse perfectly good characterization with some sort of preemptively plot-armored charm that doesn't exist, especially if the story isn't done with yet. There's nothing in literature that stipulates the readership must cheer for the good guys, or that the "good guys" even need to be cheered for. Blood Reaver balanced out whatever victories Talos & Co had with dire portents, the loss of an irreplaceable ship, a haunted Navigator, a duplicitous Tech-Adept, the undying enmity of the Red Corsairs in addition to the undying enmity of Abaddon's Black Legion, a pack of crazy Raptors whose motives are as variable as their loyalties, an Apothecary whose only motive seems to be whether or not something is/is not boring him, and internal political backstabbing to undermine the "leader"'s position, a leader whom, I may add, keeps being burdened with responsibilities he may not even be prepared for and whose "gift" may either kill him or at least render him incapable of that leadership, and the only people he can trust despise him.



It's fine to have characters pulling through by the skin of their teeth, but I feel that this happens _too often_ in the series and the negative consequences are surprisingly mild...
while reading about certain encounters, I was often amazed that every single member of First Claw manages to survive relatively unscathed (yeah, they get wounded, but I'm just shocked that none of them kick the bucket at that time)


----------



## Xisor (Oct 1, 2011)

The trouble with 'not pulling through by the skin of their teeth' is that it leaves two options:
- Outright losing
- Winning without trouble.

My point with not using the original review is that it's pretty poor. As with T's posts? I don't see it at all. It's an if-by-whisky argument, one which could easily be inverted for no loss of 'integrity'. 

I don't see how Talos' situation is anything less than awful. Unlike, say, The Doctor, he's not secretly loving it. Uzas might be, but Talos isn't.


----------



## MontytheMighty (Jul 21, 2009)

Xisor said:


> The trouble with 'not pulling through by the skin of their teeth' is that it leaves two options:
> - Outright losing
> - Winning without trouble.


I think the issue is that even when they've "barely pulled through", the damage done is too mild or promptly negated
examples:




> Then their is the battle against the Mechanicus forces where the Chaos Marines not loyal to Abaddon are launched into "suicide" attacks with low chances of survival. But to the author, Talos and his entire squad yet again survive unharmed from this "suicidal" attack.


I think the above incident would've been a good time to off a few squad members 



> What I got out of the ending was 1. Everyone important survived. 2. Vandred died, but got awesome right at the end and Talos didn't have to take him down, thus robbing the reader of the most anticipated showdown building over two books. 3. The Covenant was destroyed...but oh, look a new ship...just like the Covenant...and this one isn't corrupted and actually seems to like Octavia. Maybe it's just me, but I find that to be a little syrupy-sweet.






> As with T's posts? I don't see it at all. It's an if-by-whisky argument, one which could easily be inverted for no loss of 'integrity'.


care to elaborate...cuz I'm not seeing what your argument at all


----------

