# Character Reuse - Discussion



## bobss (May 18, 2008)

We've seen it before, familiar faces appearing in pre-, inter- or sequels, often for the benefit of their character or for our own enjoyment. In a setting as expansive as the 41st millennium, the 31st millennium and the ten thousand years sandwiched in between, the potential gain of this can also appear to stifle creativity.

Positives:

_The New Angle_. In a sequel format we can see the continued development of a character, how their new circumstances affects them and how they react to this. In a prequel or interquel format we are privy to the events that led up to a character's physical and mental condition at an already known point. In either format, a character's appearance in a different situation can lead to new or further appreciation.
*Example:* In _Betrayer_ Lorgar realises and reflects how Guilliman never hated him until the ambush at Calth. Looking at Guilliman from Lorgar's perspective provided a new appreciation for Guilliman's hurt.

_The Familiar Face_. Quite simply, a character who's known to us can provide a basis of familiarity in a new and unknown environment. With this anchor we can experience the situation first-hand and grow as they themselves grow.
*Example:* Lucius was vain to begin with, if not mad, but his devotion to swordsmanship kept him relatively unswerving and provided a window into the debaucheries of the Emperor's Children and their primarch after Isstvan V.

_The Reinforced Continuity_. This is perhaps a personal positive. A known character in a different area of the setting reinforces the sense of connection within the overall setting. Instead of the author telling us or providing a map, the author can demonstrate this with his characters. Sometimes it can provide more plausibility.
*Example:* We're aware Abaddon fought in the Horus Heresy, but seeing him in the flesh beside Horus in _Horus Rising_'s present; the 31st millennium, really reinforces this fact. Not that we doubted it before, but it does breathe life into the legend.

Negatives:

_The Small Neighbourhood_. In an expansive setting dealing with a galaxy's worth of characters, known characters having met each other before is entirely possible, but unlikely. This can lead to webs of characters interacting with each other often in a prequel or interquel setting that may require more suspense of disbelief on the reader's behalf.
*Example:* Many of the big Chaos Marine figures in 40k meeting each other at the Siege of Terra isn't out of the question, especially if they were each a First Captain, but indistinct Legionaries who would later go on to craft their own legend meeting each other at rather inconspicuous times leaves something to be desired.
_The Untapped Potential_. This is a derivative, but also the flip-side to _The New Angle_ in that while a recurring character placed into a different set of circumstances can unlock new appreciation for themselves, a fresh character with their own personality, motivations, beliefs and skills can unlock original appreciation for the greater group or organisation they belong to. As is stated in one-novel-or-another, each Space Marine believes themselves to be the centre of their own epic. With that in mind, why focus on the 'same old bunch' when a new character could be created and explored?
*Example:* On this forum some members wanted original Iron Warriors characters in _Angel Exterminatus_ to those present in _Storm of Iron_. Also, when an originally Thousand Sons protagonist in ADB's forthcoming Black Legion series was revealed, people then asked who they were from McNeill's _A Thousand Sons_.

Now granted, Black Library is ultimately tie-in fiction to the universe presented in the source material, so it isn't uncommon for a Daemon Primarch, Space Marine Chapter or Ork Warlord to make a cameo or be referenced, but I'm dealing with novel protagonists and characters of a central nature. Guys like Loken, Argel Tal, Kroeger etc. 

If there's a positive or negative you reckon I've missed I'd love to see it, but otherwise - what do _you_ think about this issue? Do you like to see recurring characters or are you more concerned by a completely original approach?


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Tying-in the big players can add to the "veracity" of the fiction; similar to maintaining places and ensuring that the continuation occurs across the story-line; i.e a Room with Blue Walls should have Blue Walls in the second book, to give it simply.

However, including "special characters" simply because; or my worst one, including MADE-UP CHARACTERS of your own, ACROSS SETTINGS is terrible.

I'll give an example; Dan Abnett; he's written the Gaunts Ghosts, and Double Eagle. The Phantine XX and another tank regiment (the Phyressians, IIRC?) appeared seperately in one of the former books; anhd then appeared together in the Doubel Eagle, and hopefully, his Interceptor City. That's a plus. Outside of seeing a quick mention of precursor hints to his Iron Snakes, or possibly the regiments mentioned therein, I don't want to read in his 30K books about the ancestor to Gaunt, or Corbec, or whoever.

Looking at Graham McNeil, as we all know where this is going; the difference is, Angel Exterminatus was a terrible book. One of the worst, down there with Nemesis, Fear to Tread, Outcast Dead, and the-book-that-does-not-exist. However, one of his biggest crimes was setting the scene, and then having climax be "Honsou". Seriously. I worked it out when I was writing about the book half-way through reading it; about Hon. Soulaka was such a nonentity and a dead character, when it clicked. Hon. Soulaka, Hon. Sou, Honsou. I won't put spoilers for it, because it's a) been out too long and b) I'll save you a painful few hours of reading.

The rest of the book on the whole could have effectively *not happened*; and the one good thing about the book, the characterisation of how "nobody loved Perty" could have been done in a short, or as part of "The Crimson Fist".

So; that left us with a shit book, with only a single minor good point, which left Honsou as being the only notable occurence within the book; made all the more noticeable by the lack of anything else of "interest".

The good name that he generated with the HH's Thousand Sons seemed to change it all around, and then, he fucked it up, by taking £12 of my money to essentially say "here's this character in a book's origin story".

If I said I went and saw "Le Bleu Tower" in "Les Red Province" and ate "Les Blancs", you wouldn't know what I was on about other than that I was in (likely) france. But If I said I went to the Eiffel Tower in Paris and ate frogs legs, you'd know instantly about the place and setting.

The high point and ending of a book should not be filler material, scene setting stuff. if it had been in the heart of the book, and nothing more was mentioned regarding it, it would be fine, but it was in the Epilogue, it's the last damn thing you remember.

Let's just not talk about how he "named" his corny 80's saturday morning TV show 4th company, either, in that terrible short he did, either. The Crazy Horses or Undefatiguables or the Expendables or whatever else it is? What's he gonna call the 1st, Guilliman's Heroes?

yes, this turned into a Mcneil slagging session, but that's how this thread was going to turn out anyway, as really, he's the worst offender at it.


----------



## Stephen74 (Oct 1, 2010)

The reuse of characters is of obvious importance in a continuing story line. However, with a few exceptions, reusing characters over 10,000 years is a tough challenge. Over 10,000 years their character is going to change. If it doesn't then they don't fit in and when it does, fans don't understand the concept and object.

It also doesn't work if the characters lack depth and it's difficult to achieve this when you have different authors writing about the same characters in different ways. It just becomes confusing and stupid. 

To look at a fantasy series that reused characters, Dragonlance, the main characters from the original trilogy appeared again and again in books but they never lost their identity or had it confused or had one they did in one book contradicted in another. You don't get that in BL books. The characters end up all over the place as different authors get their hands on them.


----------



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

Vaz said:


> I'll give an example; Dan Abnett; he's written the Gaunts Ghosts, and Double Eagle. The Phantine XX and another tank regiment (the Phyressians, IIRC?) appeared seperately in one of the former books; anhd then appeared together in the Doubel Eagle, and hopefully, his Interceptor City. That's a plus. Outside of seeing a quick mention of precursor hints to his Iron Snakes, or possibly the regiments mentioned therein, I don't want to read in his 30K books about the ancestor to Gaunt, or Corbec, or whoever.


Interesting timing for this topic because Dan Abnett has actually confirmed he is about to do this.



Fist of Dorn said:


> Interview with Dan Abnett:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCKkiZSR5W8
> 
> Around 13:00 makes mention of a Space Marines Battle Novel with Iron Snakes with his wife Nik, also involves characters from Titanicus.


The Iron Snakes characters from _Salvation's Reach_ and some characters from _Titanicus_, I assume the survivors, will be featured in his coming SMB novel that is set on the same planet and at the same time as the coming GG book, _The Warmaster_.


LotN


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

I'm fine with that though. It's like Vaz said though, I don't want to see Captain Ghauntt, part of some Imperial Army unit called the Sabatticles, attached to a loyalist Legion whose wife's name back home is Anabelle Kurt, his son is called Milov and the good medic of his Army Unit is Dordenian. Which is what I would expect from Mcneil.


----------



## mal310 (May 28, 2010)

Lord of the Night said:


> Interesting timing for this topic because Dan Abnett has actually confirmed he is about to do this.
> 
> LotN


About to do what LOTN? Interceptor City?


----------



## Anakwanar (Sep 26, 2011)

'Interesting timing for this topic because Dan Abnett has actually confirmed he is about to do this.Interview with Dan Abnett:



Around 13:00 makes mention of a Space Marines Battle Novel with Iron Snakes with his wife Nik, also involves characters from Titanicus'

Just to clarify - the only person from Salvation Reach in it, would be Holofurnace. The other characters from Iron Snakes are Priam and Damocles squad - from Iron Snakes book and background story from Tactica Imperialis background book. 
Also it all will happen at forgeworld Urdesh - thats why we will see 'Red Fury' himself - Titanicus support for Iron Snakes assault. Also Warmaster would be in it - and it would cover Urdesh campaign. 
For now BL TEAM is voting for cover - it could be John Sullivan, Neil Roberts (he is too busy now) or Karl Kopinskiy - whom cover do you want to see?


----------



## Anakwanar (Sep 26, 2011)

To mal310 - yes, he will do Interceptor city, eventually (in 2-3 years). LOTN meant the reuse of characters in another books. Gaunt ghosts in Iron Snakes, Iron Snakes in GG, Titanicus in both, Phantine in all 3, and all 3 previous in Interceptor city etc. etc.
And no. where would be none Gaunt relatives in HH. So dont worry


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

I might be the only one but...

I like to see repeat of characters. It builds, you know?

Not to use specific characters, but say there's a dominant Chaos character in WH40k. I'd love to see him as an Emperor-loving Astartes in WH30k. And then his steady (or sudden) reversal of loyalties. 

Now to use a specific character, take Talos from ADB's Night Lord series. In _Blood Reaver_ we learn that Talos use to passionately believe in the Emperor and the Imperium. I'd love to see even the beginning of his change of loyalties. What events lead to him betraying the Imperium. Surely it must be more interesting than because Cruze said so, right?
~~~~~~

I see where people are coming from. The entire Heresy wasn't devised by, led by, and fought by five dozen characters. It spanned a galaxy and probably had tens of trillions of people fighting on either side. And I will agree that we more characters isn't a bad thing.

I don't think we should have them running as main characters (at least all the time) like we did in _Angel Exterminatus_, but I personally liked how we got to see the Nassir Amit in _Fear to Tread_ (one of the few things I liked about the otherwise crappy book). Or the mention of a Captian Damocles of the Ultramarine Legion (perhaps a key leader in the future Iron Snakes Chapter?).

I like these little tie ins. It makes the universe feel...alive. Instead of a series of novels made by a bunch of middle aged men.

Then again I'm the guy who likes it when authors start describing the etiquette of neighboring countries or the style differences between swordmen (not the boring, X is slightly stronger but this is off-set by Y being slightly faster. I've seen that comparison a billion times in my fantasy reading). It allows me to get immersed in the story.
~~~

All in all, I'm okay with it. Not EVERYONE should be doing it, or we end up with a galaxy of 50 characters. But throwing in some characters (even as passing reference) is cool, in my opinion.

On one hand, if an author uses his own characters it seems to be a literary masturbation session. On the other hand, it's dangerous to allow someone else to play with your characters. I don't begrudge authors that (sparingly, in term of lime light) reuse their characters in other stories. I like it, to an extent.


----------



## mal310 (May 28, 2010)

Anakwanar said:


> To mal310 - yes, he will do Interceptor city, eventually (in 2-3 years). LOTN meant the reuse of characters in another books. Gaunt ghosts in Iron Snakes, Iron Snakes in GG, Titanicus in both, Phantine in all 3, and all 3 previous in Interceptor city etc. etc.
> And no. where would be none Gaunt relatives in HH. So dont worry


Thanks for the info Anakwanar.


----------



## jasonpittman (May 17, 2010)

I seem to be in the minority but I loved Angel Exterminatus and thought the inclusion of the Iron Warriors from Storm of Iron was a touch of genius.


----------



## darkreever (Apr 3, 2008)

Personally, when it comes to re-using characters I don't mind them so much except for when someone has Superhero Syndrome.

This is most notably the ability to 'come back from the dead,' both literally and from what appears to be death. This is most notable with Loken, who's actions on Istvaan III were never meant to do anything more than be a thorn in Horus's side and to show that the loyalists would not just lie down and die. For him to come back, albeit in the Garro audio's only so far, robs some of the meaning behind the sacrifice he made.

Another example of this is Cyrene from The First Heretic. While not much of a character in and of herself, to Argel Tal she represented (at least to me) a measure of hope and humanity; especially in the wake of what he had become. Her death robbed him of that one hope, that shred of humanity he was clinging to, and it was good to see how much she ultimately meant to him. Then you have her return in Angel Exterminatus and she is horrified/disgusted at what he has become, though he largely became that because he lost her.


----------



## forkmaster (Jan 2, 2010)

darkreever said:


> Another example of this is Cyrene from The First Heretic. While not much of a character in and of herself, to Argel Tal she represented (at least to me) a measure of hope and humanity; especially in the wake of what he had become. Her death robbed him of that one hope, that shred of humanity he was clinging to, and it was good to see how much she ultimately meant to him. Then you have her return in Angel Exterminatus and she is horrified/disgusted at what he has become, though he largely became that because he lost her.


I take it you mean _Betrayer_! And yes that was beautiful scene to see how Argel Tal has changed. I think there should be connections otherwise 40k seems so distant but I dont think they should be main characters like in _AE_ (even though I liked that book). It should be more like cameos or hints (like _Prince of Crows_ or how Abentt handles them in his own work).


----------



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

darkreever said:


> Personally, when it comes to re-using characters I don't mind them so much except for when someone has Superhero Syndrome.
> 
> This is most notably the ability to 'come back from the dead,' both literally and from what appears to be death. This is most notable with Loken, who's actions on Istvaan III were never meant to do anything more than be a thorn in Horus's side and to show that the loyalists would not just lie down and die. For him to come back, albeit in the Garro audio's only so far, robs some of the meaning behind the sacrifice he made.
> 
> Another example of this is Cyrene from The First Heretic. While not much of a character in and of herself, to Argel Tal she represented (at least to me) a measure of hope and humanity; especially in the wake of what he had become. Her death robbed him of that one hope, that shred of humanity he was clinging to, and it was good to see how much she ultimately meant to him. Then you have her return in Angel Exterminatus and she is horrified/disgusted at what he has become, though he largely became that because he lost her.


I see what your saying here and I agree with you in part. I do agree that Superhero Syndrome as you put it is an issue, characters should not just come back from the dead as they do in comic books. And Loken I think does fit that, even though he was never actually dead because he was never intended to die at Istvaan, because his supposed death became such a big thing in the Death of Innocence theme that finding out he was alive cheapened the tragedy of his death and the death of his, and the galaxy's, innocence at the beginning of the Heresy, the beginning of the end. That said Loken was not meant to die at Istvaan so I imagine there is much more ahead for him, what he was really meant to do in the Heresy series, and I think that those things will make up for the technical resurrection he underwent.

But Cyrene, I do not think is a case of this. She didn't come back from the dead, she was resurrected and it was not simple or something treated casually. That scene with Erebus, Kharn and Argel Tal is chilling and creepy, and I got the sense that what Erebus did there is a... violation of the rules so to speak. The rules of reality, I think Erebus broke them when he brought Cyrene back. However you phrase it, I think that what Erebus did isn't something that was meant to be possible or to be attempted, yet he did it and it not only worked but it worked beyond expectations and created a Perpetual, but even the Perpetuals themselves don't seem to know how it happened. Returning from death is something that is often discussed or attempted in 40k and 30k but those have been things like reincarnation, transferring to another body or being transformed into a Daemon. Cyrene was actually brought back from the dead, that has never actually happened before and I think there is far more to it than a simple "comic book return from the dead," I think that she will play a very big role in what is to come and that what happened to her isn't something we'll be seeing ever again.


LotN


----------

