# Russ and Magnus



## Emperorguard500 (May 5, 2010)

was there any primarch rivalry bigger or as big as Magnus and Russ.....

Russ and Magnus pretty much flat out hated each other, i cant think of any primarch rivalry that was as deep as theirs..


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

I dunno, Curze tried to KILL Dorn. 

I don't think Russ and Magnus hated each other. Russ hated Magnus's dabbling in the forbidden arts. Magnus hated how narrow minded Russ was about psychic abilities. They didn't actually hate each other. Merely their stances on sorcery (or rather where the line of legitimate psychic abilities ended and sorcery began).

In _Prospero Burns_ Russ mistakenly believes he's sending a last ditch message to Magnus to surrender.

"That’s not why I’m talking to you now. I’m talking to you because I hope you’ll listen. I’m talking to you as the personal courtesy extended from one brother to another. What is about to happen should not be happening. *You know I do not want this. You know it tears my heart to commit against you, *and it breaks the very soul of our father to place his sons in opposition. But you have done this. You have brought this. You have brought this action."

I don't think they hated each other.

As for pre-heresy hate (as there's plenty post-heresy)...

Iron Warriors and Imperial Fists (though it seemed more IW hating on the IF. The IF were too cool to hate ).

Word Bearers-->Ultramarines. Again, mostly WB to UM, but the UM did hold the WBs with some disdain.

There was some DA/SW tension, but that apparently boiled away.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I wouldn't call Russ and Magnus a Rivalry. Russ was a good brother but was up to the task when the time came for it.

The Lion vs Russ for example. Later Prospero.

The first time any evidence suggests the two legions ever collided was on Ravenspire, where Magnus defended the library against the Wolves by telling the Scarab Cult to kill them. This action is the first in which Russ looks at Magnus completely differently, showing that he has lost perspective of his actions and eventually leading up to Nikea. Before this, there is just minor discontent about philosophies and perspectives. I wouldn't call it a rivalry as they didn't try to out do one another with their different doctrines.

The rivalries were usually between legions of the same doctrines

Blood Angels and World Eaters

Iron Warriors and Imperial Fists

Wolves of Fenris and Dark Angels


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

ckcrawford said:


> The rivalries were usually between legions of the same doctrines
> 
> Blood Angels and World Eaters
> 
> Wolves of Fenris and Dark Angels


I don't think these 2 pairs shared the same _modus operandi_.

In _Fear to Tread_ the BA are depicted as a noble legion. The red thirst overtaking most of the Legion is a complete shock to everyone. Almost no one outside the Legion even knew of its existence pre-heresy (probably even post-heresy). It was a well kept secret.

This is completely different from the WEs. They were berserkers in battle. No questions asked. They knew it. Everyone else knew it. Heck, they wanted everyone else to know it. That was one tool in their belt. No one would be stupid enough to face a WE force because if they did, the WEs would not stop until everything was dead. No one would be stupid enough to take that risk.

As for the SW and DAs...

I don't know how they are exactly similar. Could you explain how they are?

I'd probably say they're rather different. Both on the battlefield and off it.


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

Dorn was scared of curze, but hate is too strong I honestly don't think primarchs hated each other.

The one exception I can think of is Ferrus to Fulgrim on Istavaan, not a long term rivalry, but Ferrus did go a bit mental

Lorgar never hated Gulliman, he explains in Fear to tread that he pity's him

Perturabo possibly with dorn, but i think that was due to their treatment by the emperor


----------



## Lost&Damned (Mar 25, 2012)

Barnster said:


> The one exception I can think of is Ferrus to Fulgrim on Istavaan, not a long term rivalry, but Ferrus did go a bit mental
> 
> Lorgar never hated Gulliman, he explains in Fear to tread that he pity's him


>Ferrus went a little mental.
lol, did you even read the book, i assure you it was Fulgrim that was the insane one.


----------



## zerachiel76 (Feb 12, 2010)

Apart from the ones listed already I can only think of the following:

According to the fluff Corax didn't get on with Horus but I'm not sure if this counts as rivalry.

From Lion El'Jonson's reaction to hearing what Guilliman's up to maybe this hints at rivalry there too. Both strategic masters in the same mould.

The Alpharius - Guilliman rivalry is interesting where Guilliman tells Alpharius he and his legion will never be as good as the Ultramarines. Alpharius says he just ignored Guilliman after that but went and pushed his legion harder to be more successful so Guilliman's jibe must have had some effect.


----------



## Barnster (Feb 11, 2010)

Lost&Damned;1309781 said:


> lol, did you even read the book, i assure you it was Fulgrim that was the insane one.


Ferrus lost all sense of military objectivity. Fulgrim baited him and he fell for it. This is true despite the possession of Fulgrim and the corruption of the children. 

Fulgrim may have been insane, ferrus was blinded by rage

Despite not being able to predict the massacre, greater planning could have helped fight a more effective battle


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Barnster said:


> Lorgar never hated Gulliman, he explains in Fear to tread that he pity's him


I do not know if there's hate, but there seems to be some serious...feelings from Lorgar to Guilliman.

In _First Heretic_

"Does it please you [, Guilliman,] to witness my shame? Does it please you? Do you enjoy seeing my efforts reduced to ashes while our father favours you?"

A little later on, Guilliman informs Lorgar that the Custodes will be following the Word Bearers as watchers:

"And does our father set hounds to watch over you? Do they reside in your precious empire of Ultramar, whispering of your every move? I see the shadow of a smile on your lips. These others do not know you as I do, brother. Our sons may not see the amusement in your eyes, but I am not blind to such nuance."

Lorgar more or less concludes his (as Guilliman himself describes it as "tantrum) with "You will never mock me again, brother. Is that understood?"

There are some serious slights flowing both ways.

Then in _Know no Fear_...

"'You are against us,' Lorgar whispers...

'We have no attacked you,' Guilliman insists.

'You turned on us once. You shamed us and humiliated us. You will not do so again.'"

Later on in the book when Guilliman asks why Lorgar would attack, Lorgar explains...

"'This has nothing to do with our *enmity*, Roboute...Expect that it affords me the opporutnity to avenge my honour on you and your ridiculous toy soldiers."

Bold, mine. Enmity is a pretty strong word. This isn't a strong disagreement of what should be done, but an active dislike.

Then Lorgar states what he believes Guilliman feels about him:

"Whatever you think of me, Roboute, whatever your opinion, *and I know it is about as low as it can be,* you know I am not a stupid man."

Lorgar has some serious feelings about Guilliman and what Guilliman thinks of him. It's probably beyond "rivalry".


----------



## cegorach (Nov 29, 2010)

I would have said Lorgar and Guilliman, but I am horrifically outdated now. 

But I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss the hatred between Russ and Magnus. I mean, just because Russ attempted to send Magnus a last minute message (I bet Tzeentch was laughing his arse off when he heard that), I took it not to mean that Russ didn't hate Magnus, but that he was so shocked that one of his brothers in arms would actually go that far, he didn't want to have to face his own brothers, he didn't want to face the reality of the war which they were in the midst of. 

So, I think they definitely hated each other, as much as they had time to. Just Russ didn't want this war to happen against his big ol dad. 

I think Magnus really didn't like Russ, especially since that incident with the library. And the witch hunt style with which Russ prosecuted Magnus, whether he admits it or not. 

All we have as evidence for Magnus's spy network is Russ's say so. And we all know how THAT turned out. So Russ built up an elaborate plan, with tricks and schemes and fake friends to trick Magnus and get him to Nikkea and force him to obey. 

Now I may be bias, but come on this isn't something you do to your bestest mate in the whole wide grim dark universe is it. 

But I think Lorgar and Guilliman come a close second, with that pimp slap being one of my favorite moments in the entire heresy. 

Alpharius is one of many primarchs who claims he is "above the rivalry" but ... I dunno I think I believe him a little. If he was planning to do that whole assaulting terra thing, I would argue that the reason he constantly put his men in more and more difficult situations and harsh terrains was not to show off, but to maybe toughen them up against the coming fight, so not just as a "fuck you" to Guilliman. So I think they were more square than Magnus and Russ.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

cegorach said:


> All we have as evidence for Magnus's spy network is Russ's say so. And we all know how THAT turned out. So Russ built up an elaborate plan, with tricks and schemes and fake friends to trick Magnus and get him to Nikkea and force him to obey.
> 
> Now I may be bias, but come on this isn't something you do to your bestest mate in the whole wide grim dark universe is it.


Russ built an elaborate plan? Could you explain your thought process on this? Russ did no such thing as far as I understand it. 

Sure Russ and his views on Magnus are one of the main reasons the council of Nikea took place, but Nikea was needed, the result might have been over the top in some respects, but Magnus needed to be reeled in beyond a shadow of a doubt. Russ and his sons were right after all when they said the Thousand Sons powers were dark and corrupt, they were being empowered by their own 'pet' daemons the whole time, whilst Tzeentch was the only thing keeping their rampant mutations under check.

And both Russ and Magnus had agents within the two legions, Kasper just turned out to be a chaos one instead. They chaos gods are the ones responsible for the rivalry between the two legions and their spy networks, they engineered it to be so as far as the two legions inceptions go. Was nothing to do with Russ scheming against Magnus.

I still don't think they hated each other as such either. Sure the rivalry and distrust was building even more and starting to come to ahead, especially on Shrike and later Nikea. But I don't think Russ ever truly hated Magnus, and that one line from _Prospero Burns_ validates that imo

"You know I do not want this. You know it tears my heart to commit against you"Russ to me genuinely seems remorseful that he has to attack his brother and genuinely doesn't want to, his loyalty for their father however is absolute.


----------



## Sethis (Jun 4, 2009)

There was no hatred pre-heresy. Flat. There was rivalry and friction, but nothing resembling hatred.

Horus is the one who fanned that friction hotter until it burst into rage and hatred, and resulted in a series of events that caused the grudges we know about now. Even the most out-and-out conflict between legions that wasn't the result of deliberate rebellion (The Cleansing of Prospero) was not a result of hatred, it was Russ doing his duty as the Emperors executioner. There was no personal grudge there - at least, not until the 1k Sons start mutating and blowing puppies away with fairy fire.


----------



## cegorach (Nov 29, 2010)

Angel of Blood said:


> Russ built an elaborate plan? Could you explain your thought process on this? Russ did no such thing as far as I understand it.
> 
> Sure Russ and his views on Magnus are one of the main reasons the council of Nikea took place, but Nikea was needed, the result might have been over the top in some respects, but Magnus needed to be reeled in beyond a shadow of a doubt. Russ and his sons were right after all when they said the Thousand Sons powers were dark and corrupt, they were being empowered by their own 'pet' daemons the whole time, whilst Tzeentch was the only thing keeping their rampant mutations under check.
> 
> ...



Yes I may have been speaking out of turn. But the fact is that the whole point of Prospero Burns was to show how Russ can be scheming. Otherwise the whole idea of Kasper would not have taken. Nor the Othere Wydrmake spying, literally spying, on their brother legion. 

I guess what we should take from this is that I am the only hateful one here. It just stinks of lies to me. I think if it gets to the point where you openly call an inquisition against someone and almost come to blows with them and refuse to commit your forces to engage the same battlefield as someone unless as enemies. That doesn't speak of friendship. 

I think I shall never see this truly as my bias is far too strong. The general consensus is on your side, so I shall admit my wrongs here. 

Thank you for the thought food. I enjoyed it muchly.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Nothing wrong with having that opinion. Russ and Magnus were under no circumstances friends. But again, brothers or not, the Council of Nikea, Inquisition or Trial of Magnus the Red was utterly necessary. Magnus had reached the point where he would rather kill warriors of the VI Legion before letting them destroy alien libraries, along with the aforementioned chaos imbued powers his scholars were using.


----------



## theurge33 (Apr 4, 2012)

Just throwing another one out there that no one has mentioned.

Mortarion and Magnus. I forget which book, but at the council of Nikea he was pretty much the most anti-magnus primarch there. There was a snippet where he actually confronts him about it.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

theurge33 said:


> Just throwing another one out there that no one has mentioned.
> 
> Mortarion and Magnus. I forget which book, but at the council of Nikea he was pretty much the most anti-magnus primarch there. There was a snippet where he actually confronts him about it.


A Thousand Sons? Yes, but that was still philosophical differences rather than outright hatred.


----------



## Kickback (May 9, 2008)

hailene said:


> I do not know if there's hate, but there seems to be some serious...feelings from Lorgar to Guilliman.
> 
> In _First Heretic_
> 
> ...


I always read those from Lorgar as his whiney perspective of what Roboute thought about him, I cant think of a time when Roboute agreed with those perceptions


----------



## Chompy Bits (Jun 13, 2010)

Would just like to point out again that, despite being arrogant ass, Magnus never told the Scarab Occult to kill any Wolves at Shrike, and we see in the novel that they were more than capable of restraining the Wolves without resorting to lethal force. Also, there are numerous quotes throughout the novel that state that the Sons themselves did not cause any fatalities among the Wolves up until the Siege of Prospero.

As for Magnus himself, it is implied that he possibly killed some Wolves which, to be fair, was unnecessary. But then Russ was responsible for the deaths of nearly an entire fellowship's worth of Athanaeans. I mean I don't even like Magnus, but I get annoyed when people use that incidence as an example of Magnus turning 'evil', ignoring the fact that the majority of what we think we know of what happened there is pure speculation, and the fact that the Wolves aren't the only ones who have reason to feel pissed about what happened. Both sides acted irrationally during that conflict, everything wasn't just Magnus' fault. 

Honestly, when the most rational and stable person around is Lorgar, you know people aren't of their right mind.

Other than that, the question is difficult. Hate and rivalry don't have to go together. Like I wouldn't say Lorgar and Guilliman were rivals in their particular manners of operation, but we know that Lorgar hated Guilliman. Dorn and Perturabo were rivals, but any hatred there only went one way (at least until the Heresy). The fact is that all the brothers were really rivals to each other in some way, all of them trying to out perform each other in the eyes of the Emperor.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

hailene said:


> I don't think these 2 pairs shared the same _modus operandi_.
> 
> In _Fear to Tread_ the BA are depicted as a noble legion. The red thirst overtaking most of the Legion is a complete shock to everyone. Almost no one outside the Legion even knew of its existence pre-heresy (probably even post-heresy). It was a well kept secret.
> 
> ...


Their nobility doesn't dominish the fact that they used pure brutality in combat. They were a legion known for its fierceness in close combat even before the red rage. I think it can be better clarified in _Collected Visions._ The problem with the Heresy Novels is that it has not really shown Horus' methodical steps in creating rivalries between the legions that led to the Heresy. In _Collected Visions_ it is demonstrated that he indeed did create rivalries between legions with close doctrines. It specifically even talks about certain legion rivalries. The World Eaters and Blood Angels are just one that spring off to mind that are where shown to have been one in _Collected Visions._


As far as the Wolves and the Dark Angels. I think you should put aside the notion of legions being "exactly similar," because obviously none of them are. The Lion and the Wolf compliment each other's characteristics. They both have a strong sense of loyalty to the Emperor that is different from most legions. For example the Lion became the last hope of the old Imperium before the events that led to the destruction of Caliban. We see that in the few short stories that have come about, about "others" seeking the title of Warmaster. Russ was utterly loyal to the Emperor in the sense that he was willing to do anything no matter how destructive or insane the act maybe. Including the attempt to anhilate a legion. Both the Lion and Russ have been continously shown to do whatever it takes for the better good. A stubbornly stance on what they perceive as good; which in this case is the Emperor's Imperium. When it comes down to it, I would describe both Russ and the Lion and their legions being _brutally loyal_ followers of the Imperium. Which is completely different from the likes of Guilliman's Imperium and even Dorn's Imperium. We see how Dorn views the Imperium when he confronts Konrad Curze's brutal tactics. 

As far as battle doctrine, I would say that of the legions they are the two that really employ equally both close combat and range tactics. You can see it in the units that they employ. In _A Thousand Sons_ the Thousand Son Legion was surprised to see the Wolves trying to bring down the monstrous titan things with Rocket Launchers; thinking that they were a bunch of close combat hot heads. The wolves described it as bringing down a sea monster with a bunch of harpoons, which in turn demonstrates the need of superior range tactics. The Dark Angels are also known for their superior fire power, and employing plasma weaponry as much as they can. Both the average Wolf of Fenris and Dark Angel Astartes, also understand the need for close combat tactic. The Dark Angels do it through the legacy of the Knightly Orders, the Wolves do it through their history of pillaging and raiding. Both carry those old traditions of close combat _without_ over using them or discarding them/under using them. I would also state that both units heavily use "specialized" units to carry out special procedures in combat unlike that other legions. You can see it more relevant in how the organize their chapters. They find the need of organizing certain companies as being completely of one speciality. A company of heavy armored elites for example, and also those of fast attack. Though other chapters also have elite companies, they tend to varify the units in those companies. And though it hasn't I think its fair to say, that this unit doctrines was spread throughout the Dark Angels and Wolves of Fenris to a degree that they differed substancially to other legions.


----------



## Old Man78 (Nov 3, 2011)

Barnster said:


> Dorn was scared of curze, but hate is too strong I honestly don't think primarchs hated each other.


Dorn was not scared of Curze, he was scared of what made Curze the way he was, Dorn only got hurt by Curze because he approached him arms open in way of brotherhood and not expecting a fight, if he was Curze would hav had his ass handed to him on a plate!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

Oldman78 said:


> Dorn was not scared of Curze, he was scared of what made Curze the way he was, Dorn only got hurt by Curze because he approached him arms open in way of brotherhood and not expecting a fight, if he was Curze would hav had his ass handed to him on a plate!!!!!!!!!!!


I like how Perturabo says after his little duel with his minions that what Dorn is really afraid of is him. Almost as though he can feel Dorn's feelings.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

Kickback said:


> I always read those from Lorgar as his whiney perspective of what Roboute thought about him, I cant think of a time when Roboute agreed with those perceptions


"You have always possessed an active imagination [, Lorgar]. Today has proven that."

Not exactly sticking his tongue out and blowing a raspberry, but for Guilliman it amounts to it, I think.

Guilliman also says after the meeting with the Emperor in the ruins of Monarchia, "Is your tantrum concluded, Lorgar?"

Again, low key, but from the unflappable Guilliman that's a pretty harsh rebuke.

Definitely the hate was flowing from Lorgar to Guilliman. Was there a little bit of disdain and pity (and not the good kind) from Guilliman to Lorgar? I think so.



ckcrawford said:


> Their nobility doesn't dominish the fact that they used pure brutality in combat. They were a legion known for its fierceness in close combat even before the red rage.


Could you cite a source about their savagery? 

In _Fear to Tread_ we have Sangy asking his men to spare as many men from the Nephilim overlords and this raises no questions. Could you imagine even if Angron asked his sons to spare the innocent that they'd even bother?

Proficiency in close combat does not make them "close". The White Scars are notable in their close combat abilities as well.



ckcrawford said:


> *Both the Lion and Russ have been continously shown to do whatever it takes for the better good.* A stubbornly stance on what they perceive as good; which in this case is the Emperor's Imperium. When it comes down to it, I would describe both Russ and the Lion and their legions being _brutally loyal_ followers of the Imperium. Which is completely different from the likes of Guilliman's Imperium and even Dorn's Imperium. We see how Dorn views the Imperium when he confronts Konrad Curze's brutal tactics.


Whatever it takes for the better good..

Like Guilliman willing to sacrifice large parts of the Imperium for the better good?

Dorn suppressing the truth in order to protect the Imperium? (It was part of that short story with Iacton and that one rememberencer). How Dorn became part of the "fall" of the original Imperium--the one crusading for truth and enlightenment. All in order for the Imperium to survive.



ckcrawford said:


> As far as battle doctrine...


This makes little sense. Many, if not all Legions, feature a balance of close combat and ranged weapons. Even the Blood Angels you say are such brutal close combat specialists utilize a good amount of ranged weaponry. 

And the war-pilaging of the Fenrisian men differs greatly from the more noble combat of the Knightly Orders. Feral savagery that will do anything to win versus knightly chivalry.

Not saying that there weren't noble Wolves or underhanded DA, but we're painting wide strokes now, aren't we?



ckcrawford said:


> They find the need of organizing certain companies as being completely of one speciality. A company of heavy armored elites for example, and also those of fast attack. Though other chapters also have elite companies, they tend to varify the units in those companies. And though it hasn't I think its fair to say, that this unit doctrines was spread throughout the Dark Angels and Wolves of Fenris to a degree that they differed substancially to other legions.


I'm not too keen on DA fluff, but even back during the GC the SWs were a varied lot. Each Great Company had everything. Unless you're saying that at least some of the 12 Great Companies each specialized in something?

And to my knowledge, the Space Wolves don't have anything between a Great Company and a squad.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I don't know why I'm even doing this. 



hailene said:


> Could you cite a source about their savagery?
> :headbutt: Read _Collected Visions_ like I told you. Perhaps you will better understand. I'm not going to go through it for you. You clearly came into warhammer not seeing a similarity between the two legions.
> 
> In _Fear to Tread_ we have Sangy asking his men to spare as many men from the Nephilim overlords and this raises no questions. Could you imagine even if Angron asked his sons to spare the innocent that they'd even bother?
> ...


I've listed down the page numbers so you can read. Most of it is basic fluff, and I don't understand how you don't know them. I'd write down the page numbers but I feel I'd have to write every single passage of many things you haven't read. This seriously has wasted my time.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

1. No, if you come to an argument you need to cite your sources. You can't say "Oh, this is so and so." You don't expect scientists to write a paper and then expect other people to verify their statements by doing their own research. The author himself must back up what he's saying with the source material.

2. No, I am saying that they're not brutal. If they were brutal like the WE they would have slaughtered everything and everyone without a qualm. The fact that Sangy asked him men to spare as much as they could and his men complied means that they are radically different than the blood thirsty berserkers of the WE. Even Horus asked Abandon to spare as many people as he could when they took Sixty-three-nineteen. The Luna Wolves weren't any more brutal than they had to be, at least at that time.

3. Care to condense the similarities again? Just a bullet point list.

4. Uh, what? Dorn is specifically grieving the fact he's killing his Father's vision in order to try to save it.

5. So you're saying that some Legions more or less eschewed either melee or ranged combat for the other? Which Legions? Pre-heresy, of course. The only one I could possibly think of is the WEs, but we really haven't seen them in action much pre-heresy to say really either way.

6. They can't be exactly the same, as you said, but they can be generally the same. I would probably have put the White Scars and Space Wolves as more similar than the DA and SWs.

7. All post-heresy and not really relevant to the topic at hand (which is Primarch rivalries).

8. Again, seriously post-heresy and of no importance when we're talking about Primarch rivalries.


----------



## SonofMalice (Feb 5, 2012)

Not to interrupt the verbal duel above but I always thought, perhaps a little naively, that the legions of the Traitors were made in mirror of the loyalists even before the heresy to a certain extent. By that I mean that the reverse of a World Eater is a Blood Angel. They both utilize similar close combat tactics, they are known for their brutality in battle (as in ferocity, zeal, or drive not necessarily in savagery) and both their mentalities are in opposite of each other. I think with reference to above discussion the distinction is that they are both cut from the same tactical cloth but that the way the go about it differs widely. World Eaters are, by their own admission in Galaxy in Flames (from captain Skar or some such name) butchers. Blood Angels are as ferocious but they don't have cortical implants stuck in their heads constantly urging murder. Instead they have a flaw which is, in time, just as damning as the Butcher's nails so I think that the comparison is more fair than not.

I would say with regard to balancing firepower all legions, of course, will have some stock of every sort of weapon so that they can meet any potential threat. That does not mean that they always deploy a totally ordered and balanced force. I can see the Ultras doing that (shadows of the Codex and all) but even a brief scanning of the fluff does indicate a marked predilection for certain weapons and tactics within certain armies. Chain axes are a World Eater thing, Raptors come from the Night Lords, Dark Angels use plasma etc. Moreover the legions do have distinctive roles. Look at the Iron Warriors as a prime example, their intended purpose and use is the reason they turn in the first place. 

Talking about rivalries though I find myself convinced that only one real hatred existed pre-heresy. Lorgar towards Guilliman for the humbling on Monarchia. In Aurlian, preheresy still, Lorgar is shown the vision of the future and he has to choose between hate and his desire for vengeance or winning the war for Chaos. It's made fairly clear he wants to inflict the same humiliation on Guiliman that he suffered otherwise this wouldn't even be a temptation. 

Russ and Magnus are not rivals but they are not quite outright enemies either until Prospero. The wolves are a rather hypocritical lot in their treatment of the Sons but the Sons don't do themselves any favors by acting like ethereal entitled jackasses from time to time. Still I think that absent chaos there was no real "hate" for each other in the legions. Again except for Lorgar since this vision is decades before the heresy.

Curze is just mental, truly and totally mental. I don't think he honestly cared enough about anything to really HATE something. Most fatalistic person in the heresy but then again when you see everyone's death and have a split personality I suppose that makes sense. 

Alpherius and Guiliman are not so much a rivalry as a total difference of character and, perhaps, a touch of paternalism from Guiliman. After all can he really discount sneakiness so totally when the Raven Guard and, to a certain extent, the Night Lords also utilize it as a viable tactic? Spies and surprise are such an important part of war it always struck me as ridiculous that Guiliman would undervalue them so. Probably put his fought in his mouth and Alpherrius, despite saying the contrary, took it to heart as anyone might do.


----------



## hailene (Aug 28, 2009)

SonofMalice said:


> Not to interrupt the verbal duel above


I think catching another point of view is worthwhile. Offering a fresh point of view can revive a stagnant discussion.





SonofMalice said:


> That the legions of the Traitors were made in mirror of the loyalists even before the heresy to a certain extent.


Maybe in the most general sense? But I don't think particularly so. I'd hazard it was more happenstance. 

I mean the chance of having another army that's at least partially similar to yours is fairly high. Sure, the IW had a fondness for fortresses, like the IF, but beyond that they don't seem all that similar. The IWs and IHs both had close connections with the Mechanicum and machinery in general as well. Beyond that?...

No one had that the same...flair(?) as Horus and the Luna Wolves. 

What would the Ultramarines' opposite be? The White Scars? The Dark Angels? Salamanders? Raven Guard?

There are some vague similarities...but only vague in the extreme. At least in my opinion.


----------



## SonofMalice (Feb 5, 2012)

hailene said:


> The IWs and IHs both had close connections with the Mechanicum and machinery in general as well. Beyond that?...
> 
> No one had that the same...flair(?) as Horus and the Luna Wolves.
> 
> ...


I would say that in my own opinion the legions would stack up like this.
World Eater=Blood Angel
Ultramarine=Emperor's Children
Alpha Legion=Space Wolves
Iron Warriors=Imperial Fists
Raven Guard=Night Lords
White Scars=Luna Wolves
Death Guard=Iron Hands
Word Bearers=Dark Angels

The comparison largely breaks down after that but 8 out of 9 isn't bad. I see these as either mirrors or antithesis of each other. For example the Emperor's Children and the Ultramarines. Both are striving to be the most perfect iteration of the Astartes but they have very different mentality. Again this is just how I've always thought of it but it seems pretty close to the facts.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

Alpha Legion and Space Wolves are a bit of an odd one there.


----------



## SonofMalice (Feb 5, 2012)

Angel of Blood said:


> Alpha Legion and Space Wolves are a bit of an odd one there.


See to me it is the totally opposite methods that make it work. Antithesis and all. The wolves are very visual, very individual, very into this heroic mythos but the Alpha Legion are all the same, uniform in both color and name.

Also the tactics they both use are completely opposite to each other. The one favors examples of personal bravery that might be sung about, glorious battle and coming to grips with the enemy in a brutal and ferocious way. Alpha Legion is more about using others to fight for you as much has possible, using secrecy and silence more than raw power and above mentioned ferocity. 

Maybe it's just me :biggrin:


----------



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

SonofMalice said:


> I would say that in my own opinion the legions would stack up like this.
> World Eater=Blood Angel
> Ultramarine=Emperor's Children
> Alpha Legion=Space Wolves
> ...


I like how you lined these up, but would switch the Ultramarines and DA. I've always seen The Lion as perfection-focused like Fulgrim, but The Lion is austere where Fulgrim was flamboyant. Similarly, both the Ultramarines and Word Bearers are hugelegions with a rules-based way of living, but the UM are totally secular while the WB are entirely sacred in their focus.

I'd also probably switch the SWs and the RG. The SWs, like the Night Lords, use violence and terror to overcome enemies, but the NLs get their jollies from doing so, while the SWs just have it in their nature and would rather be drinking and fighting. I don't think I need to explain why pair up the Raven Guard and the Alpha Legion... covert, screw with your head, etc.


----------



## SonofMalice (Feb 5, 2012)

Over Two Meters Tall! said:


> I like how you lined these up, but would switch the Ultramarines and DA. I've always seen The Lion as perfection-focused like Fulgrim, but The Lion is austere where Fulgrim was flamboyant. Similarly, both the Ultramarines and Word Bearers are hugelegions with a rules-based way of living, but the UM are totally secular while the WB are entirely sacred in their focus.
> 
> I'd also probably switch the SWs and the RG. The SWs, like the Night Lords, use violence and terror to overcome enemies, but the NLs get their jollies from doing so, while the SWs just have it in their nature and would rather be drinking and fighting. I don't think I need to explain why pair up the Raven Guard and the Alpha Legion... covert, screw with your head, etc.


These are quite possible too, I do think that Curze is closer to Corax than Russ. Perhaps it is the case that there are straight line ups as far as tactics and personality within the legions (all 18) and also their total reversals. In this way both our points are right. SW and Night Lords are the most similar but Alpha legion are the exact opposite of the SW. It is an interesting question. Thanks for the input!


----------

