Author Topic: new 40k book rumoured changes in background  (Read 8091 times)

Offline Inquisitor Goldeneye

  • Inquisitor
  • ***
  • Posts: 109
  • Thinks he's a wit, and he's half right...
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #15 on: June 19, 2012, 09:47:03 PM »
If true, this sounds like a terrible idea. It's the kind of thing I might have thought was cool when I was 12, but then so does bigger jaws.
'A truth that's told with bad intent beats all the lies you can invent.' -  William Wordsworth.

Offline MarcoSkoll

  • Arch Data-Archivist
  • Administrator
  • Grand Lord Inquisitor
  • *****
  • Posts: 5021
  • Time for some thrilling heroics.
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #16 on: June 19, 2012, 11:27:32 PM »
To be honest, I've been expecting to ignore most of the 6th Ed fluff changes since the earliest rumours, a decision rather heavily based on the fact that Mat Ward is going to have had a heavy hand in it (whether or not he's heading up the team, I can't remember what the rumours have said).

GW are just engaging in a load of counter intuitive retcons at the moment, largely caused by their desire to make things like seem like they're changing but not have the clock go a single second into the 42nd millennium.

I might - might - earmark 6th Ed as something to look up on eBay a few months down the line, but I'm certainly not buying it first-hand.
But I'm really more likely to buy a copy of 3rd Edition to replace my disintegrated one. It's more useful, given I never play 40k any more anyway and it's the fluff that actually syncs up with Inquisitor's release, and actually includes all kinds of interesting stuff that's seldom been republished.

S.Sgt Silva Birgen: "Good evening, we're here from the Adeptus Defenestratus."
Captain L. Rollin: "Nonsense. Never heard of it."
Birgen: "Pick a window. I'll demonstrate".

GW's =I= articles

Offline Koval

  • Grand Lord Inquisitor
  • *****
  • Posts: 1438
  • Well, that was unexpected...
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #17 on: June 20, 2012, 06:32:29 AM »
largely caused by their desire to make things like seem like they're changing but not have the clock go a single second into the 42nd millennium.
It's been pushed quite a way into the 42nd before. Several times, in fact.

Unless they're making it so that Medusa V never happened and the Cain Archive was never edited by Amberley...

Offline MarcoSkoll

  • Arch Data-Archivist
  • Administrator
  • Grand Lord Inquisitor
  • *****
  • Posts: 5021
  • Time for some thrilling heroics.
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #18 on: June 20, 2012, 07:07:54 AM »
BL stuff like the Cain novels is a slightly different matter from the continuity presented in the rulebook/codices.

And I'm fairly sure Medusa has generally been retconned out - a quick skim of the 5th Ed rulebook finds no mention of it. It wouldn't be without precedent, given the timeline around the Storm of Chaos in WHFB happened to creep back to the point that it was once again a Sword of Damocles.

In any case, while it's one thing to set a single campaign or the occasional book in M42, the problem is that doing that for the whole timeline would mean you had to start to explain things like what's happened with Hive Fleet Leviathan and 13th Black Crusade - these things won't nicely decide to take a timeout for however many years. Abaddon can't keep trying to defeat Cadia for a decade without something happening.

They really don't want to advance certain parts of the timeline (they've been not doing this for a good many years now) - so they're more than a bit stuck as to trying to advance other parts. As such, I rather doubt 6th edition will move into M42. I'd like to be proven wrong (not that I think it will redeem the quality I'm expecting), but I don't think I will be.
S.Sgt Silva Birgen: "Good evening, we're here from the Adeptus Defenestratus."
Captain L. Rollin: "Nonsense. Never heard of it."
Birgen: "Pick a window. I'll demonstrate".

GW's =I= articles

Offline Dolnikan

  • Grand Lord Inquisitor
  • *****
  • Posts: 1019
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #19 on: June 20, 2012, 07:55:14 AM »
I also presume that they won't advance much further, unless they simply say that Leviathan has somehow been stopped for now(of course it can resurface any moment) and that the 13th black crusade still has to happen or were driven back by heroic space marines. They could also ignore it completely. I just hope that they will advance slightly but more importantly, that they keep the style intact.(Not that they will do this)
Circles of the wise My attempt at writing something, please comment on it if you have any advise.

Offline 0604854

  • Interrogator
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #20 on: June 20, 2012, 09:06:44 AM »
This is gw who created trazyn the infinite, the character with the worst background I have ever read!

Offline DapperAnarchist

  • Grand Lord Inquisitor
  • *****
  • Posts: 1006
  • I'm not a Rosicrusian, are you?
    • The Keltani Subsector
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #21 on: June 20, 2012, 10:16:19 AM »
Oddly, I love Trazyn. He's absurd, impossible, ridiculous - but at least he's funny and interesting! Unlike stuff from a couple years earlier which was absurd, impossible, ridiculous, and dull. Trazyn is an impossibly powerful character - who doesn't seem to understand how powerful he is, like a senile old wizard who thinks everyone is his friend, and are just playing pranks. And he sends love notes to pretty Inquisitors! That's gotta be worth something.

The good thing about Trazyn is he gives your army a reason to fight. He's always trying to steal stuff, so you have good reason to fight him. The worst things, for me, are the ones that close off options - so the Marines being the defenders of the Tau - so why is my Chapter fighting them? or "all Marines want to be Ultramarines". Yeah? What about my Imperial Fists or Blood Angels or Raven Guard or Sallies or etc... Trazyn fits the EYHBTIAL rule, in that it makes things more mysterious, less clear. Much of Mat Ward's stuff has tried to make things simpler, more black and white, and that's a bad thing.
Questions are a burden to others, answers a burden to oneself.

The Keltani Subsector  My P&M Thread - Most recent, INQ28!

Offline 0604854

  • Interrogator
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #22 on: June 20, 2012, 11:33:41 AM »
I just find him to far fetched and radiculous, if you want somerhing funny go for orks, there has also been some other dodgey fluff, what fo you think has been gws worst fluff gaff

Offline Akuro Adenn

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 18
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #23 on: June 21, 2012, 07:27:56 AM »
I don't put much credence to the idea that they'll make the imperium appear to be any weaker. More horrible? Maybe. As to the Tau bit, it would invalidate so much of their fluff it isn't funny.

And, as always, we can just ignore the crap. Especially if 6E tanks.

Offline Draco Ferox

  • Inquisitor
  • ***
  • Posts: 176
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2012, 12:18:06 PM »
Just going to throw my 0.02 in here, for what little it's worth.

I would much prefer it if games workshop had someone like John Blanche illustrate the entire book, or approve the artwork that goes into it, whilst someone like Phil Kelly or Jervis Johnson writes the background, and the rules are worked on with extensive playtesting by both GW staff and the beardiest, most dishonourable scum ever to play warhammer, to iron out the kinks. Whilst this is going on, He Who Must Not Be Named can be kept as far away from everything as possible, and some of the ex-staff drafted back in to correct everything that The Balance Mutilator has written.

Background expansions, such as pieces about the demiurg or the squats, would boost white dwarf sales, and concreting everything down with a free poster of the galaxy with each rulebook would help.

Leaving stuff for people to decide for themselves, such as the dragon of mars (recently ruined) was one of the things that made 40k interesting, and I am loath to see GW simply explicitly state everything for the sake of the younger fans.

All of that said, if the new rulebook is awful, EYHBTIAL, even the official stuff.
Be polite. Be efficient. Have a plan to kill everyone you meet.

Offline MarcoSkoll

  • Arch Data-Archivist
  • Administrator
  • Grand Lord Inquisitor
  • *****
  • Posts: 5021
  • Time for some thrilling heroics.
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #25 on: June 25, 2012, 12:45:46 AM »
I imagine that the art is all approved by JB, given he's the Art Director. I think his realm of influence even dictates what passes muster in FFG's books.

I don't however feel he should illustrate the whole book. Partly because not everyone likes his work (it's hard to have never seen a post slagging his work off on one forum or another) so it would kick up some hefty disagreement from a fair portion of the masses, but mostly because it would mean ruling out the work of so many other fantastic illustrators.

I agree with most of the rest of your wishlist though. But the chances it's true are... slim.
S.Sgt Silva Birgen: "Good evening, we're here from the Adeptus Defenestratus."
Captain L. Rollin: "Nonsense. Never heard of it."
Birgen: "Pick a window. I'll demonstrate".

GW's =I= articles

Offline Dolnikan

  • Grand Lord Inquisitor
  • *****
  • Posts: 1019
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #26 on: June 25, 2012, 08:47:09 AM »
I fully agree with those wishes except the John Blanche part, I do like his work, but an entire rulebook filled with them would be a bit monotonous, in such a work I think that it would be better to have more veriety in artstyles.
Circles of the wise My attempt at writing something, please comment on it if you have any advise.

Offline Koval

  • Grand Lord Inquisitor
  • *****
  • Posts: 1438
  • Well, that was unexpected...
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #27 on: June 25, 2012, 06:14:37 PM »
I'll be honest, I'm not the hugest fan of Blanche art, though I can understand why people like his work. I prefer the sorts of styles you tend to see in the 40KRP books, where you can actually make out the details.

Offline Glorioski

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #28 on: June 26, 2012, 09:51:54 PM »
Looks like this rumour might have something to it. This is the allies chart for 6th ed



Tau and marines are listed as brothers in arms.

To be honest I quite like a lot of the rules changes rumoured in sixth but this fluff change sounds a bit awkward.

Offline Koval

  • Grand Lord Inquisitor
  • *****
  • Posts: 1438
  • Well, that was unexpected...
Re: new 40k book rumoured changes in background
« Reply #29 on: June 26, 2012, 10:15:57 PM »
My interpretation of that is similar to how the Tau/Imperium relationship's generally been presented for a long time -- sure, the Imperium and the Tau may not exactly get along a great deal (to put it lightly) but they'll put that to one side when there's something bigger to deal with. This has more or less been the case since the Tau were introduced.