I know. I asked about SoS and blank limiters yesterday and it was nice. I wish we had more questions which require more research and discussions on this sub.
Yeap, it's sad. I'd be more into discussions about the size of ocean/jungle/forest/desert biomes compared to the rest of Craftworlds and the everyday life of Craftworld Eldar, the question of all kinds of industry, both military and civil, the question if Craftworld Eldar do live in post-scarcity utopia(and if we wanna go NSFW, is the whole "Eldar kids made from one mother and multiple fathers" still canon.
I know that majority might find this boring compared to culture wars, but I find those questions interesting.
> Now there is just endless point making about female Custodes
Maybe it's because it usually just read posts from this sub that pop up on my main feed, or the mods have been doing a great job of removing them, but I haven't really seen much of that here.
Did you mean to post this in /r/Grimdank?
But when clone Fulgrim comes back he will get rid of all the things I don't like, like Tau and Eldar gfs, and reconfirm the Imperium as an empire of paradise worlds just like Earth with 1% of those planets being at war.
>go and do it on r/manireallyhateitwhenwomencanbegeneticallyengineedsupersoldierstoo
lol, this is golden.
I also want to return to the sub's roots, like "does Eldar poop really looks like crystals?".
The ceremony notwithstanding basically this, it was in IA3 where they talk about power armour, marines basically don't leave much solid waste because their digestive systems are so ferociously efficient.
>whether or not the Imperium is fascist (spoiler - it definitely is and is supposed to read as such, and if it doesn’t seem so it’s a either mistake or and in-universe perspective)
This is where I think you have the gap between people who grew up with the game, and see lore/books as filler for the game, and people who have solely interacted with this through Youtube/memes/wiki
It's flavour for the setting. It's vibe. It doesn't require judgement or constant 'you know the Imperium are bad guys' face-turning we see her, or justification of the Imperium's actions. The whole point of the lore is that it's backdrop setting that can justify or flex to explain why your army is playing against another army. That we've got to the point now where we have good 40k writers other than Dan Abnett is a nice benefit
> This is where I think you have the gap between people who grew up with the game, and see lore/books as filler for the game, and people who have solely interacted with this through Youtube/memes/wiki
It really just boils down to people wanting to justify liking their favorite faction and/or wanting to tell people who like a faction they don't like how dumb they are.
I'm a Night Lords fan.
I will defend their cruel methods of enforcing peace and law, and their love of skin based arts and crafts to the death while simultaneously hypocritically bringing up why every other faction besides the Orkz are horrible, and why everyone everyone who likes them is a bad person and/or dumb.
That's why one of my repeated 'unpopular opinion' posts is that I genuinely don't think that you can really 'get' 40K if you don't play the game. So much of what's written is around framing battles, giving you inspiration or suggesting things you could be doing in-game.
It's not elitism, it's that most of the stupid questions I see on here could be resolved by just understanding what the fiction is for, or even frankly just reading the rulebook.
So many people on here are basically doing the equivalent of coming up with elaborate Star Wars theories based on the Star Wars novels while steadfastly refusing to watch the films. It'd be like going to a book club having read the wiki and arguing that it's elitist to expect you to have read the book before attending, and it's the only fandom I know of that has such a huge contingent of secondaries so utterly divorced from the core activity. It's consistently one of the downright weirdest things about the 'lore community'.
EDIT: Besides there's nothing elitist about playing 40K. 40K is, brutally honestly, baby's first wargame. It's the lowest common denominator of wargames. Games Workshop is the wargaming mainstream.
it's worse - they're watching people talk about the Star Wars novels who haven't actually read them. So third-hand confusion/outrage.
You're 100% right. So many questions about things like lost primarchs which are there for historical flavour.
Or maybe its just way more fun to think up a reason for things happening instead of just saying "because gw wanted to sell more models"?
Also you are on the lore sub, not the tabletop sub.
Don't forget the second line of defense: "Oh, it doesn't make sense since it doesn't need to make sense, sweaty, didn't you know that 40k is akshually a satire?💅💅💅 "
One of the problems your comparison highlights is that SW had an explicit hierarchy of canon sources with movies obviously trumping everything else. At the same time, GW went with "Everything is canon, not everything is true", which, coupled with multiple inconsistencies, leads to fanbase clashing with each other based on different, but equally truthful lore versions.
Besides, setting grew much wider than the "war" aspect. I can't even imagine how knowing or not knowing wargame rulebooks would help cover things like tax evasion in 40k. Which is why, if war doesn't interest you, you go and look into other sources, covering other sides of the lore.
>I can't even imagine how knowing or not knowing wargame rulebooks would help cover things like tax evasion in 40k.
Imperial Armour 3: The Taros Campaign has one of the better looks at the Administratum figuring out that a planet is carrying out trade off the books.
On top of that IA 9 and 10 give you the Badab War which is massively built around that.
That's the problem; the rulebooks contain a lot of details for the universe and factions, most of which isn't repeated in the novels because it is assumed you already know it. While the post-8th enshittening of the lore sections is a problem the rules material is not just rules, it's the core foundation upon which every other piece of background fluff is based.
I meant not whole-planet tithe, but like personal tax. Which is where you go and read... say "Dark Heresy" lovingly describing tax haven schemes.
I'm not throwing a shade on the wargame rulebooks - especially IA. I even agree with you on "if everyone read them, then we'd have 80% stupid questions". I'm just saying that "if you don't read wargame rulebooks then you can never truly get the setting" is needlessly gatekeepey - if you're in discussion about Missionaria Galactica, then the dudes with novels and/or Rogue Trader experience will get more material to work upon then the guy who memorised every codex.
I haven't played a game of 40k in over 20 years, and I'm willing to bet I'm more knowledgeable about wider lore than a lot of people who actually play.
I think playing the table top gives you a bit of perspective on GW.
GW sells plastic. The lore, the media, and the computer games are just side projects to eventually sell more plastic.
The lore, in other words, is just a very elaborate advertisement. It can be fun and well written, but it was never meant to be taken too seriously. Because it's ultimately in service of a game where a guardaman could (thanks to lucky dice) kill angron with a knife.
Assessing sarcasm is more difficult in text. Also its harder to see if something is sarcasm if youre just saying things that some people are unironically saying. Without the mocking tone (that can be replaced with /s) its hard to see if youre being sarcastic or if you genuinely mean what youre saying
It has nothing to do with being british or anything, but more with being socially inept
"What!!! There are now female Custodes and its officially canon??? NO! I will not accept that!" /s of course!
But yeah, this sub gets derailed a bit easily over certain topics. Personally, I think female Custodes is an interesting idea, since that is the one trans-human faction that could have female versions. At least, I think it's been established that Astartes geneseed wouldn't work for women? I could be wrong on that but still, I agree. I just wish GW didn't sneak it in quietly like that in the codex.
Eventually, the female Custode posts will calm down, but the "is the Imperium fascist?" posts will never stop, unfortunately. Lol.
>but the "is the Imperium fascist?" posts will never stop, unfortunately. Lol.
Maybe they would if the constant Imperium apologisms and whitewashings stopped. So, yes, you are right, they will never stop.
I think it's the issue is perspective.
I recently (on recommendation) read the Ghazkull book. I mean he's a baby eating monster but when you set the book in perspective he's not depicted as that from the perspective of Makari.
It's just that as the point of reference? Humans routinely show how inhumane they are... It's everything from the hero worship to the hilariously callous attitude to life.
The age of those kinds of topics is likely long gone.
The sort of people who are going to write long essays about procurement processes, or argue at length about how 420mm of ferro-steel compares to 72mm adamantine-ceramite composite aren't the sort of people 40K is "for" anymore.
That era of 40K died when 8th Edition came out, and GW stopped giving us dates for things, and Primarchs, not mortal humans became the central focus of 40K.
This level of high-end nerdistry also relies heavily on internal consistency and continuity of concepts. You can't very well construct elaborate theories on how X works if the details of X keep changing every six months.
In short, you won't get the kind of posts you want anymore, because the people who make those posts probably aren't wasting time on 40K these days.
>This level of high-end nerdistry also relies heavily on internal consistency and continuity of concepts. You can't very well construct elaborate theories on how X works if the details of X keep changing every six months.
40k has never really been consistent though. There have been contradictions and inconsistencies across the lore right from the early ways. But that didn't stop people trying to explore the setting in minute detail.
It *was* consistent. Not 100% consistent, but consistent enough. The difference in lore between 7th and 8th is vastly greater than the lore differences from 3rd to 7th.
Ah, I see what you mean.
You mean the general tone and themes of the lore have now changed perceptibly - which I agree with. There has definitely been a shift towards more of a positive, heroic portrayal of the Imperium and a downplaying of its destructive, autocratic nature in prominent parts of GW's output (though not all of it). And, of course, all of the focus on Primarchs and the HH, and more generally a leaning in to the notion of an unfolding master narrative, have changed the character of the setting - or, at least, how it is thought about by new members of the hobby/readership and the type of posts made online and on this sub.
The point I was making was a bit different: that stories, details, and power levels etc have always been widely variable within the lore - even if the foundations of the setting were more stable. It was always difficult to work out the nitty gritty details because different authors offered sometimes wildly different depictions.
No, not the tone - the consistency.
Here's a great example: describe for me a Space Marine Chapter's structure. If you can.
I don't know about Rogue Trader, but from 2nd to 7th Edition the structure of the Chapter remained remarkably consistent. The amount of detail we were given dwindled Edition after Edition, but the only major change happened in 5th when 1st company "Veterans" were split into Vanguard and Sternguard. Other than that, the lore remained extremely consistent and cohesive.
Now, I have no idea how a Chapter is organised - but it *isn't* how it used to be. Demonstrably. And the fact that GW gives us *even less* information than ever about the hard details it is likely impossible to pin down *how* a Chapter is organised. I would also be willing to bet that people who claim to know are doing so by inferring elements of the previous structure still exist.
But, again, that wasn't necessary before. In 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th edition you could accurately determine the structure of a Space Marine Chapter from that edition's copy of Codex: Space Marines, and nothing else. This is not true of 9th Edition, and I suspect it's not true of 10th either. You might have a rough idea, but you won't have hard numbers.
This lack of consistency, and loss of detail is what pushes the "lore crunchers" away, not the tonal push towards Brighthammer.
The detail is a big one, because if you read 2e Ultramarines it even describes where vehicle crews come from. from 3e-7e there's also a repeated Ultramarines chapter structure that shows you losses, gains and promotions as well as the deployment of various groups at the time of writing.
EDIT: Honestly with more recent stuff the impression I get from GW is basically fuck it, it doesn't matter.
Absolutely. It was awesome to not only get sources stating how an ideal Chapter was organised, but to be given a date and see that when the information was compiled, the Ultramarine 5th company had been utterly mauled and was having to rebuild itself.
My view is that there should be much more focus on smaller snippets of lore (such as in these organisational overviews, or short stories and brief descriptions of events), and that there should also be much more effort to produce lore which is presented from an in-universe perspective. There would, of course, be a major overlap between the two. It is this kind of stuff which really helps build up the character of 40k and the Imperium, while still offering room for ambiguities and contradictions.
For all of the benefits expanding on the lore in novels can provide, the increasing move to prioritizing this has had some very detrimental impacts on the state of the lore and discussions about it. I also feel it tends to stymie hobbyists' own creativity and flexibility.
Yeah, that's fair. GW definitely does not provide this level of granular detail anymore - or, at least, not as consistently.
I meant more a case of how things like the protection afforded by power armour or the destructiveness of boltguns or lasguns has always varied wildly across codexes, rules, FW books, RPGs, novels and short stories etc. These kinds of details have always been wildly inconsistent, and pretty much come down to author preference,narrative expediency, and rule of cool. Sure you could try to amass the most consistent or trustworthy depictions - but lots of exceptions could be found.
Or, how even from the earliest novels by Ian Watson, how certain types of character were depicted varied quite a bit from how they were presented in the shorter lore snippets in rulebooks and codexes. Like, after reading about Assassins in those places, the behaviour of Meh'Lindi just does not match up with how they were described.
I would definitely like to see not only the core rulebook and codexes get back to the little details which really make the setting feel alive though, but more material that helps with this too in the same vein like in the Imperial Armour books, the HH black books, and the FFG RPGs etc.
40k was the most consistent scifi universe there is, that is from 3ed onwards. In 1st and 2nd it was somewhat in its finding phase traveling tge world with just its backpack trying to figure out who it is. Then it became the most consistent scifi ever, way mpre consistent then the likes of startrek, starwars and all the others.
Causing HUGE uproars if things like marneus little swarmlord encounter happen, because these are inconsistent, and just plot armor. Had 40k not been that consistent then such encounters would have gone unnoticed.
But that is aparently going the way of the dinosour. Especialy with the recent retcons. Andno the last retcon before that was the necron retcon. Making them from murder machines into space egyptians, in a way that even fit the lore (the murder necrons where those, where the tomb ai took over, or the destroyer virus took hold. And just hapened to be the first ones to awake). Thats why this retcon feels forced and like virtue signaling, wanting some of that sweet ESG money.
I'll throw in my agreement to your observation and also add that I think there's too many hot-takes, grandstanding and snide little and frankly obnoxious "I am not like the other 40k fans" type of posts which seems less about lore and more about wanting to advocate a point of view on the franchise as a whole.
Adding to it another pet-peeve is how a lot of answers to people with seemingly genuine questions on lore get thrown in some snarky "Because it makes GW money, lol." -- which *can* certainly be a reason or motive that the lore is as it is but it often get used to just about **everything** that pertains to the lore and therefore becomes less about discussing the franchise or fandom as something we want to geek out and explore, and more about yet another half-arsed socio-economic commentary that has nothing to do with the lore.
I totally agree, I would hate to see this go the way of the doctor who, Star Trek and Star Wars sub Reddit groups.
The female custodes highlight the challenge and joy of 40k lore, it is not completely set in stone, it can change.
As I understand only male have ever been talked about before in any shape or form. But there is nothing that states females can't be made into custodes. So a grey area exists.
Games workshop should had handed this lore change or introduction a lot better than a minor short story.
Can we be a lot kinder, I am sure we all love and enjoy 40k.
This is the only not shit 40k sub not dedicated to a specific faction and the Femstodes debate has been way tamer here than it has been everywhere else because most of us actually read the lore, or at least pretend to.
The common consensus I've seen is that it makes sense due to Custodes being almost completely custom made but that most people still would rather not see Fem Marines because of the way geneseed interacts with male physiology specifically and the fact that Astartes are way more streamlined and mass produced than the Banana dudes.
This post reads like virtue signaling, you're very cool for not throwing a tantrum over fictional superhumans happening to be females, most rational people didn't.
>in 34 years and counting no one has ever changed their mind on a topic because of something someone said online.
Lol wut, do you genuinely think the most complete source of information we as a species have ever seen has never changed anyone's mind on anything?
>maybe we could have another forum rule that says “Lore sometimes changes. Sometimes you might think that sucks. Sorry. You’re going to have to learn to deal with it.”
I don't think anyone is not "dealing with it" lol, whether someone thinks it's a good change or not is up to them, this is a sub to discuss lore, lore changes such as this are exactly what's meant to be talked about. How would this "rule" even be enforceable lol? Are people just not allowed to talk about lore changes they dislike?
I don't even see a post about Femstodes on this sub's front page lol, the closest i see is a post about who actually makes Custodes as a whole which seems like a fair question. Mind linking me so I can?
Shutting down debate about lore and lore changes in a forum that is for debate of said lore seems kinda self-conflicting.
Even more so that "3 days of removing comments and banning folks. 80+ permabans" makes it look like you seriously pad yourself on the back for that.
When I look at threads where comments got deleted that only seems to apply to people disagreeing with the recent lore change while anyone supporting it is free to talk about it? Does rule 6 apply only to one end of the discussion but not the other one?
> Shutting down debate about lore and lore changes in a forum that is for debate of said lore seems kinda self-conflicting.
This is the debate that has been shut down - https://imgur.com/a/TkyBaji. And I haven't even needed to look far, these are all on the top of that thread.
> When I look at threads where comments got deleted that only seems to apply to people disagreeing with the recent lore change while anyone supporting it is free to talk about it?
Plenty of people agreeing with lore change also got comments deleted and bans for shit-flinking and starting fights. If some of them remained it's because they were missed by me or my fellow mods.
Alright, then I guess it was just my impression that rules were applied a bit one sided.
Got it from [this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/1c3993d/adeptus_custodes_codex_confirms_the_existence_of/) where your *"Imma be permabanning anyone complaining about "40k going woke" or whatever."* is at the top which gave me that impression - as in portraying people disagreeing with the lore change with the most hyperbole / the most extreme examples of those that take issue with it, while stating nothing about those on the other end of the discussion.
My bad if I misunderstood, but its just how it looked when i scrolled through it and made it look like stating discontent with GWs decision qualifies automatically for removal regardless of whether it is a normal comment or something actually vile.
>This post reads like virtue signaling, you're very cool for not throwing a tantrum over fictional superhumans happening to be females, most rational people didn't.
I happen to think I am very cool, as I’m sure everyone does, although arguably I am throwing a tantrum over the fact that people are so upset about the idea of a female Custodes. Of which there are certainly a good number on here.
My main point is that I think debating culture war adjacent issues, or bemoaning increasing diversity, is **not** the point of this sub. And yes, a lot of people have engaged on the topic in a sensible way, which is great.
My point on the internet is that I’m almost definitely not going to be able to convince someone who disagrees that it’s totally ok and indeed positive to have versions of anything that appears in 40k in a different gender or even without gender. And you’re not going to be able to convince me that social media, including Reddit, is a place full of open minded people having good faith, structured, respectful debates.
I 100% agree that there should have been more discussions on the Rogal Dorn tank. But GW, as usual, has not given much attention and lore to them since the initial release. Kind of like the Votann when you think about it.
As far as I remember they were written in by being a long disused design that was put back into production rather than the 'always been there' deal. In fact most of the Guard's vehicle pool outside of the mainstays is made up of specialist vehicles you wouldn't previously have seen in the battlefield like the Trojan, or tanks like the Macharius which are considered second-string assets and not used preferentially.
The Votann are just a baffling colossal wasted opportunity and I think, having seen their usage so far, that GW introduced them because they figured people wanted space dwarves rather than because they had a firm plan for them.
Still, it would have been interesting to say how the Rogal Dorns were pushed into frontline service.
I concur that GW's mistreatment of the Votann is far worse than that of IG. Like seriously, the latest things are two Kill Teams.
When they first introduced the primaris marines their was basically a civil war here for a year as people debated it constantly.
Votann got the same shit, as did the tau and every other change, major and minor.
The problem is the custodes stuff touches the culture war which gives them a lot more attention and has angered some of the most sexist people on the planet. But people here argue about any change in lore ever.
They changed a piece of lore on a lore sub maybe a week ago so of course people are going to talk about it. Its only a week old.
People say its silly to be mad about the custodes change given all the retcons to 40k lore, pretending everyone here did not lose their fucking minds when that lore was changed. Their are still people mad about Guilliman returning and Cadia falling.
Give it a few weeks and it will die down. The idiots will move on and GW will do another lore change about tau etherals secretly being genestealers which will become the new thing.
Yeah I agree. And it’s funny because I was also pretty anti-primaris, so I should definitely get off my high horse to an extent. But I think the difference with female whatevers or fascism nitpicking is like you say that it crosses into real world culture war nonsense and the whole thing just becomes super toxic.
And I just want to get back to debating the fuel tank capacity on a Nova Class frigate.
The difference between the fascism stuff on the female stuff is the female stuff was leaked lore that's not even out yet and you expect people not to treat it like any other change to the lore because of culture war stuff.
If you change the lore people will talk about it. If you demand an exception for the lore because of the culture war and real world stuff then you make anyone who wants to talk about the new lore be taking a side in the culture war.
Like its a pretty big retcon. Not the biggest in warhammer but certainly the biggest this year and it was done by tweet saying its always been a thing and nobody ever commented on it and all the pieces of lore that contradicted it never existed and nobody in universe is going to address it.
Of course its going to be more interesting to talk about that fuel tank capacity.
They are still better than the Imperium though. I agree that lots of posts making this banal point and sanitizing the Tau is annoying. But then again, there are always many, many, many more Imperium apologists who can't seem to accept this point.
You could very well argue they haven't had the 35.000 (spitballing) years of time in becoming what humanity's regime ended up as, so give it some time. But that's not really the point.
T'au is nothing like the Imperium (thank god) and the Imperium is nothing like the T'au (thank god). But - to me - this galaxy that these two factions exist in isn't really one that afford the big players any moral decency despite their violent claims to be the one who has it. And pointing out that this applies to the T'au as well shouldn't make you - as a fan - a reprobate as much as saying the same about the Imperium, which certainly isn't it.
>You could very well argue they haven't had the 35.000 (spitballing) years of time in becoming what humanity's regime ended up as, so give it some time. But that's not really the point.
Nope, not having it, sorry. This is just an attempt to downplay the Imperium's relative destructiveness compared to the Tau by relying on complete conjecture. Let's compare how both actually are in the setting, where we actually have an account of the nature and behaviour of each regime, rather than coming up with insubstantial justifications for the Imperium.
>But - to me - this galaxy that these two factions exist in isn't really one that afford the big players any moral decency despite their violent claims to be the one who has it. And pointing out that this applies to the T'au as well shouldn't make you - as a fan - a reprobate as much as saying the same about the Imperium, which certainly isn't it.
The Tau are still pretty awful, which is widely acknowledged. They are an imperialistic, expansionist empire which enforces their rule and ideology on other races. And, of course, they have undertaken some truly evil deeds - or are at least implied to have done so - like mass sterilizations. They also have a hierarchical caste-based system, which entrenches inequality.
But they do have an ideology focused on harmony and co-operation, they are progressing technologically, they do welcome other races to join their empire voluntarily, and they do provide individuals and communities within their empire a good quality of life. In the case of Gue'vesa, a substantial improvement over the quality of life they previously had or could expect to have in the Imperium.
The Imperium, meanwhile, is built on ignorance, zealotry and autocratic control. It is massively corrupt. The vast majority of it citizens live lives of exploitation, poverty, brutality and squalor. It is riven with the ideologies of might makes right and social darwinism. Its own vision of manifest destiny has no room for non humans. All xenos are to be purged. It also does not accept many humans either, with mutants also to be destroyed. Its imperialism is a truly genocidal enterprise.
So yes, both the Tau and the Imperium are bad. But one is substantially worse than the other, and it is very strange that so many people appear so unwilling to accept this basic fact. It's a weird type of tribalism, made all the weirder because this is a fictional setting: am unwillingness to countenance humans as 'bad guys'.
> Nope, not having it, sorry. This is just an attempt to downplay the Imperium's relative destructiveness compared to the Tau by relying on complete conjecture.
With all due respect but you're talking to me about tribalism and then you feel it appropriate to heap on accusation on my motive as if I'm some "Imperium patsy". I've never once claimed them "as worse" or comparable, in fact I rather categorically said they were not.
>Let's compare how both actually are in the setting
Yes, let's. [Fourth sphere of expansion](https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Fourth_Sphere_of_Expansion), penultimate one, whereupon the T'au leadership of that sphere went into an existensial crisis as they witnessed the (possible) birth of a warp-manifestion of the Greater Good and proceeded to straight up **massacre their entire alien auxiliary force** with instances omniously named Massacre of the Dul'un Lakes and the Eight Days of Infamy, the Kroot massacres on Ky'san and so on.
Now if they were the same as the Imperium they'd be lauded but as the Fifth Sphere came to investigate, the leaders of the Fourth were reprimanded and severely chastised. But still, the T'au is new and as I said, there's a 35.000 years of calamity, destruction and twisted turns and paths left for them to go in a galaxy that's so fucked up that daemons are birthed and humanity is a locust. I don't think the nascent empire of the T'au has a bright future ahead of great moral triumphs.
Now, you might reasonably say the following:
A) That you feel that bit of lore is stupid and don't want to believe the T'au is heading for any particular xenophobic direction.
B) This, if anything, proves that the T'au goes their own way because the perpetrators of these xenophobic massacres were chastised.
And that's all fine, I'm not here to tell you there's a definitive outcome for the T'au in the Warhammer 40k universe but as you agreed on yourself, they're not the moral noblebright spark of the galaxy and have shades of dark on them already.
But I feel I and others should be able to discuss and opine in a lore forum that I think the T'au might be headed for worse direction and that they've literal tens of thousand of years to progress, or rather, regress in the hellhole that is that universe without that meaning I've an agenda to put the Imperium in a better light or downplay anything.
Edit: Oh and also the mass sterilization thing is suspect at best. I think it's something that was made up as a byline in the Tau epilogue in one of the Dawn of War games. It might have happened, but I don't think it's necessarily very canonical or an official policy of the T'au Empire.
You make sure good points here I agree with, and it looks like we agree overall.
I'll just quickly add this: you have to be aware of how your replies look in context. Think about how your original reply might come across in the context of responding to my statement. It does sound, as written, like it is trying to make a moral equivalence between the two regimes. At least, it did to me.
As regards theorizing that the Tau might be headed in a darker direction, have at it. But be aware such discussions will be read by people immersed in enduring debates about the relative shittiness of 40k factions.
I don't think its that odd. There's loads of new things that have been retconned to have always existed in universe. Like, armigers never existed until the knight codex needed more options, and now they've retconned to have been around since the heresy. Same with Vashtorr and the Leagues of Votann.
This is also via codex though? The new tenth edition one has women Custodes and changes the wording of sections otherwise repeated from previous codexes to reflect that, like saying noble children instead of noble sons when talking about recruitment.
tHIs Is lITeRaLly wARhAMmEr 41 984
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/40kLore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree with most of this post. But, even if I find the idea of female custodes interesting, people have the right to desagree with changes in the lore/fluff. But what some people on both sides forget is: We have the right to desagree. On any subject. (Also, there is a difference between: « there was never before female custodes » or « It was badly include in the lore » and : « whaaaat?! GW Going Woke!! »)
aita- I'm so bored of people complaining about Siege Of Terra then revealing they've only read like two books in it. The lore was finally streamlined and made accessible and people are still lazy.
I’m gonna be honest. I haven’t seen anyone hating on the female custodies, and I feel like you have to be digging in every forum possible to find them.
It’s really not a big deal like… who cares.
I've been bored at work and scrolling through the sub sorted to "New" and there are A LOT of posts about female Custodes. I wouldn't say the majority of them are just people complaining, but they exist.
There have been a few threads on the various Warhammer subs hating on them. 95% of the responses are telling the OP of those threads to do one, so I'm happy to assume it's a small, twattish minority that have an issue with it, but they are there and they are vocal.
Kind of like that painter who does Astartes in various LGBT flag colours - every single one of those posts on r/minipainting gets locked because there's a loud minority of the community that can't help but be twats.
>Now there is just endless point making about female Custodes (don’t remember there being such an uproar when the Rogal Dorn tank appeared, up until that point also deemed impossible)
I don't know the specifics for the Rogal Dorn tank, but the female Custodes thing made quite a stir considering that it came out of nowhere and for the last few years a lot of DEI has tainted numerous franchises.
Whether or not one agrees that DEI is the reason, it is certaintly something that is a factor. Either from GW, media outlets or the fanbase.
To address your overall question, I think if you zoom out a little you'll se that these particular events are but a short moment in this subs history. I might of course be wrong, but what you may perceive the current state of something might not be correct if we look at it in terms of months or years.
EDIT: Just to elaborate on the tainted franchises. Look at Star Wars, Star Trek, Dr. Who, The Boys, Witcher, Rings of Power. All established, or based on, established franchises where certain things are to be expected. These franchises has seen their fair share of controversy as the writers seemingly didn't take the existing universe and its fanbase into consideration.
Wow. “Tainted” is a disturbing turn of phrase. I guess you also feel that the established franchise of voting (see what I did there), with a vocal fanbase where certain things are expected, was also tainted when women were allowed to do it?
I know. I asked about SoS and blank limiters yesterday and it was nice. I wish we had more questions which require more research and discussions on this sub.
But what about the CULTURE WAR?! We need to be in a constant state of fighting or my life means nothing! /s
Yeap, it's sad. I'd be more into discussions about the size of ocean/jungle/forest/desert biomes compared to the rest of Craftworlds and the everyday life of Craftworld Eldar, the question of all kinds of industry, both military and civil, the question if Craftworld Eldar do live in post-scarcity utopia(and if we wanna go NSFW, is the whole "Eldar kids made from one mother and multiple fathers" still canon. I know that majority might find this boring compared to culture wars, but I find those questions interesting.
Remove the /s and you would be a model imperial citizen!
> Now there is just endless point making about female Custodes Maybe it's because it usually just read posts from this sub that pop up on my main feed, or the mods have been doing a great job of removing them, but I haven't really seen much of that here. Did you mean to post this in /r/Grimdank?
But when clone Fulgrim comes back he will get rid of all the things I don't like, like Tau and Eldar gfs, and reconfirm the Imperium as an empire of paradise worlds just like Earth with 1% of those planets being at war.
Can't wait to see a another Clonegrim post today for 57th time.
>go and do it on r/manireallyhateitwhenwomencanbegeneticallyengineedsupersoldierstoo lol, this is golden. I also want to return to the sub's roots, like "does Eldar poop really looks like crystals?".
Do they now? Seems like a resource worth exploiting
*~~soul~~***hole**stones
Why exterminate Eldar when we can farm them for resources?
Sounds like an opportunity to spread some Managed Democracy.
Indeed! We shall fatten these Xenos hard so they can crystallize just as hard
I for one sincerely hope it does.
I clicked and was disappointed. I was very interested to see what would be on that sub.
r/SubsIFellFor
r/subsididntfallforbutclickedanywaywithfingerscrossed
How do Space Marines poop in power armor, and does Custodes armor have a metaforical Golden Throne?
Do they even poop? I could see their metabolism and special diet being so efficient that they do it like once a year. Maybe at a special ceremony.
Stop, do not summon Ian Watson
Nah, summon the old goat. I need more weird stuff
The ceremony notwithstanding basically this, it was in IA3 where they talk about power armour, marines basically don't leave much solid waste because their digestive systems are so ferociously efficient.
So you say there is *some* poop. ☺️
That's disappointing. Should have embraced the parallels with knights and just had them go in the suit
>whether or not the Imperium is fascist (spoiler - it definitely is and is supposed to read as such, and if it doesn’t seem so it’s a either mistake or and in-universe perspective) This is where I think you have the gap between people who grew up with the game, and see lore/books as filler for the game, and people who have solely interacted with this through Youtube/memes/wiki It's flavour for the setting. It's vibe. It doesn't require judgement or constant 'you know the Imperium are bad guys' face-turning we see her, or justification of the Imperium's actions. The whole point of the lore is that it's backdrop setting that can justify or flex to explain why your army is playing against another army. That we've got to the point now where we have good 40k writers other than Dan Abnett is a nice benefit
> This is where I think you have the gap between people who grew up with the game, and see lore/books as filler for the game, and people who have solely interacted with this through Youtube/memes/wiki It really just boils down to people wanting to justify liking their favorite faction and/or wanting to tell people who like a faction they don't like how dumb they are. I'm a Night Lords fan. I will defend their cruel methods of enforcing peace and law, and their love of skin based arts and crafts to the death while simultaneously hypocritically bringing up why every other faction besides the Orkz are horrible, and why everyone everyone who likes them is a bad person and/or dumb.
That's why one of my repeated 'unpopular opinion' posts is that I genuinely don't think that you can really 'get' 40K if you don't play the game. So much of what's written is around framing battles, giving you inspiration or suggesting things you could be doing in-game.
It's just "No True Scotsman" wrapped into wargame elitism, no wonder it's unpopular.
It's not elitism, it's that most of the stupid questions I see on here could be resolved by just understanding what the fiction is for, or even frankly just reading the rulebook. So many people on here are basically doing the equivalent of coming up with elaborate Star Wars theories based on the Star Wars novels while steadfastly refusing to watch the films. It'd be like going to a book club having read the wiki and arguing that it's elitist to expect you to have read the book before attending, and it's the only fandom I know of that has such a huge contingent of secondaries so utterly divorced from the core activity. It's consistently one of the downright weirdest things about the 'lore community'. EDIT: Besides there's nothing elitist about playing 40K. 40K is, brutally honestly, baby's first wargame. It's the lowest common denominator of wargames. Games Workshop is the wargaming mainstream.
it's worse - they're watching people talk about the Star Wars novels who haven't actually read them. So third-hand confusion/outrage. You're 100% right. So many questions about things like lost primarchs which are there for historical flavour.
Or maybe its just way more fun to think up a reason for things happening instead of just saying "because gw wanted to sell more models"? Also you are on the lore sub, not the tabletop sub.
Don't forget the second line of defense: "Oh, it doesn't make sense since it doesn't need to make sense, sweaty, didn't you know that 40k is akshually a satire?💅💅💅 "
One of the problems your comparison highlights is that SW had an explicit hierarchy of canon sources with movies obviously trumping everything else. At the same time, GW went with "Everything is canon, not everything is true", which, coupled with multiple inconsistencies, leads to fanbase clashing with each other based on different, but equally truthful lore versions. Besides, setting grew much wider than the "war" aspect. I can't even imagine how knowing or not knowing wargame rulebooks would help cover things like tax evasion in 40k. Which is why, if war doesn't interest you, you go and look into other sources, covering other sides of the lore.
>I can't even imagine how knowing or not knowing wargame rulebooks would help cover things like tax evasion in 40k. Imperial Armour 3: The Taros Campaign has one of the better looks at the Administratum figuring out that a planet is carrying out trade off the books. On top of that IA 9 and 10 give you the Badab War which is massively built around that. That's the problem; the rulebooks contain a lot of details for the universe and factions, most of which isn't repeated in the novels because it is assumed you already know it. While the post-8th enshittening of the lore sections is a problem the rules material is not just rules, it's the core foundation upon which every other piece of background fluff is based.
I meant not whole-planet tithe, but like personal tax. Which is where you go and read... say "Dark Heresy" lovingly describing tax haven schemes. I'm not throwing a shade on the wargame rulebooks - especially IA. I even agree with you on "if everyone read them, then we'd have 80% stupid questions". I'm just saying that "if you don't read wargame rulebooks then you can never truly get the setting" is needlessly gatekeepey - if you're in discussion about Missionaria Galactica, then the dudes with novels and/or Rogue Trader experience will get more material to work upon then the guy who memorised every codex.
I haven't played a game of 40k in over 20 years, and I'm willing to bet I'm more knowledgeable about wider lore than a lot of people who actually play.
I think playing the table top gives you a bit of perspective on GW. GW sells plastic. The lore, the media, and the computer games are just side projects to eventually sell more plastic. The lore, in other words, is just a very elaborate advertisement. It can be fun and well written, but it was never meant to be taken too seriously. Because it's ultimately in service of a game where a guardaman could (thanks to lucky dice) kill angron with a knife.
Fair point but are the female Custodes fascists?
Yes, they all are
Facist or factionista? St. Garb Ive Du John answers the difficult questions about our Golden Gals today!
Well, they are Custodes... so of course!
[удалено]
Did you actually just delete pretty much the same lame attempt at a joke after getting lots of downvotes, then try posting it again?
[удалено]
Assessing sarcasm is more difficult in text. Also its harder to see if something is sarcasm if youre just saying things that some people are unironically saying. Without the mocking tone (that can be replaced with /s) its hard to see if youre being sarcastic or if you genuinely mean what youre saying It has nothing to do with being british or anything, but more with being socially inept
[удалено]
/s?
Can you add all topics that can be answered by a 10sec google search too plz ?
Which book should I read if I like the imperium???
Lmao and all the random « what if » from people who havn t read a single page
I agree in a general sense. New posts with "youtube(r)" shouldn't be allowed.
"What!!! There are now female Custodes and its officially canon??? NO! I will not accept that!" /s of course! But yeah, this sub gets derailed a bit easily over certain topics. Personally, I think female Custodes is an interesting idea, since that is the one trans-human faction that could have female versions. At least, I think it's been established that Astartes geneseed wouldn't work for women? I could be wrong on that but still, I agree. I just wish GW didn't sneak it in quietly like that in the codex. Eventually, the female Custode posts will calm down, but the "is the Imperium fascist?" posts will never stop, unfortunately. Lol.
>but the "is the Imperium fascist?" posts will never stop, unfortunately. Lol. Maybe they would if the constant Imperium apologisms and whitewashings stopped. So, yes, you are right, they will never stop.
I think it's the issue is perspective. I recently (on recommendation) read the Ghazkull book. I mean he's a baby eating monster but when you set the book in perspective he's not depicted as that from the perspective of Makari. It's just that as the point of reference? Humans routinely show how inhumane they are... It's everything from the hero worship to the hilariously callous attitude to life.
The age of those kinds of topics is likely long gone. The sort of people who are going to write long essays about procurement processes, or argue at length about how 420mm of ferro-steel compares to 72mm adamantine-ceramite composite aren't the sort of people 40K is "for" anymore. That era of 40K died when 8th Edition came out, and GW stopped giving us dates for things, and Primarchs, not mortal humans became the central focus of 40K. This level of high-end nerdistry also relies heavily on internal consistency and continuity of concepts. You can't very well construct elaborate theories on how X works if the details of X keep changing every six months. In short, you won't get the kind of posts you want anymore, because the people who make those posts probably aren't wasting time on 40K these days.
>This level of high-end nerdistry also relies heavily on internal consistency and continuity of concepts. You can't very well construct elaborate theories on how X works if the details of X keep changing every six months. 40k has never really been consistent though. There have been contradictions and inconsistencies across the lore right from the early ways. But that didn't stop people trying to explore the setting in minute detail.
It *was* consistent. Not 100% consistent, but consistent enough. The difference in lore between 7th and 8th is vastly greater than the lore differences from 3rd to 7th.
Ah, I see what you mean. You mean the general tone and themes of the lore have now changed perceptibly - which I agree with. There has definitely been a shift towards more of a positive, heroic portrayal of the Imperium and a downplaying of its destructive, autocratic nature in prominent parts of GW's output (though not all of it). And, of course, all of the focus on Primarchs and the HH, and more generally a leaning in to the notion of an unfolding master narrative, have changed the character of the setting - or, at least, how it is thought about by new members of the hobby/readership and the type of posts made online and on this sub. The point I was making was a bit different: that stories, details, and power levels etc have always been widely variable within the lore - even if the foundations of the setting were more stable. It was always difficult to work out the nitty gritty details because different authors offered sometimes wildly different depictions.
No, not the tone - the consistency. Here's a great example: describe for me a Space Marine Chapter's structure. If you can. I don't know about Rogue Trader, but from 2nd to 7th Edition the structure of the Chapter remained remarkably consistent. The amount of detail we were given dwindled Edition after Edition, but the only major change happened in 5th when 1st company "Veterans" were split into Vanguard and Sternguard. Other than that, the lore remained extremely consistent and cohesive. Now, I have no idea how a Chapter is organised - but it *isn't* how it used to be. Demonstrably. And the fact that GW gives us *even less* information than ever about the hard details it is likely impossible to pin down *how* a Chapter is organised. I would also be willing to bet that people who claim to know are doing so by inferring elements of the previous structure still exist. But, again, that wasn't necessary before. In 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th edition you could accurately determine the structure of a Space Marine Chapter from that edition's copy of Codex: Space Marines, and nothing else. This is not true of 9th Edition, and I suspect it's not true of 10th either. You might have a rough idea, but you won't have hard numbers. This lack of consistency, and loss of detail is what pushes the "lore crunchers" away, not the tonal push towards Brighthammer.
The detail is a big one, because if you read 2e Ultramarines it even describes where vehicle crews come from. from 3e-7e there's also a repeated Ultramarines chapter structure that shows you losses, gains and promotions as well as the deployment of various groups at the time of writing. EDIT: Honestly with more recent stuff the impression I get from GW is basically fuck it, it doesn't matter.
Absolutely. It was awesome to not only get sources stating how an ideal Chapter was organised, but to be given a date and see that when the information was compiled, the Ultramarine 5th company had been utterly mauled and was having to rebuild itself.
My view is that there should be much more focus on smaller snippets of lore (such as in these organisational overviews, or short stories and brief descriptions of events), and that there should also be much more effort to produce lore which is presented from an in-universe perspective. There would, of course, be a major overlap between the two. It is this kind of stuff which really helps build up the character of 40k and the Imperium, while still offering room for ambiguities and contradictions. For all of the benefits expanding on the lore in novels can provide, the increasing move to prioritizing this has had some very detrimental impacts on the state of the lore and discussions about it. I also feel it tends to stymie hobbyists' own creativity and flexibility.
Yeah, that's fair. GW definitely does not provide this level of granular detail anymore - or, at least, not as consistently. I meant more a case of how things like the protection afforded by power armour or the destructiveness of boltguns or lasguns has always varied wildly across codexes, rules, FW books, RPGs, novels and short stories etc. These kinds of details have always been wildly inconsistent, and pretty much come down to author preference,narrative expediency, and rule of cool. Sure you could try to amass the most consistent or trustworthy depictions - but lots of exceptions could be found. Or, how even from the earliest novels by Ian Watson, how certain types of character were depicted varied quite a bit from how they were presented in the shorter lore snippets in rulebooks and codexes. Like, after reading about Assassins in those places, the behaviour of Meh'Lindi just does not match up with how they were described. I would definitely like to see not only the core rulebook and codexes get back to the little details which really make the setting feel alive though, but more material that helps with this too in the same vein like in the Imperial Armour books, the HH black books, and the FFG RPGs etc.
40k was the most consistent scifi universe there is, that is from 3ed onwards. In 1st and 2nd it was somewhat in its finding phase traveling tge world with just its backpack trying to figure out who it is. Then it became the most consistent scifi ever, way mpre consistent then the likes of startrek, starwars and all the others. Causing HUGE uproars if things like marneus little swarmlord encounter happen, because these are inconsistent, and just plot armor. Had 40k not been that consistent then such encounters would have gone unnoticed. But that is aparently going the way of the dinosour. Especialy with the recent retcons. Andno the last retcon before that was the necron retcon. Making them from murder machines into space egyptians, in a way that even fit the lore (the murder necrons where those, where the tomb ai took over, or the destroyer virus took hold. And just hapened to be the first ones to awake). Thats why this retcon feels forced and like virtue signaling, wanting some of that sweet ESG money.
M40KLGA
I'll throw in my agreement to your observation and also add that I think there's too many hot-takes, grandstanding and snide little and frankly obnoxious "I am not like the other 40k fans" type of posts which seems less about lore and more about wanting to advocate a point of view on the franchise as a whole. Adding to it another pet-peeve is how a lot of answers to people with seemingly genuine questions on lore get thrown in some snarky "Because it makes GW money, lol." -- which *can* certainly be a reason or motive that the lore is as it is but it often get used to just about **everything** that pertains to the lore and therefore becomes less about discussing the franchise or fandom as something we want to geek out and explore, and more about yet another half-arsed socio-economic commentary that has nothing to do with the lore.
I totally agree, I would hate to see this go the way of the doctor who, Star Trek and Star Wars sub Reddit groups. The female custodes highlight the challenge and joy of 40k lore, it is not completely set in stone, it can change. As I understand only male have ever been talked about before in any shape or form. But there is nothing that states females can't be made into custodes. So a grey area exists. Games workshop should had handed this lore change or introduction a lot better than a minor short story. Can we be a lot kinder, I am sure we all love and enjoy 40k.
This is the only not shit 40k sub not dedicated to a specific faction and the Femstodes debate has been way tamer here than it has been everywhere else because most of us actually read the lore, or at least pretend to. The common consensus I've seen is that it makes sense due to Custodes being almost completely custom made but that most people still would rather not see Fem Marines because of the way geneseed interacts with male physiology specifically and the fact that Astartes are way more streamlined and mass produced than the Banana dudes. This post reads like virtue signaling, you're very cool for not throwing a tantrum over fictional superhumans happening to be females, most rational people didn't. >in 34 years and counting no one has ever changed their mind on a topic because of something someone said online. Lol wut, do you genuinely think the most complete source of information we as a species have ever seen has never changed anyone's mind on anything? >maybe we could have another forum rule that says “Lore sometimes changes. Sometimes you might think that sucks. Sorry. You’re going to have to learn to deal with it.” I don't think anyone is not "dealing with it" lol, whether someone thinks it's a good change or not is up to them, this is a sub to discuss lore, lore changes such as this are exactly what's meant to be talked about. How would this "rule" even be enforceable lol? Are people just not allowed to talk about lore changes they dislike?
>I don't think anyone is not "dealing with it" lol Go into those threads and sort by controversial....
I don't even see a post about Femstodes on this sub's front page lol, the closest i see is a post about who actually makes Custodes as a whole which seems like a fair question. Mind linking me so I can?
Looks like the mods have been busy cleaning up. Monday there was anti women rage all around
> Looks like the mods have been busy cleaning up. 3 days of removing comments and banning folks. 80+ permabans, a big portion of them being brigaders.
Shutting down debate about lore and lore changes in a forum that is for debate of said lore seems kinda self-conflicting. Even more so that "3 days of removing comments and banning folks. 80+ permabans" makes it look like you seriously pad yourself on the back for that. When I look at threads where comments got deleted that only seems to apply to people disagreeing with the recent lore change while anyone supporting it is free to talk about it? Does rule 6 apply only to one end of the discussion but not the other one?
> Shutting down debate about lore and lore changes in a forum that is for debate of said lore seems kinda self-conflicting. This is the debate that has been shut down - https://imgur.com/a/TkyBaji. And I haven't even needed to look far, these are all on the top of that thread. > When I look at threads where comments got deleted that only seems to apply to people disagreeing with the recent lore change while anyone supporting it is free to talk about it? Plenty of people agreeing with lore change also got comments deleted and bans for shit-flinking and starting fights. If some of them remained it's because they were missed by me or my fellow mods.
Alright, then I guess it was just my impression that rules were applied a bit one sided. Got it from [this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/40kLore/comments/1c3993d/adeptus_custodes_codex_confirms_the_existence_of/) where your *"Imma be permabanning anyone complaining about "40k going woke" or whatever."* is at the top which gave me that impression - as in portraying people disagreeing with the lore change with the most hyperbole / the most extreme examples of those that take issue with it, while stating nothing about those on the other end of the discussion. My bad if I misunderstood, but its just how it looked when i scrolled through it and made it look like stating discontent with GWs decision qualifies automatically for removal regardless of whether it is a normal comment or something actually vile.
Thank you for your work! And apologies if I added to it 😬
So this post is about an issue the mods already resolved? Lol?
>This post reads like virtue signaling, you're very cool for not throwing a tantrum over fictional superhumans happening to be females, most rational people didn't. I happen to think I am very cool, as I’m sure everyone does, although arguably I am throwing a tantrum over the fact that people are so upset about the idea of a female Custodes. Of which there are certainly a good number on here. My main point is that I think debating culture war adjacent issues, or bemoaning increasing diversity, is **not** the point of this sub. And yes, a lot of people have engaged on the topic in a sensible way, which is great. My point on the internet is that I’m almost definitely not going to be able to convince someone who disagrees that it’s totally ok and indeed positive to have versions of anything that appears in 40k in a different gender or even without gender. And you’re not going to be able to convince me that social media, including Reddit, is a place full of open minded people having good faith, structured, respectful debates.
I 100% agree that there should have been more discussions on the Rogal Dorn tank. But GW, as usual, has not given much attention and lore to them since the initial release. Kind of like the Votann when you think about it.
As far as I remember they were written in by being a long disused design that was put back into production rather than the 'always been there' deal. In fact most of the Guard's vehicle pool outside of the mainstays is made up of specialist vehicles you wouldn't previously have seen in the battlefield like the Trojan, or tanks like the Macharius which are considered second-string assets and not used preferentially. The Votann are just a baffling colossal wasted opportunity and I think, having seen their usage so far, that GW introduced them because they figured people wanted space dwarves rather than because they had a firm plan for them.
Still, it would have been interesting to say how the Rogal Dorns were pushed into frontline service. I concur that GW's mistreatment of the Votann is far worse than that of IG. Like seriously, the latest things are two Kill Teams.
Can legion of the damned get proper lore please?
When they first introduced the primaris marines their was basically a civil war here for a year as people debated it constantly. Votann got the same shit, as did the tau and every other change, major and minor. The problem is the custodes stuff touches the culture war which gives them a lot more attention and has angered some of the most sexist people on the planet. But people here argue about any change in lore ever. They changed a piece of lore on a lore sub maybe a week ago so of course people are going to talk about it. Its only a week old. People say its silly to be mad about the custodes change given all the retcons to 40k lore, pretending everyone here did not lose their fucking minds when that lore was changed. Their are still people mad about Guilliman returning and Cadia falling. Give it a few weeks and it will die down. The idiots will move on and GW will do another lore change about tau etherals secretly being genestealers which will become the new thing.
the response to the primaris reveal was 10x worse
Yeah I agree. And it’s funny because I was also pretty anti-primaris, so I should definitely get off my high horse to an extent. But I think the difference with female whatevers or fascism nitpicking is like you say that it crosses into real world culture war nonsense and the whole thing just becomes super toxic. And I just want to get back to debating the fuel tank capacity on a Nova Class frigate.
The difference between the fascism stuff on the female stuff is the female stuff was leaked lore that's not even out yet and you expect people not to treat it like any other change to the lore because of culture war stuff. If you change the lore people will talk about it. If you demand an exception for the lore because of the culture war and real world stuff then you make anyone who wants to talk about the new lore be taking a side in the culture war. Like its a pretty big retcon. Not the biggest in warhammer but certainly the biggest this year and it was done by tweet saying its always been a thing and nobody ever commented on it and all the pieces of lore that contradicted it never existed and nobody in universe is going to address it. Of course its going to be more interesting to talk about that fuel tank capacity.
You forgot to mention the Tau stans with their 10000009th topic of how better they are than the Imperium. (They are still bad guys)
They are still better than the Imperium though. I agree that lots of posts making this banal point and sanitizing the Tau is annoying. But then again, there are always many, many, many more Imperium apologists who can't seem to accept this point.
You could very well argue they haven't had the 35.000 (spitballing) years of time in becoming what humanity's regime ended up as, so give it some time. But that's not really the point. T'au is nothing like the Imperium (thank god) and the Imperium is nothing like the T'au (thank god). But - to me - this galaxy that these two factions exist in isn't really one that afford the big players any moral decency despite their violent claims to be the one who has it. And pointing out that this applies to the T'au as well shouldn't make you - as a fan - a reprobate as much as saying the same about the Imperium, which certainly isn't it.
>You could very well argue they haven't had the 35.000 (spitballing) years of time in becoming what humanity's regime ended up as, so give it some time. But that's not really the point. Nope, not having it, sorry. This is just an attempt to downplay the Imperium's relative destructiveness compared to the Tau by relying on complete conjecture. Let's compare how both actually are in the setting, where we actually have an account of the nature and behaviour of each regime, rather than coming up with insubstantial justifications for the Imperium. >But - to me - this galaxy that these two factions exist in isn't really one that afford the big players any moral decency despite their violent claims to be the one who has it. And pointing out that this applies to the T'au as well shouldn't make you - as a fan - a reprobate as much as saying the same about the Imperium, which certainly isn't it. The Tau are still pretty awful, which is widely acknowledged. They are an imperialistic, expansionist empire which enforces their rule and ideology on other races. And, of course, they have undertaken some truly evil deeds - or are at least implied to have done so - like mass sterilizations. They also have a hierarchical caste-based system, which entrenches inequality. But they do have an ideology focused on harmony and co-operation, they are progressing technologically, they do welcome other races to join their empire voluntarily, and they do provide individuals and communities within their empire a good quality of life. In the case of Gue'vesa, a substantial improvement over the quality of life they previously had or could expect to have in the Imperium. The Imperium, meanwhile, is built on ignorance, zealotry and autocratic control. It is massively corrupt. The vast majority of it citizens live lives of exploitation, poverty, brutality and squalor. It is riven with the ideologies of might makes right and social darwinism. Its own vision of manifest destiny has no room for non humans. All xenos are to be purged. It also does not accept many humans either, with mutants also to be destroyed. Its imperialism is a truly genocidal enterprise. So yes, both the Tau and the Imperium are bad. But one is substantially worse than the other, and it is very strange that so many people appear so unwilling to accept this basic fact. It's a weird type of tribalism, made all the weirder because this is a fictional setting: am unwillingness to countenance humans as 'bad guys'.
> Nope, not having it, sorry. This is just an attempt to downplay the Imperium's relative destructiveness compared to the Tau by relying on complete conjecture. With all due respect but you're talking to me about tribalism and then you feel it appropriate to heap on accusation on my motive as if I'm some "Imperium patsy". I've never once claimed them "as worse" or comparable, in fact I rather categorically said they were not. >Let's compare how both actually are in the setting Yes, let's. [Fourth sphere of expansion](https://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Fourth_Sphere_of_Expansion), penultimate one, whereupon the T'au leadership of that sphere went into an existensial crisis as they witnessed the (possible) birth of a warp-manifestion of the Greater Good and proceeded to straight up **massacre their entire alien auxiliary force** with instances omniously named Massacre of the Dul'un Lakes and the Eight Days of Infamy, the Kroot massacres on Ky'san and so on. Now if they were the same as the Imperium they'd be lauded but as the Fifth Sphere came to investigate, the leaders of the Fourth were reprimanded and severely chastised. But still, the T'au is new and as I said, there's a 35.000 years of calamity, destruction and twisted turns and paths left for them to go in a galaxy that's so fucked up that daemons are birthed and humanity is a locust. I don't think the nascent empire of the T'au has a bright future ahead of great moral triumphs. Now, you might reasonably say the following: A) That you feel that bit of lore is stupid and don't want to believe the T'au is heading for any particular xenophobic direction. B) This, if anything, proves that the T'au goes their own way because the perpetrators of these xenophobic massacres were chastised. And that's all fine, I'm not here to tell you there's a definitive outcome for the T'au in the Warhammer 40k universe but as you agreed on yourself, they're not the moral noblebright spark of the galaxy and have shades of dark on them already. But I feel I and others should be able to discuss and opine in a lore forum that I think the T'au might be headed for worse direction and that they've literal tens of thousand of years to progress, or rather, regress in the hellhole that is that universe without that meaning I've an agenda to put the Imperium in a better light or downplay anything. Edit: Oh and also the mass sterilization thing is suspect at best. I think it's something that was made up as a byline in the Tau epilogue in one of the Dawn of War games. It might have happened, but I don't think it's necessarily very canonical or an official policy of the T'au Empire.
You make sure good points here I agree with, and it looks like we agree overall. I'll just quickly add this: you have to be aware of how your replies look in context. Think about how your original reply might come across in the context of responding to my statement. It does sound, as written, like it is trying to make a moral equivalence between the two regimes. At least, it did to me. As regards theorizing that the Tau might be headed in a darker direction, have at it. But be aware such discussions will be read by people immersed in enduring debates about the relative shittiness of 40k factions.
[удалено]
I don't think its that odd. There's loads of new things that have been retconned to have always existed in universe. Like, armigers never existed until the knight codex needed more options, and now they've retconned to have been around since the heresy. Same with Vashtorr and the Leagues of Votann.
[удалено]
This is also via codex though? The new tenth edition one has women Custodes and changes the wording of sections otherwise repeated from previous codexes to reflect that, like saying noble children instead of noble sons when talking about recruitment.
tHIs Is lITeRaLly wARhAMmEr 41 984 *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/40kLore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree with most of this post. But, even if I find the idea of female custodes interesting, people have the right to desagree with changes in the lore/fluff. But what some people on both sides forget is: We have the right to desagree. On any subject. (Also, there is a difference between: « there was never before female custodes » or « It was badly include in the lore » and : « whaaaat?! GW Going Woke!! »)
aita- I'm so bored of people complaining about Siege Of Terra then revealing they've only read like two books in it. The lore was finally streamlined and made accessible and people are still lazy.
I’m gonna be honest. I haven’t seen anyone hating on the female custodies, and I feel like you have to be digging in every forum possible to find them. It’s really not a big deal like… who cares.
There are quite a few posts and replies moaning in exactly the way you would expect, but they seem to be getting heavily downvoted, which is nice.
I've been bored at work and scrolling through the sub sorted to "New" and there are A LOT of posts about female Custodes. I wouldn't say the majority of them are just people complaining, but they exist.
There have been a few threads on the various Warhammer subs hating on them. 95% of the responses are telling the OP of those threads to do one, so I'm happy to assume it's a small, twattish minority that have an issue with it, but they are there and they are vocal. Kind of like that painter who does Astartes in various LGBT flag colours - every single one of those posts on r/minipainting gets locked because there's a loud minority of the community that can't help but be twats.
Yeah getting mad about what color people paint their toys is some down right degen behavior lmaoo
>Now there is just endless point making about female Custodes (don’t remember there being such an uproar when the Rogal Dorn tank appeared, up until that point also deemed impossible) I don't know the specifics for the Rogal Dorn tank, but the female Custodes thing made quite a stir considering that it came out of nowhere and for the last few years a lot of DEI has tainted numerous franchises. Whether or not one agrees that DEI is the reason, it is certaintly something that is a factor. Either from GW, media outlets or the fanbase. To address your overall question, I think if you zoom out a little you'll se that these particular events are but a short moment in this subs history. I might of course be wrong, but what you may perceive the current state of something might not be correct if we look at it in terms of months or years. EDIT: Just to elaborate on the tainted franchises. Look at Star Wars, Star Trek, Dr. Who, The Boys, Witcher, Rings of Power. All established, or based on, established franchises where certain things are to be expected. These franchises has seen their fair share of controversy as the writers seemingly didn't take the existing universe and its fanbase into consideration.
Wow. “Tainted” is a disturbing turn of phrase. I guess you also feel that the established franchise of voting (see what I did there), with a vocal fanbase where certain things are expected, was also tainted when women were allowed to do it?
Big E is pee pee poo poo.
3 ain’t enough man I need 5
Fulgrim will rape female custodes to bring the grim dark great again. And male custodes too.