Jump to content

Shroud of Night


Recommended Posts

Has anyone had a chance to read the Shroud of Night by Andy Clark? I'm a huge Alpha Legion fan and I am debating whether I should get the e-version or the hardcover.

 

I've found many of the 40K Alpha Legion stories to be rather lackluster, so a little input would be great on whether this deserves to sit on my shelf alongside Legion, Seventh Serpent, Praetorian of Dorn etc... Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok - here you go:

1) The story focuses on AL methodology and views in the general scope of things. The book is much more 'cheerful' than 'PoD' and 'Legion'. And much more interesting than 'Seventh Serpent'. But tis not beaten the masterclass of the 'Serpent Beneath'.

2) Main cast is an amalgam of a company sundered by the years of conflict to the oversized dirty dozen. They are the AL of old - they 'seemed' stranded for the milleniums in one location at the Eye of Terror. They are more warlike, tired and depressed than the AL you read before.

3) In comparison to other AL they almost does not have the needed resources.

4) But they have a plan :wink:

 

Hope this helps

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok - here you go:

1) The story focuses on AL methodology and views in the general scope of things. The book is much more 'cheerful' than 'PoD' and 'Legion'. And much more interesting than 'Seventh Serpent'. But tis not beaten the masterclass of the 'Serpent Beneath'.

2) Main cast is an amalgam of a company sundered by the years of conflict to the oversized dirty dozen. They are the AL of old - they 'seemed' stranded for the milleniums in one location at the Eye of Terror. They are more warlike, tired and depressed than the AL you read before.

3) In comparison to other AL they almost does not have the needed resources.

4) But they have a plan :wink:

 

Hope this helps

This helps a lot! Thank you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it as Andy Clark take on how the Alpha Legion modus operandi works under pressure.

 

They are not as in control as in Legion, Seventh Serpent or Serpent Beneath.

So they are force to do the best they can with in the situation.

 

I like how this is portrait. They seem more "human" and relatable.

 

But as nice as this is, I found the plot a bid lacking as far as a Alpha Legion story goes.

It's too straightforward. The is no mystery in this one.

 

So it a decent book to read, but I have no desire to revisit this one.

6/10

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have very little experience with the Alpha Legion so I can't say much about how this compares to their other portrayals, but I would say that you should think of this somewhat like the Chaos version of a Last Chancers story. It's about a kill team who run the gamut of personalities and have a lot of baggage taking on a dangerous job for an outside employer, one where all manner of things go wrong and they have to improvise and think on their feet as the war about them reaches its climax.

 

I didn't exactly care for them at first and certain things about their portrayal bugged me (although that might just be my unfamiliarity with some of their quirks) but they grew on me, and I'm saying that as someone who picked this story up solely to see what it did with Celestine. They seemed alright ... although I felt like the story itself was a bit all over the place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see it as Andy Clark take on how the Alpha Legion modus operandi works under pressure.

 

They are not as in control as in Legion, Seventh Serpent or Serpent Beneath.

So they are force to do the best they can with in the situation.

 

I like how this is portrait. They seem more "human" and relatable.

 

But as nice as this is, I found the plot a bid lacking as far as a Alpha Legion story goes.

It's too straightforward. The is no mystery in this one.

 

So it a decent book to read, but I have no desire to revisit this one.

6/10

 

Exactly. Plot was lacking - and that's one of the issues of this book. But let be honest in 2017 all BL books had boring, stupid plotlines. 'Resurrection' is actually the same. Even through descriptiveness of it is good - the main plotline is lackluster.

As for the Shroud of Night - tis decent, but exactly for the one read. I don't think I will ever re-read it again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As somebody who rarely ever re-reads books even if he loved them thoroughly the first time, the first read is all that really matters. The sense of excitement, wonder, making the connections and having an enjoyable ride throughout. Re-readability never really factors into my enjoyment of a book, because chances are, even if I want to, I never will read it again from front to back unless I feel I need to in preparation for a sequel many years later.

With so many books releasing on a weekly basis, even with BL, I just don't see the point re-reading as a rule. I want a gripping first experience and then move on to the next, in most cases. There's only so much time, and there's far too many books waiting to be read beyond.

 

I know some books I will most assuredly revisit a few years down the line, like Tolkien's The Children of Húrin, which is one of the few books I actually re-read every few years, and Legend of the Galactic Heroes is due a re-read once the series is complete. Eisenhorn is something I wanted to revisit for a while but couldn't squeeze in yet, and that's a great trilogy I loved.

 

So judging a book on its re-readability doesn't sit right with me. I don't rush through books, and consider myself a pretty slow reader in general, but it comes with the perk of paying a good amount of attention to things even on the first read. If I need to revisit sections after the fact to connect and confirm twists, I'll do that in a targeted way rather than by re-reading the whole book. Besides, no second read will fully satisfy that itch of stumbling into something new and exciting anyway.

 

Bottom line, the book needs to be good on the first encounter, entertain me while I read it and offer satisfying drama and developments via a compelling plot. If it doesn't do that the first time around, no amount of revisiting will change that first impression anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As somebody who rarely ever re-reads books even if he loved them thoroughly the first time, the first read is all that really matters. The sense of excitement, wonder, making the connections and having an enjoyable ride throughout. Re-readability never really factors into my enjoyment of a book, because chances are, even if I want to, I never will read it again from front to back unless I feel I need to in preparation for a sequel many years later.

With so many books releasing on a weekly basis, even with BL, I just don't see the point re-reading as a rule. I want a gripping first experience and then move on to the next, in most cases. There's only so much time, and there's far too many books waiting to be read beyond.

 

I know some books I will most assuredly revisit a few years down the line, like Tolkien's The Children of Húrin, which is one of the few books I actually re-read every few years, and Legend of the Galactic Heroes is due a re-read once the series is complete. Eisenhorn is something I wanted to revisit for a while but couldn't squeeze in yet, and that's a great trilogy I loved.

 

So judging a book on its re-readability doesn't sit right with me. I don't rush through books, and consider myself a pretty slow reader in general, but it comes with the perk of paying a good amount of attention to things even on the first read. If I need to revisit sections after the fact to connect and confirm twists, I'll do that in a targeted way rather than by re-reading the whole book. Besides, no second read will fully satisfy that itch of stumbling into something new and exciting anyway.

 

Bottom line, the book needs to be good on the first encounter, entertain me while I read it and offer satisfying drama and developments via a compelling plot. If it doesn't do that the first time around, no amount of revisiting will change that first impression anyway.

 

In that we differ. I do not judge the book on re-readability - it's just a direct logical conclusion after someone will finish reading the book.

 

I re-read books a lot (not BL only). Masterpieces are always a joy to re-read to see something I missed. PoD, PoH, Scars, Horus Rising, Betrayer, Purge etc. I re-read at least 2-3 times each.

 

'Bottom line, the book needs to be good on the first encounter, entertain me while I read it and offer satisfying drama and developments via a compelling plot. If it doesn't do that the first time around, no amount of revisiting will change that first impression anyway.' - exactly.  But as with everything in life - there are exception to the rule.

For example - I do liked Master of Mankind and praised A D-B for it. But that is not the book I will ever re-read again. Even through it is awesome and had everything you described DC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True a book should not just be judged based on the re-readability.

 

Mostly because we all have different habits when it comes to reading.

Some just read a book once no matter how good it is, other read their favourite books several times.

 

So I would recommend taking all comment about this book with a grain of salt, it after all people own personal opinions.

 

I myself reread many of my favourite books, so it natural for me to add this to my judgement of "Shroud of Night"

 

And I just feel that is a decent book, a fail attempt to start a "Bloodquest" or "Malus Darkblade" series for Alpha Legion fans, but still a decent book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I ordered two hardback copies (One for my bro who also plays AL, funny coincidence). The fact that it is actually written a bit from the AL standpoint is huge for me. Also, if it is even a decent story, I want to encourage more.

 

I really dislike the way GW handles AL and with the tragic loss of Alan Bligh, and the distractions of other projects for Dan Abnett and Graham McNeil, I have become increasing worried about how they will be handled in the future. To me, the AL were always the XX Society of WWII (look them up, they were incredible) and I always cringe when they get the Hunt for Voldorius, DoW, or average GW codex treatment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I ordered two hardback copies (One for my bro who also plays AL, funny coincidence). The fact that it is actually written a bit from the AL standpoint is huge for me. Also, if it is even a decent story, I want to encourage more.

 

I really dislike the way GW handles AL and with the tragic loss of Alan Bligh, and the distractions of other projects for Dan Abnett and Graham McNeil, I have become increasing worried about how they will be handled in the future. To me, the AL were always the XX Society of WWII (look them up, they were incredible) and I always cringe when they get the Hunt for Voldorius, DoW, or average GW codex treatment. 

 

But what about John French (Tallarn: Executioner and Tallern: Ironclad, plus of course Praetorian of Dorn, as well as the contemporary "We are one") or Rob Sanders (The Serpent Beneath and "The Harrowing")? Really they have written the most AL fiction since Legion, and certainly very successfully (and French was deeply embedded into his friend Bligh's worldview).

 

EDIT - My apologies, i see you like these too :D but what are the 40K AL stories, actually? I've not really found any.

Edited by Petitioner's City
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Well, I ordered two hardback copies (One for my bro who also plays AL, funny coincidence). The fact that it is actually written a bit from the AL standpoint is huge for me. Also, if it is even a decent story, I want to encourage more.

 

I really dislike the way GW handles AL and with the tragic loss of Alan Bligh, and the distractions of other projects for Dan Abnett and Graham McNeil, I have become increasing worried about how they will be handled in the future. To me, the AL were always the XX Society of WWII (look them up, they were incredible) and I always cringe when they get the Hunt for Voldorius, DoW, or average GW codex treatment. 

 

But what about John French (Tallarn: Executioner and Tallern: Ironclad, plus of course Praetorian of Dorn, as well as the contemporary "We are one") or Rob Sanders (The Serpent Beneath and "The Harrowing")? Really they have written the most AL fiction since Legion, and certainly very successfully (and French was deeply embedded into his friend Bligh's worldview).

 

EDIT - My apologies, i see you like these too :biggrin.: but what are the 40K AL stories, actually? I've not really found any.

 

Just from memory and personal review,

 

Good

 

We are One

 

Okay

 

The Long Games at Charcharias

 

Bad

 

Truth is my Weapon

The Hunt for Voldorius

Pretty much any codex entry written by GW staff. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finished it yesterday. I enjoyed it, it was a great read. 

 

No, there wasn't intrigue. But that's what happens when a book is written from the perspective of the Alpha Legion operative (without a MacGuffin like "psychic restructuring"). What it DOES show is methodology of the contemporary legionnaire, the individual initiative of the XXth Legion, and the flexibility to use any method to accomplish a mission. It's a peak behind the curtain, as it were, and should be read with that in mind. This is what you get when you ask for more information on the Alpha Legion. Destruction of mystery.

 

That's what made Legion good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do the Sisters of Battle get represented here? Obviously they're the antagonists. Is it just Bloodtide levels of murderporn or is there more nuance than that?

 

Sorry so say that they are more or less just a prop in this story.

They are so bland that they could have be replaced with anything.

 

And if you are a fan of Saint Celestine... you will probably not like this story

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

How do the Sisters of Battle get represented here? Obviously they're the antagonists. Is it just Bloodtide levels of murderporn or is there more nuance than that?

 

Sorry so say that they are more or less just a prop in this story.

They are so bland that they could have be replaced with anything.

 

And if you are a fan of Saint Celestine... you will probably not like this story

 

 

True - the story is mostly about Kassar and co. Everyone else - EC, Khârn, Sisters, Primaris Marines and all the events are secondary in that novel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to be the first of a Series as far as I can tell

 

The book was pretty ok, It seemed to be setting a scene for something later on in a series with the Beacon. The removal of certain members of the group to further the plot down the line, the twists and turns, the quite obvious main antagonist of a series being introduced, and Kassar with perhaps a new struggle with chaos. I was attatched to Kassar from the beginning, similar to Talos in the Night Lords series and would be very interested in seeing where he goes from here. It could be a great series if i am right.

 

I am happy how they used Khârn in book and in universe, how they dealt with Khârn and how he was not underestimated. For the first time I have seen a group of adversaries not charge headfirst into him expecting to win and actually use their head.

 

For once outside of Serpent Below we see ordinary Legionaries in combat, how they think when in battle and especially when taking on a potentially unknowable foe, the Primaris Marines.

Edited by Warsmith Kroeger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.