Sanguinius in 40k?

[Malphas]

=][= Split from here =][=

 

Meh, once Sanguinius is resurrected in the lore, there will be another model for the 40k side.

[Indefragable]

#nothappening

 

#confirmeddeadbyauthors

[Malphas]

Source?

[Majkhel]

#nothappening

 

#confirmeddeadbyauthors

#wechangedourmindsonlesserthingsformoney

 

EDIT: IMO Sangy should and will stay dead

[Malphas]

 

#nothappening

#confirmeddeadbyauthors

 

#wechangedourmindsonlesserthingsformoney:P

EDIT: IMO Sangy should and will stay dead

I agree wholeheartedly. My point was exactly your hashtag. The story will change. Sanguinius will be back after Russ and the Lion are revived, and each of the chaos cult armies are represented by their own codex and their primarchs get models. 4 primarchs on each side, each with their own codex.

 

For the record, I think he should stay dead too.

[Nova_Dew]

 

 

#nothappening

#confirmeddeadbyauthors

#wechangedourmindsonlesserthingsformoney:P

EDIT: IMO Sangy should and will stay dead

I agree wholeheartedly. My point was exactly your hashtag. The story will change. Sanguinius will be back after Russ and the Lion are revived, and each of the chaos cult armies are represented by their own codex and their primarchs get models. 4 primarchs on each side, each with their own codex.

 

For the record, I think he should stay dead too.

 

Chances are we will get an evolved Sanguinor or Mephiston, or most likely none at all since Roboute Guilliman has to save the universe single handed... again

[Indefragable]

There are interviews with Guy Haley and Gav Thorpe (and I might be missing one other as well) where the interviewer(s) ask about Sanguinius in 40k and each of them are like "yea, he's dead for good."

 

Is that canon? <shrug> But considering someone like Guy Haley who is basically GW's PR guy for novelizing its crazy ideas is saying it, I think it's a safe bet.

 

Of course I'm just as cynical as anyone else so I certainly would not put a cash grab past them.

 

The lazy source from Guy Haley (I think there's another out there too): https://geekireland.com/interview-guy-haley-devestation-baal/

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

How long ago are those interviews ? I seem to remember a certain someone saying otherwise .

[Blindhamster]

They're from a little while after 8th edition dropped

[m0nolith]

Iv said this before here; Sanguinius’ resurrection would mean the end of the concept of death in the 40k universe the same way the death and resurrection of Superman ended the concept of death in comic books, basically making nothing have weight to it because anyone dead can be brought back.

 

I’m firmly against this but I’m also well aware of the fact that my emotional attachment to this IP isn’t shared by people who are in higher up in decision making positions, and they will have no qualms when it comes to lore bleed and retconning if they see potential for short term profit, which to be fair from a business standpoint I understand.

 

But I suspect they simply don’t have the ability to take into account all the business lost from poor lore implementation mainly due to the fact that issues like this only become evident in the long term, which is also unlikely since those numbers are going to be blanketed by people who simply don’t care about the lore and new players coming into the game. Don’t forget that miniature wargaming as a hobby is growing worldwide, so the potential for new players coming in is the biggest it’s ever been. Couple all of that with the fact that 40k as an IP is also starting become more mainstream, all of that really impacts the numbers GW gets back at the end.

If this 30k Sanguinius sells well, which it certainly will, they will have no issues resurrecting Sanguinius in 40k, and if things like Primaris and Ynnari are any indication, they will have no problem giving a terrible reason and lore why he did so.

 

It’s not that higher ups don’t care, maximizing profits though good lore and good models would be ideal, but I would imagine in the minds of higher up GW management the effort coupling good lore with good models is not worth the time when it comes to profitability. This is the key point I disagree with them.

[Blindhamster]

Also worth noting that different people have different views on what is good lore.

 

I'm a huge lore buff and love the lore. But I don't spew the vitriol about primaris that some others do as an example.

 

I too am against the idea of resurrecting sanguinius, but I'm not against him returning in another way if the story is what I deem good.

[Semirhagge]

I would love for Sanguinius to come back. I’m firmly in the camp that it would not cheapen his sacrifice. I am also not certain it would necessarily cure the flaw either. Reborn Sangy would be awesome! And even if it comes down to to an Acsended Dante or Mephiston I’m cool with that too.

[m0nolith]

Also worth noting that different people have different views on what is good lore.

I'm a huge lore buff and love the lore. But I don't spew the vitriol about primaris that some others do as an example.

I too am against the idea of resurrecting sanguinius, but I'm not against him returning in another way if the story is what I deem good.

Yeah, and there’s people out there that don’t believe climate change is real. There’s exceptions to everything, but I can say Primaris lore WILDLY regarded as being bad.

 

I agree with you on the second part tho. I’m against him returning, but it is possible to get it to work if it’s not a direct resurrection. I just don’t have my hopes up that they could get it to work.

[Dagoth Ur]

 

Also worth noting that different people have different views on what is good lore.

I'm a huge lore buff and love the lore. But I don't spew the vitriol about primaris that some others do as an example.

I too am against the idea of resurrecting sanguinius, but I'm not against him returning in another way if the story is what I deem good.

Yeah, and there’s people out there that don’t believe climate change is real. There’s exceptions to everything, but I can say Primaris lore WILDLY regarded as being bad.

 

Equating a movement that might very well prove to be cataclysmic to wider humanity to some blurbs written about toy soldiers and ascribing that much meaning to it is not just hyperbole; it is taking this whole thing way too seriously.

 

Edit: Also, public regard means jack-squat; lest one forget that Van Gogh was barely considered an artist and his production as mere trash during his lifetime. There is also a substantial amount of people that regard the Horus Heresy series as bad and horrible, though it has given us gems like The First Heretic and Betrayer.

[Panzer]

Not to mention that climate change has facts to support it and a possible resurrection of sanguinius is purely about opinions at this point so not even remotely comparable. 

[m0nolith]

 

 

Also worth noting that different people have different views on what is good lore.

I'm a huge lore buff and love the lore. But I don't spew the vitriol about primaris that some others do as an example.

I too am against the idea of resurrecting sanguinius, but I'm not against him returning in another way if the story is what I deem good.

Yeah, and there’s people out there that don’t believe climate change is real. There’s exceptions to everything, but I can say Primaris lore WILDLY regarded as being bad.

 

Equating a movement that might very well prove to be cataclysmic to wider humanity to some blurbs written about toy soldiers and ascribing that much meaning to it is not just hyperbole; it is taking this whole thing way too seriously.

 

Edit: Also, public regard means jack-squat; lest one forget that Van Gogh was barely considered an artist and his production as mere trash during his lifetime. There is also a substantial amount of people that regard the Horus Heresy series as bad and horrible, though it has given us gems like The First Heretic and Betrayer.

 

Yeah, I was equating the fact that even though 97% of people say something is one way, there are still 3% of people that say otherwise. I was saying that there are detractors to everything. If you read that I was comparing the importance of climate change to this game, then you are really going out of your way to try and be offended. 

In regards to Van Gogh,  ....

Ok... public regard actually means a whole lot for a publicly traded company because it impacts sales. I don't know how to make that clearer. This is a business, if you have any illusions that its anything else, well I hate to break it to you, and public regard to something has the ability to make or break a product. Take for example Primaris. The lore was terrible and the majority of people on various forums, facebook, reddit, youtube ect ect agree that its not good. But, the Intercessors look pretty great, so great in fact that overshadows their poor lore. For the most part they are a success because of their aesthetics in spite of their lore. Public regard for this product is pretty great actually, so it succeeded. I really didn't need to explain that for a blatant red herring that the Van Gogh comment was, but there we go.

 

In regards to the HH series, yeah, there are some detractors there as well, but it kept on selling so well that they did 50+ books so its seems that there is a very large market out there that really likes these books, me included. 

 

Look, I'm well aware this isn't exactly staying on topic, so if a Mod deletes this, I'm fine with that. That's all I wanted to say on the matter so I'm going to go ahead and disengage from talking about this subject here.

 

In regards to the subject on hand:

Ralderon, Azkellon, Sanguinius, Crimson Paladins, Host of Sacrifice, Sanguinary Guard, and a Host of Sacrifice and a Terminator Rite of war, thats what I think were going to be getting.

[Panzer]

 

 

 

Also worth noting that different people have different views on what is good lore.

I'm a huge lore buff and love the lore. But I don't spew the vitriol about primaris that some others do as an example.

I too am against the idea of resurrecting sanguinius, but I'm not against him returning in another way if the story is what I deem good.

Yeah, and there’s people out there that don’t believe climate change is real. There’s exceptions to everything, but I can say Primaris lore WILDLY regarded as being bad.

 

Equating a movement that might very well prove to be cataclysmic to wider humanity to some blurbs written about toy soldiers and ascribing that much meaning to it is not just hyperbole; it is taking this whole thing way too seriously.

 

Edit: Also, public regard means jack-squat; lest one forget that Van Gogh was barely considered an artist and his production as mere trash during his lifetime. There is also a substantial amount of people that regard the Horus Heresy series as bad and horrible, though it has given us gems like The First Heretic and Betrayer.

 

Yeah, I was equating the fact that even though 97% of people say something is one way, there are still 3% of people that say otherwise. I was saying that there are detractors to everything. If you read that I was comparing the importance of climate change to this game, then you are really going out of your way to try and be offended. 

In regards to Van Gogh,  ....

Ok... public regard actually means a whole lot for a publicly traded company because it impacts sales. I don't know how to make that clearer. This is a business, if you have any illusions that its anything else, well I hate to break it to you, and public regard to something has the ability to make or break a product. Take for example Primaris. The lore was terrible and the majority of people on various forums, facebook, reddit, youtube ect ect agree that its not good. But, the Intercessors look pretty great, so great in fact that overshadows their poor lore. For the most part they are a success because of their aesthetics in spite of their lore. Public regard for this product is pretty great actually, so it succeeded. I really didn't need to explain that for a blatant red herring that the Van Gogh comment was, but there we go.

 

In regards to the HH series, yeah, there are some detractors there as well, but it kept on selling so well that they did 50+ books so its seems that there is a very large market out there that really likes these books, me included. 

 

Look, I'm well aware this isn't exactly staying on topic, so if a Mod deletes this, I'm fine with that. That's all I wanted to say on the matter so I'm going to go ahead and disengage from talking about this subject here.

 

In regards to the subject on hand:

Ralderon, Azkellon, Sanguinius, Crimson Paladins, Host of Sacrifice, Sanguinary Guard, and a Host of Sacrifice and a Terminator Rite of war, thats what I think were going to be getting.

 

 

As have past topics shown it's not as clear cut as 97/3 though. There are plenty people who aren't as opposed to a return of Sanguinius in some way (if written properly) as you seem to think. Otherwise it wouldn't always spiral into these big offtopic arguments until a mod decides to close the topic for good.

As for the Primaris comparison. Many many people who complain about the lore don't even know the lore, they just know the memes and what other people who don't like Primaris told them about it. What was bad at the beginning was the way the Primaris lore got told because GW itself can't write good fluff text for their life but ever since we got Black Library novels about them it improved a lot ... however those people won't read them and keep spreading their illinformed opinions. Welcome to the internet.

 

On that note I'd appreciate it if we could just drop this topic.

[Malphas]

Iv said this before here; Sanguinius’ resurrection would mean the end of the concept of death in the 40k universe the same way the death and resurrection of Superman ended the concept of death in comic books, basically making nothing have weight to it because anyone dead can be brought back.

I’m firmly against this but I’m also well aware of the fact that my emotional attachment to this IP isn’t shared by people who are in higher up in decision making positions, and they will have no qualms when it comes to lore bleed and retconning if they see potential for short term profit, which to be fair from a business standpoint I understand.

But I suspect they simply don’t have the ability to take into account all the business lost from poor lore implementation mainly due to the fact that issues like this only become evident in the long term, which is also unlikely since those numbers are going to be blanketed by people who simply don’t care about the lore and new players coming into the game. Don’t forget that miniature wargaming as a hobby is growing worldwide, so the potential for new players coming in is the biggest it’s ever been. Couple all of that with the fact that 40k as an IP is also starting become more mainstream, all of that really impacts the numbers GW gets back at the end.

If this 30k Sanguinius sells well, which it certainly will, they will have no issues resurrecting Sanguinius in 40k, and if things like Primaris and Ynnari are any indication, they will have no problem giving a terrible reason and lore why he did so.

It’s not that higher ups don’t care, maximizing profits though good lore and good models would be ideal, but I would imagine in the minds of higher up GW management the effort coupling good lore with good models is not worth the time when it comes to profitability. This is the key point I disagree with them.

The concept of death died with the perpetual plotline in the HH series. Oll Person? John Grammaticus? Vulcan? The unkillable character is already established in several baseline humans and one primarch. It's weak writing and it sucks, but that's the direction they went. Now, with the advent of 8th edition and the Primaris marines, the return of Guiliman, the Ynnari plot arc, the baby has truly been thrown out with the bath water and the story GW painstakingly cultivated over the past three and a half decades no longer matters. They've made that plain, and to think otherwise is to ignore a fair portion of the Horus Heresy. Sanguinius' resurrection won't change a thing.

[Jolemai]

Sanguinius in 40k stuff moved here. Please keep the RL stuff out of the topic.

[Arkangilos]

 

Iv said this before here; Sanguinius’ resurrection would mean the end of the concept of death in the 40k universe the same way the death and resurrection of Superman ended the concept of death in comic books, basically making nothing have weight to it because anyone dead can be brought back.

I’m firmly against this but I’m also well aware of the fact that my emotional attachment to this IP isn’t shared by people who are in higher up in decision making positions, and they will have no qualms when it comes to lore bleed and retconning if they see potential for short term profit, which to be fair from a business standpoint I understand.

But I suspect they simply don’t have the ability to take into account all the business lost from poor lore implementation mainly due to the fact that issues like this only become evident in the long term, which is also unlikely since those numbers are going to be blanketed by people who simply don’t care about the lore and new players coming into the game. Don’t forget that miniature wargaming as a hobby is growing worldwide, so the potential for new players coming in is the biggest it’s ever been. Couple all of that with the fact that 40k as an IP is also starting become more mainstream, all of that really impacts the numbers GW gets back at the end.

If this 30k Sanguinius sells well, which it certainly will, they will have no issues resurrecting Sanguinius in 40k, and if things like Primaris and Ynnari are any indication, they will have no problem giving a terrible reason and lore why he did so.

It’s not that higher ups don’t care, maximizing profits though good lore and good models would be ideal, but I would imagine in the minds of higher up GW management the effort coupling good lore with good models is not worth the time when it comes to profitability. This is the key point I disagree with them.

The concept of death died with the perpetual plotline in the HH series. Oll Person? John Grammaticus? Vulcan? The unkillable character is already established in several baseline humans and one primarch. It's weak writing and it sucks, but that's the direction they went. Now, with the advent of 8th edition and the Primaris marines, the return of Guiliman, the Ynnari plot arc, the baby has truly been thrown out with the bath water and the story GW painstakingly cultivated over the past three and a half decades no longer matters. They've made that plain, and to think otherwise is to ignore a fair portion of the Horus Heresy. Sanguinius' resurrection won't change a thing.

The perpetuals you might have something, but not any of the others arguments. Although perpetuals weren’t new with the HH. In fact there used to be lore involving the inquisition thinking they should let him die so he will be reborn. They also have the star children lore.

 

Guilliman was never dead, so his return isn’t the return from death. In fact it fits with old lore.

 

Ynnari doesn’t work as an argument either. Again it’s old lore. Plus, it’s not the same as resurrection from the dead. I’m fact it’s the opposite. It’s birth of new life through death. The creation of a god through the sacrifices of their own species.

[dread05]

I could see something like a death company Sanguinius being a thing. Like, they ressurect him but he's crazy. Would be a nice contrast from 30k where he's this angelic figure with violent bursts, now he could be a being of rage having some moments of clarity. Instead of nulling his sacrifice, this way they could add to the tragedy of the Blood Angels. 

 

"There's only one way to hurt a man who's lost everything. Give him back something broken."

Stephen R. Donaldson, chronicles of the Unbeliever.

[Emissary]

For me the Sanguinius story has always been a Jesus allegory.  And because of that it's always made sense to me that at some point he's supposed to come back to save the Imperium.  At the moment it just feels like his story is half told for me.

 

Anyway.  It wouldn't surprise me for him to come back and I think they've left a lot of avenues for it to happen.  Between Dante's visions of a golden figure saving the emperor (who Dante thinks is himself), to the 2 halves of him in Sanguinor/Mephiston, to him being a vampire which in regular lore can be resurrected after being killed.  I could see him coming back in full form or as some sort of some Greater Angel of the Emperor instead of a Greater Daemon of X God.  In the Destruction of Baal novel he was already pretty much talking to Dante in his vision, which wouldn't surprise me as really Sanguinius instead of a figment of Dante's psyche.

 

Also, it doesn't cheapen his story for me.  He went to his death knowing that he would die unless he sided with Chaos and did it anyway.   There's also no mention so far that he would know he could be resurrected if it happens, so the choice of sacrifice is still fully there.

[Panzer]

 

Guilliman was never dead, so his return isn’t the return from death. In fact it fits with old lore.

 

Ynnari doesn’t work as an argument either. Again it’s old lore. Plus, it’s not the same as resurrection from the dead. I’m fact it’s the opposite. It’s birth of new life through death. The creation of a god through the sacrifices of their own species.

 

Yes and no. Part of Guillimans awakening process was getting killed by Yvraine so her god could resurrect Guilliman.

Also since we're already talking about Guilliman and new fluff, the Primaris Rubicon thing involves the Marine to die and coming back to life as well. :P

[Dont-Be-Haten]

 

 

Guilliman was never dead, so his return isn’t the return from death. In fact it fits with old lore.

 

Ynnari doesn’t work as an argument either. Again it’s old lore. Plus, it’s not the same as resurrection from the dead. I’m fact it’s the opposite. It’s birth of new life through death. The creation of a god through the sacrifices of their own species.

 

Yes and no. Part of Guillimans awakening process was getting killed by Yvraine so her god could resurrect Guilliman.

Also since we're already talking about Guilliman and new fluff, the Primaris Rubicon thing involves the Marine to die and coming back to life as well. :P

Not really. The Calgarian rites are a surgery. They go pretty in depth with it in spear of the emperor.

[Panzer]

Also, it doesn't cheapen his story for me.  He went to his death knowing that he would die unless he sided with Chaos and did it anyway.   There's also no mention so far that he would know he could be resurrected if it happens, so the choice of sacrifice is still fully there.

 ^this

Also even if he knew that he'd return it still took him 10k years. 10k years that could've went very differently with him around and with a lot less suffering on the Blood Angels part. This suffering is real and won't disappear regardless of a potential return or not.