MrDarth151

i am impressed by the ability to continually subject yourself to something you hate. that’s some death guard levels of resilience there if all black library have to put up with is some message board grumbling while still taking your money, then that’s not a terrible deal for them. and not much motivation to change Accentuating the negative. I immensely dislike how HH portrays warfare. That doesn't interfere with my enjoyment of other aspects of the series. Fiction is multi-faceted. I can, for example, enjoy character work and world building. Take Betrayer. I can hate the way Shadow Crusade was portrayed and enjoy A D-Bs portrayal of World Eaters at the same time. It is not mutually exclusive. It's the same kind of presumptions that lead people to believe that I hate everything A D-B written, which is not true. I might really dislike Master of Mankind and still say that his short stories written for HH are some of the best work I've seen in 40k period. Which I do. And there are still elements of Master of Mankind that I thought were well done, and that's probably the most disappointing book I have ever read when it comes to HH. So no. I don't hate 40k, and I don't hate HH. I hate aspects of it. A concept everyone, evidently, struggles to comprehend.

Have you read Slaves to Darkness? Especially considering your comments on Horus and the traitors winning in short order? Really? So the Siege is cancelled and loyalist can finally have an important strategic victory? No? Thought so. Beta-Garmon does not matter. It's a spectacle piece with negligible impact on the storyline. I am not going to pretend otherwise. Hilarious and completely ignorant of the fact that most WWII stories tell either A) Character stories of very small groups of people who have little relevance to the greater war being played out or B) Tell stories of fictionalised operations that can either fail or succeed depending on the author's whim. They are not going to all die, and that will have to count for victory, because this is Horus Heresy. You know why I have cynical approach to this book? I've read the entirety of Horus Heresy. All of it. Every. Single. :cussing. Piece. Every numbered book, every novella, every short story, every audio drama. It's the same story almost every time. No variation. Chaos. Will. Win. No matter how contrived it has to be, if we have to ignore continuity or just use outright diabolous ex machinas that will never show up again. Come on. Forces of Horus have fought and suffered attrition for ten years. Landing operations followed by siege action are literally the single most damaging operations for the attacker in existence. Horus will to two of them, in quick succession, win one, and almost win another. It will not possibly happen without contrivance, and I'm not going to pretend that I'm going to like it. "But Darth, the book hasn't been released yet..." Yeah, I told myself that too for the last twenty times, and was disappointed in every single instance, with the exception of Praetorian of Dorn, which I will forever champion as the way balanced conflict should be written in 40k. I hope the book will have good character moments, and that those will make it serviceable. The war? There is nothing that interests about Beta-Garmon conflict in and of itself, and that's assuming Haley has chops to pull it off in satisfying fashion, which is not something I have seen in his large scale conflicts up until this point. Yes, yes, I am bitter and cynical, and you are all excited that the conflict will actually get covered. Very good. Enjoy that feeling. It is quite pleasant. I will remain cynical until proven otherwise, because I rather be pleasantly surprised, then yet again disappointed. That is all I have to say on the matter. Have a nice day.

Meh. Beta-Garmon will be another air quote brilliant air quote display of prowess by traitors, where they will win a battle just overwhelmingly enough for Siege to happen. It's the same song and dance every time. We know that Horus will not commit all of his forces to Beta-Garmon, because it doesn't chronologically make sense. We know that they are going to win, because the Siege happens. It is going to be contrived, because Horus just spend a decade or so in constant fighting, and he is going against fortified system supported by practically untouched forces of Segmentum Solar. Because attrition is not something that happens to Chaos. We cannot allow basic principles of warfare get in a way of storytelling, after all. This is going to be a book long Armatura. This story has been told about two dozen times within HH already, and it would need to be seriously amazing to actually be readable, at this point. Pah. Sanguinius is my favourite Primarch, and I still can't muster any enthusiasm for this book.

Haley is a mixed bag for me. I think he does good character work, which is why my favourite novel of his is Dante, but I also think Beta Garmon is not a good fit for him, because when it comes to large scale action, he rather consistently underwhelmed me. I think he does fine on a smaller scale, but this isn't a smaller scale. This is as big as we ever going to get, possibly bigger in scale than the Siege, and I don't really believe Haley has what it takes to carry the book through action alone. It might be good, it might be bad, I'm certainly not waiting for it with bated breath. I also have no emotional investment in Beta Garmon. It's a battle that's put in because it would be cool. There is no particular reason to cover it, and I actually agreed with the previous decision to relegate it to FW HH books, because that is a format that simply fits it better. And there is another thing: I have no investment in the tired formula. This battle is going to go as every other battle in HH does. There will be no surprising twists and turns. A desperate Imperial defence that is eventually overwhelmed, but inflicts some casualties, while suffering bigger in return. The only question mark is how badly Imperials will lose this time, and how contrived Chaos eventual certain victory will be. It has become trite. A conflict I have no investment in, is no conflict worth reading about.

That's because I've learned something about this board quite a while ago: Putting actual effort towards negative critique of things that are praised on this board is a waste of time. It's really not that hard: There are certain opinions that are firmly entrenched here. People are already convinced that I have bizarre vendetta against ADB. Spending a day writing an elaborate response that will get dismissed flat out regardless of what arguments I will make strikes me as counter-productive. So really, what would be the point? I can spend my limited amount of free time on something more productive. As far as I am concerned, there is nothing worth discussing here regarding the subject. It was stupid of me to think otherwise.

Also of note is that Roboute didn't actually survive in a perfect vacuum. He even acknowledges it himself. So I would think Primarchs can still be strangled. Also, not sure if that wasn't actually retconned later into Horus just killing him with the Talon, instead of specifically strangulating him.

I do not make guesses about his intention, but I will say that they come off as such. It's the little things that sometimes annoy me. At any rate, I really care not about to such a degree that I want to continue this discussion. Keep your opinion, and I will keep mine.

And have I criticised that, or have I criticised their exceptionalism? Or is this another case of people not knowing what I'm talking about, and making the most far reaching assumptions just to dismiss my opinions flat out?

Sure. The lesson being, if I recall correctly "Don't criticise ADB, because we are afraid he will leave". Was it you who told me that? Pretty sure it was. Really now. I hardly only criticise ADB. If anything, I've had nothing but praise for his short stories. And considering I have talked with the man extensively, I find him far more receptive to criticism than most of his fans. *Sigh* Stacking powers and feats up on a character doesn't make them more memorable to me. Regardless of who does it.

And has been criticised for it. Perpetuals are one of the things that are not universally accepted and have met with rather mixed reception, so it's kinda disingenuous to bring it up. Most of the criticism period is disingenuous. So is most of the praise. We are talking about fiction, Sturgeon's Law applies. Not really. ADB consistently writes his Astartes as exceptional, even amongst their kind. This, combined with the high end of Astartes effectiveness, creates certain impressions. ADB is not writing in a void. I find it bizarre that people are acting as if he did.

Dunno, I see that opinion a lot in many different communities, most of which do not interact with ADB at all. Perhaps it's the more consistent writing style? Or the fact that ADB has the tendency to write his pov characters as special. I certainly never heard similar complaints about Abnett, and he is no stranger to female characters.

Perhaps instead of derailing thread into talking about Master of Mankind, you could move that discussion into more appropriate topic dedicated to it?

*Sigh* What I mean is that the books are structurally similar enough that an inattentive reader might confuse them for pattern. And when I say that looking for patterns is meaningless I mean that almost everything in modern SF and Fantasy has been done already by someone else. In generalised terms, patterns apply to the genre, not individual writers. Execution is what matters. And all BL writers are hit and miss on that score, so it's not that helpful either. I don't recall ever reading a 40k novel that wouldn't do at least one thing I would like. Except the First Heretic maybe.

Meh. If characters are good, they are good. If they aren't, they aren't. I find looking for patterns to be a generally waste of time. Work should stand on its own.

Of course. It is nevertheless noticeable. I personally don't mind them, but I have no trouble understanding why some might. *Shrugs* I wasn't the one to argue for the interpretation of the universe that makes every action futile. I've lost count how many times people told me that its canon. Internal conflicts are all, at it's base, rooted in ethics. 40k, as intended, is moral and existential nihilism. I just ignore it nowadays, because it makes enjoying it hard. Even with that caveat, I have to say that most of internal conflict falls kinda flat to me. This stems from my personal experience as an ethic; I find that most writers cannot for the live of them make internal conflicts that look meaningful to me. I've had this problem with Argel Tal, for example. I want Sisters of Silence book more. I find them far more interesting.