Talk:Abaddon

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

Newfaggotry[edit]

Uhm, whats the deal with the "no-arms" thing? It always seemes to show up whenever Abaddon is mentioned on /tg/. BladePHF 16:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

It's a joke since the Model's arms break off very easily, it kinda stayed that way

No arms[edit]

Abaddon prowls fiercely but cannot scratch his back, for as the Souix people are aware, Abaddon has no arms with which to scratch his back. 71.229.74.0 01:52, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Shut up and drive your tank. --Nave Ninja 23:17, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

The sockets on my upper torso thirsts for my limbs again. Abaddon the Despoiler 01:45, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Daemon weapon[edit]

Is it ever stated what kind of a daemon is bound inside drach-nyan (sorry if I spelled that wrong) or does the fluff just keep saying "greater daemon" with specifying?

To 121.216.27.104[edit]

I am well aware of GW's rampant favoritism regarding the Imperium of Man, but Abbadon's article is not the place to whine about it. And even if only half of all players use Imperium, that's still half their profits gone if they leave due to the Imperium falling (because let's face it, most of us don't have the money to buy two different 40k armies as you apparently assume). In any event, nobody wants to hear your suggestions, given that hell will freeze over before GW even thinks of listening to them and that they have nothing to do with the article itself.-an Anon

It appears we have a bit of an edit war on our hands here. Might I suggest that the anons involved in it do themselves a favor and just leave the article alone for a few days before the bans start getting handed out. I'm no fan of GW's ham-handed favoritism either, but this article is not the place to complain about it.--Newerfag (talk) 06:20, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Imperium favouritism debate[edit]

I was one of the people involved in the edit war on the Abbadon page; It wasn't the place for that discussion, and for that I apologize. Regarding the views expressed, there is one thing I do not understand. First, though not everyone has access to the same amount of money, I can think of three people off the top of my head who collect more than one 40k army. Some people over time get tired of one army and try another, or a lucky few may be rich enough to collect more than one at the same time. So while I don't know how common it is, it does happen to a degree. Also, you or anyone has no way of knowing how much of the fanbase collects Imperial armies, Xenos armies, Chaos armies or any combination of the three unless you are part of Games Workshop's marketing team at their HQ in Nottingham; then you can tell me the exact figures.

Also, out of curiosity, would my idea of dividing the Imperial forces into only three armies (Imperial Guard, Space Marines [with all their accompanying chapters in one Codex], and the Inquisition [containing Sisters of Battle for Ordo Hereticus units, Grey Knights/Daemonhunters for Ordo Malleus units and Deathwatch for Ordo Xenos units]) be a practical idea? I am aware that the chances of Games Workshop implementing this idea are, to quote "...hell will freeze over before... (those ideas are implemented)". This isn't for a petition or bragging rights, just wanting to know people opinions.

It's technically practical, but do you remember the shitfit Black Templars players threw when they were folded into the main Space Marines Codex? Imagine that multiplied three or four times over and you'd get an idea of the general reaction of the players if something like that happens. (Plus more factions means more money, which is all that GW cares about. IMO, the only reason why each chapter isn't its own army is because GW's laziness just barely edges out its greed.) And I'm not entirely sure of the numbers myself, but if you wanted to run a poll or something that might give a better idea, although I'm almost positive that Space Marines of one form or another are the top sellers (which quite frankly is all that GW cares about). From what I've seen, the only non-Imperium armies I've seen on a regular basis were Tau and Eldar, and even then the players who used them only did so because of the broken codexes rather than genuine interest in the codex. Put simply, humans just like to read about and play as other humans more than they do aliens and Lovecraftian horrors. Just the way things are, I guess.--Newerfag (talk) 07:51, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
I had no idea that there was a big fit from the Black Templar players and, pardon the rudeness, I don't care. Their complaint is invalid; Black Templars were just annexed into the Space Marine codex, players can still use the models, the backstory and special characters still exist, they're just in the one codex. Also, I'm not a fan of Space Marines full stop (Imperium, Chaos or any form in 40k), partly because they don't have the most interesting fluff (I prefer Eldar and some parts of the Necron fluff both new and old), but mainly due to Games Workshop's ridiculous favoritism towards them and shoving them them down people's throats is off-putting to me. I'll happily stick to my Dark Eldar, Nids and 'crons (I might collect Imperial Guard, but enough with the Space Marines GW!)
They'll only stop when Space Marines stop acting as their go-to money-printing machine (i.e. never). GW considers the fluff to be nothing but window dressing meant to sell toys, and as long as people keep buying them they'll keep pushing them. It's unfortunate, but there's nothing that you as an individual customer can legally do to stop that which you aren't doing already (i.e. not buying SM). Instead, do the pushing yourself- go to a FLGS and espouse the virtues of your armies and try to persuade 13-year-olds looking to get their first army. It'll certainly be more productive than coming here and preaching to the choir. But this debate has nothing to do with the article and it would be in everyone's best interest to drop it entirely. I know I will.--Newerfag (talk) 02:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Is the "Failbaddon the Armless"-meme outdated?[edit]

The title. I have caught myself in wanting to change an unwarranted "Failbaddon" or "No-arms", but I ahven't done it in fear of angering people who still like the joke, so my question is: Is this joke really worth keeping? It's all over the damn site, and much like "Ultramarines are the best" jokes, it has been disproven. Or at least the "failbaddon"-thing, has. Anyway, would anyone care if I change and/or remove untimely "Failbaddon the Armeless" jokes around the site? I won't touch the Abbadon page, just on other pages where it tend to pop up in place of actual humour. TheWiseDane (talk) 12:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Contradiction[edit]

I have a friend who collects chaos and has Abaddon's model. The model's arms have never fallen off. My friend uses glue just to be clear. User: Zombiecreeper

Just because it's fine for your friend doesn't mean it's fine for everyone. They might also be using a different glue and the people having the issue might have been tricked into using the Citadel superglue to attach his arms. -- Triacom (talk) 10:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Retcon[edit]

The article says there was a retcon in November of 2013 that turned Abaddon's crusades from failure to march on to Terra into probing attacks or relic hunting. Thing is, I can't find this retcon anywhere, and some people I've talked to say this happened much earlier. Is there a source for this retcon?