Talk:Primaris Space Marines

From 1d4chan

so I took this stuff out because it sounds more like something that goes on the Centurion Squad Page.

(and possibly Brother Xzibitus considering how it puts more Space Marine into the Space Marines)

Yo dawg! We heard you like your Space Marines so we put in Marines in your Marines so you can Crusade whilst you Crusade!


Look at the stats, they are Stormcast marines! Jokes aside, they look awesome!--McNash (talk) 22:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC) Sounds like some mary-sue BS. Perfected armour, perfected bolter, better than ol' emps creations...--Taumanta (talk) 02:19, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

They say perfected, but that's probably just Cawl stroking his own ego since the armour and bolter are Cawl-pattern versions (yes, he also named them after himself). That being said, the Emperor, while undeniably briliant, isn't without his own limits and arguably kept the Space Marines weaker than what they could be (as they were significantly weaker than both the Custodes and the Thunder Warriors), not to mention he didn't exactly do research on how to improve marines from their current state. With that in mind I think it's quite reasonable that in 10,000 years a genius like Cawl (who is an Archmagos, meaning he should be one of the smartest people in the galaxy) would figure out how to make them better, as well as figuring out how to make their armour and weapons better as well. -- Triacom (talk) 03:05, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Primaris Dreadnoughts[edit]

Although this sounds improbable, maybe the Primaris Dreadnought pilots are taken from failed subjects, wounded in tests or, grimdarkly, deliberately crippled.Tyranid Memestealer (talk) 22:35, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

  • Tbf that wouldn't surprise me
    • Assuming the crusade started at 000 M42, there's been about six years worth of fighting to get put in a sarcophagus, which there must have been a hundred odd empty dreadnoughts in the crusade fleet. Spencer (talk) 00:41, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Why does everyone get their own pages?[edit]

So this is a question not just about this page, but all pages similar to it. Why does every squad need their own page? Why can't we just have one page where the army's forces and descriptions are listed, with navigation at the top easily taking you down to where you want to go, and with the links directing you to that specific part of the page? It makes no sense to have anything on something like a Primaris Ancient, or a Primaris Captain if we're just going to make another page with the exact same info there (and if it has more info there, shouldn't it also have info here?). As it is the pages are always tiny and without much reason to be that way, and it makes it far more annoying if you want to search through everything because it means you need to keep all these separate pages in order, rather than just having one page for everybody (and with Primaris Marines, it's not like they have an awful lot in comparison to others). -- Triacom (talk) 06:30, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Slight edit, I made this while reading through an edit that still had all the information here, but my question still stands. What's the point in giving everyone tiny ass pages instead of just having one page you don't have to click away from in a few seconds because you're already done reading it? -- Triacom (talk) 06:31, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

  • I think they did this because of the potentially new information that is going to come out soon. The Primaris Marines page is going to be a giant wall of text once 8th edition proper is released, thus putting the squad information into separate pages and giving them their own army template (Which they should, since the Primaris can be used as a standalone faction) is to avoid potential page bloating and making it an unreadable wall of text that will get you lost in. You would not like it if the Imperial Guard page showcased Every. Single. Unit. And. Vehicle. Information now would you? Especially with the already long-as-fuck Baneblade page. Case in point, look at the WH40k Wikia, it would be an absolute clusterfuck of wall texts, sloppy editing and pages so long it would resemble more of a shopping list. Simply creating a single page dedicated to listing ALL the forces would be an absolute nightmare to navigate through, let alone classifying them into their own sub-lists. So by creating an army template and giving each playable squad/unit their own page, it cuts down the amount of bloatedness and makes it more cut-clean, neat, to-the-point and efficient. Besides, most of the tiny ass pages are still work in progress, have some patience and it will be filled up to a moderate degree. Plus, in terms of presentation, most would agree that giving each unit their own page no matter how small, is a whole load more appealing than a shopping list. Derpysaurus
The Imperial Guard are broken down into appropriate faction and vehicle pages, the Primaris Marines are not. If we were to break them down into appropriate pages we'd have Infantry for them on one page, and then vehicle information on another. You might not like it if we consolidate information like this, yet I don't see you claiming that every single Land Raider on the Land Raider page deserves its own page, or how about the Knights? I don't see you claiming every Knight should get their own page, and that's because they don't need them. These pages have been around longer than the individual pages, so no I think most would agree that the 'shopping list' idea is better. Even if they come out with new information, how much do you want to bet the information for the Intercessors, or any other Primaris group will never bloat a page enough to become unreadable? -- Triacom (talk) 07:12, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
  • The reason why pages such as the Land Raider and Imperial Knights aren't broken down is because they are kept consistent. You click on the Land Raider page because you want to know about the vehicle and its variations. It's specific. The Primaris Marines however, don't have that much of an excuse. The Primaris Marines page is the general information of the faction. It is going to be broad, it is going to potentially cover a whole load more then just Intercessor Squads for example. Sooner or later we are going to get vehicle platforms and aerial fighter jets that is going to be exclusive to the Primaris Marines. Whilst the Primaris Marines are still in their nascent stage, they are going to be the mascots of 8th edition and you can bet your ass we are going to get a ton of information and fluff from them. Seriously, just looking at the leaked page on the Primaris Captains and Ancients ([1]), that's just going to be the starter fluff alone, which will be expanded upon in future releases. That is just without the potential that some people is going to add in the crunch. What I am trying to say here is that these pages are created because they are going to be much more specific than the general knowledge of the main Primaris page. It is going to delve much deeper into the particular role of the unit and what they do and it is going to have their own rules being plastered on here. The shopping list idea only works if it is done small, concise and in relation to the particular page (Vehicle variations, different patterns, etc), I don't see this happening with the Primaris Marines. As I said, give it time and eventually it is going to balloon up rather quickly once more information gets in. Derpysaurus
And what's preventing us from keeping the Primaris Marines consistent and specific? How exactly is separating the Intercessors from this page any different than separating the Land Raider Redeemer from the Land Raider page? Both are part of one specific thing and the page relates information specific to them. Also the Land Raider and Imperial Knight pages are fucking huge, that image you linked (and further info of about the same size) isn't going to bloat the page nearly as much as those because it tells us what we already know, and isn't that much in the scheme of things. I'd be willing to bet my entire collection that the information we do get won't expand upon their individual roles all that much, and instead we'll just learn more about the Primaris Marines as a whole, which won't be added to the individual pages at all. Also the Knights page covers a whole hell of a lot more than the Individual units, so does the Land Raider page so you've got no ground to stand on there. As for how the list idea works here, the Land Raiders are kept small, concise and in relation to the particular page, which is exactly what having the individual Infantry squads on here did. They were small entries that were kept concise and in relation to the page.
For the record, if you don't want to move them back in here, I will give each and every single Knight and Land Raider their own page, while deleting them from their main pages because you cannot cherry pick this. Either everything gets its own pages and it's very annoying to keep track of, or we consolidate like things into like categories. -- Triacom (talk) 08:23, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Case in point Derpy, how the hell is the following (referring to the Lieutenants) not concise, small and in relation to this page? The Primaris Lieutenants are the Squad leaders of the new Primaris Marines. They are decked out with either a Power Sword or an Auto Bolt Rifle and are often the most experienced of a Primaris Squad. Some of them can be helmetless which often showcase an extreme amount of Hair-esy. -- Triacom (talk) 08:27, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Lolwut!? You completely missed the point here. The Primaris Marines page deals with the general information and history of the Primaris as a whole, this is the same with almost every other faction page here. The reason why the Land Raider is specific is that despite their differing roles of each variation, they are still considered as part of the Land Raider family. A Land Raider Redeemer can still go under the Land Raider page. The Land Raider details Land Raiders only. Now what counts as Intercessors? Should they go under the Tactical Squad page? No, definitely not despite the similarities in function. How about the Primaris main page? Maybe, you can try working around with it by creating a segment on the Primaris hierarchy that create a short and concise shopping list similar to the Grey Knights page that offers would a link to a more expanded explanation on the Intercessors. Thereby we can have both a shopping list that briefly details the key aspects of the unit and have a separate and more detailed page of the specific unit. Anyways, do I like the way the Land Raider page along with other pages similar it is structured? No, as you said, it is fucking long for my tastes. IMO, what I would like to see is to make each of the variations into a collapsible page to shorten the length. The reason why the Primaris Lieutenants sounds similar to the Land Raider shopping list? Because it WAS before someone decided to prematurely get its own page without rewording it. I made it short and concise because that was the only available information we have on them and that the shopping list idea was only temporary. Once I get more information I am definitely going to expand the hell out of each of the Primaris Marine Squads. Derpysaurus
  • Essentially, to clear things up, we can definitely work around this, the only problem right now is the lack of information til 8th edition arrives. Derpysaurus
Yes, because the Land Raider and Knights pages don't give general information or their histories as a whole right? Oh wait, they do, and the Primaris Marines page only deals with Primaris Marines, so it's literally the same deal just with different names. "The reason why the Land Raider is specific is that despite their differing roles of each variation, they are still considered as part of the Land Raider family..." And Primaris Intercessors aren't considered a part of the Primaris family? They're clearly not tactical squads, those are regular marines (they don't even share the same name for fuck's sake), not Primaris. You might as well ask if we should put Land Raiders under tanks (and therefore link it to Flames of War) with that kind of question.
I'll try to meet you halfway Derpy, how about we move everything back here and in a collapsible section until we get enough info to warrant new pages for these guys. If we don't get enough info to warrant the new pages, then they can remain here. Do note that I'm still giving all knights and all Land Raiders their own pages if you say no because if a Primaris squad isn't related enough to the Primaris page, then the Land Raider variants definitely aren't related enough to the Land Raider page. The reason I'm going to do this is to prove just how ridiculous it is to give everything their own page, regardless of how little is actually on it, and how little it needs it. -- Triacom (talk) 10:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
  • That was one of the main points I was trying to say in the first place. We give time for 8th edition to come out so we can gather as much information as possible and judge whether they are enough to warrant a page on their own. The people who had already created the individual pages on the Primaris Squads did it without patience. I was planning on waiting for more information before I can decide on how to structure the Primaris page. Derpysaurus
If anything it reminds me of when the 7th ed tacticas were prematurely labeled old and then undone when it was realized we had nowhere to go for the new stuff until mid-June. I'll be undoing all of the changes and putting in redirects now, and as we agreed if they come out with enough to warrant their own page, then we can give it to them. -- Triacom (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
I've now undone the various edits and moved everything back, and after having thought it over it really doesn't need a collapsible section. Just looking at it now, can you really tell me that we couldn't have had this sort of thing on the page before? -- Triacom (talk) 20:16, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
  • To give you an example:
I'm leaving this because this sort of collapsible section really doesn't work well with the replies. -- Triacom (talk) 10:36, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I do think though we'll have to make seperate pages when the new models, fluff and Primaris index comes out. Otherwise it'll end up as a clusterfuck. Instead of using Land Raiders, I'll use regular space marines. We have a general page with basic stuff about the units then we have detailed pages for most of the units Heck, the Terminator page alone is bigger than the Primaris marines page. If you meshed all the space marine unit pages together the page would be too long. As of this moment in time, there are two new models released for primaris: the librarians and the power-armoured Catachans. And it is safe to assume there will be a lot more stuff coming soon, like the stuff we only have names for, like the Aggressors. And with how much was said for the Terminators alone, it's safe to say once we get the Primaris codex, we'll need to expand the pages. I can see why it was done right now since we don't have much more than a paragraph for most of the units, but it'll most likely change when we actually have more than a paragraph or so of released stuff for them. Spencer (talk) 00:41, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Sure we can have information on some other pages, but to use a simple example, why would Primaris Terminators have their own page instead of being put on the Terminator page? Granted we haven't had those yet, but we have had Primaris Intercessors get a page when they're just the Primaris version of a tactical squad, so if there is more information it should go there. -- Triacom (talk) 05:03, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Shoe-Shovels / Shock Absorbers[edit]

Yes Newerfag, they do look rediculous, but A) they have an obvious purpose, and B) further proof of GW's cribbing from other designers without trying to be subtle about it. The Greater Meh (talk) 09:29, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Gallery Stuff[edit]

I personally despise the galleries as a reader shouldn't have to reference stuff at the bottom of a page to get a sense of what they are reading about looks like. I understand that with what little text there is to describe the image makes them look oddly spaced, but in time there will be enough. Halofunboy

Then resize the images. If you really want the various marines to be next to their respective sections (presumably like the knights page) then they shouldn't be bigger than the paragraph that talks about them. -- Triacom (talk) 04:54, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
For the record I don't see how it's all that bad considering that every other page besides the Knights page works the exact same way. -- Triacom (talk) 05:06, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
How about this, you can put this image in the Primaris Marines forces section, that way the reader will have an idea of who's who, the gallery still provides detailed images, and we no longer have to worry about the screwy spacing. -- Triacom (talk) 05:06, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Look Triacom, the models just went on Pre-order Today (June 3rd). This page may look a little bare now, but soon other writers will start to add to this page and the blank spaces will get filled as time goes on. Also it looks just fine on mobile, and with more and more people coming here from their smart phones that needs to be a consideration.
I havn't put it back to my way because I want to wait until we can reach a compromise (and also I fear the banhammer). I hope such a compromise will eventually exist.Halofunboy

Consolidating the pages.[edit]

So I'm making this prematurely to address anyone who's mad that I'm combining all of the Primaris pages. Well, as stated on this talk page there isn't enough information on those other pages to warrant splitting them up, it's more annoying to navigate between many tiny pages than one larger one, and as of the past few days this page not only has all the relevant images of the various units and rules, but it also had more information pertaining to them. If the info that we have is really that short then they shouldn't be given their own pages, and if this changes later and we know a lot more about them, then that's great, but for now making the pages serves no purpose other than having two pages with the same info on them, one of which isn't updated nearly as often as the other. Also I gave more than enough time for anyone to object to this (and I stated for anyone who had a problem with it to come to the talk page) so if somebody waited until now to speak up, then please do that here before reverting the edits and bringing back useless pages we don't need. -- Triacom (talk) 04:53, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

To bring back this issue once again, now that several codexes have come out, I don't think there is any real need for as many of these separate pages. A Primaris Captain is literally just a Brother-Captain who happens to be a Primaris Marine, there is no organisational difference. The same goes for Chaplain/Primaris Chaplain, Apothecary/Primaris Apothecary and Librarian/Primaris Librarian; they aren't even variants of a thing like Land Raiders or Predators because they have exactly the same ranks and roles, the only difference is available wargear. We don't have a page for Astartes Lieutenant yet but we do have Primaris Lieutenant, I don't see the point in creating a new page which will cover the same stuff, it's stupid... I propose amalgamating these pages and putting separate sections for their Primaris variants. --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 20:25, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
I second this notion--Arenuphis (talk) 03:50, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

What's next?[edit]

I know this may be a weird thing to make note of, but considering this is Games Workshop, it's honestly kind of surprising that they didn't go complete ham with this release. Granted, the Mechanicus and Genestealer Cults have been relatively mundane in scope of new models, but why would Games Workshop pass up the opportunity to bankrupt its Space Marines players with a full new army?

Hell, looking at the stuff we got so far, we only have one slot for Troops, Heavy Support, Fast Attack and Dedicated Transport (not that anyone needs more than the Repulsor) each and a shit ton of Elites and HQs. What's to say is next? Like, certainly it'd be unlikely to see additional Troops Choices but it IS surprising to see a lack of vehicles (possibly using the Repulsor as a base) and a lack of other units in their respective slots (strangely lonely in the Heavy Support and Fast Attack) and iconic weapons aren't represented either, like Meltas and Flamers.

Could it be possible that they'll expand upon the Primaris Marines further with the release of Chapter Approved, or would that be unlikely?

With the announcement of "Vanguard Primaris Marines" I anticipate that GW are taking a leaf out of the Stormcast release manual, we'll likely get a wave of these new Vanguard marines in a variety of unit slots, and an accompanying codex-update / campaign release to get players up to speed with the new stuff without needing to buy a new codex, but eventually being rolled into a new Codex: Space Marines anyway before the edition is over. I'm calling it now... in a few more years the next Chamber will be opened wave will be revealed and we'll have something like "Extremis Primaris Marines" all riding on bikes or wearing giant mech-suits, or "Sacrosanct Primaris Marines" who are anathema to chaos and get included in a Grey Knights Primaris release.... --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 13:38, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Gene-seed stability[edit]

For fuck's sake, Geedub's writers should really start wikipediaing things before writing. "the Primaris gene-seed is actually even more stable than the standard version, with an estimated deviancy of .001% per generation." .001% per generation is fuckhuge.

Even if assuming the Primaris have the same amount of genetic material than a standard human (and they obviously have to have more), that would be 34 000 Mbp, so assuming a .001% mutation rate, that would make it 340 000 mutations per generation and base pair. Comparatively, the human species mutation rate is estimed at 1.2*10^-8 mutations per generation and base pair. Basically, that would mean Primaris marines are more than two trilion times more prone to mutations than the human species, which is already amongst the most diverse species known.

If that is actually more stable than the standard gene-seed, I propose the theory that, under the armour, space-marines are actually chaos spawns.

sources :

You realize that "deviancy" means the degree by which it drifts from accepted standards and not simply the rate of mutation of single base pairs? You also realize that in 40k when the term "mutation" applies to growing eyestalks and tentacles within the space of a single lifetime and not whether a single Guanine gets swapped with a Thymine; mutation is absolutely rampant in the 41st millennium and no-body cares whether a Space Marine's eyes turn a different colour or if he's a couple of inches taller or shorter than his brothers, these are all considered acceptable. In the case of Primaris Marines, if the total deviancy per generation is 0.001% then it will take a LOT of generations before you even reach the 1% mark (less than a thousand generations, because the drift compounds itself over time), this is compared to normal space marines gene-seed, who routinely suffer >10% chance of degradation each generation (going by the RPG figures, but it is probably lower than this) and the reason that Apothecaries pore over their genetics and deciding whether or not to keep the gene-seed and use it for the next generation or simply write it off as a loss and burn it. --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 07:05, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Guilliman's Blasphemous Quote[edit]

The frequently used quote by Guilliman referring to the Primaris as blasphemous when the quote was obviously not intended to imply a he he himself believes so or are evil. It was never spoken by him but in an internal monologue regarding how they are received by aspects of the wider imperium. However it is not being presented as such on the main page and is presented as he activly hates them. This is inaccurate and needs better clarification what the quote implies or it should be removed or edited properly.:GBC343]

Agreed, but a lot of people seem to want that quote to stay. That said, I would not miss that quote if it was removed. --Newerfag (talk) 16:47, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
I agree that it is, at the very least, misleading, but the whole section needs to be erased of skub (really the whole article). It should be changed (I'm not going to do it any time soon), but it needs to be done in a way that won't make grognards and skubtastic lorefags assmad. Again, the whole article needs to be cleaned up, which looks like it'll be a battle of inches. I might get to it after I work on Oblivion and Dungeons and Monstergirls. --Kracked Mynd (talk) 16:57, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
agreed much of this article was originally written when tempers were high so a lot o it was written in a negative light or atleast with misleading information. Many sections of the main page are outdated and needs a cleaning anyway. That quote however needs to be clarified if it is going to stay. I think it was written that way so the haters can say “hey even the Primarchs hates them so we are justified in saying they suck”. But that’s stupid because it’s being taken out of context to support a view point that there bad( or at least who read Dark Imperium didn’t know what he meant and jumped to conclusions)—[:GBC343]]
He (Guilliman) understood. He knew what his father wanted to achieve, and why. Facing things like Qaramar brought it home to him, time and again. Knowing what opposed mankind made him see the utility of lies. Could Guiliman honestly say he loved all the men who called himself his sons? He barely knew them, especially now - Cawl's blasphemous hordes in particular. They, too, were a means to and end. He and his "father" had this in common. The mantle of rulership was weighty, and moulded the man that bore it.

Well? Any "dark jests" about how Imperium treats Primarises or changes Guilliman makes? --Flutist (talk) 20:19, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't quite understand what you mean. But he acts jovial with several individuals from the novel. And you know if you actually were paying attention to the fluff like you claim too that in many publications the Primaris are not taken well by all and this comes up several times in the Novel. If you are referring to Guillimen he acts jovial to several characters in the story and the quote you are so in love with was mostly sarcasm to the pushback he is getting for using Cawls creations. Look like it or not Primaris are the future, you can misquote lines and spew bile at their fluff all you want. Like I said if you don't like them fine but I will call you out when you intentionally misapply info because you salty on the lore [:GBC343]]
You don't understand? There is no sarcasm here, nor can be. Means to an end, as explained. Blasphemy against the Emperors' work, but a useful one. Primarisues are indeed the future, and that's exactly why I dropped 8th edition, but there were no "misquotes". It's you're the one "misapplying info", eager to blame me for something you're doing (and doing very bad, by the way). As a side note, please check on how discussions are generally edited, this one is a mess. --Flutist (talk) 20:45, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
The only thing I am doing is calling you on poor citation and interpretation of a quote. And you are lying to me when you say that you are not misinterpreting info, especially when you were fine with it adding "so much for daddys love eh?" at the end of it so since you did nothing there either you obviously believe it was meant to be taken as an insult. You are trying to say you are not being objective with the post but everything your saying now shows you lying to me and yourself. The quote was made made in sarcasm in regards to his changing of the marines into primaris (as he is noted himself in that very chapter as they were discussing the imperium and imperial cult and what he is doing is technically heresy). And while you claim that I am misapplying info me and several people can see that this is the correct response but you are letting your salty ness at the lore cloud your judgement (and aruging rather poorly for your case by the way. As your whole case is based that he only sees them as a means to an end yet the entire book pretty much contradicts your entire argument with him showing great compassion even towards the common man and even personally tutoring one of the Primaris for years prior to promoting him). Again you are the one who is misapplying information and intentionally ignoring facts from the book just so you can hold on to some fantasy that Guillimen doesn't care about the Primaris. And your not even doing a good job disguising your bias as you keep saying you dropped 8th because of them, not relevant at all but it does show my theory that your just butthurt holds up fine. If you want to include the quote I am fine with it but you have to give the proper context of what it means. Not just put it up with a little dig that suggests he hates the primaris. That is literally what this is about that you guys putting it up with no context with the implication that its an insult because your salty former fanboys who are mad a Primaris. [:GBC343]]
Oooh, we've come to calling each other names, that's my favourite part! Go read the book and refresh your memory. The quote is his own thoughts while talking to a boy if the Emperor loves humans. There is nothing to support your point of view, there is an explanation in text why exactly they are called so ("The Primaris warriors were shocking: a blasphemy against the holy works of the Emperor-Omnissiah to some, a sure sign of the deity’s work in the world to others."), the whole chapter is about Guillimans' reflections on Emps current status and you're just retreating to an old tactics of insulting an opponent instead of making a credible discussion. --Flutist (talk) 21:22, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
And your using the tired defense of trying to deflect from the subject when you have run out of backup for your original argument. And your very subject supports my view. He didn't hate the Primaris, he doesn't actually think they are Blasphameous (or if we actually use some logic on his actions he doesn't really care what anyone considers blasphemous as he looks down on the concept itself which the book outlines extensively). And I have read the book outside that one line, never in any other internal monologue or bit of dialougue or any actione does he imply that he hates them or thinks their expendable, obviously he would sacrifice them for the greater good but your entire argument is that the interpretation that he doesn't like them is flawed and you have not given any real evidence to support your stance beyond misquoting some lines and throwing this theory that he hates them but uses them as a blunt tool that he doesn't really care about like its some kind of fact we are all missing, the book used internal narration it would have come up atleast once now wouldn't it? That theory you are working with has no real evidece to support it and the book has far more evidence supporting mine that he does care about the Primaris and is dismayed by the Emperors coldness (in addition your whole theory if true would basically be saying he no longer cares for Calgar who himself is now a Primaris, which heavily contradicts his behavoir beforehand). Again his own internal thoughts are presented in the story and never does he think that he considers them abominations or expendable. You wanting that to be true doesn't make it so. Also for the future if you don't want people to accuse you of having bias on the lore maybe leave out the irrelevent bits about leaving the hobby because of the Primaris lore, it adds nothing to your argument and just proves the assumption that you are biased towards them and we are right to assume you are using that bias to effect your judgement (that's not me making stuff up that's stuff you yourself have stated).[;gb343]]
What?.. Your argument is basically based on "reeeee, you're ignoring the context!" where there is no context you speak of in the whole chapter whatsoever in any way, shape or form. Both you and Triacom somehow totally can't understand one can consider something problematic and still use it (therefore he does not "hate" Primarises, he's just not their "fanboy" the way you are). I also heavily doubt you actually read the book with all that "Guilliman doesn't consider anyone expandable" nonsense. The whole last chapter is him reflecting on how he feels towards the Emperor and how he's slowly becoming (or have already became) like him, and how even if the Emperor himself isn't really all that worth it, his ideals are. If anyone here is biased, it's you, and with big problems of understanding the text ("It was never spoken by him but in an internal monologue regarding how they are received by aspects of the wider imperium", really?). Simply being stubborn isn't enough to prove your point. --Flutist (talk) 19:38, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Are you kidding me? I'm actualty starting to think you have not read it at all and just got you info from a comment site. You could literally just replace me with you and I could throw your entire tantrum right back at you. You continue to push your view that you have read the book but you have not given any evidence from it that supports your view that he "dislikes" or thinks they are problematic beyond one little quote that you refuse to take into account the scene and line of thinking of the conversation and also he never treats them no different than any other Space Marine, he sighed of on them, treats them with respect and admires their accomplishments throughout the book and even makes one of them a Tetrarch of Ultramar (do you honestly think if he had doubts on Primaris he would promote one to one of the highest positions of power in his own backyard? No he wouldn't). The text that you are holding onto so desperately only appears once and the context does not support the notion that he believes them to be tainted or problematic. You are the one being stubborn and are refusing to look at proper facts surrounding the quote because your desperate to believe Guilliman secretly hates Primaris because you yourself are butthurt about them. Get over it others agree with me and its basically just you nashing your teeth at Primaris and honestly not making any real compelling argument for your case that Guilliman finds them Problematic besides vague references to the Emperors behavior but giving no real evidence that Guilliman only tolerates Primaris becasue they are currently usefull. And before you come at me regarding the book again it has far more evidence that supports the view that Guillimen respects them as much as the classic marines than anything to the contrary (he is even highly respectful of mortal humans) and you refuse to acknowledge that and are instead just grasping at anything that could be romotely considered negative (the book makes it clear he doesn't distrust them because they were made by cawl, he does distrust Cawl to an extent but trusts the Primaris to be noble soldiers and even mentions in an internal monolouge that he doesn't even think it is possible for them to even turn traitor). Your entire argument is just you wishing it was true and holding unto this little sentence desperate for validation. And on a more meta note you really think GW would make their main Primarch hate on their new model line? No he praises them as the future. You can have your little opinion and be stubborn and salty on Primaris all you want but we will correct if you insist on sharing your inaccurate theories. [:GBc343]
Once again you're just ignoring everything I wrote and continue to go in circles saying same things all over again without really adressing the point. >You continue to push your view that you have read the book but you have not given any evidence from it that supports your view< It has Guillimans' words that you (somehow) think are ironic despite him being dead serious at the moment. >because your desperate to believe Guilliman secretly hates Primaris;you really think GW would make their main Primarch hate on their new model line< He doesn't "hate them", I've said this 10 times already. >trusts the Primaris to be noble soldiers and even mentions in an internal monolouge that he doesn't even think it is possible for them to even turn traitor< I think you've missed the point there. Primaris can't turn traitor not because they're so noble and honourable, but because Cawl tinkered with their hypno-induction process, which begs the question whether or not they have freedom of will the same way their shorter bretheren has. And if you read the book, once again, you'd notice Guilliman is aware the creation of Primaris is interference with technologies expressly forbidden by the Emperor of Mankind, therefore blasphemy. The argument about Roboute not using this word is also unsound - he thinks of Cawl Inferior as a "blasphemous device". --Flutist (talk) 08:17, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Funny how once again you declare I’m not supporting my views but you refuse to even challenge any of my examples from the book such as in regards to Felix or Guillimans behaviour(likely because you know you have no real argument to it). yes I know Cawl tinkered with the marines and is perhaps using methods that the mechanics wouldn’t use but what you seem to not want to understand is Guilliman doesn’t care. He went to Cawl to create them because he would use new methods that others would consider heretical because he wanted improved marines for the wars ahead. This is what everyone is telling you but you refuse to listen Guilliman doesn’t care what is considered blasphemous by the imperial cult or mechanicum as he sees both as degraded and backwards even for his own time. So if you you use your critical thinking for one second you’ll see he is fine with Cael’s innovations (guilliman the one looking down on religion and dogma would not use blasphemy as an insult but you refuse to accept that) also if he truly cared about enforcing imperial dogma on machines he would have destroyed Cawl inferior if he even suspected( which he does and even chuckles at its obvious attempts to disquise itself). Again that is just you projecting your own flawed view onto him. He would never have ordered there creation ten millennia ago if he was actually concerned with the blasphemous or willingly work with a radical tech priest. Again you give no evidence from the novel or any of his behaviour or internal monologues to support your views beyond one little sentence that everyone else agrees your misinterpreting and are just circling around a very shaky theory with no real supporting evidence. And again we know your not objective as you have claimed your bias towards Primaris. And before you accuse me I am neutral towards them (I neither play them nor do I hate them like you do though). So it is easy to see you are intentionally reaching. And again his opinions on the Cawl inferior is irrelevant in regards to the Primaris. They were his ordered innovation, he is aware of the changes, gave Cawl the genetic material to work on them and is fully fine with promoting them above normal marines and nothing implies he thinks Cawl did something he doesn’t like to them (he doesn’t want him creating marines from traitor stock but that’s about it). Again nothing you have said makes a compelling argument in regards to Primaris and anything all the evidence points too he does. So really your theory that he secretly thinks they are a problem but uses them because he has too has no real supporting evidence. Beyond you just using vague references to other situations and people to draw parallels that are irrelevant without evidence. Your argument is that he thinks they are problematic but you have not provided any real evidence and continue to just throw out that he considers them blasphemous because of the Emperors decrees but we are telling you he doesn’t care as he actively subverted them. Your biased theories do not hold up. [gbc343]]
>Funny how once again you declare I’m not supporting my views but you refuse to even challenge any of my examples< Because they are irrelevant and I've addressed them before? Guilliman is a politician: what he does is a one thing, what he thinks is another. Following your logic of "SEE WHAT HE DOES" he actually believes the Emperor loves all humans, just because he said so to Mathieu. And you still stubbornly claiming that he won't use something he considers problematic in nature (hint: Cawl himself). He did want to create new, better marines, true, but we do not the form in which he desired those to be. Primaris marines, despite their usefulness, may very well be not something he wanted them to be. >seem to not want to understand is Guilliman doesn’t care< Oh, but he does. He knows very well he goes against the laws of the Emperor Himself in sanctioning Cawls' work. Do you really think it's a thing to be done willy-nilly? >guilliman the one looking down on religion and dogma would not use blasphemy as an insult but you refuse to accept that< Wrong, as seen with Cawl Inferior (which you seemingly can't decide he doesn't call that way or it's irrelevant that he does). Laws made by the Emperor isn't a thing to look down either. >And again we know your not objective as you have claimed your bias towards Primaris< What? I can't understand this one. If you're claiming I'm biased toward them - well, anyone is biased towards something. You're, for example, not neutral on them (and I do not hate Primarysues either - if you check history of the article, you'd notice I was amongst those defenending the article from real haters; I've also said that 10 times already) as you can't answer one simple question: why is the word "blasphemous" there in the first place? Instead you're walking in circles presenting solid walls of text referring to some other actions of Guilliman during the story, his relationships with Primaris officers, GWs' agenda etc. You tried to answer it, true, but both times unsuccessfully.--Flutist (talk) 17:33, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
again that is just your theory you have no evidence to support that Guilliman is against what Cawl created or is just pretending to be approving of them. Again this is you making s theory based on no evidence except your own opinion that you want to put as fact (you give no real example from the novel, and are obviously afraid to delve into the internal monolouge). That’s why your alone on this and is why no one is taking you seriously. The book outright says his thoughts through internal monologue and nothing what your saying is supported in the novel and your intentionally ignoring this brought up fact when we call you on it or really address any of the points we make because you know you can’t really challenge it and are just repeating the same theory with no evidence (along with arguing for a theory , poorly, that doesn’t match up to any of the lore surrounding him). It’s just a conspiracy theory “Oh he ordered there creation but he actually hates them because Primaris suck.” The majority agree with me and I’ve grown bored discussing with someone who’s just being a salty former fan boy who just doesn’t want to lose an argument even when they aren’t even doing well (I actually find it a little sad Primaris upset you so much but that’s on you. There really not that bad if you stop letting your nerd rage get in the way.).I suggest you move on. Your in the minority on this and are committing the same logic fallacies your throwing at us.Good day. [gbc343]]
No answer on direct question, more accusations and insults, on top of ever-popular "I feel sorry for you". Ah, classics. --Flutist (talk) 19:08, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
ah and more avoiding uncomfortable facts and ignoring counterpoints that poke holes in your reasoning (by me and others) and just playing the victim card instead of showing proper evidence for your theories. But hey whatever. You do you man, you do you.
Victim of what? Your inability to answer one simple question? Yeah, I'm pretty traumatized by it. Sitting at my PC with thousand-yard stare right now.--Flutist (talk) 21:31, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
you don’t ask any questions, we poke holes in your reasoning, then you post our own sentences followed by either you saying we are wrong or just saying “you see it’s against the emperor so it’s blasphemous that way” with no evidence that guilliman feels that way, when we give evidence from the book to back up our claims and ask you too do the same you just give examples unrelated to Primaris to use as parables. That’s not evidence that’s you trying to reach like crazy over a theory that has no footing. You can think we are attacking all you want but your arguing your case poorly and honestly giving a poorly thought out and not believable theory for the most part. People aren’t believing you because of me like your trying to spin it. That’s on you and your inability to present a compelling argument. And I know that cause your arguing with three other people and we are all telling you the same thing but your too butt hurt to listen. Just accept it [gbc343]]
First, I don't know which "we" you are talking about, it's not like we're in Soviet Russia or something, in this branch I'm talking to you personally. Second, >just saying “you see it’s against the emperor so it’s blasphemous that way” with no evidence that guilliman feels that way< piece can be confirmed by actually reading the damn book or, if you're too lazy for that, his discussion with Cawl Inferior. Third, you still didn't answer that simple question. Hint: it's a sentence with a question mark at the end of it. Finally, insults and accusations don't count as "poking holes in reasoning". Dissing your opponent is just a classical way of arguing when no actual facts support your position (you can see below how an actual discussion with any hope of reaching a compromise looks like). --Flutist (talk) 11:20, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
right you mean the ones were they make a statement. You disagree instantly make a counter statement. Then they point out the logic flaws in your reasoning than you ignore that and double down on your original statement with no new supporting evidence except again using references to his views on the Emperor to try to convince people your theory has merit. I’ve seen your arguments. They simply lack any supporting evidence to be believed. A fan theory is not evidence as much as you want it to be. So go on, post my sentences followed by more references to the Emperor and Cawl as parables. That’ll convince me. Try bringing some actual dialogue, monolouue or actions that support your theory beyond the quote you love so much, as you have been told you are misinterpreting it. No body cares about your baseless theory as it’s just reaching like crazy.
>The frequently used quote by Guilliman referring to the Primaris as blasphemous when the quote was obviously not intended to imply a he he himself believes so or are evil< That's literally what he thinks. They are a means to an end, and Guilliman himself finally takes notice he has become a hypocrite like the Emperor himself, the very trait he hates in his "father". Once again, I get it, you like Primarisues and have no problem with their atrocious origins, and that's a-ok, as long as you don't suppress other people who think the other way. --Flutist (talk) 18:35, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Whether their fluff is bad or not is beside the point. My point is whether you hate them or not the quote that people are using isn't what you people seem to think it is. He is not saying he thinks they are blasphemous (seriously Guillimen would be the last person to actually think something is blasphameous) and you misreading the quote or intentionally misapplying it to suite your agenda against the Primaris. If you don't like them fine, but use backed up quotes and information, I have the book with me and the internal monolouge is easily readable that it is a dark jest on how the imperium sees the Primaris and the changes he is making, he is literally thinking about that in relation to the conversation he is having. The quote is out of context. I am not trying to suppress people who don't like Primaris but I will correct bad information that you want to use as you have literally said out loud that you are motivated by your dislike of their fluff, so you are not being objective when applying this quote with no context -[;GBC343]]
Flutist, he doesn't hate them or think they're evil and the quote is definitely misleading. While I wouldn't say he likes them he's certainly tolerant to them, if he ever really disliked them then his opinion's changed by the time the Plague Wars rolled around. Also I get that you don't like the idea that Marines can be upgraded, despite superior Marines to the Primaris being made twice in the past (once by Corax, once by the AdMech) but that doesn't mean you and others should be so bitter as to keep editing this misleading quote back in. At the very least give it proper context. -- Triacom (talk) 18:46, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Of course he tolerates them, and, despite being creation of a cuckoolander-Techpriest they are still his sons. He also tolerates the Ecclesiarchy, which doesn't mean he don't understand it's based on Lorgars' books and is therefore an affont to the Imperial Truth. Means to an end, as it was said. Raptors were developed by Emperor, not some noname out of nowhere, and 21st founding was so fucked Magoses responsible for it was basically burned at the stakes. I don't agree it's misleading as there were no argument given for this interpretation. --Flutist (talk) 19:14, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
How could you not he doesn't even believe in the religion completely and was the one who ordered their creation, sanctioned their use when he revived and has been training and directing them for over a century. He doesn't hate them and even promoted one to be one of the main commanders of Ultramar. If you don't think he wasn't being a little sarcastic with that internal monologue line than your just lying to yourself because your buthurt over Primaris taking over. Guillimen doesn't hate them (especially since on his orders their going to eventually completely replace the older marines sooner or later). Deal with it he doesn't hate them or think their blasphemous.
Hold up, "it's based on Lorgars' books and is therefore an affont to the Imperial Truth." Flutist you know that the Imperial Truth is a lie right? You know that the Emperor lied to his sons and everyone else and it ended up backfiring? Guilliman has no interest in re-instating that because A) It's a massive lie that could easily end with the same results, B) It accomplishes nothing besides making the Imperium more vulnerable to Chaos, and C) The Ecclesiarchy, shitty as it is, is still a better alternative. Now that being said, you say "I don't agree it's misleading as there were no argument given for this interpretation." But you also say "Of course he tolerates them, and, despite being creation of a cuckoolander-Techpriest they are still his sons." Those are mutually exclusive. Putting the quote there makes it seem like he hates them despite treating them as well as he treats his sons. Finally Raptors were made by Corax and are proof that the Marines could've been made better, an idea reinforced when the AdMech made super-Marines latter. Yes a lot of the Chapters in it were bad but that doesn't mean it didn't create some real winners and we both know who I'm talking about. -- Triacom (talk) 19:27, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Imperial Truth is a lie, but it's a lie Guilliman was lead to believe his early life. It's also not a lie in Emperor not being a God (at least wasn't before sitting on the Golder Throne for the last time). Seeing the usefulness of Ecclesiarchy, Papa Smurf didn't disband them. Seeing the usefulness of Primaris Marines, he didn't throw them all in some giant grinder. You're strangely sure one can't being aware that something is bad and still use it. What Guilliman thinks can directly contradict what he does to reach his goals - as fitting for a politician. Raptors were made by Corax using technology given by the Emperor, not developed all by himself. Yeah, I know what Chapter you're talking about and still not convinced occasional sightings on the battlefield are good enough for a history of a functioning Chapter. --Flutist (talk) 19:42, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
And it doesn't matter that it's a lie he was led to believe in because he found out it was a lie, because of this he doesn't give a shit about the Imperial Truth or anything that might be an affront to it (keep in mind he also read Lorgar's book with the worry that his brother might have been right, so he really doesn't want anything more to do with the Imperial Truth). You also seem to think I was saying the Ecclesiarchy isn't bad, despite me saying "shitty as it is" which is weird, Guilliman's feelings on them and the Primaris aren't comparable because one he calls and treats as he sons, the other he outright calls parasites and denies everything they tell him, regardless of how convincing an argument they make (and sometimes, directly in spite of what actually happened). If Guilliman ever thought of them as how the quote makes it look, he no longer thought of them in the same way by the time the Plague Wars came about. "Raptors were made by Corax using technology given by the Emperor, not developed all by himself." By that logic, Primaris Marines were made by Cawl using technology given by the Emperor, not developed all by himself. It's the same thing either way. Battlefield reports and records of how they upgraded those 21'st founding Marines also show how the process could be improved without any noticeable issue, technically even the Primaris could still be improved in this way since those Marines have at least one implant the Primaris do not. -- Triacom (talk) 19:55, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
Quite the contrary, the idea of Emps is worshipped as (or, indeed, is) a god twists his nipples to no end as of Fall of Cadia. When did it change? Technology of making Primarises was specifically not made by the Emperor. --Flutist (talk) 20:20, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
I recall quite clearly that during his meeting with the Emperor, Guilliman thought to himself that the Emperor having the power of a god meant that he may as well have become one, and that it would not have been the first time his judgments were wrong. And besides, the Emperor didn't need to make the technology to approve of it- Corax was explicitly given the technology to make the Raptors by the Emperor, and Cawl himself personally designed the Black Carapace that all Space Marines use, so if anything the technology for making Space Marines always belonged to Cawl. But anyway, it is clear from this and many previous other discussions that you are unable to put aside your bias long enough to accept that you're taking this one quote out of context. --Newerfag (talk) 23:56, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
It bothers him, about as much as it bothers him that the Emperor's worshipers might actually be right. His fear about them being right is why he refuses to acknowledge the Living Saints as what they actually are (despite being saved directly by two of them so far), and assumes the entire time that they're just powerful Psykers, despite doing what Psykers cannot (coming back from the dead and resurrecting people are two examples). This is also the same fear he had when he began to read the Lectitio Divinatus. Also we learned a while ago that the Primaris have some of the same modifications the Custodes get, so with that logic the technology was made by the Emperor. If we want to go the opposite route, Corax did with the technology what the Emperor didn't, so his use of it had nothing to do with the Emperor. If you really want to continue the line of thinking that the Emperor was responsible for the Raptors because Corax used stuff belonging to him, then you're not actually arguing with me, you're arguing against Microsoft. -- Triacom (talk) 06:25, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
The main reason he's so disturbed is because if Emperor is a god, he's a god so tyrannical and cruel humanity is in trouble either way. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is almost a direct quote from somewhere, but I can't quite remeber the source. You also somehow don't understand that a) being given a blueprint made by genius and follow instructions on it< and b) reverse-engineer said blueprint, make upgrades to it and incorporate in your own inventions< are totally different situations. And yeah, Cawl did not personally designed anything, as we've seen in Wolfsbane, and that information comes from absolutely reliable narrator. --Flutist (talk) 19:38, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes, that's why he's disturbed, and to get back on topic, another reason he doesn't give a shit about the Imperial truth anymore. He's still heavily in denial about a lot of what's happened around him (especially the Living Saints) and that's another reason why he's the last person who would ever call anything "blasphemous". I don't think you understand what you just said, first of all I don't remember the Emperor telling Corax exactly what to do, and Cawl didn't reverse-engineer anything. The Space Marines make their own initiates, the process is very well known and all Cawl did was add extra steps to the process. I wonder if they've done this before, OH WAIT. To use another real-life analogy, it would be like taking a computer you got from Microsoft, opening it up and upgrading the parts inside (whether it be by changing the parts out for better ones or adding new parts to it). -- Triacom (talk) 04:07, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
See above about "blasphemous". >I don't remember the Emperor telling Corax exactly what to do< He explicitly gave him the technology with which to restore his legion, and there isn't a word about Corax modyfing it (Alpha Legion, however, did). >Cawl didn't reverse-engineer anything< The Custodes parts you were talking about? >and all Cawl did was add extra steps to the process< I somehow doubt even knowing the process you can add new steps in it willy-nilly and expect improvement. To give an IRL example, knowing all steps of creating a nuclear reactor won't enable you to make it fusion by adding extra steps without making a revolution in physics. >I wonder if they've done this before, OH WAIT.< Ah, yes, the 21st founding. Never ever has anything gone awry in that one. We've also talked that example before even on this very page. --Flutist (talk) 08:17, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
Guilliman would never legit call something "blasphemous" at this point, that's the entire reason behind this discussion. "He explicitly gave him the technology with which to restore his legion, and there isn't a word about Corax modyfing it." He didn't need to, he had everything he needed to make super-marines (and it wasn't by stopping where the regular Marine process stopped at), just as Cawl didn't technically modify anything existing either, he added Custodes parts and arguably a new one. In terms of innovation and modifications Corax has Cawl solidly beat, and there's no way you can claim the Emperor made the Raptors. If I let you use my garage and my tools, does that mean I can claim credit for everything you do? "The Custodes parts you were talking about?" Taking something wholesale and putting it in something else isn't reverse-engineering it. I don't reverse-engineer RAM by taking it from one computer and putting it in another. "I somehow doubt even knowing the process you can add new steps in it willy-nilly and expect improvement." They weren't added willy-nilly, they were added where they'd fit and why not? They've got durasteel coils around the muscles to make them stronger/tougher, they've got an organ that enhances the others, and they've got a steroid injector, that's it. I don't see why they wouldn't be improved from those three things since the only one that interferes in the current process is designed to help it. "To give an IRL example, knowing all steps of creating a nuclear reactor won't enable you to make it fusion by adding extra steps without making a revolution in physics." But this isn't that, this would be like reinforcing the security to make the building more secure, updating the software in the building and increasing your safety protocols. "Ah, yes, the 21st founding. Never ever has anything gone awry in that one." Nothing went wrong with that chapter, probably because all chapters created were individually altered in various ways. We've talked about it before because I'm using it as precedent, and you're trying to pretend that precedent doesn't exist. -- Triacom (talk) 08:40, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
>Guilliman would never legit call something "blasphemous" at this point< He calls Cawl Inferior so. "Blasphemous" doesn't always refer to a religion. >If I let you use my garage and my tools, does that mean I can claim credit for everything you do< And give me step by step instructions on making something - yeah, pretty much. That's basically how patents work. >I don't reverse-engineer RAM by taking it from one computer and putting it in another< Because modern RAMs are standardised. Human genome is not. There are no ddr4 slots there to insert whatever you wish. If anything, human and, in extension, marines' body could be seen as a very complex mechanism consisting of intricate parts hanging in balance. You can't just put something else in a finished system of such complexity that wasn't designed with those very upgrades in mind and make it work with same reliability (that's why your average modernization of military vehicles are usually either damn lengthy and/or expensive, and those are built with modernization capacity). And here we come to the second problem: Primarysues are also stable to the extreme and have virtually no mutations and organ failures, and that presumably is not an effect of any of the new organs. >We've talked about it before because I'm using it as precedent, and you're trying to pretend that precedent doesn't exist.< I insist we don't know anything about them and saying they are well-functioning Chapter when all information we have about their modus operandi is that they were sighted on the battlefield just isn't right. Not "known" or "recorded", but "sighted". Chapters of Imperial Space Marines aren't "sighted", stuff like Legion of the Damned is.--Flutist (talk) 17:02, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
"He calls Cawl Inferior so. "Blasphemous" doesn't always refer to a religion." Again, Guilliman would never legit call something "Blasphemous", when he's referring to Cawl Inferior it's in the same context as the rest of the Mechanicus, in that Cawl's machine is technically blasphemous, though again he doesn't give a shit. Him calling anything blasphemous isn't an insult. "And give me step by step instructions on making something - yeah, pretty much." Good thing the Emperor didn't do that isn't it? "Because modern RAMs are standardised. Human genome is not. There are no ddr4 slots there to insert whatever you wish." But they're not re-writting the human genome and neither is Cawl, if they were the Space Marines would be a type of Abhuman. You say there's no slots to add whatever you wish but there kind of is, when you cut somebody open and reshape them like the Marine organs do then you're definitely going to have the room and how they make more Marines actually is standardized. " You can't just put something else in a finished system of such complexity that wasn't designed with those very upgrades in mind and make it work with same reliability-" Good thing the new organs are designed with those very upgrades in mind isn't it? Like I said 2 of the upgrades are designed to be independent, whereas the last is designed to enhance the original process. To go to your military analogy, old vehicles can be fitted with new equipment that wasn't ever thought to exist back when they'd been designed, I fail to see why the same can't be true for the Marine's organs, especially since the 2 that are independent of the existing system are kept effectively inactive, since one of them is an artificial part (and as such doesn't do anything in regards to a Marine's biology) and the other is an injector that doesn't come into play barring a specific circumstance. "And here we come to the second problem: Primarysues are also stable to the extreme and have virtually no mutations and organ failures, and that presumably is not an effect of any of the new organs." And? So are Minotaurs and Red Scorpions, Lamenters were also the same way before they were retconned. "I insist we don't know anything about them-" Sure we do, we know that they have at least one additional organ that Marines and Primaris Marines do not, we know they really don't like the Eldar, we know they're loyal and we know there are groups keeping an eye on them because they suspect them to be from Death Guard gene-stock. Also the precedent I was using was that the Mechanicus have always been capable of adding new organs to the Marines, despite people pretending as if they shouldn't be able to. They were also 'recorded' and 'known' when they fought the Eldar since they didn't do it alone and were identified immediately, and unlike the Legion of the Damned their whereabouts are also known. They also don't vanish into nothing like the LotD or have their ethereal properties, or really anything out of the ordinary apart from their extraordinary resilience. -- Triacom (talk) 23:58, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
>though again he doesn't give a shit< Why does he use the word then? > Good thing the Emperor didn't do that isn't it?< He literally did just that, giving Corax keys to his secret laboratory of super-pure genestock everybody though had been destroyed along with experienced staff from Mecanicus who worked with him earlier. >But they're not re-writing the human genome and neither is Cawl< Sorry, do remind me why Space Marines call each other "brother" and their Primach "gene-father"? >Like I said 2 of the upgrades are designed to be independent, whereas the last is designed to enhance the original process.< I'll just leave the part about independent organs at that (despite the whole concept of organ being independent is wrong) and point that an artificial organ enhancing the work of all other kinda shows that one who made it must have a thorough knowledge of how exactly those work. >So are Minotaurs and Red Scorpions< Do they have Space Wolves or Salamanders as their progenitor Legions? >we know that they have at least one additional organ< Which is?.. >also 'recorded' and 'known' when they fought the Eldar< Which is also the only official record in fluff about them, and it tells they arrived without warning and disappeared without a trace. --Flutist (talk) 11:20, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
I already told you, he uses it as a representation of what something is to the wider Imperium, he himself doesn't care if something's blasphemous or not. "He literally did just that-" No he didn't, he did not tell Corax exactly how to modify his Marines or what he should be doing with them specifically, he gave him the keys and that's it. You're also aware that purity of gene-seed doesn't make the Marine stronger right? In fact it's the opposite in some cases (where a mutation had a beneficial effect), what the purity does do however is ensure longevity for the chapter as it leads to fewer cases of rejection/organ failure down the line. "Sorry, do remind me why Space Marines call each other "brother" and their Primach "gene-father"?" They say brother because they're a literal brotherhood of warriors/warrior-monks. They call the Primarch's their gene-father because that's where their gene-seed originated and once they become Space Marines they leave behind everything they had, while having it repeatedly reinforced that their Chapter and Primarch are their new family as part of their indoctrination. I think you completely misread what was going on. "I'll just leave the part about independent organs at that (despite the whole concept of organ being independent is wrong)-" Is a pacemaker also wrong? Is getting a metal reinforcement for a crippled limb also wrong? Neither of these things would be very hard to implement and keep being independent of the other gene-organs, especially for an Archmagos Biologis, who are supposed to be able to grow living limbs/organs for other transplants (not just on Space Marines). "and point that an artificial organ enhancing the work of all other kinda shows that one who made it must have a thorough knowledge of how exactly those work." Yeah, how they work is known to not only literally every Space Marine chapter, but the entirety of the Adeptus Mechanicus because they're the ones who collect gene-tithes, who check for genetic impurities, and who go over the organs extensively every time a new founding is declared. How the organs work isn't a secret or a mystery. Even if it was for some reason, you don't need to know how something works in and out to give it a boost, you don't need to know the ins and outs of a motherboard to give it a new power supply for example. "Do they have Space Wolves or Salamanders as their progenitor Legions?" No, where'd this come from? Minotaurs, Lamenters (pre-retcon) and especially Red Scorpions were all stable in the extreme with little to no mutation or organ failure and had no other additions added to prevent gene-seed mutation/deterioration or organ failure. "Which is?" They have a highly augmented skeleton, seeing as how the coils are counted as an organ I'm also including whatever causes this as an organ because it's unknown how it was augmented, whether the augmentation is entirely artificial or biological in nature (and in any case, neither origin matters since the coils are also counted as an organ). They're also significantly larger than normal marines (so much so that it's mentioned in literally every report on them), which leads to my next point: in the autopsy report for a cursed founding marine, one who was significantly larger than a normal Marine and had a highly augmented skeleton (to the point where it required specialized equipment just to cut through, gee I wonder which chapter this Marine belonged to) and when they cut him open they found a lot of unknown organs inside of him, alongside the normal Marine ones. The autopsy report found that this Marine's primary organs to be much more efficient than a normal Marine, which they needed to be thanks to him being larger than normal, as well as tougher and stronger. GEE, I WONDER WHAT THAT SOUNDS LIKE, it's almost as if the Primaris Marines were a revisit of an older idea and aren't a mary-sue concept pulled out of nowhere (hate them if you want, but don't try and pretend that this sort of thing is new or should be impossible for the AdMech to do). The autopsy report also concludes by saying that if the Marine was alive he'd be superior to their current Marines in every way (they assume he died when the incubation unit he was in gave out since no other cause of death was evident). Funnily enough the investigation was also conducted using a codename for the person who sent the investigatory fleet to find the facility where the marine was being held, along with several others which the Explorator in charge thought was odd, since it was as if his sponsor (who seemed to have enough power to give him all the supplies/ships he wanted) knew exactly what was there. In the same report it's mentioned that the covert way in which the Explorator operated prevented the Inquisition and the Grey Knights from tracking them and their sponsor down, I wonder who else was working on building bigger, stronger and tougher Marines with new organs who could've also been involved in this project and didn't want the Inquisition to find out what he was doing. Finally, the Sons of Antaeus did not arrive without notice in the time when they were officially recorded, they showed up to help the Imperium fight pirates, whom they fought for fifty years before finally saying goodbye and taking off. They've shown up unannounced several times since then, but they never disappear without a trace. I think you've really gotten your Chapters confused, especially since you seem to think their officially recorded war record is the same as when they fought the Eldar, which it isn't. -- Triacom (talk) 12:54, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Chaos Primaris[edit]

It looks like they're finally here /tg/, and starting with the new-and-improved Abaddon. Hopefully GW isn't just trying to make some sort of weird joke. Here's the promotional video. --Kracked Mynd (talk) 02:32, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

That's not a chaos primaris, you've completely missed the joke which is that the new lieutenant is the dead guy on the ground. -- Triacom (talk) 03:40, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
I didn't see it the first time around, but I'm not even surprised. This is exactly the kind of thing I would do. -- 17:39, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
I honestly don't get how anyone missed it, the words "THE PRIMARIS LIEUTENANT YOU HAVE ALWAYS WANTED" Go across the screen and this is immediately followed with an image of the dead Primaris lieutenant on the ground. -- Triacom (talk) 18:56, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, just let me be a pitiful dumbass in peace. --Kracked Mynd (talk) 19:31, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
It's not so bad, there were idiots I found who saw the teaser for Malevolence and came to the conclusion that Sanguinius fighting alongside Mk III armoured Blood Angels against Khorne Daemons meant he didn't actually get killed by Horus, and was just stuck in the warp for over 10k years and would soon be coming out to help Guilliman. -- Triacom (talk) 19:34, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
Well looks like there's hope for me yet lol. --Kracked Mynd (talk) 19:45, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Primaris Variants[edit]

Just a breif point to bring up for future referance, but on the subject of the Primaris Marines, we've got another wave coming in. While new units go on new pages obviously, it looks like we're getting an alternative Primaris Librarian. We can assume at least there will be an alternate Captain as well. So how will we go about placing these on pages? Will we add the Vanguard Librarian to the already existing Primaris Librarian as a Subheading, or make a new page for it?-- 12:01, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Personally, I'd be against making a whole new page for what would essentially be a variant of an existing thing. A "Vanguard Primaris Librarian" is still a "Primaris Librarian". If we do lots of new pages, we end up with small stubs for articles, or worse: articles that are copy pasted of each other. --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 12:42, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Add a blurb about it on the existing page, since the only major difference between the two is the psychic powers they practice. Even if I was to argue that they try to be more sneaky, that just makes the same point since their powers and role go hand in hand. -- Triacom (talk) 13:27, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Seems somehow the Vanguard Librarian's Red Link came back when the name was reverted. Based on what you two have said, I've fixed it to just be a bold undertext. Information on the Vanguard Librarian will go on the Primaris Librarian page with a new subheading.-- 15:30, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Are Primaris Grimdark? Or: The Day the Grimdark Died.[edit]

Primaris are 40k, but it could be argued they are not grimdark. After all, they only exist because the power of technology and science has been re-learned to create them. They also remove the flaws and internal conflicts of chapters such as the Dark Angels, Blood Angels and Space Wolves (flaws which defined these factions and made them interesting). They do not represent the setting which became established with 2nd and 3rd edition 40k. Also, the lore itself has now started to resemble something more akin to a children's Saturday morning cartoon show than a Lovecraftian/Dune inspired horror Sci-fi dystopia. The Gathering Storm and Vigilus Ablaze being excellent examples.

Dead fucking wrong on all counts, as our own article points out. Now stop whining and actually try reading the fluff you bash first. Maybe then you'd notice that the inspiration you cite isn't even all that closely connected to the setting- or have you never heard of Michael Moorcock? --Newerfag (talk) 19:55, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

That is a disappointing start. Redefining the proposal thusly: it could be argued that Primaris represent noble bright rather than grimdark. Regarding reading the article and the loss of internal conflict in the setting, the following quotes from the article summarise these issues succinctly ".001% chance of genetic deviation per generation" and "It's also worth noting that Cawl did something to make the Primaris Marines physically incapable of turning traitor." As William Faulkner said, “The only thing worth writing about is the human heart in conflict with itself”. Additionally, the quote "An enhanced gene-seed, which was created by combining the purified genetic material of the Loyalist Primarchs with parts of the Custodes creation process.", supports the claim that the power of technology and science has been re-learned. And having read both the Horus Heresy Black Books and Gathering Storm/Vigilus Ablaze, the writing is significantly better in the ForgeWorld publications. Lore from 3rd edition Imperial codexes would have stories and snippets highlighting the loss of technology and progress. Regarding inspiration for the Warhammer 40,000, I would recommend watching these excellent videos on YouTube by leakycheese, "What Made 40K Lore": and These videos discuss the influences of Dune and Starship Troopers on 40K. Also, Lovecraft is a huge influence regarding Chaos. It is because of the lore that I have stayed in the hobby since the mid 1990s, and it is sad that the lore is losing the grimdark. In the comment section at the end of a White Dwarf from within the last year or so, one of the WD writers wrote, and I paraphrase, "With the return of Guilliman and introduction of the Primaris, things are looking up for the Imperium." That is not grimdark. Finally, if Cawl can improve upon the work of the Emperor then that undermines the Emperor's significance in the setting. And if rumours such as Sanguinius returning comes to pass, then his sacrifice in the Heresy will be undermined and this will lessen the Heresy and lore overall.

Regarding the lore, you don't seem to be as up on it as you think you are, the Primaris aren't a brand-new idea that's been forced into the setting because the Mechanicus managed to "re-learn science" or whatever you want to claim happened, their concept has been around since 3rd edition and the Mechanicus have had the ability to create them since 3rd edition, to the point where three of them actually existed. In fact I went into this in detail just two topics above yours. Aside from that, the predicted mutation rate has turned out to be significantly lower than the actual mutation rate, as chapters like the Blood Angels and Space Wolves have Primaris exhibiting their gene-flaws, while the Dark Angels are still as secretive as ever. As far as the lore itself goes, the Primaris have lost to the traitors several times and don't suddenly make everything better just by existing (see the Plague Wars book for good examples of that). Guilliman's return also doesn't mean things are looking up as a whole, they're just not as shitty as they were, which still means the Imperium is in a much worse state than it was in back when we were playing 3rd edition. The end of 3rd edition actually had things looking really good for the Imperium, as barring the Tyranids, the majority of galactic threats had been successfully dealt with (yes, even Abaddon's 13th Black Crusade). -- Triacom (talk) 21:47, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

What is more engaging and grimdark? A knackered old space-marine, made from inferior geneseed with old, failing technology, or a new and improved Primaris-marine with improved technology and led by a resurrected leader who represents a better time? I think the former. Regardless of disagreements regarding lore specifics, I think the ethos of the grimdark is being eroded.

Gene-seed doesn't become inferior with age, quite the opposite as it absorbs memories and the skill of the Marines it inhabits. They're also not using "old, failing technology" because the vast majority of their weapons are still being produced (yes, even in 3rd edition), and are sometimes outright improved, as was the case with all of their armour and storm bolters. The leader representing a better time and now being dropped into a shit hole without a good way out is far more grimdark, even if the other stuff you said was true. -- Triacom (talk) 22:44, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
It's not, I might add. It's still essentially the same geneseed, and Dark Imperium specifically notes on multiple occasions that the Primaris' lack of experience in real battles led to major losses (and also does quite a bit to illustrate how the realities of the 41st/42nd millennium are taking their toll on Guilliman). Furthermore, some videos by a no-name chump on YouTube who barely knows what he's talking about himself proves nothing other than your own refusal to actually look at the fluff you insist isn't grimdark. Hell, look at Vigilus Ablaze- the Imperium just barely managed to hold off the Black Legion, and even then only at the expense of countless lives and very nearly getting Marneus Calgar killed. I think you're simply mistaking grimderp for grimdark now. In any case, your opinion about "the ethos of the grimdark" is nothing more than a fancy way of saying "I DON'T LIKE CHANGE".--Newerfag (talk) 15:26, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Let's parse this out bit by bit. Pre-Gathering Storm, the galaxy is dominated by the Imperium. Sure, there are places the light of the Astronomicon doesn't reach, pockets of resistance, and two (albeit very large) holes into the Warp, but nothing other than the Tyranids or maybe the Orks could totally destroy the Imperium. It was stagnation, not a fight for survival. Enter Abby, the Cadian clusterfuck, and a whole host of concurrent events, the galaxy gets ripped in two. Now, the Eldar aren't trying to rebuild their empire, they're trying to stay together with the coming of Ynnead. The Imperium isn't an invincible entity with a lot of enemies, it's two mini-Empires fighting a constant fight for survival, with the coming of the Primaris (who, in reality, suffer the same number of mutations and are probably just as resistant to Chaos as their predecessors) barely holding together. Enter Grimdark. --Kracked Mynd (talk) 18:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Actually the Primaris have been shown to be ridiculously resistant to Chaos some shenanigans -- see in War of Secrets and how the psychic Plague literally couldn't find any purchase on the Dark Angels Primaris there -- but not ALL of it. A fireball will still burn a Primaris to a crisp, but mental spells or illusions will probably be resisted somewhat.
      • Even there one could just argue that it's only because they haven't been exposed to Chaos long enough for it to kick in. Resistance is not immunity. --Newerfag (talk) 21:29, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

I think the proposition that Primaris marines aren’t grimdark is still not being fully explored. Instead focus is made on lore specifics or the setting in general. I agree that events are grimdark, but I’m specifically focussing on the Primaris, as space marines are the poster boys of the setting. They are the symbols of Warhammer 40,000. Primaris are a significant change to what came before. My issue with the campaigns are in their execution, which I feel has too much of a villain of the week flavour.

I agree that improved marines have been explored before, from Fabius Bile to Battle of the Fang. But Fabius Bile’s experiments in improving on the works of the Emperor led to the creation of psychopathic animals, which is grimdark. And I’m vaguely aware of an article (I think from an old White Dwarf) in which attempts were made to create better marines in an isolated research station, but which ended in said marines spontaneously dying or going mad. Again, grimdark. Cawl on the other hand has overcome “Forget the power of technology and science, for so much has been forgotten, never to be re-learned.” This article itself states that the gene-seed has been enhanced (meaning it is effectively new) and 3 new organs have been created. I would argue that this isn’t grimdark, as it runs counter to the ethos of the quotation that the term grimdark derives from.

Regarding gene-seed, the Index Astartes books devote a section on each legion’s gene-seed, detailing some of the failings found in them ( I admit, I am unaware of geneseed absorbing memories and skills of a marine, but appreciate the Omophagea allows a marine to gain knowledge from a foe after eating genetic material.

I still think that pre-Primaris 40K marines are using ‘old failing, technology’ as evidenced by the story regarding Brother Beliasus in the 3rd edition Space Marine Codex page 4 (PDF: Also, current plasma weaponry has always been said to be inferior to older versions, even since 2nd edition. 30K also includes weapons unavailable to such common degree as in 40K, but I admit it could be argued that this is retconning as the HH Books are relatively new.

Its an interesting point to raise that dropping an ‘enlightened’ leader like Guilliman into the 40k setting is grimdark. Certainly, I’ve always thought seeing through his eyes to see what the Imperium has become highlights the nightmare of what it means to live in the 40K setting. My point was with the White Dwarf writers who said things were looking up for the Imperium as Guilliman had returned. It seems they missed the point of the setting, and they work for the company that created the hobby. I still think it is more grimdark to have none of the loyalist Primarchs back in the galaxy, only traitor Primarchs who are closing in on the Imperium instead.

I think the videos by leaky cheese are excellent and well sourced (he also creates great hobby videos). I don’t understand why they provoked anger. The argument that watching his videos would mean I haven’t read certain lore has no internal logic. I included the links to the videos as they provide a thoughtful insight into the background of the hobby we all enjoy. As for change, I think the concept of the Ynnari is great. The Yncarne is definitely grim-dark. But the execution of some of the changes I think have not been handled so well, notably the Primaris.

My issues with the campaigns are in their execution (and specifically their writing style). Campaigns these days seem to require elaborate ways in which to get 4 or more factions fighting together in a small locale, which seems a bit forced (hence the cartoon reference, it seems a bit like a Marvel movie). But I understand why from a business point of view it is done. However, this is just a personal preference. I think campaigns in earlier editions were more focused: Codex Armageddon; Codex Eye Of Terror; Ichar IV etc. On a side note, I agree the end of 3rd edition, from a certain perspective, had the Imperium in a better position (but I wouldn’t say really good, and I wouldn’t say the galaxy was ever dominated by the Imperium, thats not what the setting is about). The 13th Black Crusade had been ground to a stalemate, but I think 3rd edition Necrons were significantly more terrifying in terms of Neitzchian cosmic horror than their current counterparts. And yeah, the Tyranids have always been a horrifying prospect for the Imperium.

This is a hobby which I can tell we all enjoy and its okay to debate and disagree. I think that providing confrontational sweeping statements and personal accusations as an answer isn’t actually acknowledging the question proposed (but this is the internet, we’re not speaking face to face in a social setting). I realise stating ‘The Day The Grimdark Died’, may have been a bit too inflammatory (and, indeed too sweeping, to reflect on and reference myself) and touched a nerve with some. Specifically to Newerfag, taking things personally regarding a hobby must be exhausting and I recognise and regret that I have upset you, it wasn’t my intention.

I love the hobby and setting and I consider the hobby to be in a new Golden Age. I still propose that Primaris aren’t grimdark. Grim-bright or noble-dark at best, but not grimdark. The space marines are the front and centre part of the hobby and it is my own humble opinion that they have lost their grimdark edge with the Primaris.

Marines viewed in a vacuum are never grimdark, it's only when you put them in perspective with the rest of the setting that they become grimdark. Take Primaris for example, they're bigger, stronger, tougher, and still not enough, that's what prevents them from brightening up the setting. 40k's campaigns have also been nothing but a villain of the week style setting, since once the campaign's over they move onto something else.
To move onto your other points, the Marines in the research station didn't lead to them spontaneously dying or going mad at all, the research was shut down when the station was attacked, the Marines were hidden, and later rediscovered and safely recovered. There are also other attempts to improve the Marines, like the Sons of Antaeus, that ended up being 100% successful and there's also the Raptors. If it wasn't for Alpha Legion shenanigans they would've been entirely successful, being flat out superior Marines. I'll admit the info that it absorbs skill and memories (specifically, the progenoid glands do this) comes from an older publication, however that info has yet to be contradicted, however what people who argue against the Primaris' introduction also forget is that the Emperor didn't create the Marines on his own, who do you think the Larraman's Organ was named after?
Short stories about individuals and the equipment they have are not a good indication of the Imperium's level of technology as a whole, especially since the AdMech's support for chapters greatly diminishes after a few years, which is why you can find newer chapters who have a huge amount of terminator suits, while the Iron Hands are still struggling with the handful they still own. Current plasma weaponry is inferior to the weaponry used during the great crusade, not because the guns themselves have gotten more poorly maintained or their manufacturing of them is worse, but because entire gun types were lost during the Heresy. Phase Plasma-fusils are great examples of that, as are plasma repeaters (these are the weapons you mention). They were the natural evolution of plasma weapons and the knowledge of how to make them was lost. Also Plasma has still been studied on Mars for the past 10k years, and the idea of safe plasma has existed at least since 7th edition where the Mars formation removed the Gets Hot rule from all of its plasma guns, because the Priests there had finally figured out how to do it right. In any case Mars is a good place to look for advanced technology the AdMech doesn't feel like sharing, either for petty or ideological reasons. Finally on that point, we need to acknowledge that the loss of technology and the inability to relearn it isn't grimdark, it's grimderp. There's zero reason for it to be impossible to happen over the course of 10k years, especially given how fast technology advances in the real world, and the only reason it made sense in the past was because the Imperium was too busy fighting to study.
Things are looking up for the Imperium only as far as a unified leader goes, as nobody's going to try and oppose him, not to mention he's currently a peerless warrior and a tactical genius, however like I mentioned before, that quote's after the galaxy was split in two and Cadia was destroyed, not meant as a general. If you read it in a vacuum then it looks like the setting's becoming Nobledark, if you account for the first two Gathering Storm books then it's still very clearly Grimdark. Once again I'd like to point out that the Imperium had pretty much won by the end of 3rd edition. The greatest threats they'd faced were dealt with, except for the Tyranids, and even the bugs were having trouble since they were fighting Tau, Necrons, Eldar and the Imperium all at the same time.
While I can't speak for the other users, I ignored the videos from leaky cheese when replying to you because I didn't see the bearing they had on this discussion. Looking at the origin of the setting is fine, but that's not what we're talking about and if you're trying to go back to that, you'd be ignoring the decades that have passed since the start of the hobby and now.
As for the campaigns, nearly all campaign books have involved 4 or more factions. Even going back to a classic one (and one you mentioned) like the Eye of Terror, you had Space Marines, Eldar, Chaos Marines, Traitor Guard, Mutants, Imperial Guard and the Space Wolves 13th company. Currently the setting's big focus, Vigilus, has been pretty good about introducing the various elements in little pieces until it's become the massive clusterfuck it is now, which is how that sort of scale should be done. Also one more thing: "The 13th Black Crusade had been ground to a stalemate-" Losing your fleet and being stranded on the planets you'd wanted to capture with no way out and your enemies safe above you, capable of launching their own invasions and bombardments, is not entering into a stalemate. That's a loss especially since Abaddon wanted to go much further. The Necrons were a definite threat, but that was tempered by the fact that they were very slow moving and their leaders were content to sit around and only wipe out a planet if they felt like it.
In closing, I'd argue that the Primaris Marines make no difference to the tone of the setting in the same way as the Grey Knights. I don't recall people arguing that they suddenly killed the grimdark edge with the Marines, even though they are objectively better Marines in every way, and even put the Primaris to shame. I'd even argue that if you want to use the Primaris as an example of grimdark leaving the setting, you need to argue that happened in 3rd edition. The Knights existed since 2nd, but they weren't fleshed out as 'better marines' until 3rd, and I can't see why the Primaris are different to that. -- Triacom (talk) 00:48, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I genuinely feel like all points have been made regarding this argument, however, I want to make a statement for the record. I don't think the "Emperor did this" "Emperor did that" "outdoing the Emperor" argument is valid. The Emperor was a flawed being, and was, ultimately, just a human. And yes, this predates 7th Ed with Master of Mankind. The origin of 40k was a protest against far-right politics in Britain, caricatured by the factions of the universe. Going back to 2nd Ed the Imperium, led by the Emperor, was exceedingly xenophobic. In the current canon he is revealed to be someone who is not all-knowing, and is arguably outsmarted by Malcador more than once. Beyond that, he couldn't do everything on his own. If he could, he wouldn't have needed Mars or Luna, he could have just exterminated them. I'm not saying that the Emperor isn't an extremely exceptional being; he is 39000 years old and the most powerful human, if not being, in the galaxy, but he is also arrogant and pragmatic. Ultimately, there's no reason for a good Tech Priest not to be able to improve on the Emperor's work in 10000 years, especially since there's precedent for it (the Sons of Antaeus aren't the only successful Cursed Chapter; the Black Dragons, Flame Falcons and Minotaurs were all successfully improved, and we don't know how many other Chapters actually "fell to Chaos," or were just targeted as mutants like the Flame Falcons). Anyway, as I said, not necessarily pertinent, but something worth saying nonetheless. --Kracked Mynd (talk) 17:17, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

I forgot to mention this: the original Marines were partly designed by Cawl himself. If anything he has more of a claim to designing them than the Emperor since he actually invented the Black Carapace personally. You can't outdo someone who never actually did the work that's being outdone, you know. And if your issue is with the campaigns, why the hell are you focusing on just one tiny element in them? The Primaris' at the end of the day are functionally identical to the old Space Marines despite all their shiny new toys, and the whole thing about them being resistant to corruption may very well be nothing but wishful thinking on Cawl's part. --Newerfag (talk) 15:21, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Other people creating the Marine's organs isn't a new idea either, the Larraman's organ is named after the guy who created it and that's been around forever. Then you have new people who are losing their shit over the thought that the Emperor didn't do everything himself. - Triacom (talk) 17:48, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
I agree with the grognard that Primaris marines are NobleBright BS and the whole setting is now. Even the page of GrimDark and NobleBright acknowledges WH40k is now "nobledark" as in "Heroic actions are justified and some noble heroes that are legitimately good make a lasting difference in a bad world" and not grimdark. Gulliman is the epitome of this, he's "so powerful and good and righteus". The Spiritual Liege has won. And the stupid primaris marines are just to sell new minis, of course, but the whole super-resistance to chaos (which has been CONFIRMED in battle reports which shows they are basically immune, so all the dumb stuff of it being "wishful propaganda" is willfully ignorant of the facts as presented) destroys the appeal of space marines which is their fallibility and not their perfection. So basically they are mary sues (Gary Stus), a whole subspecies of them. -- 15:51, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
I just want to address this: "WH40k is now "nobledark" as in "Heroic actions are justified and some noble heroes that are legitimately good make a lasting difference in a bad world" and not grimdark." Warhammer 40k has always been like that, despite the fact that several factions are either morally neutral or evil they have had heroes who do make justified actions and who've made a lasting difference in a bad universe. Furthermore Marines being resistant or even immune to Chaos corruption has been a thing since the Grey Knights came out in second edition, it was just not widespread like it is with the Primaris Marines. -- Triacom (talk) 17:20, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

About those Meltas[edit]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Meltaguns rifles anyway? Sure they don't have the full range an assault rifle has, but they're not heavy weapons, and the biggest difference between the newer ones and the older ones it their ammo size, so how exactly did they go from not being rifles to being rifles in your mind? -- Triacom (talk) 18:08, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

  • Tell that to GeeDubs themselves. I am merely updating the new shit that Games Workshop puts out. It could be more to the point of GW not knowing their terms as per usual. Derpysaurus (talk) 02:16, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
I meant the old meltaguns are also rifles, so why is it offensive that these new ones are also rifles? -- Triacom (talk) 02:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Not offensive but stupid and lazy. GW could have looked through their own 30K fluff or FFGs Deathwatch books for cooler names but they didn't. Their codex writers seem to have a very loose definition as to what carbines and rifles are in the first place. Valvatorez (talk)
Uh-huh, like lasrifles of Solar Auxilia, that have no rifling. -- 16:34, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
  • I dunno. I don't find it offensive, it's just another different gun with a new name. Unless I am missing something? Derpysaurus (talk) 14:12, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
    • Triacom, it's really easy to know if something is a rifle or not. It should have a rifled barrel to qualify. -- 16:41, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
Sure, I'm just curious why we're being selective with which ones we're having issues with seeing as how several "rifles" in the setting don't have rifled barrels. -- Triacom (talk) 04:45, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Having rifled barrels wouldn't make sense anyway in most of those cases- the rifling is meant to spin-stabilize bullets, and meltaguns don't fire solid projectiles at all. One could make a similar argument for the bolt rifle, since bolts are rocket-propelled and thus wouldn't need rifling to help them fly straight.--Newerfag (talk) 15:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
I could also swear I had read Melta's being described as rifles somewhere, but I might've been wrong on that. If that's the case then I'll admit I just misremembered and fucked up. -- Triacom (talk) 04:52, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Perhaps you're thinking of the Beamer Melta from the RPG? -- 06:04, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
I might be, and I can't find the reference I was thinking of in regards to the original meltagun so I think I just misremembered and fucked up. -- Triacom (talk) 15:05, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Discussion about the community feelings on Primaris[edit]

Would a new section discussing the overwhelming updates and frustration parts of the community feel about Primaris be a good idea? Parts of /tg/ are have pretty much put Primaris marines on a Black list and won't play against them at this point and I feel like the extreme unfair treatment they have got should be discussed on the page. SabbatMartyr (talk) 19:36, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't see any reason we shouldn't, go ahead. -- Triacom (talk) 19:43, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
What I saw came off as too rant-y, and IMO the issues in question are better understood as being extensions of the issues with Space Marines as a whole. I'm not surprised parts of /tg/ are blacklisting it, but /tg/'s never been particularly unified to start with and quite a few of its users have hated Primaris from the beginning. --Newerfag (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
We'd be a pretty poor community wiki if we excluded the community. I agree it needs to be cut down, but not removed, and people aren't complaining about Space Marines, they're complaining about Primaris. 9/10 times somebody says they have issues with Space Marines it's because they didn't feel the need to add "Primaris" on the front of it, even though that's where their problem lies. -- Triacom (talk) 06:09, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
There's sentiment among the community that we never really reflected it anyway (or so that's what I've found every time I see 1d4chan mentioned on /tg/), but perhaps the section could be retained in a truncated form. We should probably wait to see what the points costs for the new units are before incorporating them into the section though, as it may end up changing how OP they're perceived to be. Still, I stand by my view that the Primaris favoritism is best understood as an offshoot of GW's Space Marine favoritism, exaggerated by their desire to push sales of the new models by any means necessary.
It might also be worth waiting to see if the new Necron releases have a similar effect on their army, since if that's the case it could just be power creep. (And to tie in with the "Marine favoritism" perspective, we should also consider the buffs being given to the Firstborn as well- especially the Terminators who can't be one-hit killed by overcharged plasma any longer.) It wouldn't be the first time that's happened in 40k and definitely won't be the last. --Newerfag (talk) 15:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Looking over what I originally wrote, yeah it was pretty rant-y. But I still think that the frustration people feel about the Primaris Marines merits discussion on the page discussing it. I'm happy to edit it down and remove the more opinionated parts. Also while the new codex could balance Space Marines, I feel think GW's favouritism and how they seem to want to make Space Marines THE army, is pretty much guaranteeing that the new codex will be extremely strong especially for Primaris like we have seen with the Heavy Intersessors. SabbatMartyr (talk) 15:55, 16 September 2020 (UCT)
I think the most important piece of info we're missing there is the cost of the Heavy Intercessors' weapons options- the datasheet we've seen only uses Power Level, so it might be more balanced in Matched Play than what we've seen of it. Unfortunately this is the kind of stuff we can only know for sure after testing it in real world games, and for obvious reasons that's not possible right now. --Newerfag (talk) 16:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
I really don't feel like future updates would change how the community feels about them right now. Even if they did, we can handle that as it comes and reflect the changing opinion on the main page, there's no need to wait. -- Triacom (talk) 16:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
So it's been a few months and while I would say that while the constant ranting has subsided, a fair few of the problems with primaris still exist, at least in a large section of the communities eyes. And considering the fact that GW balanced a handful of uber strong Primaris units, while simultaneously introducing a bunch of different uber strong primaries units that the main problems originally detailed (favouritism in the release schedule, making new units very strong to make the sell and adding more redundant units to the marine bloat) that this section should be re-introduced. I agree that what I first wrote was a bit too much of a rant, but a more objective version of the section should be re-added to the page. SabbatMartyr (talk) 02:26, 18 December 2020 (UCT)
I can do that sometime tomorrow my time. I am pretty nuetral about marines in general so I could offer a pretty fair opinion on the subject --Lord Of The Lemmings (talk) 03:36, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
I don't play table 40k, but I think they look cool. At the end of the day, GW is a business and if they're not selling minis then they're not making money. While I appreciate that people who've sunk money and effort into large marine armies over the years don't appreciate the new hotness coming along with better stats, that's kind of the business model. CCG players are used to rotation and ongoing expenses. At the very least, 40k players can be pleased that GW isn't having the problems Privateer Press is. --Piroko (talk) 04:01, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
The problem is due to the specifications of Primaris they kinda need separate pages however the Phobos units in general could maybe use their own page explaining just what the fuck Phobos primaris do. I still see a lot of guys asking if Phobos replaced Scouts. When it comes to the community at large I think most Space marine players like primaris. The lore could be better but the models are quite nice however due to the recent blitzkreig of Primaris models the hate for them is reaching a boiling point right now where we will need other faction updates in order for the community as a whole to calm down. (anon) 14:03, 29 January 2021 (CST)