Originally posted by NemeBro
A. You have yet to point out what I said that was "full of crap".
B. You have yet to post evidence.
C. You have yet to even cite the name of a book.
D. When I called you out on your erroneous statements, rather than cite a source or post evidence, you decided to act delightfully smug and condescending, which would be fine, had you posted the evidence or even cited a source to back it up.
E. I'll go ahead and apologise for the start of my first post, which could be considered needlessly confrontational in terms of the vocabulary used. Yet it was you who made the biased assumptions about me (I only know recent fluff, that my opinion was worthless, etc.) which I did not, in fact, do right off the bat.
F. Your assertion that I am in fact the one making bullshit statements with no knowledge is ****ing hilarious, considering you:
a. Said there is nothing that states/shows that the Emperor was getting his ass kicked by the Dragon before he found its weakness, when Mechanicum, aka the only source that so much as references the Emperor's fight with the Dragon, shows as much.
b. You seemed to have no knowledge of Gork and Mork's supremacy in terms of raw power in the Warp, which is fairly common knowledge on any 40k forum.
c. You called fluff that is like, 10+ years old recent, in your further attempt to be smug and ad hominem/well poison my points away. You also seemed to have no knowledge of the origins of the Chaos Gods in Realm of Chaos.
G. You can't even be consistent in your ignorant dismissals of my posts."It's too bad too. You sound like you read a lot of 40K stuff. It could have been cool to hear more from you."
Yet I have only read the Horus Heresy series now? What a ****ing joke.
Anyway, it is pretty self-evident that I have knowledge of more than just recent books, since I can sort of, you know, cite said books. You, on the other hand, have apparently only skimmed wh40k.lexicanum.com.
Oh, and on the Chaos Gods and The Emperor:
The Emperor, after a cataclysmic galactic event known as the Age of Strife/Old Night, caused by the sudden appearance of human psykers across the galaxy, was forced to wait until the Warp Storms that cut off much of galactic civilization died down before he could embark upon the stars for his Great Crusade. If the Emperor, whom equals Chaos, was unable to stifle a galactic phenomenon in the Warp, what does that say about Chaos and the Emperor? That neither were universal. Simple.
U see, I have read almost the whole pile, going back a long time. I know what is recent and what is old. What is true retcon and what is a statement in one or two books, as opposed to many, many statements in many, many books.
You have sited a minute fraction of the material, and tried to use it to trump volumes . And you didn't even try to be cool about it.
EVERYTHING I stated is in print, some of it many times in many books. The fluff you countered with is in the minority, from 40k forums or just your opinion.
If you chose to go with it, that's fine. But, you can't force your view on somebody that knows more of the material better than you. No matter what tactic you use.
You mention the Emperor not being able to quell the chaos gods during Age of Strife/Old Night. If you go back and read my posts, I talked about how he dilutes his power in many ways, sending it here and there, and throughout the trillions of humans in the imperium. That he does not consolidate and use his power the way traditional entities and comic book gods do.
And, the problem wasn't that the chaos gods personally kept the Emperor from humanity during the Age of Strife/Old Night. It was that the warp itself was in upheaval and made impossible to travel thanks to the chaos gods, WITH the added power of humanity in abandon, the terror and hate and fear of trillions of humans and the appearance of huge numbers of human mutant psykers. The warp was completely unleashed and uncontrollable.
Dude! You just sited "Mechanicum" (which is a relatively shiny new book) and 40k forums for your assessment of Gork and Mork. You are proving my point.
Stop giving me fuel!
This thread isn't even that important to me.
I just check in every couple of days to see how upset you are. It cheers me up. 😄
Seriously though, this material isn't the same as arguing a comic book. Comics are made for us to be looking at the character, on-panel, with a mix of depicted action, with dialogue and some narration. The pictures and dialogue are usually taken as firm "facts of the story". Unless the dialogue takes obvious poetic liberties. But, the narration is often taking liberties with what is happening in the Comic book.
But, when you are dealing strictly with novels, most of the details are either dialogue, or narration that is often a writer taking artistic license with the details of the story.
2 writers can each create a novel about Magnus the Red, (my personal favorite). They could even include many of the same history. But, writer x may go way over the top compared to writer y, when describing situations.
Who is right? The guy that wrote, "Magnus struck Leman Russ with such a blow, it shattered many of the nearby mountains!"? Or, the guy that wrote, "Magnus hit Leman Russ."?
I am going to go with the statement that most coincides with the majority of written references that have made it into novels.
Continuity in 40K books is a lot weaker than comic books also. Horus Heresy books play it very loose, while non-Horus Heresy books are still being written that do not play along the same lines as the HH info.
Books come out simultaneously, depicting the same situations with different spins. So, ,I wouldn't have blamed you for your views at all and would have understood and respected them. Except for the fact that you tried to trash my views immediately.
But, yes, I do know where you are coming from.
And, no, the statements you make, that are on the written page are probably just as valid as mine in most cases, even if they differ.
That's why it's a pain in the ass! As I stated way back in my earlier posts.
