Would it be possible to perfect the space marine process? - Page 3 - Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums
40k Fluff Discuss GW background material here. All those bits in the Codex that aren't stat blocks or special rules. Post your custom character/chapter/army background in our Homebrew Fluff subforum!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #21 of 22 (permalink) Old 06-25-15, 09:49 AM
Vaz
Senior Member
 
Vaz's Avatar
Vaz's Flag is: United Kingdom
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Manchester, UK.
Posts: 12,830
Reputation: 79
Default

It wouldn't be really small. For something as momentous an evemt as having near perfected SM creation, you'd expect there to be some mention of it. When I say 'most recent' I mean most recent when there is some clash or overlap;

Ie Book 1 makes mention of EC geneseed and accident leading ti near destruction. IA says supposedly that it was perfected. Why does one make mention of it, and one not? Lots of other background info is removed, changed, or called a lie outright, so why should something 'not updated' be considered to be of the same level of veracity as something else explicitly stated?



100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindi Baji View Post
It's not a black and white question really, there are different shades of anal probing,
a rectum spectrum, if you will
Vaz is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 22 (permalink) Old 06-25-15, 04:36 PM
Senior Member
hailene's Flag is: USA
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 2,215
Reputation: 17
Default

Several reasons come to mind.

In universe? Betrayal is written from a post-Heresy chronology. Some record of their gene-seed perfection could have been lost.

The author may have wanted to avoid writing on the perfection of their gene-seed because clearly it was not--their loyalty ultimately failed. How could their gene-seed have been perfect if they betrayed the Emperor?

Out of universe? As I said before, there's a lot to stuff in there. Maybe for purposes of space and brevity, they skipped over this fact.

Maybe the author writing the book didn't read all of the Index Astartes and forgot to add it. Maybe the author didn't like it or felt it wasn't important enough to add.
~~~~~~~~~~

The lack of evidence isn't proof enough to discount something. Re-reading the Emperor's Children portion of the book, I don't think I saw any mention of Fulgrim and Ferrus's close relationship. Should we write that off, too?
hailene is offline  
Reply

  Lower Navigation
Go Back   Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums > Warhammer 40K > 40k Fluff

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Wargaming Forum and Wargamer Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome