Would you look at that, another question a quick search could answer

 

Damnit I miss negative rep.

Everything and Nothing is considered Canon. Yo.

 

Officially, only novels or series that have been approved by Alan Merret can be considered canon. In practicality this exclusively refers to the Horus Heresy series. It's why Dan Abnett was cautious when writing Legion and revealing the presence of two gene-fathers for the Alpha Legion.

I'm unsure regarding Time of Legends, but classic Black Library novels that have been received well are usually incorporated into future codices, gaining canonical status in the process. For example, the events in Skavenslayer were recorded in the latest Skaven codex.

However, there is nothing that dictates you cannot view Black Library publications as canon on a personal level.

Damnit I miss negative rep.

I don't know why. Your own negs would be pathetic. Besides, as already mentioned, it would be an abuse of the function if it still existed. Negs ought to be given out judiciously, and although concepts of justice vary, the socially accepted boundaries would be crossed if you had carried on and negged this person.

The function was eradicated because certain members would be exposed to relentless negs by dozens of members on a daily basis. I ought to know as I participated in a few directed towards members who I believe deserved it at the time. Names shall not be mentioned, but that's irrelevant when all negging achieves is detracting from the comfortable atmosphere that is naturally exuded by this forum.

 

Damnit I miss negative rep

Certain members of the staff can still dish it out in spades, would you and Angel of Blood care for some? If not, then I suggest you and others stop being trolling ass-hats. He's gonna make more threads, get the fuck over it.

is every thing that comes out of Black Library considered canon

It varies from person to person, some may tell you yes everything is canon, some may say everything Black Library publishes is not canon, and some may say pick and choose.

I personally hold to everything counts, though there are some novels which feature out-dated fluff (The Inquisition War) and some novels include fluff for things that have not come out yet. (If memory serves, we saw this in The Fall of Damnos.)


You ask me, pick and choose is shit; how do we judge which novels should be counted?

 

They are canon, as long as Terminators dont do back flips or Carnifexes wield multi-lasers.

 

Some interesting responses may be found in this other thread you made asking the same question only 4 days earlier - http://www.heresy-online.net/forums/showthread.php?t=103030

Also consider ADB's thoughts on the matter at http://www.boomtron.com/2011/03/grimdark-ii-loose-canon/

 

dont think you can argue with adb on that one, its clear concise and logical.
Some south americans have definitely replaced those thick and confusing trees with some lovely cows.

It can't all be canon, I mean william king states the spear of russ was used by wolf lord skoll to distract magnus allowing russ to snap the crimson kings back.

Oddly absent in a thousand sons.

Which is canon, I'd take the heresy novel as canon simply as its newer and more indepth than the passing reference in the space wolf omnibus.

However it is still a conflict between authors, and if ADB drops by and knows why they chose the new version I'd be rather intrigued to know why it changed. I must admit I liked the old version, that being said i would forgive graham mcneil almost anything.

I personally, even before the article, take bl as canon and take the newest stuff as canon, that being said I am very antiretconning, I prefer strict canon to remain canon once its been established, just how it is for me.

Why i cant read comic books.

 

Yeah, there's two ways to look at that kind of example and the approach you take is the sensible one - it's canon until it gets overwritten and retconned, as much as retcons suck and we'd prefer they didn't happen.

However, you can still make room for it by using the whole 'myths and legends' thing...so the legend that the Spear of Russ was used to break Magnus back...is just a legend. What really happend ten thousand years ago was totally different. That kind of approach works reasonably well, if one wants to try and include everything.

Even then, you still have to ditch the absurd nonsense, the blatant mistakes, and the factually overwritten. So the only way to look at it is really the approach you outline IMHO.

 

As far as I understand it, only the Horus Heresy seires can be considered canon as such.

 

As far as I understand it, only the Horus Heresy seires can be considered canon as such……………

Canon doesn't work like that in 40K. Everything is canon. It's not an answer that's immediately easy to understand, but it is what it is.

There's a link earlier in the thread to my detailed explanation, but the three sentences above are a shorter, just-as-accurate version.

The creators and contributors of 40K just don't view canon the way it happens in some other licenses. That's why these arguments and debates never get anywhere. Everything everyone is saying is personal opinion, and when they make a statement like "X is canon, but Y isn't canon" they're always wrong.

And yet, bizarrely, the few times insiders have gone public about this (rather than the majority of GW, which simply doesn't care to get involved in the needless debate) people refuse to listen and cling to their suppositions. That's very much their prerogative, but they're then speaking for how they personally like to view canon - not what canon actually is.

 

Feel free to pick and choose what you like, but I would rather take into account the explanation given by A-D-B (among others), earlier.

It's all canon, and it's a license where what we receive in Codices, novels, comics, audios, video games, etc., are just as likely to be told history that's been mythologized, corrupted, or otherwise made inaccurate over as much as ten thousand years... sometimes inadvertently (see our own history for that), and sometimes on purpose, with an aim at suppressing certain knowledge or promoting propaganda.

Yes, there are certain products that are easier to have this concept applied on than others. When you look at the Apocrypha of Skaros list of Space Marine Chapters, for instance, you understand that it was written thousands of years ago... and that it might be as complete and concise as the roster of Alexander the Great's brigades circa 324 B.C. Conversely, others will be harder. When you read a novel that purports to be telling you a story as it's happening, it's difficult to objectively pretend that this might actually be the inaccurate re-telling of something that happened differently: especially if there's no qualifier as such from the author.

At the end of the day, it's a lot less complicated to me than the comic book properties I grew up with. You know, supposedly mortal individuals seemingly never aging since the 70s or the 80s (X-Men, Iron Man, etc.), or constantly switching allegiances and ethos.

 

Perhaps I should clarify myself:

In the link in A D-B’s blog he talks about the Studio, Forge World, Fantasy Flight Games and Black Library as being equally canon. I note he does not address Relic Entertainment whatsoever. Which was the point of my question.

 

Sorry but Terminators doing somersaults and Sisters of Battle killing Grey Knights can never be considered canon or chalked up to history being corrupted/misinterpreted due to a ten thousand year setting.

 

Like I said: it's obviously going to be tougher to reconcile novels not delivered with a "this happened a long time ago, and this is how it was told to me..." tone, but there you have it.

It's much better than the alternative, which will eventually narrow down to taste. As in, someone who leans more toward the tabletop game than the stories arguing that a novel can't be canon since a Terminator killed creatures amounting to an exponentially greater point cost than his own model's worth.

Cheers,
P.

 

Picking and choosing what's canon defeats the point of canon. I don't interpret the law according to how I feel, do I?

Lets not get confused here, canon and interpretation are not the same thing.

Black Library publications are essentially fanfiction with considerably more weight and influence behind them than the average member of DeviantART.

 

Naw, actually, you're dead wrong, dude. You're seeking "canon" in the sense of something that doesn't exist in 40K - because it doesn't exist, you're going to keep being wrong when you make those claims about what is and isn't canon. You're going to continue missing the point until you adjust that outlook - which isn't easy; I had to have the IP department and the IP manager (among other GW brass) directly explain it to me several times. Read the article linked earlier, or any of my posts, for the actual explanation of how 40K's creators deal with canon.

You're free to keep ignoring them, of course. I'm not sure why you still are - it's starting to look deliberately obtuse, in all honesty. Black Library is as canonical as Forge World and the games studio. That's just how it is, whether you think it rocks or sucks. That's how GW itself views it. You don't have to see it the same, but that's your preference, not how it is.

You see "picking and choosing canon as defeating the point of canon." You're absolutely right, which is why 40K doesn't have canon in those terms. That's the point of the setting. It's not about canon and a metaplot. It's a sandbox. It's not bound to the same laws of canon as most other settings. Trying to apply them will always make the applier wrong.

If the explanation in the article and my own posts are still not working for you, here's a quote from Marc Gascoigne:

"The Background exists as a context for the games that people play. Despite the occasional event, the background was never intended as an ongoing narrative that would be constantly updated. The back story presents questions, enigmas, problems, and conflicts. Gamers explore and solve these issues by playing games and developing armies. In short, the background provides the beginning, but the players provide the end.

What is Cypher up to? Well, he's up to whatever you need him to be up to for your games and campaigns. What does the cult mechanicus have to do with the dragon? Whatever you want that relationship to be.

The background should be like Schrödinger's Cat - Nothing is defined until the players look into the box by playing games and determining the outcome for themselves. Backgrounds should be full of possibilities to be exploited and expanded by players, not answers that limit the potential of the game and its setting.

"Keep in mind Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 are worlds where half truths, lies, propaganda, politics, legends and myths exist. The absolute truth which is implied when you talk about "canonical background" will never be known because of this. Everything we know about these worlds is from the viewpoints of people in them which are as a result incomplete and even sometimes incorrect. The truth is mutable, debatable and lost as the victors write the history...

Here's our standard line: Yes it's all official, but remember that we're reporting back from a time where stories aren't always true, or at least 100% accurate. if it has the 40K logo on it, it exists in the 40K universe. Or it was a legend that may well have happened. Or a rumour that may or may not have any truth behind it.

Let's put it another way: anything with a 40K logo on it is as official as any Codex... and at least as crammed full of rumours, distorted legends and half-truths.

I think the real problem for me, and I speak for no other, is that the topic as a "big question" doesn't matter. It's all as true as everything else, and all just as false/half-remembered/sort-of-true. The answer you are seeking is "Yes and no" or perhaps "Sometimes". And for me, that's the end of it.

Now, ask us some specifics, eg can Black Templars spit acid and we can answer that one, and many others. But again note thet answer may well be "sometimes" or "it varies" or "depends".

But is it all true? Yes and no. Even though some of it is plainly contradictory? Yes and no. Do we deliberately contradict, retell with differences? Yes we do. Is the newer the stuff the truer it is? Yes and no. In some cases is it true that the older stuff is the truest? Yes and no. Maybe and sometimes. Depends and it varies.

It's a decaying universe without GPS and galaxy-wide communication, where precious facts are clung to long after they have been changed out of all recognition. Read A Canticle for Liebowitz by Walter M Miller, about monks toiling to hold onto facts in the aftermath of a nucelar war; that nails it for me.

Sorry, too much splurge here. Not meant to sound stroppy.

To attempt answer the initial question: What is GW's definition of canon? Perhaps we don't have one. Sometimes and maybe. Or perhaps we do and I'm not telling you."

 

You intrigue me bobss. I recall one post where you regarded WH40k literature as something you do not take seriously/consider childish and yet here you are, throwing your weight behind yet another opinion that downgrades the literary caliber of BL novels on a WH forum no less.

 

You've projected my opinion on two areas. Congratulations on your wrong interpretation on both accounts.

Firstly, I find some Black Library literature to present childish themes. So that's half of this post made utterly redundant. Notice the words ''some'' and ''themes''? Good, because they're important.

Secondly, I haven't ''downgraded the calibre'' of Black Library publications by calling them what they are. Are you going to back that up with anything concrete, or just presume what I'm doing? Me calling BL publications ''fanfiction with considerably more weight and influence behind them'' downgrades them in no objective fashion. That's simply your opinion which you've tried to pass off as fact.

Oh, and lovely hypocrisy with your post. Throwing my weight behind opinions? Well, firstly this is tautological. I think some novels have childish themes. See the verb ''think'' there? It's opinion. So what? On internet forums we tend to debate opinions, not say they're right or wrong. In regards to what I posted above, then so what? Are you going to try and disprove what I've said, or are you just going to post superfluous garbage?

If you don't like how I post, go on and say it. Just don't hide behind bullcrap that's fundamentally your own opinion. We have different opinions? So what? I'm sure many members here do.

 

There is nothing for me to backup. There is just that one post which I tried digging up and the ones in this thread.

I am not saying everything BL pumps out is a miracle of the English language but you stating that they are merely an author's interpretation and saying they have no more sway than a DeviantArt member's interpretation of how big Corax's jump-pack is for example just proves my point.

I would continue with this but I fear for the safety of any pets you might own or the next barista who gets your coffee wrong.

 

Thats very interesting. But a good question is what happens when 40k fluff becomes more than just a means to a game. Black Library has made its mark almost in a much larger scale then the game. And yes, I believe they have been more successful. They have some good enough work to be New York Time Best Sellers.

The thing I've realized with the game is that you always need new players. As people its just not rational to spend money on models and devote all that time for so long. Its a good and fun hobby, but there comes a time when you slow down, and perhaps just stop all together. We even see a loss of potential clients because of video games.

Fluff is a bit more manageable. A book series has more of a legacy. Especially since its being recognized across the ocean. I feel sooner or later, they may have to take fluff more seriously, just due to the demand. But... lets not get ahead of ourselves. I just feel that the lore in BL has potential above the game.

 

EDIT:

As it appears a professional author who is in the business of writing NYT Bestseller novels for Black Library weighed in, my post is obviously redundant.

The thing I've realized with the game is that you always need new players. As people its just not rational to spend money on models and devote all that time for so long. Its a good and fun hobby, but there comes a time when you slow down, and perhaps just stop all together. We even see a loss of potential clients because of video games.

At the risk of derailing this thread...

I would be interested to see figures comparing the number of tabletop players versus the number of people who purchased the computer/console games. I'm sure there's a great deal of cross-over business there, but when I read that Dawn of War 1 (and its expansions) alone sold over four million copies (and I'm not sure that this includes Steam business/sales), I find myself wondering to what extent the focus should be on miniatures.

 

Gree, good point. I don't know if that was due to accidental omission or because GW doesn't recognize Relic's material as part of the "continuity" or "canon" of the existing license.

I would guess that, with the popularity of the "Dawn of War" series, the "Space Marine" title, and the upcoming MMORPG, this would not be the case. I could very well be wrong, of course.

EDIT: did A-D-B mention Fantasy Flight Games in another post or blog? I assume "game studio" means GW, not FFG.

Either way, I would imagine FFG's products, just like Relic's, would be considered part of the "canon" of 40k. Like the man said: anything with a Warhammer 40k logo in it... which both of them have.

 

I think they stated things in Space Marine game never happened, and are alternate universe, so to speak.

I might be wrong.

 

 

@D.B.C,

That is actually really interesting. Thank you for that explanation.

EDIT: I would rep you, but the internet won't let me.

 

As someone that has just started reading WH40k books, let me say this thread has been very interesting. It's way too much to ask for everything to make perfect sense within this universe with so many different series with different authors...different mediums whether it be books or video games. Obviously it's nothing like a focused vision like a series by a single author.

As a new reader, I think the only thing I expect is consistency in canon within a single series. That's pretty much all I ask. If I'm reading the Horus Heresy, I don't expect everything to make sense when comparing it to a book from say, a Space Marines Battle book. But even with so many authors, I hope that the story stays consistent within the Horus Heresy series... or within any other series.