PDA

View Full Version : how many chais gods are there?



Ashers
15-08-2008, 21:44
i mean there is

Slaanesh
Nurgle
Khorne
and Tzeentch

and the now defunct

Malal

but are there more? i thought the arrows of the chaos star represnted the amount of chaos gods major and minor there was i may be wrong lol. the eight sided chaos star. and all. ca nanyone enlighten me.

and i know there are gods of law but i also dont know their names i have forgotten them

Malevon
15-08-2008, 21:52
This probably belongs in background, where I just answered this question yesterday, but...

There are three minor Chaos Gods that I know of:

Malal, who, exiled from the other Chaos Gods, seeks only to destroy them. Malal was created by comic artists for a comic book series, and after GW broke ties with the comic books they could no longer officially use him. However, many GW publications reference the Outcast God indirectly, including a chapter devoted to his worship, the Sons of Malice, who share his heraldry, a skull split down the middle between black and white.

Zuvassin, the meddler, strives constantly to undo what other have done. His followers want to make sure nothing goes as expected and all plans go awry. Zuvassin will even go so far as to remove the mutations laid upon mortals by the other gods of Chaos in order to thwart their carefully laid plans. I would imagine his desire to spread true chaos would bring him into conflict with Tzeentch, who always has a plan. The symbol of Zuvassin is a double ended Y-shape, which is usually incomplete or otherwise incorrectly drawn in some way; some part may be missing from, or something may have been added to it. Both Zuvassin and Necoho were first published in the WFRP campaign, "Something Rotten in Kislev."

Necoho, the great doubter, seeks to depose all deities. He was formed in the Warp by a paradox which makes his existence impossible; he is formed from the emotions of those who struggle against religions and their gods. Obviously this means his following would be very limited. He has no livery, as he has no worshippers.

Ashers
15-08-2008, 21:54
cheers for answering i wasafter the background just the names lol thats why i didnt put it in background, and shouldnt there be another chaos god. i heard one for each of the points

Bregalad
15-08-2008, 22:23
Current official background only allows for the four chaos gods you mention. Everything else is not official. Not even if some 19 year old fantasy campaign booklet says something else.

Andyalloverdaplace
15-08-2008, 22:32
I thought there was "Countless other minor deities" quote in one of the army books, but they never went into any detail on it. Presumably they are the equivalent of Luxembourg or Georgia, while the big 4 are the Russia/US/Chinas of the pantheon.

Kelkyen
15-08-2008, 22:40
The original genestealer cult list and the Tyranid stories mention a Devourer in the warp as a equal to the powers of chaos.

Khane the Eldar god of murder is shattered and in real space.

The Emperor is a warp power due to the combined faith of a galaxy full of humans. Hints from stories say if humanity "falls" like the Eldar did it turns to the dark side.

The Warhammer Fantasy gods. Most any other minor powers for a species. Kinda lesser powers, but may be powerful on a isolated world.

(damn I'm a geek) :chrome:

chaos0xomega
15-08-2008, 23:00
In the Fantasy setting, aside from the aforementioned big-4 there are a number of other "chaos" gods, including the something is rotten in kislev ones, and the skaven's horned rat (which is described as a warp-god), etc.

In 40k, there are only the named big-4, and then the oft-debated malal(whether or not he should be considered canon), but there are also a lot of lesser gods in chaos. None of them have ever been named (AFAIK), and are left ambiguous (for the players own fun).

And Bregelad, you are in fact wrong. There are only 4 named gods(in 40k), there have been multiple instances in codexes etc. of obscure mentionings of other gods in the warp, as andyalloverdaplace suggested.

Malevon
15-08-2008, 23:40
I wasn't trying to suggest that those Gods are part of the current canon, those are just the others I've heard of. The eight points of the Chaos star, however, do not represent the amount of Gods as far as I know. There are the four biggies, and then there are endless other warp entities, ranging in power from minor deities to greater daemons, down to the likes of Nurglings.

Pacific
15-08-2008, 23:50
By that you mean Cornish Yarg, Hereford Hop, the dark prince Wensleydale and no doubt the most powerful, Stinking Bishop, I presume?

Kulgur
15-08-2008, 23:52
I wasn't trying to suggest that those Gods are part of the current canon, those are just the others I've heard of. The eight points of the Chaos star, however, do not represent the amount of Gods as far as I know.

Nope it's a generic symbol denoting chaos, arrows pointing in all directions

Preston
16-08-2008, 01:15
well, Gork and Mork are warp dieties, but not ones of Chaos. The Great Horned Rat is a warp diety in WFB for the Skaven. The only ones that are specific to Chaos are the big 4, all others are thought to be aspects of those 4.

AFAIK.

HsojVvad
16-08-2008, 01:24
I thought there were 1000's of lesser chaos gods, but only 4 Major ones. But that was in the old codex, witch I lost, and havn't really read the new one yet.

MrBigMr
16-08-2008, 01:59
"Officially" (as in the secret agent "officially this doesn't exist" type of a way) there are only 4 major Chaos powers. But just because Malal cannot be used, doesn't mean the design team has given up on it. Such as the Sons of Malice. Not only are they a Chaos Marine chapter which carries Malal-ish colours and iconography, but also is quite self-destructive and likes to attack other Chaor forces. And then there's a daemon weapon (name escapeds me) that is designed to take on daemons.

Or so I've been told.


Besides, what's to stop some Deamon Prince from gathering a force under its wings and make them worship him/her as a god? That's really the only true mark of godhood, being worshiped as one. In WHFB this happens. Reading Daemon World, if you leave out Marines, it would have worked as a Fantasy novel as well as a 40K one.

MaliGn
16-08-2008, 02:41
The Eight pointed star is a symbol of Chaos nicked from Michael Moorcock, so it doesn't really mean anything. Other than being a really cool and iconic graphic.

TzeentchForPresident
16-08-2008, 04:59
If you read the fluff about the Eye of Terror and the Daemon worlds there you will find plenty that doesnīt seem to belong to any of the major four.

At page 51-52 in Daemonhunter codex there are rules for Greater and daemons and daemon packs that will give you daemons that are anything but generic in stats. And there it is mentioned that greater daemons "take myriads of forms" and daemon packs have "infinitlely different forms and infinte malice."

For really old fluff you can read about the lesser daemon powers at page 86-103 in "Realm of Chaos-The lost and the damned". The 1st edition book with Nurgle on the front page.

zanotam
16-08-2008, 05:00
None, there aren't any chais gods, only chaos gods. Unless there is a race called the chais and they have warp entities they worship, in which case you'll just have to make it up as YOU were the one who invented the chais in the first place.

Starchild
16-08-2008, 05:11
Realm of Chaos clearly states that there are (potentially) endless numbers of Chaos Gods.

Part of the confusion lies in the distinction between a powerful, independent Daemon and a Chaos Power. Some Daemons are vain and like to claim the veneration of mortals. Too, most Chaos Powers like Zuvasin or Necoho are virtually unknown. (By the way Bregalad: Zuvasin & Necoho are from the old WFRP adventure "Something Rotten in Kislev," so the info comes from a reliable source.)

Realm of Chaos: The Lost and the Damned has rules from making your very own Chaos Power!

However, for the purposes of the current game systems, and to keep things (thankfully) simple, the Big Four are all you need to know about.

Logarithm Udgaur
16-08-2008, 05:36
There are zero chais gods in the 40K universe.

There are 4 primary Chaos Gods, with an uncountable amount of lesser powers and principalities.

march10k
16-08-2008, 08:12
Hmmm...lizardmen are known to hoist their high priests about on their shoulders in a chaise...perhaps these priests worship this "god of chairs"?

afshinbb
16-08-2008, 08:17
chais gods i believe- zero.

AdmiralDick
16-08-2008, 08:57
i think we've had enough of making fun of a typo (or possibly mistranslation).


Current official background only allows for the four chaos gods you mention. Everything else is not official. Not even if some 19 year old fantasy campaign booklet says something else.

i'm not sure why it is you persist in thinking that because something may not be mentioned in the most recent run of codexes and rule books it is not part of the 40k universe. that's never been the case.

presumably there is no such thing as the Death Watch as their are no current rules for them.


The original genestealer cult list and the Tyranid stories mention a Devourer in the warp as a equal to the powers of chaos.

whilst the Great Devourer is not a Chaos God it is quite cool to speculate that one day it might become one.


well, Gork and Mork are warp dieties

are they? i haven't found enough description of Gork and Mork to know anything about what they are in comparison to the Chaos or Eldar gods.

as far as i am aware though, there are currently 4 major powers, although this changes all the time (in galactic terms) and there are a near infinite number of minor powers. there are a few named here and there, but i haven't got my books with me right now, so i'll have to try and look around later.

where was that story about the guy who got people on a dozen world to from a death pact to kill themselves simultaneously so that he would be granted daemonhood and possess a giant gold statue?

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 09:05
Gork and Mork are Chaos Gods. In Waaagh The Orks there is a story about them teaming up and being able to beat down any of the other Gods, but they get bored too quickly and go back to fighting each other. Just like the Orks!

andyg2006
16-08-2008, 09:08
The 8 points of the Chaos star symbol represent the 8 Winds of magic (i.e. the ones which are embodied by the Empire's Colleges of Magic).

ChaosBeast
16-08-2008, 09:09
surely if their were more than the big 4, they would have been mentioned at least in passing, in the deamon codex. this just isnt the case. it mentions the big 4, Isha and the laughing god and thats it. they have obviously retconned the other chaos gods away for some reason.

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 09:37
Obviously. :rolleyes: The Daemons Codex deals with the Daemons of the big four. There is plenty of space in the fluff for there to be other Gods. We know there are other Warp Gods that are not mentioned, such as Gork and Mork, so why must they be the only ones not in there?

susu.exp
16-08-2008, 09:47
The Ork gods, the Emperor, etc. are warp entities but not Chaos gods. In one case itīs Ork psyches establishing a Warp presence, in one case it is a particularly powerful human psycher. Chaos is the stuff of warp itself, and you can think of the 4 gods as dimensions of the warp (i.e. a place in the warp can be identified by a 4-vector giving numerical values for Tseentch, Khorne, Slannesh and Nurgle).

The 8-pointed star came from Morecock, who used it for Chaos - although (and according to Morecock he was unaware of it) it had been identified with devil worship and wichcraft in medieval germany - a sign used in vehmic courts. It got there because it was used earlier as a symbol for the Goddess Ishtar, which was the goddess of the morning star (which in christianity of course is synonymous with lucifer). Interestingly Ishtar was known in Anatolia (the place where according to 40k fluff the Emperor was born) as Astarte.

Interestingly the graph for a two dimensional unstable node looks just like the Chaos star. Which is one of the things that may make you laugh if you read Strogatz' "Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Applications to Physics, Biology, Chemistry and Engineering (Studies in Nonlinearity)"... Itīs just a coincidence, but that makes it no less cool that the star of Chaos comes up in Chaos theory...

Hokiecow
16-08-2008, 09:47
Don't the two Ork gods (Mork and Mindy or something) live in the Warp?

susu.exp
16-08-2008, 10:00
Yup. But thatīs the difference, they live in the warp while the big 4 are the warp. Gork and Mork are "brutally cunning" and "cunningly brutal", both have aspects of Khorne and Tseentch with one heavier on the K side and one heavier on the T side. Warp entities have aspects of the big 4, the big 4 are pure essences.

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 10:03
The Ork gods, the Emperor, etc. are warp entities but not Chaos gods. In one case itīs Ork psyches establishing a Warp presence, in one case it is a particularly powerful human psycher. Chaos is the stuff of warp itself, and you can think of the 4 gods as dimensions of the warp (i.e. a place in the warp can be identified by a 4-vector giving numerical values for Tseentch, Khorne, Slannesh and Nurgle).

Chaos Gods are particularly powerful Warp Storms created by emotions. Khorne is a Warp Storm created by emotions such as honour and rage. There is no difference between this and the Ork Gods.

susu.exp
16-08-2008, 10:30
There is one, and itīs in the purity of emotions. The Chaos gods represent primary drives in psychology (Slannesh is Freuds libido, Khorne his destrudo, Tseentch and Nurgle are the two phases of Jungs self-realization - with Tseentch being the need to seperate oneself from the community to define oneself as and individual and Nurgle the need to be a part of the community and not seperate). Other Warp entities can be described as having aspects of the big 4, they are mixtures of them. With Orks thereīs little libido and loads of destrudo, thereīs also little need for other Orks. So you get Khorne and Tseentch, though Stormboys collectively build up a warp entity that is Khorne/Nurgle. There are far less stormboys than other Orks so this one is far less powerful than Gork and Mork - a grot among the two big ones and Orks donīt think much of him (thatīs why he never appears in the fluff - but heīs a logical extension of the Ork panthenon).

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 11:13
Lets take a look at the actual facts.

Realms of Chaos: Slaves to Darkness Page 14, Paragraph 1

"Chaos Pantheon

The forms taken by the Chaos Powers are many, varied and often wildly bizarre in the eyes of mortals. The Chaos Powers take different forms for their dealings with the different races, so it is impossible to say whether the apparent multitude of Powers are actually distinct entities, or whether they are but aspects of the same being.

Some claim that Chaos has spawned an infinite number of gods, who constantly struggle amongst themselves for mastery over all. Others say that all the apparently diverse gods of Chaos are no more than different aspects and manifestations of one being: The Great Unnamable One, He Who Must Not Be Named, The Great Abomination, The Lord of Chaos, The Unspeakable Shapeless Beast and numberless other titles."

Realms of Chaos: The Lost and the Damned page 7, Paragraph 1

"The Chaos Powers

TheRealms of Chaos is like an endless sea, and like a sea it is neither empty nor still. It is populated by the shadow-selves of both the living and the dead for the death of the material body does not destroy the shadow-self. Severed from its psychic link to the material body, the shadow-self drifts in the Realm of Chaos. As it does so, some of its energies are dispersed into the general flow, but the strongest and most distinctive mental traits remain. The countless shadow-selves of the dead flow together because they are mutually attracted by their common traits. Thus the shadow-selves of deceased warriors retain their most warlike traits, and flow together into a huge co-joined entity. This movement causes eddies and tides within the warp, and leads to the creations of vortices or whirlpools formed almost entirel of common traits. In the Realm of Chaos these whirlpools are called the Chaos Powers.

A Chaos Power thus represents a particular and generally extreme aspect of the traits shown by the living. The traits which characterise the Chaos Powers are insanity, violence, ambition, greed, and others of a kind which are often feld to typify the worst of human nature. But this is not wholly the case, and Chaos Powers also exist which typify fellowship, charity, law and other redeeming characteristics. Indeed, no Chaos Power is wholly one sided, for no human or other creature is wholly good or evil, and likewise neither are their shadow-selves. For example, along with violence and blood-shed Khorne has inherited the warrior's sence of honour and martial virtue. Nurgle may typify decay and disease, but he also embodies the human hope and energy that defies the inevitable.

The four Great Powers of Chaos represent the four largest and most powerful of these many co-joined entities. They are so large that they have achieved a coherent consciousness and will, a mind formed from the collective emotions and beliefs of the countless myriads of shadow-selves that comprise it.

Other Chaos Powers sometimes achieve temporary consciousness, but their existence is less stable because they are smaller; they may be likened to slumbering gods whose dreams sometimes achieve a passing solidity and who will perhaps one day awake to full awareness. These Lesser Powers are discussed later in this book."

Bregalad
16-08-2008, 11:13
1.) As mentioned, we have exactly the same topic in this thread on 40k background:
http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=157842
2.) Here is a half written WIP wikipedia entry on that topic, also mentioned in said thread:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_(Warhammer) . It gives you a rough idea, whether the mentioned names are from the now separate Fantasy universe or 20 years old (e.g. "Realms of Chaos: Slaves to Darkness" book), as this important information is often withheld.

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 11:16
What difference does it make if the information is 18 years old? If nothing has ever been said which contradicts it, it is still perfectly valid. The majority of the background for Orks was written in Waaagh The Orks, and has never been printed anywhere else, but it is still perfectly valid, and the majority of Chaos background was written in Realms of Chaos and never since repeated, but it doesn't make that any less valid either.

t-tauri
16-08-2008, 11:17
Moved to background.

Bregalad
16-08-2008, 11:40
What difference does it make if the information is 18 years old?
1.) It is a sign of fairness to mention the sources, esp. when they are that old (or from another universe like Warhammer Fantasy).
2.) In the anniversary WD, it was clearly stated that the 40k background was completely rewritten, so no Rogue Trader book info can be taken for granted. Esp. since the Fantasy and 40k universe have been split since then.

Quoted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realm_of_Chaos_(Warhammer) :

Games Workshop stopped publishing the books within a few years. It is possible that this was because, in the mid-1990s, Games Workshop began to try to appeal to younger gamers, rather than adults, and the explicit violence of the Realm of Chaos books was seemingly inappropriate for the younger market. The books are consequently quite rare. The rules contained in them would now be out of date as the various Warhammer games have since undergone several revisions. For more extended and deeper reference lore material on the nature of the Hordes of Chaos both books The Lost and Dammned and Realms of Chaos have been replaced by the newer reference book called The Liber Chaotica. The book The Liber Chaotica is published by The Black Library a publishing house that is a subsidiary of Games Workshop charged with the creation of reference material, novels and lore for the Warhammer fantasy and Warhammer 40,000 game worlds.

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 11:42
Nothing gets replaced, only added to. ;)

Idaan
16-08-2008, 13:01
Everything can be taken for granted if you wish so. All GW published material is equally canon, no matter how old. It is up to you to choose which version of events you follow or which one is true for you. Or at least Marc Gascoigne, head of BL says so.

bobbles
16-08-2008, 13:57
None there are no chaos Gods, there are being's which gain power through worship (does'nt make them Gods) otherwise known as gaint ego's.
Meaning if that if you take anything that gains power through belief or worship then there are infinite chaos gods

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 14:07
Chaos Gods are not powered by Worship...

Sikkukkut
16-08-2008, 14:25
Which is one of the things that may make you laugh if you read Strogatz' "Nonlinear Dynamics and Chaos: With Applications to Physics, Biology, Chemistry and Engineering (Studies in Nonlinearity)"...

What I like most about that sentence is the implication that there are plenty of other things in that treatise to make one laugh. Ah, Strogatz, you scamp. <chuckles and shakes head>

Anyway, by temperament, I'm a lumper rather than a splitter. For me, there is Chaos. the great blasphemy, always and eternal, which when mortal perceptions are turned on it refracts through them the way light might break in a prism, causing us to perceive particular aspects and patterns that snag on our minds and give them names like "Khorne", "Nurgle" and so on.

Witchfire-959
16-08-2008, 14:37
How long is a piece of string? Also its spelt C-H-A-O-S

Bregalad
16-08-2008, 18:29
Everything can be taken for granted if you wish so. All GW published material is equally canon, no matter how old. It is up to you to choose which version of events you follow or which one is true for you. Or at least Marc Gascoigne, head of BL says so.
GW has published that they have completely rewritten the background of 40k in 2nd edition. Maybe you missed that and all the changes in background. Like you missed that Marc Gascoigne was fired in March.;)

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 18:36
Maybe you missed that this is a fictional universe, and it is exactly what we make it. It makes more sence with the old, more mature fluff, therefore the old, more mature fluff stays.

susu.exp
16-08-2008, 19:14
Still the liber Chaotica series is a pretty good summary of where we are now. Iīve mentioned Freud and Jung and of course they are not in the fluff, but they are behind it. There are these 4 aspects to the human psyche in classical psychology (similarly the 4 tempers, the 4 riders of the apocalypse, the 4 elements... we like to classify in doubly dichotomies).

chaos0xomega
16-08-2008, 19:34
1.) As mentioned, we have exactly the same topic in this thread on 40k background:
http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=157842
2.) Here is a half written WIP wikipedia entry on that topic, also mentioned in said thread:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_(Warhammer) . It gives you a rough idea, whether the mentioned names are from the now separate Fantasy universe or 20 years old (e.g. "Realms of Chaos: Slaves to Darkness" book), as this important information is often withheld.

Things like Zoats and Squats are almost as old, why aren't you discounting their existence?

Arguing that "so and so fluff is x years old so it shouldn't be accepted any longer as canon" is like saying, "the original 3 star wars movies are like 20 years old, we shouldn't accept them as official canon until George Lucas redoes them in 3-D in the next couple of years."


Games Workshop stopped publishing the books within a few years. It is possible that this was because, in the mid-1990s, Games Workshop began to try to appeal to younger gamers, rather than adults, and the explicit violence of the Realm of Chaos books was seemingly inappropriate for the younger market. The books are consequently quite rare. The rules contained in them would now be out of date as the various Warhammer games have since undergone several revisions. For more extended and deeper reference lore material on the nature of the Hordes of Chaos both books The Lost and Dammned and Realms of Chaos have been replaced by the newer reference book called The Liber Chaotica. The book The Liber Chaotica is published by The Black Library a publishing house that is a subsidiary of Games Workshop charged with the creation of reference material, novels and lore for the Warhammer fantasy and Warhammer 40,000 game worlds.

That doesn't say that the fluff has been completely rewritten, all what it says is that the RoC books were too violent for younger gamers, so they ended production and released a toned down version called the Liber Chaotica. One will have to check what that specific book says, but if it makes no mention, oh well, the RoC books can be, and should be, accepted as canon.



GW has published that they have completely rewritten the background of 40K in 2nd edition. Maybe you missed that and all the changes in background. Like you missed that Marc Gascoigne was fired in March.

And where, pray tell, does it say that? By that same logic, we should no longer accept the Sensei, or anything about the early life of the emperor being canon (so he ain't anatolian anymore). 2nd edition was published in '93, and from what I can tell, using the scant few sources I could find on the matter, they ceased production of the RoC books AFTER 2nd edition was released.

There is also the fact that the Liber Chaotica book REFERENCES AND QUOTES the RoC books, which to me suggests that the RoC books are still valid.

Idaan
16-08-2008, 20:48
Marc Gascoigne was fired, so what he said doesn't count. By that logic everything MvS said or even written in Liber Chaotica is no longer canon as he doesn't work for BL any longer. Well, screw that. Jervis or Phil said the same thing on one of the conventions, only less eloquently. That we are only presented with possibilities not definite facts. That it is up to you to decide and explore in your narrative what Cypher is up to or whether Dragon is Deus Mechanicus or not.
Besides, how old does fluff have to be to be considered invalid? One year? Two years? One edition? And who gets to decide which is valid and which is not? You, Bregalad?

I missed nothing of the changes in the background between 1st and 2nd edition, because I didn't even play wh40k back then. Yes, GW said that they have rewritten background. But they also said that we're supposed to have fun with their game. And when we're forced to accept one vision (arbitrally chosen on basis of material's age) of someone who isn't even GW's employee that's not fun. That's totalitarism.

And beside, minor Chaos deities are mentioned as recently as 3 edition Chaos Codex as patrons of spiky bits.

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 20:55
Also, don't forget the Horned Rat, patron of Scaven. Yes, yes, WFB and 40k are different universes these days, but they share the same pantheons.

Fire In The Hole
16-08-2008, 21:12
Isn't the Void Dragon supposed to be a god, at least a sleeping one? Chaos gods are the embodiment of the evil in all our emotions as far as I know.

Khorne is the overspill in your rage and aggression
Nurgle is the desire to afflict others and make them weak
Tzeentch is the malign nature that sometimes shrouds our decisions to change and alter things in our lives
Slaneesh is the evil desires that echo in the corners of the brain.

Slaaneshi Slave
16-08-2008, 21:13
They are not the embodiment of evil. :rolleyes:

Check my post on the previous page.

MvS
16-08-2008, 22:06
I think it is safe to say that the Big Four are the current apex of 'life' in the Warp. They are the most dominant, powerful and effusive Powers.

This doesn't mean that there are not other entities within the Warp who:

1. are formed from emotions, ideas and soul fragments,
2. have amazing 'supernatural' powers,
3. respond positively and/or negatively to faith from mortals,
4. vie with each other for power and mortal servants/worshippers/slaves/souls,
5. are not directly connected or subservient to the Big Four.

So I would say there are other 'gods' in the Warp, many of them in fact, but their influence upon Realspace and powers to affect the Warp and mortals vary wildly.

The Anarchist
17-08-2008, 00:06
i guess a stupid question but when do you consider a chaos deamon a major God, and by what measaur can u put a warp entity? as in degrees' of godness?

maybe a stupid question, and slightly out of place. but i guess this needs to be answered before its fair to say it should be answered before its possible to say how many chaos gods there are.

jsut my two cents.

baphomael
17-08-2008, 00:12
And then there's a daemon weapon (name escapeds me) that is designed to take on daemons.


Dreadaxe. Its a homage to an early white dwarf comic strip featuring Kalab Daark - a champion of Malal armed with a weapon called Dreadaxe that was designed to smite daemons (interestingly, Dreadaxe looks a *lot* like the axe the Gamesday chaos champion, the one holding up the dead wood elf, carries).

Slaaneshi Slave
17-08-2008, 00:24
i guess a stupid question but when do you consider a chaos deamon a major God, and by what measaur can u put a warp entity? as in degrees' of godness?

maybe a stupid question, and slightly out of place. but i guess this needs to be answered before its fair to say it should be answered before its possible to say how many chaos gods there are.

jsut my two cents.

A Chaos God isn't a Daemon, so it's a mute point.

Bregalad
17-08-2008, 00:33
Maybe you missed that this is a fictional universe, and it is exactly what we make it. It makes more sence with the old, more mature fluff, therefore the old, more mature fluff stays.
If someone asks about official fluff, he doesn't want to hear "Make up your own stuff and be happy" as an answer. As you said, the 40k universe is a fictional one. You can decide to play within the universe or make up your own. But then it is not the 40k universe but your own fictional universe. And BTW, more violent and more perverse is not always better for a background ;)


Things like Zoats and Squats are almost as old, why aren't you discounting their existence?

Arguing that "so and so fluff is x years old so it shouldn't be accepted any longer as canon" is like saying, "the original 3 star wars movies are like 20 years old, we shouldn't accept them as official canon until George Lucas redoes them in 3-D in the next couple of years."

That doesn't say that the fluff has been completely rewritten, all what it says is that the RoC books were too violent for younger gamers, so they ended production and released a toned down version called the Liber Chaotica. One will have to check what that specific book says, but if it makes no mention, oh well, the RoC books can be, and should be, accepted as canon.

And where, pray tell, does it say that? By that same logic, we should no longer accept the Sensei, or anything about the early life of the emperor being canon (so he ain't anatolian anymore). 2nd edition was published in '93, and from what I can tell, using the scant few sources I could find on the matter, they ceased production of the RoC books AFTER 2nd edition was released.

There is also the fact that the Liber Chaotica book REFERENCES AND QUOTES the RoC books, which to me suggests that the RoC books are still valid.
1.) Zoats and Squats were written out of the background with a simple "they are all dead". Tyranids moved away from being close "Alien" clones and got some independent fluff, Dark Angels lost their Native American background, IG no longer has jet bike technology, Eldar moved away from being all Corsairs, Harlequins no longer have Imperial Land Raiders or other tanks, etc. Every veteran is familiar with more examples of background change. BTW, the Emperor is still Anatolian according to the HH novels.
2.) In WD June 2007 we had the 30 years WD anniversary with a big article on Warhammer 40k history. The author explicitely stated that for the second edition they rewrote the complete background. So it is a matter of fairness to state, if your sources are before or after the total rework. Is that fairness a problem for you? Liber Chaotica was published 2006, so it is fairly recent and could be considered current official fluff (being no Chaos specialist, I don't know, if the new Daemon and CSM Codices changed some fluff though).


Marc Gascoigne was fired, so what he said doesn't count. By that logic everything MvS said or even written in Liber Chaotica is no longer canon as he doesn't work for BL any longer. Well, screw that. Jervis or Phil said the same thing on one of the conventions, only less eloquently. That we are only presented with possibilities not definite facts. That it is up to you to decide and explore in your narrative what Cypher is up to or whether Dragon is Deus Mechanicus or not.
Besides, how old does fluff have to be to be considered invalid? One year? Two years? One edition? And who gets to decide which is valid and which is not? You, Bregalad?

I missed nothing of the changes in the background between 1st and 2nd edition, because I didn't even play wh40k back then. Yes, GW said that they have rewritten background. But they also said that we're supposed to have fun with their game. And when we're forced to accept one vision (arbitrally chosen on basis of material's age) of someone who isn't even GW's employee that's not fun. That's totalitarism.

And beside, minor Chaos deities are mentioned as recently as 3 edition Chaos Codex as patrons of spiky bits.
You missed nothing of the changes because you missed all of them?
Anyway, we are answering questions about the official 40k universe here, not some personal made up universe. If, in answers, keeping to official fluff is too totalitarian for you, you are probably in the wrong forum and should go to "Random musings". Answering questions about official fluff doesn't mean, that someone hinders you to do what you want. On the other side, other people can have fun without bending official background.

BTW, please don't put obviously false argumentation into my mouth (three times by three posters on this page alone!). A bit more careful reading would raise the fairness of this thread.

Slaaneshi Slave
17-08-2008, 00:37
The fact that GW themselves say all fluff ever written is still valid in some form or another says you are pertty wrong. As usual. ;)

DarkMatter2
17-08-2008, 01:03
surely if their were more than the big 4, they would have been mentioned at least in passing, in the deamon codex. this just isnt the case. it mentions the big 4, Isha and the laughing god and thats it. they have obviously retconned the other chaos gods away for some reason.

Page 7 of the Fantasy Demon Codex says that Khorne has the severed heads of lesser Gods mounted on his fingers.

chaos0xomega
17-08-2008, 03:53
1.) Zoats and Squats were written out of the background with a simple "they are all dead". Tyranids moved away from being close "Alien" clones and got some independent fluff, Dark Angels lost their Native American background, IG no longer has jet bike technology, Eldar moved away from being all Corsairs, Harlequins no longer have Imperial Land Raiders or other tanks, etc. Every veteran is familiar with more examples of background change. BTW, the Emperor is still Anatolian according to the HH novels.

Zoats are still very much part of the background. They received mention in the latest Tyranid codex IIRC. They weren't written out, they were merely updated. Background evolves.

Squats on the other hand, haven't been mentioned in any background sources for quite some time, only recieving passing mention in things like the abhuman doctrines etc. They haven't exactly been written out either though. JJ himself said they are going to be revisited once all the other codexes have seen their 5th edition update (as per one of the last couple GD's).

I am not aware of the early Tyranid fluff, but they are still very much evocative of Geiger's xenomorphs. Their reproduction cycles are different (with the exception of Genestealers which are very much the same), but they still have the same feel. Both have chitonous exoskeletons, and have acid blood(which they can also spit mind you), and if you look at the genestealers implant attack, you can still take Tyranids that have a smaller mouth inside the main one, etc.

Dark Angels, I'm going to ignore. I wouldn't say their native american fluff has totally been abolished(there still are plenty of feathers to be found on them), but I'm not all that familiar with the previous editions DA fluff anyway. To me, there never really was much Native American fluff to begin with. Likewise, the White Scars only bear a passing resemblance to Mongol's to me, etc.

The IG jetbike tech has been at least EXPLAINED in the background, as having been to complex for the Admech to continue building and supplying to guard units, and the only anti-grav tech still supplied to the Imperium going almost solely to the Space Marines.

Eldar still are very much corsairs. Yriel, the Corsair Prince in the latest Codex, as well as the Imperial Armor Apocalypse Corsairs datasheet, along with the BFG eldar corsair fleetlist, as well as other mentions of corsairs in the latest codex. The army list may not be representative of the Eldar Corsairs, but they are very much still around.

I'll give you Harlequins, but to me that was always a gameplay mechanic and not a fluff one.

As for the Horus Heresy novels, how do I want to play this. Do I want to tell you it doesn't count because the Horus Heresy novels are still being released, or that they are less than 2 years or so old and cannot be considered valid because of their recentness, or maybe I want to say that they aren't valid because their less than 3 weeks old...


2.) In WD June 2007 we had the 30 years WD anniversary with a big article on Warhammer 40k history. The author explicitely stated that for the second edition they rewrote the complete background. So it is a matter of fairness to state, if your sources are before or after the total rework. Is that fairness a problem for you? Liber Chaotica was published 2006, so it is fairly recent and could be considered current official fluff (being no Chaos specialist, I don't know, if the new Daemon and CSM Codices changed some fluff though).

Thats all well and good, but they continued publishing the Realm of Chaos books AFTER the release of 2nd edition(for at least a couple of years). To me this suggests that the RoC-era fluff can still be seen to be current, as they were around even after the fluff revision.


The fact that GW themselves say all Fluff ever written is still valid in some form or another says you are pertty wrong. As usual.

Hell yeah!


Page 7 of the Fantasy Demon Codex says that Khorne has the severed heads of lesser Gods mounted on his fingers

To be fair, that is fantasy fluff, and it is interesting to note that the same wasn't said in the 40k daemons codex, but who gives a crap.

Idaan
17-08-2008, 11:31
OK, Bregalad, but how do we decide which fluff is still canon and which is not? I would be all cool with your vision of canon and not-canon if there were an easy way to differentiate. But there is none as far as I know.

Slaaneshi Slave
17-08-2008, 11:34
It's canon if it fits in with his "teh tau are incorruptablez!" universe.

Bregalad
17-08-2008, 13:13
OK, Bregalad, but how do we decide which fluff is still canon and which is not? I would be all cool with your vision of canon and not-canon if there were an easy way to differentiate. But there is none as far as I know.
If you can quote a current Codex or rulebook, it is official. If it is in BL novels, some people might argue (e.g. Eldar stuff in Goto novels is just nonsense and not compatible with the 40k universe). Other sources might be even more questionable, like sources from another game (Warhammer Fantasy) or fan fiction.

So give a quote of your info source and let people decide for themselves, how far they go. This is no easy way, I agree.


Squats on the other hand, haven't been mentioned in any background sources for quite some time, only recieving passing mention in things like the abhuman doctrines etc. They haven't exactly been written out either though. JJ himself said they are going to be revisited once all the other codexes have seen their 5th edition update (as per one of the last couple GD's).
Squats were written out of the fluff as "completely eaten by Tyranids". You are mixing them up with Demiurg.


Eldar still are very much corsairs. Yriel, the Corsair Prince in the latest Codex, as well as the Imperial Armor Apocalypse Corsairs datasheet, along with the BFG eldar corsair fleetlist, as well as other mentions of corsairs in the latest codex. The army list may not be representative of the Eldar Corsairs, but they are very much still around
Read again. Of course there still are some Eldar Corsairs and Ex-Corsairs like Yriel (and his BFG fleet), but nowadays there are also others (and their BFG fleet), that are NOT Corsairs (Craftworld Eldar, Exodites), while all Rogue Trader Eldar were Corsairs.


As for the Horus Heresy novels, how do I want to play this. Do I want to tell you it doesn't count because the Horus Heresy novels are still being released, or that they are less than 2 years or so old and cannot be considered valid because of their recentness, or maybe I want to say that they aren't valid because their less than 3 weeks old..
I hope you want to play it fair and forget such nonsense.


Thats all well and good, but they continued publishing the Realm of Chaos books AFTER the release of 2nd edition(for at least a couple of years). To me this suggests that the RoC-era fluff can still be seen to be current, as they were around even after the fluff revision.
Selling stocks of obsolete books is common practice with GW and doesn't affect the official background. RoC is now officially replaced by Liber Chaotica.

Slaaneshi Slave
17-08-2008, 13:23
My god, there is just no talking sense with some people.

chaos0xomega
18-08-2008, 03:35
Squats were written out of the Fluff as "completely eaten by Tyranids". You are mixing them up with Demiurg.

No, I'm really not. JJ was pretty clear when he said squats. He didn't once say the word Demiurg.


Read again. Of course there still are some Eldar Corsairs and Ex-Corsairs like Yriel (and his BFG fleet), but nowadays there are also others (and their BFG fleet), that are NOT Corsairs (Craftworld Eldar, Exodites), while all Rogue Trader Eldar were Corsairs.

I don't see how that is the same as writing the corsairs out of hte fluff. That's merely a perspective shift on GW's part, because they found the Craftworld Eldar to be of more interesting subject matter than the Corsairs. It's not a rewrite, as they never once said that ALL ELDAR ARE CORSAIRS, it's simply a broadening of the background. That is called EXPANSION. By your suggestion of the RoC books no longer being valid, you are proposing a SUBTRACTION.


I hope you want to play it fair and forget such nonsense.

Right back at ya ;)


Selling stocks of obsolete books is common practice with GW and doesn't affect the official background. RoC is now officially replaced by Liber Chaotica.
http://www.amazon.com/Chaotica-Complete-Warhammer-Richard-Williams/dp/1844162087

So I'm guessing by your reasoning, now Liber Chaotica isn't official background anymore either?

Not only that, but by that same logic, any fluff written in ANY now out of print book, including older editions of codexes is also obsolete and no longer valid. The fact of the matter is they continued to publish the RoC books AFTER the fluff revision that was second edition. If that was no longer valid fluff at that point, then why would they bother to do such a thing.

Also, Liber Chaotica was never meant to replace RoC, it was meant as an update. There is a difference there.

Bregalad
18-08-2008, 09:51
On squats:

April 2008:

Some retard always has to ask about Squats, Squats are not coming. No information on IG or Necrons. I would speculate that they are not currently in progress. Getting Space Marines right is the current focus of the studio.
June 2008:

There will be no new races for the forseeable future (so no change on the party line from last year), as to support the races they already do is hard enough. Though Rick did mention Squats more than once - but in the context of tongue in cheek 'after too many cappucino's' was the phrase...

Additionally, JJ brought up the topic of Squats. Yes, I said nothing, nor did any one else. HE brought them up, and said that if they are redone, they will be trated as a new race. once all the existing codex books are completed they will look at their existing resources, and decided weather they can support a new race, and if they can, they will seriously look at bringing back the space stunties. Seems JJ has dwarfs on the brain, and for some of us, that's a good thing. As it is they're looking at a 5 year plan, so to speak, and are trying, at GW HQ to fit everything into it. We'll see what happens, won't we?

How many winks were tipped, fingers crossed, tongues in cheek were to be seen with this one... I really doubt GW will ever bring back the Squats anywhere akin to their 2nd ed format. Not saying small sized alien races in the future. The idea of stumpy fat biker dwarves with big bikes and guns in space is IMHO lame as hell especially in the universe 40K has evolved into. As to an new alien race JJ comments contradicts what Tim Deakin, Rick P, Alessio and Andy H were saying at the design studio open day. The team currently doesn't have the resource to start a new race from scratch AND update the remaining races. I'd take the fabled 'return of the Squats' with a VERY big pinch of sodium chloride.
PhilB
:chrome:
Apart from that, read the "Death of the Squats" thread here in the background forum:
http://warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46402

On Corsairs: I said that they changed the fluff that "not all Eldar are Corsairs". According to standard logic that's not the same as "no Eldar is a Corsair". I have the Yriel miniature, the Corsair flyer and use BFG corsair ships as jet bikes, so I am aware of them.

On OOP book: When I said that the print status of a book has no influence on its validity in background, I didn't mean that it HAS an influence. Please don't put random negations in my texts, if you try to recapitulate them. BTW NOT(All Eldar are Corsairs) = (at least one Eldar is not a Corsair) /= (no Eldar is a Corsair) , as you often make mistakes with negating statements from others.

On Liber Chaotica: RoC was considered too brutal and perverse for 40k background since 2nd edition so got officially replaced by Liber Chaotica.

MvS
18-08-2008, 09:56
Liber Chaotica was never meant to replace RoC, it was meant as an update. There is a difference there.
Mind you, there is a fine line between 'replace' and 'update' in this context.

The Chaotica series was originally pitched as being just a compilation of all the out of print Chaos imagery from RoC, WFRP (where possible) and other old Chaos army books and codices. In this respect it was never intended to be a replacement of all the rules from earlier books, as these were a completely separate matter from the background.

BL then allowed the brief to be expanded so that Chaotica updated the Chaos imagery, so more contemporary bits and bobs could be rationalised with the older stuff and made consistent. So, at the time of writing Chaotica at least, any seeming contradictions between older Chaos imagery and newer Chaos imagery were to be regarded as 'settled' in Liber Chaotica.

Then BL very firmly decided that Chaotica should stay in the realms of Warhammer Fantasy with only abstract references to 40K imagery, which by its nature restricted how much could be taken/adapted/re-written/created from scratch concerning certain elements of Chaos/theological/religious imagery that applied only to the 40K setting.

Now there are some elements of Chaos imagery that have seemed to have 'reverted' back to older imagery, while in other areas it seems to have stayed consistent with Chaotica, and in other areas it has become something else again.

I suppose this all adds weight to the idea that the imagery provides themes and settings, the 'truth' of which is left to individual enthusiasts to decide upon for themselves.

EDIT:

As a side note, the only reason Liber Chaotica went ahead as it did was because the RoC books weren't going to be re-printed at all so the brilliant imagery content was 'dying'. Bearing in mind the original brief was to copy the imagery content word-for-word it wasn't the 'adult' nature of the content that consigned RoC to history.

Any editing and changing of the content in what we had in the Liber Khorne manuscript, and the proposed content of Slaanesh, Nurgle, Tzeentch and Undivided, was due to pressure from the editor Matt Ralphs and the writers. As the Chaos imagery stood it was contradictory here and there.

Not long after these initial talks, other GW people stepped up to point out specific areas that they didn't want included in Chaotica and other areas that they wanted changed - although consensus was often hard to come by.

I was told that the only reason the RoC books haven't been re-printed because of licensing issues concerning some artwork and story content and because of the rules from those old books, which makes up for most of their content, are completely unusable with 40K and the roleplay games - at least without substantial modifications.

The cost of reprinting such large books when their content is largely unusable made no sense, even if it was wholly possible, at least to the BLP editors who spoke about it to me.

Pacific
18-08-2008, 12:09
Originally Posted by Maxis Lithium View Post
Additionally, JJ brought up the topic of Squats. Yes, I said nothing, nor did any one else. HE brought them up, and said that if they are redone, they will be trated as a new race. once all the existing codex books are completed they will look at their existing resources, and decided weather they can support a new race, and if they can, they will seriously look at bringing back the space stunties. Seems JJ has dwarfs on the brain, and for some of us, that's a good thing. As it is they're looking at a 5 year plan, so to speak, and are trying, at GW HQ to fit everything into it. We'll see what happens, won't we?

Apart from the above, everything else you have quoted is a value statement - I'm sure there are people who still like the concept of drunk space dwarves on trikes. However, the fact that the main reason for Squats being removed in the first place was becase their imagery did not fit in with the rest of the 40k universe, makes it extremely unlikely that they would return in any similar form.

Also remember that apparently a lot of design and R&R work was done before the Tau were originally released (when GW were looking for a new 'high technology' race), so it is unlikely that they would be strarting completely from scratch. They also have a complete history and culture being created for them on this very forum as well, in the link that you posted!

Besides, everyone loves dwarves, and its been far too long since we've seen them driving around in tanks and shooting laser guns :)

AdmiralDick
18-08-2008, 15:57
If you can quote a current Codex or rulebook, it is official.

i can certainly agree that this is the strictest rule for adjudicating background, but it is unfortunately not tenable due to the volume of background that is now around. there are a number of examples that come to mind that are not in any current rulebook or codex but are still very much a part of the background (Death Watch are a fairly obvious example of this).

i also do not believe that you adhere to this rule either. newer is not necessarily right in your own book. Codex: Eldar is a good example of this.


So give a quote of your info source and let people decide for themselves, how far they go. This is no easy way, I agree.

i do always try, but its not always easy. and its not like you always make direct quotes.


Squats were written out of the fluff as "completely eaten by Tyranids". You are mixing them up with Demiurg.

i agree that for the most part the Squats are not a part of the current 40kiverse, just as the Old Ones are not, but that says nothing of whether they are part of the background. they clearly are a part of the background or they could not have been eaten.

as far as i am aware next to nothing has literally been re-written with no reference to previous incarnations. aside from shared weapons and vehicles nothing really springs to mind.


Read again. Of course there still are some Eldar Corsairs and Ex-Corsairs like Yriel (and his BFG fleet), but nowadays there are also others (and their BFG fleet), that are NOT Corsairs (Craftworld Eldar, Exodites), while all Rogue Trader Eldar were Corsairs.

the tone of the background has changed dramatically since RT. the nature of the universe has changed very little (aide from the introduction of Chaos), but we see a very different picture. in RT the average human being would have know next to nothing about the Eldar. if they were to come into contact with such a thing they would not have been able to tell you if they were Craftworld, Dark, Harlequin, Exodite, Chaos, Corsair or any other kind of Eldar you could think of. they would just appear as Eldar Corsairs.

whilst the average knowledge of a Imperial Citizen has not likely increased since that time, we are generally given information as though we were a high-ranking officer of the Imperial Guard, and official of the Adeptus Terra or even an Inquisitor. so we know far more about the various flavours of Eldar than we would do if we actually lived in the 40kiverse. that doesn't actually mean anything has changed at all in the background though.


RoC is now officially replaced by Liber Chaotica.

is it? can you please give us a quote where we are told that it replaces RoC.

because the books actually cover some quite distinctly different ground. RoC is far more generic and tells you in far greater detail the inner workings of Chaos, where Libre Chaotic is much more personal and is irritatingly vague about all the subjects it attempts to broach. don't get me wrong, its a great book (one of my favourites even), but it is certainly not the same thing as RoC, in fact its not even very close.

chaos0xomega
18-08-2008, 17:51
It's an uphill battle Bregelad. Let's end this now, come to the Dark Side....

But seriously, your logic is flawed in many areas, and apparently it's not just me that thinks so.

Bregalad
18-08-2008, 21:15
i can certainly agree that this is the strictest rule for adjudicating background, but it is unfortunately not tenable due to the volume of background that is now around. there are a number of examples that come to mind that are not in any current rulebook or codex but are still very much a part of the background (Death Watch are a fairly obvious example of this).
i also do not believe that you adhere to this rule either. newer is not necessarily right in your own book. Codex: Eldar is a good example of this.
i do always try, but its not always easy. and its not like you always make direct quotes.
What I tried to explain is that there are different qualities of official background, with Codices and rulebooks being the best (but not always perfect). Other sources like 20 year old books or BL novels have another quality and discussion may evaluate the contents, esp. if they contradict other sources. To make it clear: This only affects the officiality of background info. Everyone is free to change it to his personal version of 40k, as long as he doesn't claim it is official. People often mix up answers on official background with imagined restrictions of their personal version. But that doesn't belong in these question threads.


It's an uphill battle Bregelad. Let's end this now, come to the Dark Side....

But seriously, your logic is flawed in many areas, and apparently it's not just me that thinks so.
My Professor on mathematical logic was quite pleased with my logical abilities. But sometimes I take the ability to logical conclusion wrongly for granted.

Slaaneshi Slave
18-08-2008, 21:32
Well Realms of Chaos was both a Codex/Army Book and a Rule Book... :p

Bregalad
19-08-2008, 00:02
"Realms of Chaos" was written, when Fantasy and 40k shared one Chaos background. The universes and esp. the Chaos background of both were split since then. Anybody contests this statement? So a book claiming to present the common Chaos background of both universes is obviously outdated. Still, many Chaos fans (and GW designers) read it for inspiration, knowing the books limitations.

BTW, just read that "Liber Chaotica" is Fantasy background only:
http://forum.blacklibrary.com/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=3233

The setting is Warhammer: the author is an Old World scholar who has begun documenting the insanity of the Ruinous Powers and is slowly losing his own mind as he continues his labours. So while he's documenting the Chaos powers of the Warhammer world, some of the tales and visions he is granted might be strangely familiar to 40K fans...

Slaaneshi Slave
19-08-2008, 00:09
Have you ever read any WFB background? Chaos background is shared between the two. If you ready the new Daemon Codex and Army book the background sections are almost identical.

chaos0xomega
19-08-2008, 01:29
That is indeed true. In fact, early suggestions were to have just one unified book for both of them, in the spirit of the old RoC books. When they realized how much content there would be in that one book, they split it into two seperate ones.

AdmiralDick
19-08-2008, 09:43
"Realms of Chaos" was written, when Fantasy and 40k shared one Chaos background.

err... they still do.

the special characters in the Codex: Chaos Daemons and Warhammer Armies: Daemons of Chaos are the same. they are not just similar characters, but the very same individuals. they made that quite explicitly clear when they published the two books.

"Skulltaker is the same whether he's in 40k or fantasy" to paraphrase (as i don't have the release issue of WD with me).

more than that the descriptions of the Chaos Gods and their realms are exactly the same. nearly word for word.


So a book claiming to present the common Chaos background of both universes is obviously outdated. Still, many Chaos fans (and GW designers) read it for inspiration, knowing the books limitations.

i would whole heartedly agree that the RoC books are limited but i would still argue that they are not entirely outdated. certain elements like the Sensei and Illuminati have not really been mentioned since, and certain things have been filled out like the Thousand Sons background and army list, giving more flesh on bare bones, but there is little that has simply been retracted. what examples can you give of more recent publications that directly contradict the description of the universe from RoC?


BTW, just read that "Liber Chaotica" is Fantasy background only:
http://forum.blacklibrary.com/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=3233

i assume you mean aside from the section on Abaddon the Despoiler.

i admire your enthusiasm and readiness to take on all comers Breg, but i do worry for you Mathmatics Professor.

AdmiralDick
19-08-2008, 09:43
"Realms of Chaos" was written, when Fantasy and 40k shared one Chaos background.

err... they still do.

the special characters in the Codex: Chaos Daemons and Warhammer Armies: Daemons of Chaos are the same. they are not just similar characters, but the very same individuals. they made that quite explicitly clear when they published the two books.

"Skulltaker is the same whether he's in 40k or fantasy" to paraphrase (as i don't have the release issue of WD with me).

more than that the descriptions of the Chaos Gods and their realms are exactly the same. nearly word for word.


So a book claiming to present the common Chaos background of both universes is obviously outdated. Still, many Chaos fans (and GW designers) read it for inspiration, knowing the books limitations.

i would whole heartedly agree that the RoC books are limited but i would still argue that they are not entirely outdated. certain elements like the Sensei and Illuminati have not really been mentioned since, and certain things have been filled out like the Thousand Sons background and army list, giving more flesh on bare bones, but there is little that has simply been retracted. what examples can you give of more recent publications that directly contradict the description of the universe from RoC?


BTW, just read that "Liber Chaotica" is Fantasy background only:
http://forum.blacklibrary.com/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=3233

i assume you mean aside from the section on Abaddon the Despoiler.

i admire your enthusiasm and readiness to take on all comers Breg, but i do worry for you Mathmatics Professor.

MvS
19-08-2008, 09:47
Well actually the desire to do one book only came from me and from Matt Ralphs, the editor.

I inherited the series from the previous author who wrote Liber Khorne as a single book. Because that manuscript had been written predominantly from a 40K point of view (mentioning Rhinos and other tanks by name, as an example), Matt Ralphs decided that all the direct 40K references would have to be re-worded to be more ambiguous, because, after all, it was supposedly a Sigmarite priest who was writing the books. As the printing and release of Khorne had been slowed a bit to allow for the re-wording, I suggested at that point that we just meld everything into one big book, but sadly it was not to be.

BLP head man of that time, Marc Gascoigne, had already decided on the books being separated for each of the four gods of Chaos and one for Chaos Undvided. Marc also seemed to want a bit more 40K background in the books so that they would appeal to both lots of fans, although I made a conscious effort to drift away from blurring the imageries as the books progressed. I did this because at the same time as there being pressure from then BLP supremo to keep the RoC 40K content (and other 40K content from old codices) in Chaotica, I was still being told by other parts of GW that the two imageries are completely separate and should be presented as being such.

The imagery content in LC, where it is concerned with the stuff that appeared in the RoC books, is almost identical in terms of imagery content, with a few tweaks to bring it up to date with contemporary imagery. The 'problem' was that the whole series had to be written from an in-narrative POV of a Sigmarite priest, which means Voice-Of-God objective language had to be traded for a more subjective in-character voice. I was told that this was necessary to allow GW Studio games/rules developers wriggle room if they wanted to change or add anything.

chaos0xomega
19-08-2008, 19:18
So, MvS, maybe you can settle this debate:

Are there chaos gods aside from the "Big Four," I.E. minor gods? Specifically speaking in terms of 40k of course.

madd0ct0r
19-08-2008, 19:36
How about there are other Chaos Powers...

Bregalad
19-08-2008, 22:48
... or the other questions in this thread:
1.) Are 40k and Fantasy background now officially separate, esp. the Chaos Realms?
2.) Is everything in RoC still official background? If not since when?
3.) Has background changed since Rogue trader edition?

DantesInferno
19-08-2008, 22:54
So, MvS, maybe you can settle this debate:

Are there chaos gods aside from the "Big Four," I.E. minor gods? Specifically speaking in terms of 40k of course.

Given that some of them are mentioned by name in the 3.5 ed Chaos Codex, I'm going to hazard a guess toward the affirmative...

MvS
19-08-2008, 23:03
From what I can see, in the barest terms, if a 'god' in the 40K imagery is a bizarrely sentient vortex or tempest of emotions, souls and soul fragments in the medium of the Warp, which in itself is made up of an energy so exotic or perhaps basic that it can only be described as 'psychic' or 'magic', then yes there are other 'gods'.

We know that there are numerous daemons and gods because of the imagery for independent daemons and for the Eldar gods (at the very least), with Isha still being alive but in the thrall of Nurgle.

Are there other gods that rival the power of the Big Four Chaos Gods?

Well remember that we have been shown time and again that at different points, different ones of the Big Four are more powerful than all the others put together. So if individuals amongst the Big Four are so extremely variable in power I think it is reasonably safe to suggest that other entities and conscioisnesses within the Warp are variable in influence and power as well.

So maybe Gork and Mork are separate gods who, at some point or another, were more powerful than Khorne, Tzeentch, Nurgle and Slaanesh - after all, we know that at Slaanesh's 'birth it was the most powerful Warp entity in existence (at that point at least).

The Warp, or the chaos/Chaos within the Warp is nothing if not variable.

I believe that there are other Powers, Domains, daemons, gods, angels, spirits, ghosts, entities, consciousnesses (or any other terms you wish to use) within the Warp, at different 'depths' and in different 'parts' in and of the Warp (insofar as these terms have meaning within the Warp).

I also believe that the imagery seems quite clear that at the moment the most powerful and influencial entities within the Warp are the Big Four, and by a long way too. This doesn't mean they will always stay this way and nor does in mean that they have always been this way.

Or so it seems to me. Writing and compiling some books on Chaos doesn't automatically give me an insight that no-one else can have - just read the same books I did and speak to the same people I did and you are in exactly the same position I am in. It isn't hard actually, many here on Warseer already have, and long before me too.

EDIT

@ Bregalad: For what it is worth:

1. I was told time and again that yes the imageries were separate, but with the Chaos imagery having many definite consistencies. The 'why' of why I was told these two imageries are separate is probably a more salient question here, and from what I understand I think it was done purely because of the idea that having the Warhammer world as being situated within the EoT or whatever would devalue that imagery.

2. In my experience different GW writers, both of the Studio and not of the Studio, have different opinions on this and they often contradict each other then say the contradiction is deliberate for some esoteric reason. I think the only definite way to know is to get Alan Merret and Rick Priestly together and force them to think through and answer every question and to write down and publish an absolute response, because in my limited experience they seem to be the only two people in the company who seem to wield 'sovereign' powers of decision when it comes to the imagery. Everything else said by anyone else risks being contradicted or changed at a moment's notice - which isn't to say Merret and Priestly themselves have never changed their minds about elements of the imagery, but that's a different story.

3. See my previous answer for the 'truth'... but personally...? Yes I think it has in many ways. (I'm thinking about Space Marine imagery here).

chaos0xomega
20-08-2008, 00:53
... or the other questions in this thread:
1.) Are 40k and Fantasy background now officially separate, esp. the Chaos Realms?
2.) Is everything in RoC still official background? If not since when?
3.) Has background changed since Rogue trader edition?

1.) Already answered towards the middle of his post.

I did this because at the same time as there being pressure from then BLP supremo to keep the RoC 40K content (and other 40K content from old codices) in Chaotica, I was still being told by other parts of GW that the two imageries are completely separate and should be presented as being such.

2.) Also covered, check the above quote


Or so it seems to me. Writing and compiling some books on Chaos doesn't automatically give me an insight that no-one else can have - just read the same books I did and speak to the same people I did and you are in exactly the same position I am in. It isn't hard actually, many here on Warseer already have, and long before me too.

Ah but it does. As a writer you would have access to a great deal more material than we did, as well as access to the guys at GW that have the final say. Short of writing Rick Priestly, you're the best source available to us.

madd0ct0r
20-08-2008, 11:29
Not to mention being a source of fantasticly long and intricate posts.

I like them.