PDA

View Full Version : How are you feeling about the Primarchs in the HH series?



m1acca1551
07-12-2013, 01:57
I know that this thread could equally belong in the BL forums, but in the interest of more people viewing I though to post it here.

So to the question, how are you reacting to the Primarchs so far? Are you liking the way that BL are taking them? Has your personal favourite been treated fairly and how would you like to see then progress?

For me, I'm loving it, I'm an ultramarines fan, so I'm enjoying the view of Guilliman and the ultra smurfs are turning out, but of the most part I'm loving the evolution of the iron hands and the salamander especially Vulkan as a leader. I think that the HH has really brought some primarchs out of the shadows and placed them into the spot light.

For me the biggest disappointment is Horus, he just doesn't seem likeable at all, it almost seemed as he was good then bad with out the crucial step in between, I've read the books but I find the explanation hard to find plausible, but hey that's just me.

Over to you

Orthodox
07-12-2013, 03:16
There are some good novels that are about the primarchs, but those are the ones where the primarchs never appear. The only novels where someone who wasn't buying any and all merchandise that says GW on it would care about primarchs are novels that barely talk about the primarchs, but the characters/plot are instructive about them, like Horus Rising and Prospero Burns. TFH and the other novels that have primarchs as pov characters are complete melodrama, because you have to believe this incredible/contrived situation of superhero army brothers. Primarchs are written in a way that would make a a person who did not know anything about warhammer absolutely not care about the primarchs.

Nazguire
07-12-2013, 05:46
I thought The First Heretic was a great book and fun to read, personally. But other than that I think that you're right. Horus Rising, Prospero Burns, Know No Fear, Legion, etc where the Primarchs have minimal roles in them and are described from other points of view have generally portrayed the Primarchs better than those where the Primarchs have had a main role in the cast. Unremembered Empire suffered because there was TOO MANY primarchs I thought without any getting real character development apart from the most superficial of kinds. Prospero Burns, for example, cast Leman Russ as an unknowable barbarian king with more to him than what you'd see at first glance, whilst Legion really conveyed the labyrinthine mind of Alpharius Omegon without seeing inside his head for any more than a few seconds at a time. In contrast, we have Descent of Angels where the Lion seems like a nitwit.

m1acca1551
07-12-2013, 06:26
Yeah there have been some really iffy writing in regards to certain primarchs, the lion especially, the only saving grace for the lion's character were the short stories by ADB who turned him from town drunk to a being who you could actually understand.

Russ is a dissapointment, as he as already said is more a bezerker king than a space wolf primarch.

harlokin
07-12-2013, 10:58
Yeah there have been some really iffy writing in regards to certain primarchs, the lion especially, the only saving grace for the lion's character were the short stories by ADB who turned him from town drunk to a being who you could actually understand.

Russ is a dissapointment, as he as already said is more a bezerker king than a space wolf primarch.

Couldn't agree more, really disliked the portrayal of The Lion in Descent of Angels, and Fallen Angels, but ADBs interpretations have been great.

I think that Lorgar comes across very cool in Betrayer. Guilliman and Russ, who I have generally disliked, are also depicted very well in that book. They aren't portrayed as a smug logistics robot, and a space viking mary sue.