PDA

View Full Version : Did GW screw up the story again?



typhus22
16-07-2005, 19:24
in the recent white dwarf the article said that hive fleet kracken was the oldest invasion but wasn't it hive fleet behemoth? i'm almost 99% sure that behemoth was the first invasion. that and behemoth had the red and tan carapace.... right?

Xander-K
16-07-2005, 19:28
behemoth was earlier yes, it has the dates in the old 'nid codex.

typhus22
16-07-2005, 19:55
man it seems like once andy chambers left no one really knew the fluff or the rules history of the nids. i think just last months issue they said that the broodlord was the first non monstrous creature HQ

Rabid Bunny 666
16-07-2005, 20:02
not sure, in theory the lost fleets were, but behemoth was the first, then Kraken, then Leviathan

Jal'knock
16-07-2005, 20:02
Thats the unfortunate reality that is GW fluff now. They've gone too marketing orientated and care little about the damage they do to the fluff. They'll always come up with a reason to justify it though. In this case: Warriors aren't new? :rolleyes: :mad: :wtf:

typhus22
16-07-2005, 20:05
i wondered why they didnt call the beings from hive fleet colossus zoats...

Rabid Bunny 666
16-07-2005, 20:07
because zoats are the 'nids squats

typhus22
16-07-2005, 20:35
that weird relative no one wants to recognise as being family huh? i remember the zoats used to work with the wood elves in fantasy as well. didnt the demiurg (squats) make an appearance in epic and battlefleet?

Rabid Bunny 666
16-07-2005, 20:38
IIRC they were in epic, but not sure (probably not) in battlefleet gothic, but the squats were stopped before i started anyways, so there ya go :D

Karhedron
16-07-2005, 21:13
didnt the demiurg (squats) make an appearance in epic and battlefleet?
Yup, Squats were actually well supported in Epic and had some fantastic war machines as well as artillery that could blast pretty much any army off the table. I still have my Squat army for Epic.

Squats got squashed long before BFG was release but their Demiurg descendants have appeared in that game. Apparently they have allied with the Tau but whether to the same degree as the Kroot have is unclear.

Grand_Marshal_Kazan
16-07-2005, 21:32
Squats got squashed long before BFG was release but their Demiurg descendants have appeared in that game. Apparently they have allied with the Tau but whether to the same degree as the Kroot have is unclear.

I think that the Demiurg have a business like agreement with the Tau.

Rabid Bunny 666
16-07-2005, 21:36
plasma drive makers IIRC

twisted_mentat
17-07-2005, 04:06
Uh....according to the new 'nid codex, Behemoth is still the first hive fleed encountered, its 745.M41, while Kraken is 993.m41. Now, there were smaller encounters with unknowing creatures, which are now known to be Tyranids..but the first time they were KNOWN as the Tyranids is Behemoth...

boogle
17-07-2005, 09:45
supposedly Kraken were meant to have fought against the Tau (destroyed the Sqauts too)

Jaq Draco
17-07-2005, 13:16
earlier on Leviathan was the be all and end all of everything,

now from what ive been reading they are just making leviathan out to be as threatening as a fart in a hurricane

Delicious Soy
17-07-2005, 15:56
A fart that resulted in the destruction of many worlds and the excommunication of the Inqusition's top 'Nid expert. Thats some left cheek sneak.

sulla
17-07-2005, 18:38
Yep, GW's fluff management division screwed up... Again.

Hang on? We're talking about a mistake in white dwarf here... hardly a rarity and hardly the end of the world. Why does this site attract so many people who don't like GW?

typhus22
18-07-2005, 05:39
i dont think its the end of the world and its not like i hate GW but its just kinda like "hey i don't remember this happening before" type comment. personally i like history and i like stories and for them to re write it is kinda lazy on their part not to at least reread an old codex. so many stories and such are literally cut and pasted from past material that i dont understand how these inconsistencies can happen.

Praetorian
18-07-2005, 09:49
Ahh, yes, perhaps too many younglings at GW now not rememberin' their tellin' of the fluff. :p :D

boogle
18-07-2005, 13:00
that'll be because the bugmans isn't made like it used to be

Inquisitor Samos
18-07-2005, 13:33
i dont think its the end of the world and its not like i hate GW but its just kinda like "hey i don't remember this happening before" type comment. personally i like history and i like stories and for them to re write it is kinda lazy on their part not to at least reread an old codex. so many stories and such are literally cut and pasted from past material that i dont understand how these inconsistencies can happen.

Sounds to me like they need to develop themselves an in-house "tech and background bible" detailing how the overall setting is supposed to work, what the general background is, what has transpired "historically," and so on. And make everyone working on anything official read it and follow it, at least the parts that apply to whatever they're doing.

It's a shame that so many GW-employed persons who are actively writing material for the 40K Universe setting don't seem to know all that much about the setting itself!

GavT
18-07-2005, 16:50
in the recent white dwarf the article said that hive fleet kracken was the oldest invasion but wasn't it hive fleet behemoth? i'm almost 99% sure that behemoth was the first invasion. that and behemoth had the red and tan carapace.... right?

Could you please reference which issue and which article, please?

Cheers,

GAV

Brusilov
18-07-2005, 19:32
Personally, for once I stand with GW, especially on the matter of the Zoats (although not mentioned in name, anyone knowing Zoats knows what the creatures of Colossus tryly are). I very much enjoy when GW points at truly old fluff harking back to the glorious days of Rogue Trader (damn after that I sure can get my title of honorary dwarf, or squat for that matter :rolleyes: ;) ).

For me the high point of the Necron Codex was introducing back the Old Ones as a major force in the 40k universe (although not in present 40k days) as well the Jokaero (gotta love space orang outangs with incredible technological knowhow, now that's an original concept) and the Enslavers (a testament to the spirit of 40k, a nice blend of Lovecraft, Moorcock and Herbert, not necessarily in that order).

On the matter of the connection of all bizarre wildlife in the galaxy with Nids, I'm more dubious though. I think a Magos Biologis is reading too much into this, they're not quite sane at the best of time, so I guess this one simply 'lost it' with his obsession over Nids.
I personally try to stir from the "+++insert race/god name here+++ are the real menace that will take over the whole galaxy in the blink of an eye" that appears in the Codices. It has been done in almost every Codex (Orks, Chaos, Nids, Necrons even Tau because of their attractive philosophy), that it's not believable anymore I'm afraid.

Nevertheless on the whole matter of Behemoth not being the oldest Nid hive fleet I don't really mind. After all what are a couple of millennia in an intergalactic journey that probably took hundreds of thousands of years.

typhus22
19-07-2005, 03:57
its in white dwarf 306 (july issue )under the primal colors article on page 61. yeah and i think the catachan devil being a nid as well as everything else a bit buggy is crap too.

Briareos
19-07-2005, 10:04
i think the catachan devil being a nid as well as everything else a bit buggy is crap too.
Not so much "crap" as an irritating habit which regularly pops up when a new codex is released.
When the Chaos codex was released, the studio said they wanted Chaos to take center stage as the "big bad guy" enemy of the galaxy. If something, anything happened in the fluff, "Chaos did it".
When the Necrons were released, the C'Tan were described as having their fingers in so many pies that it was ludicrous. For beings who had spent the last milleniums in hibernation, they sure seemed to have a stranglehold on the galaxy. A conspiracy is uncovered ? "The C'Tan did it".
Now with the Tyranids, the WD article makes it sound almost as if aeons-old precursor hive fleets have been responsible for seeding most planets of the galaxy with life... There's a interesting monster in the fluff ? "The Tyranids did it".

This extreme "conpiracy fave" gets tired very fast (essentially you can only have so much while keeping up the suspension of disbelief). Going overboard with "cool" concepts is _not_ the way to go for quality (or coherent background).

Uriel71
19-07-2005, 10:38
Um...actually, no, they didn't.

If you actually read the article, rather than leaping in with venomous comments regarding background accuracy, then you'll see that what it says (in a painting article let's not forget) is that Hive Fleet Kraken is the oldest of the 'featured Tyranid armies' which is exactly correct since these models were painted for the 3rd Ed 40K Codex: Tyranids. The others shown are Behemoth; painted for Battle for Macragge (last year), and Leviathan; painted for the current Tyranid codex (this year).

Just thought I'd set the record straight on this one.

Tastyfish
19-07-2005, 13:33
Demiurg gave the Tau ion weaponry, rather than plasma drives. They use it for mining, but whether they had considered the military applications is unknown seeing as being almost purely space based they will not have come into a situation where that level of weapon is useful (though the Tau ships do have ion batteries which the Demiurg don't, but will have to check).

As for tyranids everywhere - its probably small isolated colonies crying wolf, and then triggering more panic so more colonies do so. Nothing is more likely to get a fleet assigned to protect your sub sector like a possible Hive fleet lurking around there.

Phunting
19-07-2005, 17:19
Sounds to me like they need to develop themselves an in-house "tech and background bible" detailing how the overall setting is supposed to work, what the general background is, what has transpired "historically," and so on. And make everyone working on anything official read it and follow it, at least the parts that apply to whatever they're doing.

It's a shame that so many GW-employed persons who are actively writing material for the 40K Universe setting don't seem to know all that much about the setting itself!That's a really good idea. A book that collates all of the background into one piece that is easily referenced and widely available. A book that supports fans and writers and on the whole helps the hobby develop and keeps it coherent.

Perhaps it could be called 'the fluff bible'?

Nahh, they'd never go with it!

Tastyfish
19-07-2005, 17:42
They do have one, it gets mentioned usually when the computer game designers are saying what it is like to work with GW - usually its fluff and art though

Briareos
19-07-2005, 18:19
The rumoured holy "background bible" of GW hadn't been compiled as of 18 months ago. According to some sources of the old Portent, the studio had a poor guy slaving on it but it was progressing very slowly.

Nowadays, I think they just downloaded and use "that which shall not be named (version 2.19)". ;)

Brusilov
19-07-2005, 18:46
That'd be the ultimate irony considering the fact the GW legal team shut it down...
But I agree with Uriel71 (aka Graham McNeil) on the matter originally at hand.

btw Uriel71 if you're still around, I'm reading The Ambassador Chronicles and I must say it's a very good book (as good as Storm of Iron, which I considered to be your best book).

Briareos
19-07-2005, 20:21
Ironic but expedient. Although the irony would be for them to have the document and fail to use it correctly (getting the background right and/or building on it).

charlie_c67
21-07-2005, 10:35
I think part of the problem with fluff is the sheer scale of any collation task. There's almost 20 years worth of the stuff if not more and to make sure that all ends tie up correctly and seamlessly is no easy task, specially when you think consider the number of different authors and their different takes on 40k. Of course you'll get discrepencies, but then name a historical period on earth where we don't have the same problem. For instance, one spanish princess was described as a short tall blonde with brunette hair, richard the third (in the UK) was(n't) a evil hunbacked man who did(n't) murder his nephews. So a lot of history/fluff is down to the individual observer and they're opinion on siad subject.

Brusilov
21-07-2005, 11:00
I disagree, facts are facts, then it comes to interpretation but that's a different matter altogether. And this is especially true when you're talking about 40k background which does not concern itself so much about events but general trends.
For example the revisionist stance on the history of the Mechanicus. We don't know who started the cult, but we know how it started. And GW apparently changed that from dependance on technology to worship of a Star God...

Although in 40k they are sometimes deformed into legends, this is an easy excuse for avoiding consistency. I'm ready to believe things like the existence of the warp, Chaos gods and such like, but I don't like the attitude that seems to exist within GW with regards to the fluff, that is: "we don't need to make it consistent or logical, it's all legends and such anyway" or "it's the warp so it does not have to be logical."

Honestly, I've said it before and I'll say it again. There is a market for pure fluff books of good quality that will try to create a comprehensive approach to the fluff. I'm willing to accept changes in the fluff if it leads to such a result.

The counter example I'll give is the Star Wars universe. In the last 25 years you probably have dozens of authors, writing novels, comics, games, you name it, that have been involved with the expanded universe. And it keeps its coherence (too a great degree).
Why? Simply because the story is the core of their activity, and this is not the case with GW. The core of their activity is the game, and understandibly so, but this comes with a price to those who, like me, enjoy the fluff as much as the game, if not more.
Personally I believe there is room for both. And the game would certainly win from more fluff consistency.

Sojourner
21-07-2005, 11:25
what it says (in a painting article let's not forget) is that Hive Fleet Kraken is the oldest of the 'featured Tyranid armies' which is exactly correct

Are we not counting the really old stuff from 2nd ed? I jumped into 40k post-publication of the 2nd ed Tyranid codex, but I was under the impression that the old old Tyranid stuff was meant to be Behemoth, making them the first featured GW army.

hivefleetcarrion
21-07-2005, 11:54
just a note in nid colour schemes, does anyone actually like the old 2nd ed rainbow coloured nids..... as i only joined in 3rd ed it looks like that the old nids used every single colour that wasnt orginally used for other armies

hey if us gamers can remember the fluff and we pl;ay the game then the makers should be able to.. hell they run the company, its there job to direct it and make sure that everything makes( rough) sence.

Uriel71
22-07-2005, 12:25
Are we not counting the really old stuff from 2nd ed? I jumped into 40k post-publication of the 2nd ed Tyranid codex, but I was under the impression that the old old Tyranid stuff was meant to be Behemoth, making them the first featured GW army.

Well, no, since none of them are 'featured Tyranid armies' in the article. If you can spot any 2nd Ed miniatures in that article being 'featured' then I'll happily eat my*hat. Anyway, this is entering the realm of semantics and since I've made my point, I'll happily leave this thread to the pendants. Enjoy.

Sojourner
22-07-2005, 12:36
Ah, I misunderstood. I don't actually have that article so I was jumping into the discussion purely from this thread.

Flame Boy
22-07-2005, 20:36
just a note in nid colour schemes, does anyone actually like the old 2nd ed rainbow coloured nids..... as i only joined in 3rd ed it looks like that the old nids used every single colour that wasnt orginally used for other armies

hey if us gamers can remember the fluff and we pl;ay the game then the makers should be able to.. hell they run the company, its there job to direct it and make sure that everything makes( rough) sence.


The 2nd edition Tyranids used purple, red and bone as their main colours, with the odd colour now and then to offset something. How is this "rainbow coloured"?

Anyway, the 40k setting has been around since about 1987 and has had countless people working on it... I think sorting through all that material is most likely to be an almost impossible task... it will take a long time to re-envisage a lot of older fluff to get it to fit more constently in the future.

Briareos
22-07-2005, 23:52
Anyway, the 40k setting has been around since about 1987 and has had countless people working on it... I think sorting through all that material is most likely to be an almost impossible task... it will take a long time to re-envisage a lot of older fluff to get it to fit more constently in the future.
"Countless" might be pushing it a bit. The GW studio isn't _that_ big and the employee turnover seems pretty low.
Furthermore, fans of the game were able to come up with a document which more or less incorporated much of the 40K background. There is no reason the studio couldn't do it as well.

It is possible to do. It has already been done outside of the GW infrastructure. There is nothing impossible about it. But to have coherent fluff, you need competant editors and an in-house policy which enforces this coherence.

Void/Urban war and Warmachine are good examples of products with strong directions and with coherent and innovative backgrounds (compare the Koralon to the Tyranids). It is one of their selling points. For GW, the rules come before the setting. Thus we get sub-par background development.

Muffin Man
23-07-2005, 08:08
The counter example I'll give is the Star Wars universe. In the last 25 years you probably have dozens of authors, writing novels, comics, games, you name it, that have been involved with the expanded universe. And it keeps its coherence (too a great degree).
Why? Simply because the story is the core of their activity, and this is not the case with GW. The core of their activity is the game, and understandibly so, but this comes with a price to those who, like me, enjoy the fluff as much as the game, if not more.
Personally I believe there is room for both. And the game would certainly win from more fluff consistency.

I just had to point out that Star Wars the movies are fairly undeveloped, I mean there are entire comic books and stories dedicated to people that appeared in *one scene* of the movie. Yet fluff inconsistencies still crop up, such as the fact that Boba Fett's origin has been changed several times just to name an example (Mandalorian to criminal who found the Mandalorian armor to clone of a Jango Fett).

BTW, the real reason I'm posting is: how did you know Urial71 was Graham McNeil based on 1 post? Not doubting you, just really curious.

Darius Rhiannon
03-09-2005, 14:02
Well the Star Wars universive also has some severe problems with its fluff (bang, bang kitty). This problem even has a name. George Lucas.

With the three prequels he has managed to totally destroy the basis of the following story archs. The Corran Horn Story Arc. The Heir to the Empire story arch and so many others that it completely upset me.

In short, all those novels and comics etc. have been rendered into "expanded universe" status because the underlying pinnings of the stories have been severed. At least GW has yet to make as large of a stuff up with their fluff. It has evolved over the years, not been evolved and then destroyed by a fit of meglomania.

Vosk
03-09-2005, 15:05
Are we not counting the really old stuff from 2nd ed? I jumped into 40k post-publication of the 2nd ed Tyranid codex, but I was under the impression that the old old Tyranid stuff was meant to be Behemoth, making them the first featured GW army.

The top of the article talks about how the studio have produced three Tyranid swarms since the new Warriors were released. Interestingly, with the advent of the new codex and release of new Tyrant, Carnifex, Zoanthrope and so on, they have removed these models from the previous swarms. What is now classed as their Kraken fleet used to feature a Tyrant, Raveners and at least two Carnifi (not to mention ye venerable olde Genestealers), but now consists of almost nothing but Warriors, Gaunts, Rippers and Biovores. I guess GW don't want any confusion over what is what in their armies.

cardboard_armour
03-09-2005, 15:38
Those Collossus fellas were involved in the Zorastra-Attilla war as it says in the web article on lost fleets. If this isn't a subtle refernece to them being called Zoats then I don't know what is.

ZOrastra
ATtila

ZOAT

All Tyranids names are given to them by imperials and so it'd make sense that they call them Zoats after the two systems they attacked.

Brusilov
04-09-2005, 05:15
Because Graham McNeil used to post on Portent under the name of Uriel71, so I assumed it was the same person behind the same name (Mr McNeil being the author of the Uriel Ventris series also helps).

starlight
04-09-2005, 06:48
Back on topic (sort of) last year I met the nice lady who actually keeps the archives at GW. She is a delightful lady, but sadly I can't remember her name. We had a good talk about GW and the state of their library. It seems that it is quite extensive and is in exceptional shape. They are slowly (due to understaffing) transferring the entire collection to electronic format so that it is more easily available to the designers (and so forth) who need it.

Good news for continuity buffs. :)

Flame Boy
04-09-2005, 15:32
It would help if the fluff what divided into "what is suggested to be happenning" and "what is actually happening", so that people will know when it's acceptible to start a "what if?" scenario without contradicting some past background. I'd imagine they already have this kind of "behind the scenes" info, though.

Inquisitor Engel
04-09-2005, 20:23
They are slowly (due to understaffing) transferring the entire collection to electronic format so that it is more easily available to the designers (and so forth) who need it.

Hopefully all that text in the HH books will become 'corrupted' somehow. ;)

Personally, if I were a developer, I'd rather have the physical book to read and familiarise with (and check out!)...

starlight
04-09-2005, 20:59
Sadly there are only so many copies of the original works. Sharing across the world is better electronically, but I know what you mean, I'd rather have a proper book myself.

<ponders moving to the UK to marry a GW librarian>

Nahahahahaaaaaaa........:)

Kage2020
05-09-2005, 02:06
With regards to an official ''fluff' bible' it remains within the power of GW to produce. Heck, they could go beyond it and produce something truly exceptional with a minimal expenditure in terms of real wages. A per diem for Grecian 2000 might up that expenditure a bit, though! ;)

There's a lot of 'fluff' out there, but not that much! :D

Anyway, the real point is to get something marketeable that offers a framework and an answer to some of the questions. Just not all of them.

Kage

palmerantony
05-09-2005, 12:39
Anyway, this is entering the realm of semantics and since I've made my point, I'll happily leave this thread to the pendants. Enjoy.

This makes me feel sorry that Mr Graham has been troubled by our small site.