Warhammer 40K's story, how is it even remotely appealing?

[Andy of Comix Inc]

People said Warhammer was a legitimately good setting and definitely not campy while others refuted their claim. Sorry if unsubstantiated opinions aren't considered the final word to me when they seem like they could easily be given actual support. You can have your opinions, likes and dislikes, and everything else, just don't give reasons for them that fall apart when anyone so much as argues against them.

Whoa whoa whoa! Who's saying that Warhammer's setting isn't campy? There's no denying that... but on the other hand, the camp is what makes it good.

Ah, I'm glad I can just nod and agree with someone!

The reason I love 40k's universe is how relentlessly stupid it is. It started out as essentially a parody, mocking both itself and the sci-fi of the time. The way its grown since is nothing short of stupendous. If there's a science fiction concept that exists, Warhammer 40,000 has it. It takes cues from everything and mixes it up into a gloriously, unprecedentedly dumb candy-coated lore, where space faeries and football jock orcs share both the same universe and the same sentences... it's ridiculous! Absolutely mental, and that's exactly why it's so appealing to me. It is basically a hodge podge of campy, crazy, stupid and bizarre, and it's utterly fascinating for it.

Combine that with occasionally genuinely good writing, allegories to everything we have on Earth from homosexuality to sadomasochism, really unique creatures (the idea that the Orks are a kind of fungus? Inspired!), good sense of self-aware humour, and really great amoral factions that let people choose their team, essentially, and still find them as the "good guys"... its just really diverse and wide and bombastic and bright and colourful and yet grimdark at the same time. I understand why it turns people off, but you must understand also how that sort of craziness glues people in.

 

[Augustine]

Why do you like Twilight?
"Because it has a group of great characters finding the perfect love that I just wish I could have."
[Scrutinizing of the characters and examination of the creepy relationships]

Okaaay... So you demonstrated specifically why YOU didn't like Twilight. How would have any bearing on anything other than you?
The outcome: You feel better about yourself because of how nicely polished your critique was, and how handsome your ego looks in it's reflection, and the Twilight fan gone watching Breaking Dawn for the n-th time with his/her fan compadres.

If one could reason with people about the value of Twilight books, there'd be no Twilight fans anywhere. As far as I can tell that's a perfect example of why you can't argue taste objectively.

Furthermore:

"I'm not here to please your desire for discussion and you just don't understand because you haven't read the books."

This statement is made out of lots of straw, here's why:
"OP's appeal: "Tell me why you like 40k, for I don't understand the appeal, for it seems "stupid" (word used by OP).
Posters: plethora of reasons why they enjoy it.
OP's response: These reasons are poor. <goes on to demonstrate his weak understanding of the lore by listing few reasons, which he admits are taken from casual conversations and wiki browsing> Now, you need to justify your reasons for liking 40k before me."
Calling that a legitimate discussion is absurd. We need to justify our tastes? Why? And if we do don't? Our tastes are somehow invalided in the eyes of the world? And if they are somehow invalidated, next step is, I imagine, you showing us the "proper" things to like, with legitimate qualities, that are immune to any criticism? How benevolent.

Also, I'd love to have discussion with someone about, say, Leibniz's differential calculus and it's effect on his philosophical worldview. If my interlocutor claims that my understanding of Leibniz is lacking, that he never actually read anything written by the guy, yet he still wants to argue, I will end the conversation right there. Why? At best, he'd be an ignoramus, at worst, a sophist.

I am amused by your certainty in your abilities to defend your favourite colour in the manner that would make it impervious to scrutiny. I'll let people reading this gauge themselves how likely it is to be true.

People said Warhammer was a legitimately good setting and definitely not campy while others refuted their claim. Sorry if unsubstantiated opinions aren't considered the final word to me when they seem like they could easily be given actual support. You can have your opinions, likes and dislikes, and everything else, just don't give reasons for them that fall apart when anyone so much as argues against them.

I don't remember every single response in this topic, but generally response was along the lines: "I like 40k because x,y,z appeals to me." NOT "40k is great universe because clearly x,y,z coalesce into an immortal edifice of fiction for all time."
First cannot be refuted, for it is supported by subjective reasoning, and makes only a subjective claim. If you don't see how that's irrefutable, refer to dictionary definition of the word "subjective."
Second can be refuted.
You cannot prove to others that x,y,z aren't actually appealing to THEM. If your argument is that x,y,z don't appeal to YOU... well I don't think anyone would contest that, for it has nothing to do with anything but you.
I should point out that the question in the opening post was phrased to fish for responses of the first kind. The inherent fallacy here is that first kind of response can be debunked the same way as the second kind.

So playing the games and examining the universe that Warhammer takes place in is just completely worthless when discussing the setting as being silly and immature? I'm sure some of the books tell good stories, but they don't exactly change the universe or its inherent, over-the-top nature that seems to have been derived from the doodles of a middle schooler.

Actually, while I did not write that previously, but that's roughly what I'd say now: yes, it is potentially worthless(with a caveat below). Here's why:
Playing the game requires no knowledge of the universe. None. Different kind of fun to be had there. So you could play the game for years and know nothing beyond the names of the races, units and gear.
I'm not sure what "examining the universe" means other than reading. Looking at pictures? If so, that is not entirely worthless, as can get a vague sense and mood of the setting (I'm a proponent of visual learning myself).
Next, "books do not change the universe or ...[it's] nature" - that's... false. Just stunningly outright 100% falsity. Books is the only thing that keeps the universe together. Books are the only major thing that developed this universe. Without books, the only thing left is a strange collection of miniatures and terrain.
If your assumption is that the game is what drives the universe, I will smile and say merely: "it does not." (that has been explained previously)

 

[144_v1legacy]

The problem with it is, from my point of view, that it is a story that requires a certain (huge) degree of do-it-yourself retconning. A lot of the things written are exaggerated far beyond necessity in the hopes of enforcing a sense of scale that could be better attained elsewhere. A lot of items are just silly, and need to be swept under the rug. The story is a mess, and is therefore one that works best if you rewrite it using the existing text as guidelines. The story isn't great. After all, it's the setup for a game. It's an interactive story. It has to be made great through its coexistence with gameplay, tabletop or otherwise.

 

[Bifford]

It's a lot of nonsense, really. It tries to be as grim and dark as possible at the cost of logic. How can humanity have stagnated for 10,000 years? The Age of Strife was bad, but they've had plenty of time to recover. 10,000 years ago we were experimenting with stone spears, so there's no excuse. Maybe the Chaos Gods are rotting humanity's brains, making them shun innovation. A bigger plot hole is why the other races haven't outstripped humanity in technological progress. Only the Tau seem to be actually advancing their sciences.

The Imperial Guard doesn't give a fuck about casualties. Casualties matter a lot, actually. There is only a finite supply of humans and a whole lot of Orks and Tyranids to kill. The depletion of a planet's population to the IG means a loss of economic productivity.

Then there's the obsession with Space Marines. SPESS MAHREEENS!!! FOR THE EMPRAH!!!

It's quite fun, actually, but you mustn't think about it too hard.

 

[Frankster]

No, there's only a barely sane vegetable on Terra pulling the strings. Who's very poop is literally considered a source of holy power. Not much of an improvement.

Ill take the god emperor of humanity over some intangible force any day.
But point taken ><

 

[J Tyran]

The Imperial Guard doesn't give a fuck about casualties. Casualties matter a lot, actually. There is only a finite supply of humans and a whole lot of Orks and Tyranids to kill.

Manpower is actually the one resource the Imperium has an infinite supply of. With over a million worlds filled with untold trillions whats the loss a few regiments?

 

[Rastrelly]

It's a lot of nonsense, really. It tries to be as grim and dark as possible at the cost of logic. How can humanity have stagnated for 10,000 years? The Age of Strife was bad, but they've had plenty of time to recover. 10,000 years ago we were experimenting with stone spears, so there's no excuse. Maybe the Chaos Gods are rotting humanity's brains, making them shun innovation. A bigger plot hole is why the other races haven't outstripped humanity in technological progress. Only the Tau seem to be actually advancing their sciences.

The Imperial Guard doesn't give a fuck about casualties. Casualties matter a lot, actually. There is only a finite supply of humans and a whole lot of Orks and Tyranids to kill. The depletion of a planet's population to the IG means a loss of economic productivity.

Then there's the obsession with Space Marines. SPESS MAHREEENS!!! FOR THE EMPRAH!!!

It's quite fun, actually, but you mustn't think about it too hard.

a) Humanity is stagnated due to religious pricks who rule it. Mechanicus do not try to invent - only to find and copy old stuff in their search for omnissiah. All the humanity is completely "addicted" to machines built by mechanicums, so if they will lose support of Mars, they won't be able to use almost any technological device more complex then primitive tools.
b) Who said Imperial guard does not care about casualties? Some dumb generals do, but it is so even today.
c) Imperium is obviously doomed. That's why final heroic acts of some imperial forces look so epic in their pointlessness.

 

[MrPeanut]

Only the Tau seem to be actually advancing their sciences

Orks and Chaos get new techs their unique way, since no two weapons or tanks will ever end up the same.

The necrons are 100's of years ahead in research to begin with, their crypteks are actively researching new stuff but since the grand majority of necrons are still sleeping they are sort of taking baby steps.

Can't say about Tyranids, The Eldar's don't advance in tech because they are stupid.

 

[Nouw]

snip

Reading through, I think this comes down to our standards in literature. The unique qualities of Gaunt's Ghosts 'redeem' itself from using the same story but for you it doesn't, largely because it's not of a well-written quality. Rather than arguing that my standards are better than yours and vice-versa, perhaps you can explain to me what constitutes a story in your eyes because obviously we have differing opinions on it.

 

[smartalec]

There isn't much it doesn't pull from, Dune is another massive influence on 40k.

A fair bit of Asimov, too. Foundation, especially.

 

[Starke]

Only the Tau seem to be actually advancing their sciences

Orks and Chaos get new techs their unique way, since no two weapons or tanks will ever end up the same.

The necrons are 100's of years ahead in research to begin with, their crypteks are actively researching new stuff but since the grand majority of necrons are still sleeping they are sort of taking baby steps.

Can't say about Tyranids, The Eldar's don't advance in tech because they are stupid.

The 'nids are constantly evolving new abilities.

I don't remember every single response in this topic, but generally response was along the lines: "I like 40k because x,y,z appeals to me." NOT "40k is great universe because clearly x,y,z coalesce into an immortal edifice of fiction for all time."

I do remember someone saying they thought the Eisenhorn trilogy was the "best sci-fi of all time" and that "there [was] nothing superior only equals," or something very close to that. Which was, you know, easily refuted.

 

[Leoofmoon]

I'm really not even going to give a huge try at this but Warhammer 40k IS childish but its fun with how over the top violent it is! I'm sorry but you can keep you'r big boy pants on if you want but I enjoy just of "give me a fucking sword that a chainsaw and a large group of orcs to go fuck up!" Hell you want a game that's even more like that? I played Space Hulk: Vengeance of the Blood Angels when I had a PS1 and it is the same type of game and story. If you wanted a happy go lucky story well too bad Warhammer is not a friendly universe and it has a mass amount of fans.

 

[Starke]

There isn't much it doesn't pull from, Dune is another massive influence on 40k.

A fair bit of Asimov, too. Foundation, especially.

Heinlein may have had a small influence as well...

 

[Starke]

I'm really not even going to give a huge try at this but Warhammer 40k IS childish but its fun with how over the top violent it is! I'm sorry but you can keep you'r big boy pants on if you want but I enjoy just of "give me a fucking sword that a chainsaw and a large group of orcs to go fuck up!" Hell you want a game that's even more like that? I played Space Hulk: Vengeance of the Blood Angels when I had a PS1 and it is the same type of game and story. If you wanted a happy go lucky story well too bad Warhammer is not a friendly universe and it has a mass amount of fans.

And I think that's fair, it just strikes me as odd that people in this thread continue to insist that "No really, the Warhammer story is totally compelling!"

I'd say it's a matter of taste, but, honestly, it's both. It's got a stupidly childish veneer on the surface, and if that's all you're looking for, you'll find it. But, when you start digging there's some surprising sophistication buried under the surface.

Now, there's a legitimate argument to be made that 40k's sophistication isn't really intended by games workshop, it's either the product of a lot of people who write for The Black Library, or a byproduct of simply layering more and more groups into a setting until you create a facsimile of a plausible and complex setting.

But, either way, there has been some pretty compelling work to come out of the setting, and it is a remarkably detailed playground to drop into, even if it is, on the surface, childish as hell.

 

[Jigoku-Aisatsu]

I think I understand the OP's sentiment and what he was trying to say. Let me explain....

Warhammer fans take their game SO seriously, and are SO absorbed in it that it can be a bit annoying. Warhammer is also one of the chest-beating, ego thumping, I-post-regularly-on-spacebattles.com type of universes. You won't have to look hard to find some fanboy going ape-**** over their game, how awesome it is, how much you suck, and how insert alien race here is SOOOOOOOOO AWESOME!

But the thing is to any observer it ranks as one of the most puerile and childish settings that you can find.

-Yes, I know the story has to be structured in a way to set the stage for constant small battles in an ever unfolding universe.

-Yes, I know it's self satirical and tries to cram every science fiction trope into it's overstuffed seams.

But Warhammer fans take it SO seriously and are so absorbed that to the rest of us it just seems painfully childish!

-No, that doesn't mean I want to have sex with other men just because I don't like things you find awesome and tuff! (GRRRR SPACE MARINES!)

-No, I don't play with the girls at recess and cry when someone pushes me. I just find Warhammer to be painfully childish.

Sometimes it's like the men of our generation (and I do mean MEN, most Warhammer fans are grown adults) are stuck in adolescence.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

I'm really not even going to give a huge try at this but Warhammer 40k IS childish but its fun with how over the top violent it is! I'm sorry but you can keep you'r big boy pants on if you want but I enjoy just of "give me a fucking sword that a chainsaw and a large group of orcs to go fuck up!" Hell you want a game that's even more like that? I played Space Hulk: Vengeance of the Blood Angels when I had a PS1 and it is the same type of game and story. If you wanted a happy go lucky story well too bad Warhammer is not a friendly universe and it has a mass amount of fans.

And I think that's fair, it just strikes me as odd that people in this thread continue to insist that "No really, the Warhammer story is totally compelling!"

Well Tarantino movies can still be seen as compelling storytelling despite their childish ultra-violence and inane pop culture conversations. Childish and compelling aren't mutually exclusive, look at Shrek, or Toy Story 3. A universe can poke fun at itself while still delivering great compelling narratives and interesting themes, look at the TV series Scrubs, one second JD is chasing the janitor around a slapstick obstacle course, the next scene he's diagnosing a child with cancer. There are hundreds of examples from all forms of media of comedic or childish productions that still work on higher levels, and can be compelling in other more adult ways.

The 40k universe is highly stylised, the characteristics of models are emphasised to the point of absurdity, almost everyone is in some way an insane psychopath (or in all ways) the background story takes every sci-fi trope it can and ramps it up to 11, you like Batman? It has thousands of them. You like vampires? Again there's a legion of them. You like parasitic aliens, unstoppable killer robots, space elves or demons, there are entire armies of all of these, fighting each other, all of the time, and that in itself is compelling in it's fine details as a highly crafted universe that just provides more information on everything the deeper you scratch.

However the same universe has had mature writers take these over the top settings and create more adult material with them: Introducing characters with philosophical struggles relating to coping with the world around them, physical problems, constant threat and danger, and it explores what it would be like to live (and die) in such a hostile universe.

It's childish, yes. It's also serious. Those things aren'y mutually exclusive, and if you think that being one thing automatically destroys an ability to be the other, well then...

Spoiler

[HEADING=1]You're wrong.[/HEADING]

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Also it helps that I <3 science fiction.

The trouble with that as a justification for liking 40k is that it lets very little science into the fiction. Or even much logic.

For example, the entire universe revolves around close order combat. In 38,000 years in the future with advances in armor, weapons and the means to deliver both to battlefields around the world and what do we get? Combat at ranges of less than 100 yards. What makes this insane is that there is literally no reason for combat to play out like this in most campaign settings. Sure, the various city and space hulk settings sort of force the close combat aspect but what is it about bolters that makes them useless beyond about 60 yards? Do the rounds just rattle down the barrel? Are all spaces marines secretly suffering from palsy?

As far as the science part goes, the Warhammer ethos seems to be that they make a declaration as fact and presume that somehow is science. I don't expect perfection but hand waving the fact a power sword ignores armor because it's sheathed in "eldrich energy" isn't even trying.

That isn't to say I don't like 40k. I just don't think it is science fiction. Future fantasy perhaps but when the best example of science is the cargo cult example found in the Adeptus Mechanus well, your universe. . .

 

[Xan Krieger]

Also it helps that I <3 science fiction.

The trouble with that as a justification for liking 40k is that it lets very little science into the fiction. Or even much logic.

For example, the entire universe revolves around close order combat. In 38,000 years in the future with advances in armor, weapons and the means to deliver both to battlefields around the world and what do we get? Combat at ranges of less than 100 yards. What makes this insane is that there is literally no reason for combat to play out like this in most campaign settings. Sure, the various city and space hulk settings sort of force the close combat aspect but what is it about bolters that makes them useless beyond about 60 yards? Do the rounds just rattle down the barrel? Are all spaces marines secretly suffering from palsy?

As far as the science part goes, the Warhammer ethos seems to be that they make a declaration as fact and presume that somehow is science. I don't expect perfection but hand waving the fact a power sword ignores armor because it's sheathed in "eldrich energy" isn't even trying.

That isn't to say I don't like 40k. I just don't think it is science fiction. Future fantasy perhaps but when the best example of science is the cargo cult example found in the Adeptus Mechanus well, your universe. . .

There are plenty of science based weapons and gadgets. You mentioned the bolter which is based on the gyrojet handgun. There is actual science in how that weapon works. Lasguns are another great example, the technology there is pretty self-explanatory. Sure there's some fantasy but alot of actual technology. Servitors are just cyborgs, something you see in plenty of science fiction. The pathetic little space elves have hover tanks and we've worked to develop hover vehicles.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

There are plenty of science based weapons and gadgets. You mentioned the bolter which is based on the gyrojet handgun. There is actual science in how that weapon works. Lasguns are another great example, the technology there is pretty self-explanatory. Sure there's some fantasy but alot of actual technology. Servitors are just cyborgs, something you see in plenty of science fiction. The pathetic little space elves have hover tanks and we've worked to develop hover vehicles.

That the technology could conceivably exist is not the bit that makes it science fiction. The science bit is how you explain why the thing that currently doesn't work suddenly does. The Gyrojet projectile is an excellent example. On the small scale of a personal weapon, you don't really gain anything significant to justify the tremendous increase in cost and degradation in reliability of ammunition stores. High power directed energy weapons (Lasrifles, lascannons, plasma rifles, etc) have two problems - the power (solved with high energy density power packs) and the fact that no known material would survive the weapon being fired.

In most of the big areas the setting doesn't bother with explanation beyond some equivalent of divine intervention or magic. How one opens a gate into the warp for example. Why the astronomicon is useful for navigation in the warp. How the aforementioned signal propagates faster than light in a setting where faster than light anything is not actually possible. I don't need this explanation to enjoy the work; but when the work does not attempt to answer such things it isn't science fiction. It's just fiction.