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

[Shymer]

I think it's debateable whether WH40K is a story. It's a setting. The criteria for a good setting and a good story are different.

I think WH40K is a good setting for the following reasons:
* Strong coherent visual style
* Plot inherent in the dynamic of the setting
* Specific themes with definite ascendent values
* Unlike everyday life but...
* ... familiar enough to understand and project yourself into
* Space and scope for stories of many different types

The setting seems not to appeal to you. I can understand that. The themes of constant war, inexorable descent into chaos/corruption and doomed heroism can overwhelm a weak storyline and, if consumed without breaks, can lead you to being 'fed up' quite easily.

Is the setting over the top? Yes. The WH40K visual style starts with a gothic sensibility - cathedrals, vaults, butresses, vertical exaggeration and majesty but multiplied to a galactic scale as a visual metaphor for the settings' principal (human) political system. Everything else in the setting's style riffs off of that. It may not be your taste.

Is it misogynistic? I am not especially well qualified to judge on whether a setting can be misogynistic. The visual representations of many of the women in the setting are overtly sexualised. The principal human political systems are exclusively patriarchal. Where they do appear, women are in subordinate roles, usually answering to men. You could argue that the exaggeration of the patriarchy is so great to be parody or cultural comment. It would not be too far off to imagine that many of the characters (male and female) in the WH40K universe would be misogynists. Outside of that - some of the artwork is embarrassing.

That's not to say that you can't write powerful stories in this setting. However - you would need to set up the characters with care so the readers can identify with them, that they have flaws and weaknesses that they struggle with, and that you can care about whether they win or lose. If you are looking for that quality in a setting, then I think you may be looking in the wrong place.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

I felt like commenting in this thread, quoting specific people, arguing specific points... But forget that.

You know what I hate about most people who dislike Warhammer 40,000? You're virtually all ignorant of what's actually popular in the setting, instead basing your opinions on the excitable reports of the over-the-top stuff that is more often than not a framing device.

You don't know about Gaunt's Ghosts, or anything Dan Abnett writes about. You don't know about the comedy stuff that gets inserted and still made canon. You don't know how much of the stuff was originally put in as parody. You don't realise that the entire point of a setting that big and generally unchanging is that you can make your own characters, stories and planets, tuck them away in some small section of the galaxy and then do whatever you like with them. I had a conversation with a friend who insisted that Warhammer 40K isn't about good charactters and I gave him some counter-examples. He wouldn't listen, he just wanted to say "That was what he'd heard" and so he was sticking on it.

You take the setting however you like, as serious grim dark, as satire, as bleak yet hopeful, or anything else.

You confuse "I'm not willing to make the time investment required to dig out the potentially good stuff on something I don't like the sound of" with "It's all bad". I don't have a problem with the former view; there are plenty of areas that I expect have some things that I would like but I'm not willing to go looking for them, such as animé (I realise that's not quite the same, as one is a setting and the other is a genre, but you get my point). But you still insist on coming along and telling all the Warhammer fans that it's a setting with no hope and nothing but evil characters and then ignoring everyone who gives examples to the contrary.

 

[deathbydeath]

The problem I see with WH40K is that everyone is grim and dark, ALL THE TIME. This makes them just whiny bitches, not characters you can relate to.

Well, whether that is good or bad depends on if you want to relate to them, right? I can think of other works where you can't relate to the character, and yet they are still well received. Sponge Bob Squarepants, for example is sort of on the other end of the scale. I'm enjoying the spectacle, so to say, rather than try to unearth qualities in WH40K, I'm not actually after to have fun.

I'm not talking about having fun. Jim Sterling covered this pretty good. Where everyone is grim and dark all the time and that becomes the norm, then you stop noticing that the game is dark and grim. To have sadness you need happyness.

True, and there is quite a bit of happiness. Not MLP happiness, but a "Theory of Courage" kind of happiness. Take the novel Fifteen Hours for example. At it's basic level, it's about Larn, a new recruit into the Imperial Guard who is accidentally thrust into a frozen hell called "Bucheroc" (I think), and he learns that the average lifespan on Bucheroc is fifteen hours. Grim, right? Not really, actually, as from there, it evolves into a "coming of age" story, where Larn's illusions of hope and grandeur are smashed and rebuilt in order to survive a semi-literal hell. It's thinly-veiled commentary on the nature of religion, but (spoilers) Larn dies at the end, having lived on Bucheroc for about twentyish hours, and in his eyes, he conquered hell and dies peacefully and content.

What bugs me is when people only define 40k in terms of "big manly men killing aliens with chainsaws on sticks", because the universe is so much bigger than that. It's about the glory of war, in both the rewards and the costs. Warhammer 40,000 is the epitome of the Theory of Courage, and in that respect, it's not that dark at all.

 

[deathbydeath]

On misogyny: Honestly don't see it. Space Marines (despite the name) are basically space-monks (all male) and there's a corresponding faction of space-nuns (all female) There are few female guard models because of miniature match-up and mold issues (issues which can be alleiviated if you really need to) Orks reproduce by spores so technically there AREN'T any girls or guys(yes, i know they call themselves 'boyz', shut up)

The treatment of the SoB is sometimes alarming; they seem to exist in order to be massacred and/or raped by Dark Eldar.

Blame Matt Ward. Seriously, it's all his fault.

http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Matthew_Ward#Also_Misogyny

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

The treatment of the SoB is sometimes alarming; they seem to exist in order to be massacred and/or raped by Dark Eldar.

Blame Matt Ward. Seriously, it's all his fault.

http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Matthew_Ward#Also_Misogyny

Always blame Matt Ward. Always.

Spoiler

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

The treatment of the SoB is sometimes alarming; they seem to exist in order to be massacred and/or raped by Dark Eldar.

Blame Matt Ward. Seriously, it's all his fault.

http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Matthew_Ward#Also_Misogyny

Yeah, that's bad. Really, really bad. A while back I actually re-read a copy of White Dwarf where they were interviewing Matt Ward about the new Grey Knights codex, and in that they specifically note that he seems to be getting over excited about the Sisters of Battle snuff-stuff. Yes, that's right. The official Games Workshop magazine mentioned that Matt Ward is creepy as fuck about that stuff.

*Snip*

I just wanted to say that I completely agree with your post, and I also wanted to pull out a specific bit of it for discussion:

Is it misogynistic? I am not especially well qualified to judge on whether a setting can be misogynistic. The visual representations of many of the women in the setting are overtly sexualised. The principal human political systems are exclusively patriarchal. Where they do appear, women are in subordinate roles, usually answering to men. You could argue that the exaggeration of the patriarchy is so great to be parody or cultural comment. It would not be too far off to imagine that many of the characters (male and female) in the WH40K universe would be misogynists. Outside of that - some of the artwork is embarrassing.

It's a real shame that there is plenty of misogynistic content put out, given that in theory there's not a single Imperial institution that cares about someone's gender, apart from the Space Marines and Sisters of Battle. Sadly this doesn't show outside of the written fluff, mainly due to general laziness.

 

[Scow2]

People fail to realize that Warhammer 40k DOESN'T take itself seriously. The joke in on anyone who does. That said, you can still have 100% Serious-but-silly lore discussions about it. You just have to take it all at face value.

Of course, I don't see it quite as GRIMDARK as people make it out to be. There are a LOT of "Flashes of Light" that stand out in the GRIM DARKNESS OF THE 41st MILLENIUM. Most of them are ridiculously large explosions, though.

The grimness isn't supposed to have weight, as far as I can tell. The death of a million isn't even a statistic. It's an "Oops". And I'd say it's fun BECAUSE it's so "Childish". It's a game. It's a fantasy. When all games and fantasy "Grow up", I won't want to live on this planet anymore. Being an adult is way too serious, boring, stuck-up, and depressing to put up with 100% of the time.

 

[Hazy]

So, what is everyone's favorite chapter of the glorious Imperium of Man?

Heretics and xenos need not apply.

 

[Zantos]

The problem is though, at the time of posting the things he laid out as problems were only subjective problems. You can't refute that it's over the top, or that it's overly violent, or that it's awfully bleak. It is, but whether or not you think that's a problem is subjective, and if he doesn't like that sort of thing then there is nothing anyone can say to persuade him otherwise.

Those aren't subjective, simply undefined; you would just have to arrive to an agreed upon definition of what constitutes being over the top, overly violent, and awfully bleak. This doesn't seem like it would be hard as most defenders seem to cite this as a positive. Again, whether or not you like it is indeed subjective.

The only thing really that I could dispute was that 90% of the characters are jackasses (mild paraphrasing?), though when I have absolutely no idea how he came to that conclusion beyond him looking them up on the wiki, it's really difficult to back up why I'd disagree with that with any common source material. And that's before the ones that really are jackasses, but in the context that's part of the appeal of the character.

I happen to agree and would back up the general level of jackassery with two examples.

1: Calgar stops to ponder whether that artillery strike is going to obliterate him or not. Only then will he allow himself to make the choice to get into a nearby foxhole. That's jackass behavior.

2: The opening to both Dawn of War games.

2-A: They charged uphill for no reason at an entrenched enemy, with heavy weapons, to engage in close combat, with an enemy who has a terrain advantage and excels in close-quarters combat.

2-B: Brightly colored giants walk noisily towards an enemy who excels at ambushes and tactical thinking. They noisily report in, verbally confirm the intent to snipe an enemy commander with a weapon ill-suited for that task, while standing in the open wearing brightly colored suits...and are surprised when they're ambushed.

On the first point, why do we need to define it when we all agree it is all of those things? The difference is whether you see that as being a pro or a con.

On the second point, I think we're working on different definitions of jackass here. I can't speak for DoW2 having never played it, but the others I don't really see how you can call it jackass, that's more just the different perspective of genetically engineered super-humans who fear absolutely nothing, have the glorious future prospects of die in war or die in other war, and can recover from injuries that would kill normal people instantly. Calgar just looks at a situation and thinks "what's the best thing to do here?". As for Dawn of War, that was a 2 minute cinematic where they needed to fulfil their death quota, to a game where if you actually do that you will lose very quickly. I'm fairly sure the codex astartes has a lot to say about entrenched enemies and being outnumbered.

 

[Zantos]

So, what is everyone's favorite chapter?

Heretics and xenos need not apply.

The Grey Knights chapter! Blind faith and unreasonable hatred!

Hatred! Huzzah!

Also I like the way they bling out their power armour.

 

[Griffolion]

-snip-

You're right about it being ridiculously dark and hopeless. I find my fascination with the world/lore of 40K to be the depth and detail 30 years of development has brought it. The Black Library books have some such a long way, and I love how much they expand into characters, events and races.

You're right about the Misogyny, female characters are limited, though I can think of one or two in books I've read that have played major roles and aren't just there for a sexual aspect. But then again, I imagine the creators are all guys into nerdy stuff with little female influence to balance things out. I think the race that really puts females on a truly even keel with males is Tau, with Eldar coming in a close second. There are female heroes in the Imperium, but they are mostly hugely masculinated.

There are some "good" characters that I've come across, take a look at Justicar Alaric in the Grey Knights series of books. He's a Grey Knight space marine, so he's got no problem in killing just about anything for the Emperor, but he does stick to his convictions and is loyal to his brothers in battle. Also, if you take a look at the Ultra Marine chapter, the worlds they are in charge of generally flourish, because their creed holds tightly to protecting the people and helping them. Granted, this may be to aid their recruiting process, but many chapters recruit deliberately off barren, harsh worlds to get the fiercest warriors. So you do get some glimmers of niceness in there.

But yeah, according to the lore as it stands right now, Tyranids (and by proxy, Ctan) win. No contest. And that takes some fun out of it.

The Grey Knights chapter! Blind faith and unreasonable hatred!

Hatred! Huzzah!

Also I like the way they bling out their power armour.

Umm, pretty much every race save for the Tyranids (because they aren't able to feel it) are defined by unreasonable hate. Maybe the Eldar just want to survive and be left alone, but even they have no trouble re-directing Tyranid hive fleets to human worlds just so it misses a craft world.

Also, they don't just "bling" out their armour, it's the best armour the Imperium has to offer. Not only can they no longer actually make any more due to the forging techniques being forgotten, they psychically seal them with protective wards, basically making the armour totally anti-demon. The armour does look good though, they really take the turtle neck to the next level.

 

[TheRussian]

Everything about Warhammer 40K is so aggressively juvenile that it's hard to take anything about it seriously. Opinions are opinions, but your opinions can be wrong.

 

[Seventh Actuality]

It's a backdrop so players can keep having massive battles with each other and a variety of colourful factions without the status quo ever changing and nothing really at stake past the end of every game. You're not supposed to care who wins in the long run, because nobody is ever going to win. There's nothing personal about it, it's there to make things more interesting for the players of the actual game. There's a reason all the good 40k books are set either in the distant past when things weren't as insane, or set on a small scale that focuses on the characters rather than the wider universe.

It's a setting, not a story.

 

[Frankster]

and obviously caters to younger males

Fun fact, all of my friends who are into 40k are female xD Sexism argument i must say is very silly though, 40k is one of the most gender equal universes there are in regards that kickass female warriors aint unusual anymore then having powerful female leaders in command of vast armies.

Ive learnt long ago theres no point trying to defend 40k though, remember when yatzee ranted and said some untrue things people were happy to mindlessly repeat and bash on 40k for all sorts of reasons (i was taken aback by the outright hostility at the time, didnt realize 40k was so hated by some so intensely especially considering how on this kinda site one would assume we all are fans of some setting that can be equally derived as puerile and silly to the casual onlooker). 40k is an easy target it seems to take potshots at, especially for the unintiated.

I think the race that really puts females on a truly even keel with males is Tau, with Eldar coming in a close second. There are female heroes in the Imperium, but they are mostly hugely masculinated.

Gonna have to disagree, especially with your curious choice of tau as being the most gender equal. Eldar,dark eldar, imperials then tau would be correct order. Which leaves races like orks and nids who cant qualify for obvious reasons. Not that im looking for a fluff argument here but yeh disagree with you big time.

You know what I hate about most people who dislike Warhammer 40,000? You're virtually all ignorant of what's actually popular in the setting, instead basing your opinions on the excitable reports of the over-the-top stuff that is more often than not a framing device.

QFT. I guess haters gonna hate indeed.

 

[Da Orky Man]

Some Warhammer 40k book: Space Marine XX2365 (Why would they even have names? Hitman bar codes would be more efficient for a clone army, yes?)

They aren't cloned; each Space Marine is an actual individual. Alse, when telling the stories of your forebears and legends, bar-codes aren't very catch names.

has to stop Chaos marines from getting If he doesn't, hundreds of thousands of nameless, voiceless, lifeless, easily replaceable cookie cutter space marines will die. Should he succeed, the war continues on in it's regular state with the greater conflict at hand going unresolved or not advanced in any visible way.

A rather... cut down way of saying it, but fair enough. But why would the war change? That was just one siege of the thousands going one. One planet amongst the millions. Who wins would have arse-all effect on the war because the war is so unimaginable vast.

 

[DrOswald]

Admittedly this might be due to over-exposure from a friend who won't shut the hell up about it, but I really can't see the appeal of the story of Warhammer 40K. (I emphasize story because the games are pretty fun gameplay wise)

The entire setting seems like a big case of Darkness Induced Audience Apathy [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DarknessInducedAudienceApathy].

I read through some wiki pages and listened to my friends and have played enough of the games to know the basic premise and factions; and I couldn't give less of rats ass who wins. 90% of the characters are jackasses and the ones who aren't are probably dead knowing this setting, and that's not getting into how there are no actually "good" or even "meh" characters.

Hell reading the wiki alone made me feel uncomfortable, there's no hope, its overly violent and its practically childish; something an "edgy" thirteen year old would make up.

Not to mention its a tad misogynistic (Such as there being limited female soldiers that aren't part of the female only faction, the eldar or the dark eldar) and obviously caters to younger males. (Something that irks me to no end)

Can someone explain the appeal of this universe to me? Because to me it all seems over the top and plain stupid.

The setting of Warhammer 40,000 is ridiculous and shallow at the core. "Lets see how extremely over the top we can make everything" is not a strong premise for making a great narrative. What it is good for is maximizing rule of cool opportunities, fun jokes, and an entertaining back story for a war game. With a premise this shallow it all depends on if you enjoy the superficial elements on display. But that is the nature of a shallow premise. And I personally think that is ok. Not everything has to be deep to be interesting and not everything has to appeal to everyone. I think the problem here is that you are not within the target audience but you think you are.

 

[barbzilla]

Admittedly this might be due to over-exposure from a friend who won't shut the hell up about it, but I really can't see the appeal of the story of Warhammer 40K. (I emphasize story because the games are pretty fun gameplay wise)

The entire setting seems like a big case of Darkness Induced Audience Apathy [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DarknessInducedAudienceApathy].

I read through some wiki pages and listened to my friends and have played enough of the games to know the basic premise and factions; and I couldn't give less of rats ass who wins. 90% of the characters are jackasses and the ones who aren't are probably dead knowing this setting, and that's not getting into how there are no actually "good" or even "meh" characters.

Hell reading the wiki alone made me feel uncomfortable, there's no hope, its overly violent and its practically childish; something an "edgy" thirteen year old would make up.

Not to mention its a tad misogynistic (Such as there being limited female soldiers that aren't part of the female only faction, the eldar or the dark eldar) and obviously caters to younger males. (Something that irks me to no end)

Can someone explain the appeal of this universe to me? Because to me it all seems over the top and plain stupid.

I will try to answer your question as best I can. I will break it down into multiple points though, just to make it easier.

1: The story was written in as an after thought to the board game. The board game was nothing but war and while the factions had back stories and a nice little blurb about how and why they function, the real story aspect was done by the players. Eventually W40k became popular enough that they decided to write books to accompany them (think magic the gathering), their target audience being the fans. As such the stories didn't need to be Pulitzer material, they only had to be entertaining enough to please the people who were already engrossed into the core material.

2: Popularity grew and it began to put more pressure on the writers to come up with deep story lines. Yet they couldn't retcon all that they had done thus far, so they decided to extrapolate on that. This led to the dark, "no hope", and violent setting you see today.

3: Many people like a story where there is no clear cut good guy, and hope may not be a readily available commodity. Just look at the gritty Noir films/books, these have been immensely successful. The writers may be trying to pander to this group, or it may just be that they are a fan of that genre themselves. Either way, they aren't poorly written (the books anyway) it may just be a style of writing you don't like (Kind of like how I hate books written in the first person).

So everything combines together and you end up with the writers hands being forced into making a more elaborate story out of what was essentially a glorified board game back story. The writers then realized how popular the IP was becoming and stepped up their work to actual novels with a fair amount of detail. In the end we landed on what equates to a gritty space war noir story series. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it just might not be your thing.

 

[Scow2]

So I guess we should blow up the earth because our lives are pointless and stupid

Lol

At what point did I say our actual real lives were pointless and stupid? At what point was that even relevent. How about you don't shove words in my mouth?



Since you're not getting what i'm saying let me give you a clear cut example of what i'm talking about.

Some Warhammer 40k book: Space Marine XX2365 (Why would they even have names? Hitman bar codes would be more efficient for a clone army, yes?) has to stop Chaos marines from getting If he doesn't, hundreds of thousands of nameless, voiceless, lifeless, easily replaceable cookie cutter space marines will die. Should he succeed, the war continues on in it's regular state with the greater conflict at hand going unresolved or not advanced in any visible way.

This is a problem I had with Mass Effect 2 actually (since you seem so keen on bringing it up), At the end of 2 Shepard is right where we left him off during the first one, nothing in regards to the greater plot was advanced in anyway, Shepard just wasted a fuck ton of time messing around with generic looking alien things.

There's only one cure for nihilism. What you're arguing against Warhammer 40k could be applied to any setting, even "The real world". Why should we care what wars are fought or what nations rise or fall on this insignificant blue rock, since none of that will matter in a couple thousand years? Likewise, Warhammer 40k's stories, while taking place on an infinite backdrop. What you're failing to realize about the 41st millenium is arguing things are "Pointless" in it is the same as arguing things are pointless in our own world. Why does the life of a farmer out in Montana matter to anyone? World Hunger is never going to be solved!

The space marines have names because they are still people, with their own quirks, foibles, and personalities. Why do you bother having a name? You're just Escapist Forum poster.

 

[MrFalconfly]

So far the only thing about 40k that I like besides some of the games (Dawn of War was good, and so was Space Marine) would be the tech (that is, the proper tech, not all the Warp augmented or Psycked up weapons).

I mean how awesome would a real life Tau Pulse Rifle be (most of the tech exists today. Magnetized acceleration? Check, just look at the Railgun or any of the atom-smashers. Plasma? Check, VASIMR engine uses plasma and we know how to make and control it, albeit in large scale)?!?