Ofcourse there is no "admech" per sé, as each forgeworld has their own ways of doing stuff.

I imagine a forgeworld that has been on the frontline for centuries* would have rituals and procedures focusing on time and production output, while some backwater FW would take a more slow and esoteric aproach.

* there was this sweet lil' piece in the HH epic rulebook about titans going into battle, straight from the asembly line, their holy ungents and paint still being wet.

Ah, but cursing denotes agitation -- a condition of the feeble human mind where cold logic is replaced by *shudder* emotional response and base instinct, increasing the capacity for error.

I get what you're saying, though. In the end, as with most things 40k, it comes down to personal preferences.. it's just not something I'd see working out in my version of the setting, where the AdMech would be too hardcore to let something like that slip through. Unless it was some sort of intentional sabotage, I suppose!

True, but they accecpt and believe that machine spirits can be angry.

I imagine a forgeworld that has been on the frontline for centuries* would have rituals and procedures focusing on time and production output, while some backwater FW would take a more slow and esoteric aproach.

Up to a point, sure. Just like the Ecclesiarchy has levels of tolerance to what it condones and where they bring down the hammer. But Servitors that seem capable of independent thought rather than relying entirely on the instructions they are given sound like a huge risk to me.

(and not very atmospheric either -- in my perception of the "spirit of 40k", servitors are quite simply robo-zombies, not cyborgs with an actual personality like, say, Seven of Nine .. to me, that's just too much into "Brighthammer" territory )

True, but they accecpt and believe that machine spirits can be angry.

Such as due to attempts to merge sacred tech with improperly prepared human subjects?

Yeah if you have free tought you are no servitor, that's where I draw the line (in my headcanon) Yeah they are robo-zombies as you put it. (Wich makes it all the more disturbing if you suddenly have one who goes "F*ck!" )

We need more novels about the admech instead of GW effin up the HH series.

Everything past and including an unremebered empire is starting to get to me. we got 3 whole legions on Macragge now (one of wich is suposed to be at the imperial palace by the time horus invades.) if the Blood angels can make it there in time why not the other two?

On the other hand daemonettes transforming themselves into the girl from The Ring is kinda cool. (Loli daemonettes, why am I not surprised?) Oh and wegonna get Sanguinius vs Nighthaunter in an upcomming novel. Sigh...

Honestly, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, ... there is a reason it's called the Abnettverse . No reason to assume a mistake when the author has a reputation of altering some details to suit his own ideas, especially in a franchise that is kind of notorious for authors doing this all the time.

Well. It doesn't look more like a servitor than any other specialised agents of the imperium, he doesn't acts like a duck, it doesn't sound like a servitor, it's not a servitor.

If the only thing close to a servitor in the book is the term "servitor", it isn't a servitor.

Even if we speak of the abnettverse, it's kinda easy as an answer

Ah, but cursing denotes agitation -- a condition of the feeble human mind where cold logic is replaced by *shudder* emotional response and base instinct, increasing the capacity for error.

Which all techpriests suffers from time to time, because they keep active parts of the brain to avert being Artificial Intelligence.

It's the same for servitors; they aren't complete robots, so they can still have some basic emotional responses, even if just as artefacts of their former selves.

If the only thing close to a servitor in the book is the term "servitor", it isn't a servitor.

Then perhaps the author should have used a term with a different connotation. Although this is not the only example of servitors with emotions like fear in his books.

And after having seen so many deviations between so many authors writing on this IP ... it's just his idea of the setting. No big deal, unless one expects it to conform more. I think that is the actual problem with these books.

Which all techpriests suffers from time to time, because they keep active parts of the brain to avert being Artificial Intelligence.

This may be a matter of interpretation, but in my mind the average Tech-Priest is much closer to a human than a servitor is.

As I mentioned above, I see the latter as robo-zombies. The AdMech clergy, on the other hand, may have "stunted" their levels of emotional response due to a regimen of religious/philosophical indoctrination and chemical treatment, but few of them will have taken parts out of their brain, and none of them have been lobotomised. Consequently, they are still capable of exerting a unique personality, complete with human feelings such as greed, anger, joy or fear. Indeed, otherwise there would be no religion.

I just don't see these things coming up in a servitor's mind. Not with how I envision them based on GW's codex description.

Then perhaps the author should have used a term with a different connotation

Agreed.

As I mentioned above, I see the latter as robo-zombies. The AdMech clergy, on the other hand, may have "stunted" their levels of emotional response due to a regimen of religious/philosophical indoctrination and chemical treatment, but few of them will have taken parts out of their brain, and none of them have been lobotomised. Consequently, they are still capable of exerting a unique personality, complete with human feelings such as greed, anger, joy or fear. Indeed, otherwise there would be no religion.

I don't know much in the domain of brain surgery, but isn't a lobotomy a small hit in the brain (certainly there are other means) but not ablations of part of said brains, while tech priest get ablations of great part of the brains. Servitors get some too, but my finality is: i don't think there is so much differences.

Only that the techpriests gets greater implants and much more freewill with those, while a servitor is at its basic physical and mental functions.

I think they can still suffer fear (like the one you mentionned in salvation's reach) or at least, artefacts of it.

We both agree that the case of servitor-pilot isn't at all, even we considering the possibility of them having some form of sentiments, is rather extreme. But I don't consider it to be a servitor.

It's like in many books where chapters were said to have primarchs, while they didn't. Authors do always terminological mistakes in their books. We must learn to just go pas them. The case of servitor-pilot is one in my opinion.

It's like in many books where chapters were said to have primarchs, while they didn't. Authors do always terminological mistakes in their books. We must learn to just go pas them. The case of servitor-pilot is one in my opinion.

Perhaps, yes, though it's a bit weird when it is a recurring issue.

As mentioned in the other thread, the author seems to apply a more "traditional" description of servitors whenever he describes them as a background element rather than as characters. It just seems as if as soon as he attaches a name to a servitor, they suddenly start behaving like humans.

I guess that makes it more an issue of consistency (or disassociation?) rather than his personal take on the setting, though. In other words, it could simply be a minor quirk of him as a writer, and it simply did not occur to him as he was typing away at a particularly thrilling moment in the story.

In the end, as pointed out above, it only really becomes a problem once you have people trying to proclaim a "canon", and suddenly these examples are used to justify emotional servitors. Dan Abnett being one of the most popular authors of Black Library could attach a weight to such arguments that they do not actually deserve.

I don't know much in the domain of brain surgery, but isn't a lobotomy a small hit in the brain (certainly there are other means) but not ablations of part of said brains, while tech priest get ablations of great part of the brains. Servitors get some too, but my finality is: i don't think there is so much differences.

Yeah, I guess I could have worded it better -- what I meant is that a lobotomy is carried out with the specific intent to change someone's very being. Psychosurgery. Whereas Tech-Priests would just receive implants to augment their abilities, with their personality still largely a result of their upbringing and education, and only little to no influence from surgery.

Where did you read the bit about ablations, though? I have to admit that this is new to me, but depending on the source I may have to adjust my interpretation.

Either way, I guess we are largely of one mind in regards to the difference, although the emotions described in the novel are still too much for my taste. In my mind, a servitor's fear would be very primal and instinctive, entirely disassociated from what actually happens around them -- for example, they might feel a hint of fear when subjected to pain, but they'd lack the mental capabilities to expect it. Kind of like a child that keeps touching the hot plate again and again because it doesn't remember.

Kind of like an auto-emotional response based on nerve-memory rather than situational analysis. The wiring is still there (and thus sensitive to stimulation), their cyberbrains just lack the ability to make the connection between what their brains see vs what their flesh feels.

And because of this, servitors were immune to psychological effects, back when this was still a thing in the tabletop rules.

I guess that makes it more an issue of consistency (or disassociation?) rather than his personal take on the setting, though. In other words, it could simply be a minor quirk of him as a writer, and it simply did not occur to him as he was typing away at a particularly thrilling moment in the story.

To me it's the same as when he describes as an autocanon something that is clearly a heavy stubber. But since both of these work on the same principles and are, in the end, heavy calibre guns, I can understand the mistake since he certainly didn't play the 40k game so the huge difference between a heavy stubber and an autocanon. To me it's just bad choices of words, and these bad choices are comon for many authors. The difference, in my opinion, is that number of authors don't write as many books as Abnett and so are pretty much in the case of "any 40k word is a unique word in my text", but when you become so prolific as this one, I can really see that even 40k words become commons and so, at risk of doing common mistakes.

Either way, I guess we are largely of one mind in regards to the difference, although the emotions described in the novel are still too much for my taste. In my mind, a servitor's fear would be very primal and instinctive, entirely disassociated from what actually happens around them -- for example, they might feel a hint of fear when subjected to pain, but they'd lack the mental capabilities to expect it. Kind of like a child that keeps touching the hot plate again and again because it doesn't remember.

I must admit that, as much as I'm a fan of Abnett's book, I didn't like Salvation's Reach (should reread it to give it another chance) and when it was over, I just didn't give more thoughts about it.

Where did you read the bit about ablations, though? I have to admit that this is new to me, but depending on the source I may have to adjust my interpretation.

Well, I frankly am not as "scientific" as you in my takes on the universes and can't tell you where it does come from. Is it in novels? In mechanicus BG? In DH? I don't remember.

But I'm pretty sure about informations like this, where tech-priest are more and more machine even in their brain, as long as there is still a human part left, this is okay.

Whereas Tech-Priests would just receive implants to augment their abilities, with their personality still largely a result of their upbringing and education, and only little to no influence from surgery.

Taking what I said above into account and considering that the priesthood consider cold logic as a better thing than emotional responses, considering that they have what it takes to limit these emotional reactions, I consider that they certainly do, and then, if they still have leadership test in TT or willpower test in RPG, I consider them to still being sensible to fear, and consider that servitors could, in a rather limited way (as we seems to agree) acts emotionaly.

But in the end, there is also this points between many of our discussions: I consider mankind in 40k doing the best stuff possibles with what they've got (like having super space marines since they've got already super good storm troopers, like we discussed earlier) and I consider it the same way, where I think you see 40k's humanity as degraded society, even close to an idiocracy (which is also very fitting and grimdark), so this is where I make some assumptions like this one.

Long story short, I think that logic still applies to humanity in this universe, even if they are hardpressed to give good results.

I'm not sure as to what extend the Mechanicus inhibits the emotions of its clergy; to me it always seemed like an ideal for the Tech Priests to aspire to on their own accord, similar to how Ecclesiarchy clerics are supposed to represent the tenets of their own religion. I'm just basing this primarily on individual Tech Priests' human qualities, though -- as much as they claim to be all about logic, their very religion is illogical (and emotional, as religion = veneration), not to mention the instances where said human qualities led them astray. In my interpretation of the setting, a servitor will never rebel against its creators but only do what it is being told, whereas a Tech Priest can absolutely scheme against his or her superiors, or even make a pact with Chaos.

But like you said, I guess this is just the small nuances the setting inspires in each of us, depending on what we see in the IP, or at the very least what we want to see in it. As you guessed, I'm interested in 40k for its uniquely dystopian atmosphere, and mankind being its own worst enemy (be it due to greed or zeal or arrogance) is a huge part of that.

That's not to say that everything needs to suck, obviously. Indeed, I am quite fond of the heroic aspects as well. It's just all about the particular balance, and the darker the world, the brighter the flames of purity. It's all interconnected, anyways: the Sororitas wouldn't be able to focus their religious zeal if it were not for the insane, quasi-masochistic devotion to the cruel tenets of their faith, and the Space Marines wouldn't be able to strike as hard as they do if their deployment would be governed by a more reasonable administration concerned about stuff like "rules of engagement" and "collateral damage" like they are a thing in modern warfare.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, in a twist of irony, it is the bad things that make the good things possible in the first place.