Lynata said:
ak-73 said:
In the end, studio material trumps everything. Of course it is true that GW has retconned a lot of stuff already, and likely will do so in the future - but I can only go by what is most current. And the most current information on the setting simply happens to contain things I like, so I lobby to keep them, just as many of the Marine fans lobby against it because of what they would like to see - with the difference that I have GW's current fluff on my side.
That's good and fine as long as it doesn't get serious (like the debate about female space marines). Lobbying in here is irrelevant. Nobody at FFG will make a decision based on someone (including me) in here lobbying for or against something, at least not on something that fundamental. They either want the Space Marines to be much better than the SoBs or not. That is probably more guided by prospective sales than "artistic integrity" anyway.
Lynata said:
Here I see it not only contradicted but outright ignored or proclaimed as un-canon by some posters - in many cases likely due to a lack of detailed knowledge on the subject, as this kind of fluff isn't as omnipresent as the Astartes Awesomeness which gets emphasized all over the source material again and again. Given this problematic situation, I could even think that some FFG designers may be unaware of it, so who knows:
Okay, you have a point there. Chances are it was an intentional deviation though.
Lynata said:
me posting such citations and bits of fluff could very well end up clarifying some misconceptions if they take a look at threads such as these. Nobody can know every single detail of fluff that was churned out over the years, after all. If these changes truly are an intended retcon, though, then I have at least tried.
Then I have an advice for you: these long elaborate debates won't help your cause. Your actual arguments will drown in all the talk. With the goals you have in mind, it's better to use rapier than claymore. Be aware of your core argument and bring forth at the right occasion.
Sometimes less is more, Sister Lynata. 
Lynata said:
ak-73 said:
Maybe, though I don't believe that either GW or other BL authors will look at weapon or character stats. They'll look at locations, characters and events. You may be right that all of this is the beginning of a retcon, but it is just as likely that GW will continue on its old path, potentially directly contradicting the RPG (I'm primarily thinking of the true status of the Deathwatch here). For the time being we can only speculate, but I suppose we'll see that next year and after.
Right, that's why I talked of it as a possibility. In my estimation what might happen is that different authors will choose different interpretations depending on who is the protagonist of their novel. If you have an author who is a Deathwatch RPG player and fan, it probably will have an impact.
Alex

), and that she should just shut up and take it because, well, of COURSE this fluff trend is going to continue and of course it won't be contradicted in the future.