I wonder what would the new Imperial Guard for TT 40k mean for Only War. What are the chances that Shield of Humanity was pushed because of incorporating the new fluff/units (there ARE bullgryns and SoH will feature abhumans).

Anyone considered the RP possibilities of the name change. Particularly if in character the Guardsmen don't realise they are officially the Astra Militarium.

For example imagine the scene in a court marshall for desertion where the Commissar prosecutor says 'Do you not respect rhe fine traditions of the Astra Militarium'

Guardsman 'I don't know nothing about belonging to no Astra Miliwhatsum'

Commissar 'See! The accused even admits he no longer believes he belongs to the Astra Militarium what more proof do you need of his guilt'

Or the confusion that a commanding officer from a fuedal world has when he is told four companies of Astra Militarium have arrived on his left flank and he begins moving troops to defend that flank. The Commissar is dead so maybe a nearby PC should tactifully explain what's what.

I wonder what would the new Imperial Guard for TT 40k mean for Only War. What are the chances that Shield of Humanity was pushed because of incorporating the new fluff/units (there ARE bullgryns and SoH will feature abhumans).

To a certain degree, the fluff is and remains a matter of picking and choosing - for FFG, too. An example that might be somewhat similar to the situation you are proposing might be the Daemon Hunter supplement, which did include the new Dreadknight unit, but ignored the introduction of Warp Sorcery for the Grey Knights as a means to protect themselves against corruption and fight against the forces of Chaos.

So there is a chance that new units might show up, but the name "change" (or addition) is left out.

The final decision, as always, rests with the group and their GM.

I wonder what would the new Imperial Guard for TT 40k mean for Only War. What are the chances that Shield of Humanity was pushed because of incorporating the new fluff/units (there ARE bullgryns and SoH will feature abhumans).

To a certain degree, the fluff is and remains a matter of picking and choosing - for FFG, too. An example that might be somewhat similar to the situation you are proposing might be the Daemon Hunter supplement, which did include the new Dreadknight unit, but ignored the introduction of Warp Sorcery for the Grey Knights as a means to protect themselves against corruption and fight against the forces of Chaos.

So there is a chance that new units might show up, but the name "change" (or addition) is left out.

The final decision, as always, rests with the group and their GM.

I take the view that certain unit choices might simply represent the equivilent of urban legends rather than actual things.

So for example I am not really a fan of much of the Grey Knight fluff in the GW codex (Draigo in particular) so I just take that as wild rumours perhaps within the Ordo Malleus (Not many people even know about the Grey kngiths full stop. So rumours are quite rare I should imagine).

The other one is Centurians. I'm not really loving them as a concept. In my own head I've taken the view that there were maybe a dozen of these suits and they belonged to a Chapter called the Centurians. After a particularly epic battle when they fought alongside Guard the whole thing got blown out of all proportion and now certain members including officers in the Guard believe that all Space Marine Chapters can field these 'Centurian' suits.

That's my take on it anyway.

Perfectly valid - GW employees themselves came out stating that this is how the books are meant to be read (see the quote from Black Library head editor Marc Gascogne in Aaron Dembski-Bowden's post here ).

Though the Centurions I actually like, and would even expand their use to other Imperial forces. At the same time, I feel that the simple addition of anything so important as new vehicles or equipment unnecessarily puts the feeling of stagnation within 40k at risk. With Centurions, they were at least clever enough to do it retroactively, stating they've been in use for thousands of years already, but the action as a whole may still put people off simply because it "feels new" and it changes how your possibly favourite faction looks like...

Perfectly valid - GW employees themselves came out stating that this is how the books are meant to be read (see the quote from Black Library head editor Marc Gascogne in Aaron Dembski-Bowden's post here ).

Though the Centurions I actually like, and would even expand their use to other Imperial forces. At the same time, I feel that the simple addition of anything so important as new vehicles or equipment unnecessarily puts the feeling of stagnation within 40k at risk. With Centurions, they were at least clever enough to do it retroactively, stating they've been in use for thousands of years already, but the action as a whole may still put people off simply because it "feels new" and it changes how your possibly favourite faction looks like...

I read that dakka dakka thread from the beginning. It's funny how things can get quite heated over stories!

The interesting thing is since I was about 6 I've been interested in mythology, particularly Greek mythology. In many of the Greek myths, or at least the English translations they'll begin by saying something like.....

'Jason was born of Rheo although the Athenians insist his mother was Polymede while the Thebans say it was Theognete daughter of [bLAH BLAH]'

So I never had any problem with realising that the WH40K background was a set of myths and legends not a ongoing consistant universe.

Very well said! Unfortunately, years ago I was not as wise - though this was because I came to 40k being used to much stricter canon policies from other IPs (such as Star Wars), and because virtually everyone back then kept telling me that all the official material is indeed supposed to create a consistent setting. I don't know where or how this "urban rumour" started, but I can only assume that, at some point in time, people must have made the very same mistake as me, but in addition to this presented this belief as fact rather than assumption. Cue the avalanche.

Needless to say, I was both confused and angry at all the inconsistencies, and it was not until I started trying to find statements from people actually working for GW that I found out the truth. Nowadays I'm less angry at GW & Co. but more at the fans who still "don't get it" and keep confusing others who are new to the franchise. For all its value as an index, the Lexicanum wiki is part of the problem, considering how often people turn to it as a source of "knowledge".

Looking back, it was a bit stupid of me to be so naive, but as ADB said, a bit of fault might lie with GW itself for not being more clear/obvious with it.

Once you know how they think about their material, it becomes a lot easier and even fun to "read between the lines". For example, the newest core rulebook of the tabletop has a timeline whose foreword ends on the notion that Imperial history "as currently termed and understood" has been subject to "many adjustments, by revisionists from the Adeptus Ministorum, the Inquisition, and some say the High Lords of Terra themselves".

My view is that there is an objective truth in the 40k universe, but that everything we are presented with in terms of background is of questionable value in revealing it. The better 40k writers leave themselves a good deal of "wriggle room", if only because the setting is now so detailed that one runs into contradictions wherever one looks.

Incidentally, I think it is fascinating to watch the arguments over what is "Canon" and what isn't. I think that the squabbles over what is "true" in shared multi-author universes like 40k, Star Wars, Star Trek etc must reveal some deep inner insight as to how humanity creates and orders shared mythologies in general, and religions in particular.

There are notable purposive parallels between the 16th century Council of Trent (which attempted to decide which religious texts were "canonical" and as such made it into the bible) and the more recent attempts by the Lucasfilm Story Group to decide which parts of the massive and unwieldy Star Wars "expanded universe" will be jettisoned to make a new Star Wars movie workable.

There's a PhD Thesis in this, I reckon: "Canon and Apocrypha: From Genesis to Star Wars. A history of attempts to rationalise and categorise shared multi-author worldviews."

My view is that there is an objective truth in the 40k universe, but that everything we are presented with in terms of background is of questionable value in revealing it. The better 40k writers leave themselves a good deal of "wriggle room", if only because the setting is now so detailed that one runs into contradictions wherever one looks.

Incidentally, I think it is fascinating to watch the arguments over what is "Canon" and what isn't. I think that the squabbles over what is "true" in shared multi-author universes like 40k, Star Wars, Star Trek etc must reveal some deep inner insight as to how humanity creates and orders shared mythologies in general, and religions in particular.

There are notable purposive parallels between the 16th century Council of Trent (which attempted to decide which religious texts were "canonical" and as such made it into the bible) and the more recent attempts by the Lucasfilm Story Group to decide which parts of the massive and unwieldy Star Wars "expanded universe" will be jettisoned to make a new Star Wars movie workable.

There's a PhD Thesis in this, I reckon: "Canon and Apocrypha: From Genesis to Star Wars. A history of attempts to rationalise and categorise shared multi-author worldviews."

It is a common human desire to take the limited information we know and the facts we remember and craft an ordered narrative from that. It is not just myths or religion either, much of the study of history is the same. Amazingly even science (the history of science is particularly prone to this), practised as it is of course by humans, is not immune to this effect though luckly by the nature of the discipline it mitigates much of the problem.

For example my sister did a degree in the History and Philosephy of Science. She explained to me that the development of the dispute between Galileo and the Papcy is quite fascinating, simply because how it is understood now is fairly different both in content and nuance to what the issue was at the time.

To give a present day example one of the main arguments used to support anthropgenic climate change amongst the general population is that 97% of climate scientists are of the concensus that it exists. Really this is an appeal to canon/authority rather than an argument based on a particular scientific fact. Now it is probably a reasonable appeal given that it refers to people who we trust have studied the subject but it is not fundamentally a scientific argument.

(Disclaimer I do believe in man made climate change however ones personal opinion or scientific reasons for or against this subject is NOT the point of the preceeding paragraph. NOT trying to start a discussion, let alone an argument, about climate change just using it as an illustration of how humans naturally gravitate towards narratives rather than a constant stream of facts to help us inform our world view).

I am reading a book at the moment called 'Against the Gods' It is about the devlopment of risk management and also the modern numbering system. It is quite fascinating that what we take for granted was completly unknown to some of the greatest mathamtical minds across Europe.

Humans are phenomenal at spotting patterns and acting on them. At the moment we are even better than a computer. Our memories however are kind of sketchy all things considered. It is not surprising therefore that we naturally gravitate towards taking known facts, linking them and then making assumptions to fill in the blanks. In fact in that respect GW are probably presenting the most realistic account of a shared author world history than many other fictional universes.

Whether or not it effects your game (beyond whether you, as GM, bothering to include the name change) essentially comes down to whether or not the characters speak High Gothic or only Low Gothic. Speaking High Gothic is fairly rare among the IG (or AM) so you might imagine they aren't going to notice the difference unless they are dealing with characters for other organisations.

This has been fascinating. Thanks for sharing that link, Lynata, it was fascinating.

Astra Militarum? Eh, I don't like the name. Would rather it was something else high gothicy.

Changing the name to something in High Gothic? Yeah, I'm down. I never liked that they didn't have a fancy name like the Arbites and the Sororitas anyway.

This has been fascinating. Thanks for sharing that link, Lynata, it was fascinating.

Astra Militarum? Eh, I don't like the name. Would rather it was something else high gothicy.

Changing the name to something in High Gothic? Yeah, I'm down. I never liked that they didn't have a fancy name like the Arbites and the Sororitas anyway.

That's what gets me too. I really like the idea of changing the names of the Imperial Guard, the Imperial Navy and the Commissariat.

But Astra Militarium sounds stupid in relation to naming conventions.

Apparently the Commissariat is now the Ordo Prefectus.

Ordo Prefectus? By naming conventions, Ordo is a prefix for the Orders of the Emperor's Inquisition, nothing else.

I have no idea what they were thinking. There's a sea of possibilities, and they opt for confusing, nonsensical options.

I miss the likes of Pete Haines, Gav Thorpe, Andy Chambers, Alessio Cavatore, Owen Rees and others that contributed to the 40K background in meaningful and thoughtful ways. The writers these days...it's like they went out and hired a bunch of virgins-to-the-setting fanboiz and set them loose with a pocket copy of the 40K thesaurus.

I miss the likes of Pete Haines, Gav Thorpe, Andy Chambers, Alessio Cavatore, Owen Rees and others that contributed to the 40K background in meaningful and thoughtful ways. The writers these days...it's like they went out and hired a bunch of virgins-to-the-setting fanboiz and set them loose with a pocket copy of the 40K thesaurus.

I don't disagree with that at all (there has been a lot of bad writing lately), but it doesn't take into account the detrimental effects of corporate meddling on the IP- and rest assured, the change from 'Imperial Guard' to- ugh - 'Astra Militarium' was a corporate-level decision (driven by the desire to copyright every aspect of the setting), and not something driven by the writers.

I don't play 40K nearly as often as I'd like, but one thing that sort of scares me, for the next few years, is when other people who've been playing at least as long as me will call it Astra Militarum, and worse, when some newb says it. I'll say Imperial Guard, they'll ask "what's that? what are you talking about?", and I will just up and leave that room for a while. Certainly, it's not a real-life big issue, but it will happen, and at one of my rare social gatherings, trying to color the whole event with sadness.

This has been fascinating. Thanks for sharing that link, Lynata, it was fascinating.

Astra Militarum? Eh, I don't like the name. Would rather it was something else high gothicy.

Changing the name to something in High Gothic? Yeah, I'm down. I never liked that they didn't have a fancy name like the Arbites and the Sororitas anyway.

That's what gets me too. I really like the idea of changing the names of the Imperial Guard, the Imperial Navy and the Commissariat.

But Astra Militarium sounds stupid in relation to naming conventions.

Apparently the Commissariat is now the Ordo Prefectus.

Ordo Prefectus? By naming conventions, Ordo is a prefix for the Orders of the Emperor's Inquisition, nothing else.

I have no idea what they were thinking. There's a sea of possibilities, and they opt for confusing, nonsensical options.

Just like the storm troopers, sorry, Militarum Tempestus, are called 'Ordo Tempestus'.

Gee, nice way to water down the importance of the Ordo Hereticus/Malleus/Xeno and the other branches fo the Inquisition by having any and every organization bearing the title Ordo.

I was very much confused when storm troopers became "Militarum Tempestus". I was even more confused when they got a whole codex for a half a squad of soldiers, and an APC. Really?

...I was even more confused when they got a whole codex for a half a squad of soldiers, and an APC. Really?

Yeah, that's really dialing the Corporate Greed up to 11. As if it's not bad enough that the rulebook is an eye-popping $75US and Codexes are $50 (minimum requirements to play the game, which should logically be as close to 'free' as possible to attract new players), now we have a whole Codex for one squad ...

Not that they would've necessarily charged much less, but I really expected the Storm Trooper Codex to be like the Inquisition book, as in digital only. It's a lot to pay for a book that doesn't do much (not that I've actually seen in it, so I could be wrong, but I bet not), with a group partly meant to be for a bigger army. Oh well, at least IG Codex is finally coming out, even if with the new name. I look very forward to what they do with some things, what they changed, added, and such. Some hopeful relics, and unique Warlord traits.

As something for the FFG game, I wonder how well the Wyvern works in? I've never given mortars much love, but the appearance of the Wyvern makes me happy, and maybe the quad heavy mortar (two twin-linked heavy mortars, I presume) will be very nasty/effective. A nice defensive regiment that holds structures with stuff like that, or takes them from others, with these and Basies.

Not that they would've necessarily charged much less, but I really expected the Storm Trooper Codex to be like the Inquisition book, as in digital only. It's a lot to pay for a book that doesn't do much (not that I've actually seen in it, so I could be wrong, but I bet not), with a group partly meant to be for a bigger army. Oh well, at least IG Codex is finally coming out, even if with the new name. I look very forward to what they do with some things, what they changed, added, and such. Some hopeful relics, and unique Warlord traits.

As something for the FFG game, I wonder how well the Wyvern works in? I've never given mortars much love, but the appearance of the Wyvern makes me happy, and maybe the quad heavy mortar (two twin-linked heavy mortars, I presume) will be very nasty/effective. A nice defensive regiment that holds structures with stuff like that, or takes them from others, with these and Basies.

Well the Wyvern may be twin linked, reroll wounds and ignore cover...but they're only Str4 AP6 small blast..so while they look good they don't deliver much.

Just as the chimera is now costing 10 pts more without the usual bells and whistes (smoke launchers+searchlight)

Warlords trait looks **** good (d3+1 outflanking units ? Yes please), but most special characters are out, powerfists/power weapons got a price hike as well.

EDIT: 666th post bwahahaha

I didn't realise the Ordo Tempestus were the storm troopers, I thought it was a new take on the Schola Progenium armies that used to get mentioned back in the old SoB fluff. How disappointing...

However, I full expect to see an Ordo Tempestus regiment option in the near future.

Just as the chimera is now costing 10 pts more without the usual bells and whistes (smoke launchers+searchlight)

Warlords trait looks **** good (d3+1 outflanking units ? Yes please), but most special characters are out, powerfists/power weapons got a price hike as well.

EDIT: 666th post bwahahaha

Some of what you are saying, as I am understanding it, is making me uneasy. There is no good reason to lose any SpCs from the other codex; no other army lost their named heroes. If they maybe made them not as good, I don't know why, yet, but they had better not be gone. Spendier Chimeras hurts, but the word seemed to hit at it, and Meltavet transport was probably expected. Mass outflankers I DO like.

I didn't realise the Ordo Tempestus were the storm troopers, I thought it was a new take on the Schola Progenium armies that used to get mentioned back in the old SoB fluff. How disappointing...

However, I full expect to see an Ordo Tempestus regiment option in the near future.

I will say that, to some extent, this is my opinion, anyway. I BELIEVE they are the old Storm Troopers. Someone might correct me, but "Tempestus" --> Tempest --> Storm, and they look similar.

I didn't realise the Ordo Tempestus were the storm troopers, I thought it was a new take on the Schola Progenium armies that used to get mentioned back in the old SoB fluff. How disappointing...

However, I full expect to see an Ordo Tempestus regiment option in the near future.

I will say that, to some extent, this is my opinion, anyway. I BELIEVE they are the old Storm Troopers. Someone might correct me, but "Tempestus" --> Tempest --> Storm, and they look similar.

It's a Schola Progenium army. Storm Troopers and Commisars come from the Schola. They are the old storm troopers, and they are not. =D

Also to settle this thread, from GW's website

The Astra Militarum, commonly known as the Imperial Guard, is comprised of countless soldiers from a million worlds. They are mere mortals in a galaxy of gods and monsters, and yet, at a time when the Imperium of Mankind is beset on all sides, it is the duty of the Astra Militarum to hold back the tide.

And done. No more raging over not being called the Imperial Guard. =P

Oh, I'm still gonna call them the IG, just like I call the Arbites the Arbitrators or Judges. I'm just going to (quietly) rage (to myself) over the unfortunate selection of a High Gothic name.

The Militarum Imperialis or even Malleus Imperialis (Imperial Hammer, or Hammer of the Emperor, to make the common nickname a literal translation of the High Gothic, which I think would add a nice touch of circular irony) would have been better. I wouldn't even have objected to any risk of confusing the Malleus Imperialis with the Ordo Malleus, since the Inquisition generally chooses to be obfuscating about its internal workings.

Astra Militarum? Ordo Tempestus? Screw those names, gonna change them for my games. The idea of a name change in general, or the fear of the Imperial Guard name fading into nothingness? Never worried me.

Discussing better names was always a more interesting talk than the sensationalism against the name addition/change itself. =D