Jump to content



Photo

Using the C'Tan like WFB is using Nagash


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Lightbringer

Lightbringer

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,385 posts

Posted 01 September 2014 - 05:10 AM

I'm rather enjoying what GW are up to at the moment with Nagash in their WFB line. I've run undead armies since they were just undead armies, so it's kind of nice to see things go a bit full circle, and it's fun to see Nagash again, all grown up.

 

Where this links (tangentially) with 40k is that GW's "return of Nagash" storyline got me musing about GW's approach to the Necrons, and the C'Tan in particular.

 

The old Andy Chambers Necron Codex is (in my opinion) a bit of a GW classic, hitting the 40k tone beautifully, and introducing a fully workable Necron army in an interesting and fun way. It certainly wasn't perfect, in that if you didn't have one of the four named C'Tan, your army was a bit generic, but it remains one of the best codices written, in my view.  

 

Many people disliked the more recent (Mat Ward) codex, and I have my issues with it, but it isn't as bad as it's sometimes made out to be; on the whole I still like it. Mat Ward gets far more than his deserved share of internet hate, in my opinion. The Codex is strong on allowing players to create interesting unique armies, and has a considered, open and nuanced take on the motivation of different Necron factions. It's often characterised as "tomb kings in space" which is in my view a fair if double edged criticism; it's true, but then tomb kings are a fun and workable concept/stereotype. I dislike some aspects of the writing, which can come across as a bit cartoonish, but on the whole it's a solid piece of work, background wise. (note I'm not talking about the rules themselves anywhere here, that's beyond the scope of what I'm discussing.) 

 

Anyway, my point here is that if we're doing "the return of Nagash" why not do a "return of the C'Tan" storyline? The C'Tan occupy a similar position in the 40k canon to the position held by Nagash in the WFB canon; the instigators and creators of an undead faction. You could have the four "named" C'Tan (Deceiver, Dragon, Nightbringer, Outsider) return to 40k in the same way that Nagash has in WFB.

 

Under the newer codex canon, the C'Tan have been shattered into dozens of "shards", though Mat Ward left the background sufficiently open to (in my view) permit GW to reintroduce more powerful named C'tan.

 

Imagine: a new giant plastic C'Tan model, created using GW's splendid new CAD technology, configureable into any of the four major C'Tan. Just look at the new Nagash miniature for an idea of how adept GW had become at utilising negative space and flowing, floating, silk like features in three dimensions. All of these features would work brilliantly with the floating C'Tan.

 

Imagine this miniature accompanied with 2 new Codices: one for "tomb kings" style Necrons and one for reawakened C'Tan forces - the "Vampire counts" Necron army. The Necrons are factionalised enough to permit two entire major subfactions: those who support the reawakened C'Tan, and those who fight to defeat them in revenge for the death fo their souls.  

 

You could roll in some interesting new miniatures for the "vampire counts" Necron faction: lesser C'Tan fragments as Elite infantry or generals for the C'Tan armies. For the pure Necron armies have special C'Tan slaying heavy weapons, or portable Tesseract vaults capable of imprisoning them. Perhaps even bring back the Silent King as a named character (a Settra analogue) for the "Tomb Kings" perspective on 40k.

 

I'd buy all of that little lot GW...go on...give it a go! :)


Edited by Lightbringer, 01 September 2014 - 05:19 AM.


#2 Blood Pact

Blood Pact

    Member

  • Members
  • 890 posts

Posted 01 September 2014 - 06:36 AM

Anyway, my point here is that if we're doing "the return of Nagash" why not do a "return of the C'Tan" storyline? The C'Tan occupy a similar position in the 40k canon to the position held by Nagash in the WFB canon; the instigators and creators of an undead faction. You could have the four "named" C'Tan (Deceiver, Dragon, Nightbringer, Outsider) return to 40k in the same way that Nagash has in WFB.

 

Ehh... not really as analogous as you present them. That they both 'created an undead faction' is more coincidental than anything else.

 

Especially considering no one ever broke Nagash in to a thousand pieces and using their super-knowledge, and are using him to power their techno-arcane creations. In WFB, Nagash is the closest thing the world will ever see to a God Incarnate in the setting. The C'Tan don't even seem to come that close.



#3 Lightbringer

Lightbringer

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,385 posts

Posted 01 September 2014 - 07:56 AM

Well you're right of course...there are obvious differences between the two that prevent them being entirely analagous:-

Nagash
-Tall pointy hat
-Floats around surrounded by spirits
-Has a gopher called Arkhan
-Lives in a pyramid
-Wants to kill every living thing in the world
-Has repeatedly been shattered and has rebuilt himself each time


C’Tan
-Tall pointy head
-Floats around surrounded by cloth
-Has no gopher whatsoever
-Lives in a pyramid…on a tombship…in space
-Wants to kill every living thing in the galaxy
-Has (probably) been shattered and has not rebuilt himself yet


...I could go on identifying discrepancies and similarities all day.


You could do the same thing for other parts of the setting:-



High Elves
-Ride Phoenixes
- Use magic
-Are a powerful race, shrinking in numbers, clinging to the glories of the lost age, defending their realm against ignorant younger races and their own tragically twisted kin
- Very fond of pointy helmets


Craftworld Eldar
-Keep banging on about phoenixes
-Use psychic powers
-Are a powerful race, shrinking in numbers, clinging to the glories of the lost age, defending their craftworlds against ignorant younger races and their own tragically twisted kin
…er…

My point is, however, that Nagash and the C'Tan clearly occupy very similar roles in their respective settings, despite certain differences. Perhaps broadly analagous is a better way to put it; broadly analagous in the same way that many elements of WFB are broadly analagous to elements within 40k.

My wider point is - as above, so below. What works for WFB (and the fanbase's response to the Return of Nagash seems broadly positive) is likely to also work for WH40k. I like the C'Tan, and it would be nice to see them updated in a manner as interesting as the way in which Nagash has been presented. The real trick would be doing it in a way which doesn;t break the very narrow M41 999 timescale.

Edited by Lightbringer, 01 September 2014 - 05:15 PM.

  • Fgdsfg likes this

#4 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,155 posts

Posted 01 September 2014 - 10:30 PM

Isn't the gopher named Arkhan Orkhan the Diviner?



#5 Lightbringer

Lightbringer

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,385 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 08:04 AM

Isn't the gopher named Arkhan Orkhan the Diviner?

 

How did I misss that? Orkhan/Arkhan...damn you GW, you're too subtle for my feeble brain! :wacko:



#6 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,155 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 07:19 PM

I have a theory that Orkhan is supposed to be a C'tan in masquerade.

 

He has the same stats as a shard in his stars are right form.



#7 Robin Graves

Robin Graves

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,379 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 07:33 PM

Seeing the nagash model did make me wonder how it would look painted in green and metalic colors as a c'tan. Then i decided it would also make a great daemon prince.

 

The problem is the scale diffrence in fantasy vs 40k settings. If the warhammer world gets destroyed its game over; While in 40k even the imperium is like" we lose a planet? what we worry? we got reserves." So for the c'tan return to have the same impact it would have to threathen the whole galaxy.

 

But besides that i'd like to see me some new c'tan models! I was even thinking about an all c'tan unbound army list.

With an ascendant c'tan (sans tesseract vault) and 2 or 3 shards. who are all shards of a single c'tan called "The Hydra"



#8 Marwynn

Marwynn

    Member

  • Members
  • 495 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 07:52 PM

I was actually proposing using the Necrons in the Koronus Expanse. I want Craftworld Kaelor to be doing something other than looking at us disdainfully, and a good ol' re-enactment of the War of Heaven should be fun.

 

Also really want to engage in trade with some of these new talking Necrons. Or not. If the C'Tan are in the mix, even as sentient shards, it could be interesting.


Beyond Reach - The New Adventures of the Strom Dynasty

The Tau Fleet | The Tyranid Hive Fleet | Battlefleet Jericho


#9 Errant Knight

Errant Knight

    Member

  • Members
  • 518 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 08:09 PM

I still think the Laughing God is a C'tan in disguise.



#10 venkelos

venkelos

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,260 posts

Posted 02 September 2014 - 09:02 PM

I've read stuff that says Cegorach and the Deceiver are expressly different beings; that said, those people weren't GW writers, and even GW writers can't always be pinned down to give one definitive, detailed, and/or consistent answer regarding anything in their universe. I think most of them agree that there was once a man called "The Emperor." ;)

 

I think an argument for this is that Cegorach has to be able to enter the Warp, and steal the occasional soul back from Slaanesh. If the Laughing God was a C'Tan, the act of going into the Empryrean would annihilate him, and She Who Thirsts wouldn't even need to raise a finger. Granted, I'm also not a GW writer, so what do I know?



#11 Errant Knight

Errant Knight

    Member

  • Members
  • 518 posts

Posted 03 September 2014 - 05:23 PM

Yeah, I don't read that stuff.  I make up my own stories.  C'tan can go anywhere they want to.  Everything you've been told is a lie.



#12 Ramellan

Ramellan

    Member

  • Members
  • 80 posts

Posted 08 September 2014 - 04:20 AM

Me, I've always been interested in the Void Dragon. There are only stats for two of the c'tan so far, but the Dragon is by far the coolest to me. If there was ever going to be a new model, I'd want that one. (I keep picturing something like the Ultima Weapon from Final Fantasy and then squealing)

As for actually using one in a story; definitely has potential, especially if you're going for a transcendent c'tan that has more of its raw power mad maybe personality back. Monsters are pretty cool, but I also like villains with depth to their character. Ooh, might be one of those extra-rare, extra-heresy moments where the Imperium and the Necrons have to team up to stop the thing. Necrons don't want to be enslaved again, and the Imperium doesn't want to die!

I like both versions of the Necrons, but the Newcrons I like more, so and especially the Silent King, wandering ruler of all Necrons. If you're gonna use the C'tan I think you should consider him too, how the being whose responsible for defeating them the first time would react.




© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS