Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Blefuscu

Emotional attachments, friends, family...the "fluff" of life...

Recommended Posts

If you can't see the humor in acolytes investigating a group selling Ork Genitals, then I feel that we have no points to relate on. And yes, I say this knowing the lore behind how orks reproduce.

The fact that we have no points to relate to should not come as a surprise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynata, while I totally agree on a point that if everyone at the table is fine with what is happening and having fun - it's all you really need, as a sidenote I have to add that (surprizingly) bringing themes of sexuality and love is actually easier in Dark Heresy / Only War compared to Black Crusade, where half of the team is incapable of feeling lust, and the other has long since crossed the line where mere sex could no longer satisfy their need to feel anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

 

There's a lot of ways one could interpret the situation on Krieg. Some sources mention something called "iron wombs", which could easily be interpreted as cloning (which source contained the idea that it's outlawed?

I thought it was a rule held over from after the Dark Ages, went along the lines of Dark Technology. I may have been mistaken.

 

Who cares? 

People, that's why we're discussing it on an online forum. Don't scream wake up to a computer screen.

 

 

 

 

If you can't see the humor in acolytes investigating a group selling Ork Genitals, then I feel that we have no points to relate on. And yes, I say this knowing the lore behind how orks reproduce.

The fact that we have no points to relate to should not come as a surprise.

 

This

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howdy folks! Here's a campaign endgame I can present as an example of what motivated this question of mine to begin with.

 

(This idea is actually taken from a bit of 40K fiction I was working on ages ago.) In game, this is something that the Acolytes might never find out about. But here goes...

 

The Acolytes' patron Inquisitor is corrupted by a daemonic entity during passage through the Warp. The Inquisitor has recently lost his beloved lover/wife and the entity uses the Inquisitor's grief as the ***** in his mental armor through which it gamins access and begins slowly consuming him from within.

 

Anyhoo, there it is. Just thought I'd toss that out there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thinking for a campaign would be that this has already happened when the campaign starts, and the Inquisitor's corruption gradually deepens until he is the one the Acolytes are working against. I ramble, ergo I am...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, pretty naive of me that I have to have that pointed out. And I totally understand it getting filtered. That is now one of those words I will think twice about when I use it the way I did. Thank you good ole fashioned human brutish hatefulness for complicating the English language. As if it needed that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If someone gets up in arms over you using that phrase or using the word to refer to a gap, they're probably being overly sensitive or are ignorant of the word's meaning. Unless you're making a racist pun with it. Pretty much the only word we've sadly lost to "political correctness" that isn't a slur is niggardly, but it has enough synonyms (miser, cheap, penny-pincher, tightwad) that it's not really a huge loss to language.

Also, that sounds like a decent enough concept for an inquisitor. It doesn't really matter in that case whether he's allowed to have romantic relationships or not, and it would in fact be more dramatic if they were prohibited to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't a word I will stop using for a "gap" in something's armor. But, now a part of my lizard brain will probably shiver for a second reminding me of the 2nd usage.

 

True, celibacy being institutionalized in the Inquisition wouldn't matter here. Just happened to be thinking about this idea on the way to work this morning, so I tossed it up here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's one of my favorite books for fluff and alternate character options. The rules for sorcery and alternate corruption track may be of use as well. There's also some neat equipment and villain rules.  If you can get it on the cheap it's definitely worth picking up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lynata, while I totally agree on a point that if everyone at the table is fine with what is happening and having fun - it's all you really need, as a sidenote I have to add that (surprizingly) bringing themes of sexuality and love is actually easier in Dark Heresy / Only War compared to Black Crusade, where half of the team is incapable of feeling lust, and the other has long since crossed the line where mere sex could no longer satisfy their need to feel anything.

 

Yup - although I'd say that I would almost expect it as a background element, at least in certain scenarios. Yes, I know that Slaanesh has a multitude of domains and associations, but a campaign that consistently steers around sex - which is, I believe, the most obvious, easiest to corrupt, and strongest - might feel ... strange, as if there was something missing.

The question then becomes how you can pay sufficient homage without making things awkward, but even just stuff like skimpy clothing and some off-hand comments about orgies could suffice to cover that area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Lynata, while I totally agree on a point that if everyone at the table is fine with what is happening and having fun - it's all you really need, as a sidenote I have to add that (surprizingly) bringing themes of sexuality and love is actually easier in Dark Heresy / Only War compared to Black Crusade, where half of the team is incapable of feeling lust, and the other has long since crossed the line where mere sex could no longer satisfy their need to feel anything.

 

Yup - although I'd say that I would almost expect it as a background element, at least in certain scenarios. Yes, I know that Slaanesh has a multitude of domains and associations, but a campaign that consistently steers around sex - which is, I believe, the most obvious, easiest to corrupt, and strongest - might feel ... strange, as if there was something missing.

The question then becomes how you can pay sufficient homage without making things awkward, but even just stuff like skimpy clothing and some off-hand comments about orgies could suffice to cover that area.

 

That's the thing, while Slaneesh certainly does appreciate carnal physical acts I personally think he appreciates depravity with a bit more...substance. I think it was WFRP that described the chaos god's realms Slaneesh's was a palace that you had to go through 6 fields to get to. Each one representing a sin that Slaneesh followers could represent. Sure there was the lust one, but there was also sloth, and greed, and plenty of other things.

 

There's an npc in the Tome of Excess that represented sloth, somehow drained after some ritual, I found her way more interesting in terms of Slaneesh worship than anything else personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you can't see the humor in acolytes investigating a group selling Ork Genitals, then I feel that we have no points to relate on. And yes, I say this knowing the lore behind how orks reproduce.

The fact that we have no points to relate to should not come as a surprise.

 

This

 

 

 

Oh god, it's the mythical customer who thinks that Games Workshop abandoning any sense of satire or black comedy was a good thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the thing, while Slaneesh certainly does appreciate carnal physical acts I personally think he appreciates depravity with a bit more...substance. I think it was WFRP that described the chaos god's realms Slaneesh's was a palace that you had to go through 6 fields to get to. Each one representing a sin that Slaneesh followers could represent. Sure there was the lust one, but there was also sloth, and greed, and plenty of other things.

 

That's what I meant with "multitude of domains and associations" - and the 6 fields was mentioned in the 40k Daemons Codex, too. But I stand by my opinion that sexuality is still the most straight-forward and most powerful of his/her domains.

 

A lot of people may be greedy, a lot of people may enjoy to eat a lot. But almost universally everyone enjoys sex. It evokes a much stronger response from our bodies and plays a much more prominent role in our society. How many people would you manage to wrap around your little finger with some nice food, as opposed to an attractive body? The urge to procreate is genetically coded into our bodies, much like the urge to feed when we're hungry. But whilst we aren't hungry all the time, our bodies do respond to sexual stimulation almost 24/7.

 

Hence I think it would be .. weird to discard it as if it was just some minor adjunct that would play a very small role. I am convinced that this is Slaanesh's strongest card, and how its cultists manage to infiltrate most worlds and cultures.

Especially given how, y'know, Slaanesh's daemons look like and how they act. They are mere aspects of the patron deity, after all. And I have yet to see something like a Daemon of Sloth.

Edited by Lynata

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Hence I think it would be .. weird to discard it as if it was just some minor adjunct that would play a very small role. I am convinced that this is Slaanesh's strongest card, and how its cultists manage to infiltrate most worlds and cultures.

Especially given how, y'know, Slaanesh's daemons look like and how they act. They are mere aspects of the patron deity, after all. And I have yet to see something like a Daemon of Sloth.

 

I think it's just his easiest card, but yeah you're right. No daemon of sloth, I think they really tend to miss out on their own source material's possibilities a lot of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd always seen slaanesh as being about an over-focus on the self. Slaaneshi warriors are good because thy want to be the best and feel like the best and make things into an art. Khorne is about losing oneself to bloodlust borne of martial honor. Tzeench I about losing oneself to planning and conspiracy borne of a desire to control. Nurgle is about losing oneself squalor and nihilism borne of hopelessness, and slaanesh is about losing oneself to the self, borne of pride.

Or, if you go by what was probably originally intended, slaanesh is all about the moral decay of British youths, sex, drugs, and rock & roll. If a conservative is turning their nose up at it, chances are good that it's something slaanesh is into.

I don't think the sex really has to be a core component of slaanesh. There are plenty of other prideful and selfish pursuits to tempt people with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's just his easiest card [...]

 

That's what I mean, yeah. If it's his easiest card, it might feel odd not to see it played. ;)

 

It's just the most difficult for the GMs to play it in a way that doesn't upset or derail their group.

 

 

Khorne is about losing oneself to bloodlust borne of martial honor

 

... or hate/revenge. *nods*

 

The theory about Slaanesh being a reference to the British youth is interesting - it certainly lets me see the classic Noise Marines in a slightly different light. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There goes Lynata making sense again. 

 

I think it comes down to what's right for a specific story.  If it's sexy Slaanesh, then there ya go.  If it's artsy Slaanesh, then go for it.  If it's liposuction Slaanesh it could be particularly gross, but that's Chaos for you.

 

I'm not sold on Slaanesh as the tempter of artists... that's a tad too, um, conservative.  I really like the definition of Slaanesh as the extreme selfish, Nimsim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...