So everything that is written and found in the lore description for said cosmetics items are part of the 40k Lore or its treated as non-canon?
1 Like
it’s canon to the game. i’ve yet to find anything that can actually be applied outside of it on any level. 's all anicdotal.
1 Like
If it’s in the game, it’s virtually canon.
GW is VERY picky with what they allow others to do with their IP, even WITH the correct licencing. If it’s in the game, GW themselves greenlighted it, which makes it at least semi-canon until GW specify otherwise.
I’ve always liked the “it’s call canon, even the things that contradict other things” approach.
Yes it is canon - and GW never hat problems with two sources contradicting each other (in small details at least) and both still being canon.
Which means for example: Due to the cosmetic texts we know Kriegsmen have names and psykers and Ogryns are uncommon in Krieg units but they do occur - despite Steve Lyon’s novels depicting it differently.
1 Like
And honestly thats great, gives creative freedom for fans to have their fun with characters and models and the like. Its healthy for the community to have this kinda plausibility open for interpretation attitude towards canon as it better suits different tastes of people.
2 Likes
I absolutely agree!
1 Like
Canon is something of a loose thing with 40k, intentionally so. 40k lore varies intensely by author and product, Dan Abnett’s own writing has all sorts of things change wildly depending on the tale to suit the story. Many of things are contradictory and nonsensical, and stuff mentioned in one place may never be referenced again. 40k is really a grab-bag of imagery to make cool games/models/books with more than a well designed and carefully constructed coherent narrative universe, to allow people to take tonka trucks and have them fight dudes with chainswords and tentacle aliens and mechawalkers together.
1 Like
yes, no it depends on what you consider Cannon, Dawn of War? Inqustior Maytra, Boltgun, Space Hulk Deathwing, kill team?
are these action cannon some say yes other say no, does the raptor Chapter being a scuessor of the Ravengaurd yet they were mention before the ravenguard existed, or the founding 20 legions.
It doesn’t matter “what you consider canon”, because players don’t get to choose what is and isn’t canon, GW does.
All those things you mentioned are canon. Even the contradictions.
GW’s offical position is unless they specifically say otherwise, nothing that happens in a videogame is canon. has been since the 90s (although there were some WILD things in the games of the 90s going on that shoulda been canon)
the great thing about 40k is that two things can be completely contradictory and still exist in the same room… characters like that can talk to each other and offer utterly different everything and yet it all falls into the bowels of the vast administration of the Empire… if it serves the God-Emperor its good, if it doesn’t it is destroyed. that’s all.
I mean, even Dan abnett made a mistake in realizing how he had described the emperor differently in 2 places. Instead of retconning a book he simply made himself infallible in his descriptions of the emperor by saying that people perceived the emperor how they wanted to see him (which goes a long way in how he managed to become the omnissiah)
i mean… writing a god is not hard at all. All the utterly crap ones we invented when we were still half-ape are still tooling around causing genocide now. At least he was smart enough to invent a realistic and honest church to support his(no believe? burn it).
No, that is not their official position, they’ve not said that anywhere. The video games are canon.
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.