Re: [Epic] Magnus the Red

From: Scott Shupe <shupes_at_...>
Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 18:27:53 -0400

Oki Purwanto wrote:
>
> Actually, I always think that the traitor primarchs are pretty wimpy - even
> in the 2nd edition.

        Wimpy how? They're only 1 man -err, daemon.
How much do you expect 1 being to be able to do? In
combat, that is. They probably have bunches of
powers that for one reason or another can't be
used on the battlefield.

> I think the keyword to watch out for Magnus, Angron and so on, is that these
> guys are not just Daemon Princes, but rather Daemon Primarchs. Normal human
> - if somebody who managed to butcher, bluff his way to the basest of human
> nature can be called normal :) - becomes merely Daemon Princes.
>
> They get extra powers but generally are not as powerful (just a little less)
> than Greater Daemons.

        Actually, the daemon princes detailed in the
Chaos Codex were all once normal humans, but as princes
they are all more powerful than the normal GDs. Which
is why it's kinda strange that they're portrayed as
being less powerful in Epic 40k.

> However the Primarchs started on a much higher base
> than Daemon Princes, ie. Primarchs will beat the heck out of any human (no
> matter how skill, powerful). When the Primarchs succcumbed to Chaos, I would
> think that the power promised and given to them would make them more than a
> match for any Greater Daemons.

        And they pretty much were. Magnus could send
any GD within 100cm and LOS back to the warp on a 2+.
In close combat they were all better than lords of
change and great unclean ones, and Angron was the equal
of a bloodthirster.

> Witness Angron, Daemon Primarchs of Khorne
> and WorldEaters. In the 1st battle of Armageddon, he was the supreme
> commandeer of the Chaos force. He had a retinue of twenty (!) BloodThirsters
> as his bodyguards ! OK! It might be jumping to conclusions to say that he is
> very much superior to a BloodThirsters, but I would think that retinue does
> seem to point that Daemon Primarchs are indeed much more valuable than
> Greater Daemons.

        More valuable does not neccessarily mean
amazingly more powerful.

        Plus, how accurate is the retelling of the
first battle for Armageddon anyway? It sounds a lot
like a "legend" to me - the 'facts' have been somewhat
distorted with each telling.

Scott
shupes_at_...
Received on Fri Aug 01 1997 - 22:27:53 UTC