#night lords omnibus

[the-liars-art]

it’s everything

[twizzlysticks]

My first sketches of Talos that I forgot to post sooner

[supercomputer-lizard]

Night Lord trilogy protagonists fuckableness poll

I feel like should mention that my school has started, so my posts will be later in the day, but I also usually already post at this time, so

[general-grey]

Not to get in my business just cause you reblogged some of my posts, but. I saw what you said about the desperate urge to get to know Perturabo, and absolutely feel that. He's unexpectedly at some of his best in Magnus's primarch novel (Master of Prospero), is my secret tip.

OH INTERESTING, that is actually great to hear because. I am kinda sorta on a Thousand Sons kick myself and i've been eyeing that book anyways! But i have. SUCH a long list to go through now, and it is ever-growing because my impulsive ass can't stop bouncing between all these characters :'))

but yeah thank you for the tip, it'll be super tasty to finally get a grip on this crabby man!

[guilliwife]

me rn

[the-knight-of-cheeze]

Me when Uzas.

i think the hottest look you can give someone after they commit acts of unspeakable violence is approval. like don't get me wrong if there's lust there too that's great, but staring at someone with gore dripping down their chin and coating their hands to the wrists with undisguised appraisal and admiration. maybe giving them a little nod as if to say 'well done'. THAT'S what says "yeah we're gonna fuck nasty later".

[cursed-40k-thoughts]

what 40k books would you say are at least a 7 out of 10?

Twice Dead King: Ruin + Twice Dead King: Reign. Ghazghkull Thraka: Prophet of the Waaagh! The Infinite and the Divine. Assassinorum: Kingmaker. The Fall of Cadia. Night Lords: The Omnibus. Word Bearers: The Omnibus. Spear of the Emperor. Gaunt's Ghosts series. Titanicus. Fire Caste. Apocalypse. The Lords of Silence. Harrowmaster. Brutal Kunnin. The Lion: Son of the Forest. Da Big Dakka. Warboss. Eisenhorn: The Omnibus. Ravenor: The Omnibus. Day of Ascension. Watchers of the Throne series. Vaults of Terra series. Fabius Bile trilogy.

[moodymisty]

I know that it's pretty much taken for granted that Night Lords suck with most baselines, let alone small children.

But I believe that in the Night Lords Omnibus, Decimus is implied to be the son of Septimus and Octavia, and assuming they both died in the refugee planet they were sent to by Talos because of the Inquisitors finding them.

It's also implied that Variel, another Night Lord was the one who stole baby Decimus away and mentored and raised him.

So assuming that all of this is canon, we have a chance that the Night Lords can (in some special cases) be good with children.

I now want to know what they would be like around Konrad's blood children, if he ever had them.

I know that them being 'good' with kids is a stretched, but i hope people have enough critical thinking skills to understand that 'good' in 40k means not like putting the child on a grill XD

also boop

-------------------

"Are you missing something, Night Mother?"

Sevatar walks up to you from your left side, holding something in his right gauntlet.

He has your young son by the back of his clothing, holding him like a cat would hold a kitten by the scruff. Your child appears entertained however, laughing as he swings about.

"Ten feet away isn't missing, Sevatar. Let the boy walk around."

The Night Lord stands in front of you, still dangling your child in his grip. He just babbles, arms outstretched. Sevatar snorts, giving him a little shake.

"You like that? I could spin you around, you'd be a little morning star."

Instead of making true on his threat however, he simply puts your child down, letting him topple close to your legs. Sevatar hooks a finger on his collar so he doesn't fall face first, sighing.

"All the damn boy does is fall over." You roll your eyes at him, smiling.

"You were the same at one point, Sevatar." He gives you a sour look and stands upright.

"Don't remind me."

He mentions to you that he's going to leave; He has other things to attend to and can't linger any longer. You take a closer look at him, and notice the way his nose is wrinkled more than usual and his eyes are hooded.

"Alright then, goodbye." You look up at him as he passes by, and he stops for a moment. "Get those headaches of yours looked at, please?"

He smirks at you, looking down as your child topples for his boot. He just misses however, as Sevatar starts walking away.

[teknomagic]

I'm reading the Night Lords omnibus and this is very good? I'm not used to chaos marine books being good.

[libraryshadow]

Dog!! I’ve legit have been making a Night Lords Ballet in my head and have been really wanting to make this.

Thinking it should be based of the Night Lord Omnibus and Konrad’s life.

I'd sell my left kidney for a 40k stageplay or ballet

[twizzlysticks]

My design for Talos in the void stalker (book 3 of the omnibus) era

Spoilers!! Detail reasonings below the cut

- scarring from the skin grafts after half his face got blown off in the previous book in the fight with third claw

- I imagine his hair would’ve grown out a bit while he was chained to the command throne on the Echo and given the fast paced and unhinged nature of everything after that I sincerely doubt he’d bother to cut it

- nosebleed just cause that happens pretty frequently in that book our boy is going through it with his prophetic abilities

[olderthannetfic]

I've done some reading challenges before and I think they can be fun if they have a purpose: for instance, something like the Read Harder challenge, ones that encourage you to read from different genres or read more diverse books, etc. I have a sort of evergreen challenge where I encourage myself to read more books written by authors from different countries, and keep a spreadsheet of which countries I've "read." (I also do this with other kinds of entertainment like movies.) But it's definitely true that some of them just seem to be for the gimmick and aesthetic, and for people who prize quantity over quality of reading in a sort of commodity-fetishism (as they're prizing books as markers of intelligence over the actual experience of learning and expanding your world via reading). Like when the challenges start to be things like "read a book with an orange cover" that's where I start to roll my eyes a bit, haha.

I will say that while I try not to be a snob about reading, it does drive me nuts when I've had people lord over how many more books they've read or how many more pages when they're reading beach reads and YA and other easily digestible stuff whereas I'm reading stuff that is heavier. One time when I was working some crappy minimum-wage job in college, I was reading this big omnibus of all Jane Austen's works (because I was taking a class on her where I was required to read those, not that I wouldn't read Austen otherwise lol) on my break, and one of the other employees asked me how many pages it was and I answered and he was like "pfft, that's nothing, I read all the Harry Potter books in a week and they're more than that!" And I wanted to be like.... yeah, me too, dipshit. I mean, I didn't literally read them in one week, but when each one came out, I devoured it within a day or two like a lot of people did, despite it being 800 pages. Because Rowling's prose is really easy to gobble up like that. Not that Austen is impenetrable or anything (I don't think she is and I think that's precisely why she remains so evergreen popular), but she does require more effort than *that*, particularly when you're reading her work for a literature class where you're expected to write a paper analyzing it, so you want to linger to make sure you really deeply understand it.

I've read academic monographs that were 150 pages long that took me weeks to get through, and I've read 800-page bestsellers that I ripped through in a few days. Pure page length does not determine how long it takes to actually read something. I mean.... in fandom we should all be aware of this, how many of us have devoured some 100k fic in a night or two? As someone who has written some of those academic monographs myself and therefore is familiar with how word count tends to relate to book page length, I can verify for you that that is the equivalent of devouring a novel in the same time frame. But it's a lot easier to do that when you're reading relatively invisible prose and are invested in your OTP getting together (or whatever) vs. if you're trying to digest someone's very dry and convoluted argument about Foucault.

--

I just read all of Scum Villain in about five minutes, yeah. And it was great, but nothing to brag about as an achievement.

I've got this friend who goes on about reading sooooo fast but then admits to often rereading to catch things that she missed the first time. It came up when I was explaining how seldom I reread or rewatch anything. I tend to remember it far, far too keenly after one time through, and it just doesn't hit the same a second time. I still read pretty fast, but not that fast.

I don't think it's snobby to roll your eyes at people who clearly don't grasp the difference between different difficulties of reading and—this is key—who are trying to wave their dick at you about how great they are. They started it!

The time I do roll my eyes is when people think you should read mega hard prose in order to learn, especially in order to learn vocabulary or get faster at reading. That's not what the science says. (Apparently, the fastest way to improve on that kind of thing is to read mass quantities of faintly hard-for-you stuff, not stuff that's hard hard.) But to learn how to decode confusing arguments? Yes, absolutely.

I do wish people would put a little more effort into unwinding their own tortured syntax on Foucault though.

[o-uncle-newt]

Personally my favorite example of this is when she wrote in her (excellent) introduction to The Omnibus of Crime, in 1929, that "one festering convention, from which detective fiction is only just now freeing itself, is that of the 'love interest" and then basically IMMEDIATELY turned around and published Strong Poison in 1930. It makes me wonder whether she was drafting this section about the drawbacks of the genre to date and, in the process, was like "I can SO do better":

A few notable highlights:

...some of the finest detective-stories are marred by a conventional love-story, irrelevant to the action and perfunctorily worked in.

The Instances in which the love-story is an integrated part of the plot are extremely rare. One very beautiful example occurs in The Moonstone. Here the entire plot hangs on the love of two women for Franklin Blake [and the mystery comes from] their efforts to shield him.

EC Bentley, in Trent's Last Case, has dealt finely with the still harder problem of the detective in love. Trent's love for Mrs Manderson is a legitimate part of the plot; while it does not prevent him from drawing the proper conclusions from the evidence before him, it does prevent him from acting on his conclusions and so prepares the way for the real explanation. Incidentally, the love-story is handled artistically and with persuasive emotion [emphasis mine]

Apart from such unusual instances as these, the less love in a detective-story, the better. ... A casual and perfunctory love-story is worse than no love-story at all, and since the mystery must, by hypothesis, take the first place, the love is better left out.

There is the whole difficulty about allowing real human beings into a detective-story. At some point or other, either their emotions make hay of the detective interest, or the detective interest gets hold of them and makes their emotions look like pasteboard. It is, of course, a fact that we all adopt a detached attitude towards a "a good murder" in the newspaper. Like Betteredge in The Moonstone, we get "detective fever," and forget the victim in the fun of tracking the criminal. For this reason, it is better not to pitch the emotional key too high at the start; the inevitable drop is made less jarring.

My hypothesis- just as, in 1932, Sayers was probably about to start (if she hadn't already started) The Nine Tailors, which famously took her enough time to write that she had to write and publish a whole-ass Murder Must Advertise in the middle because she was too busy teaching herself campanology to actually progress on The Nine Tailors, in 1929 she was already going to start Strong Poison- in which she had already had the avowed intention of Reichenbaching Wimsey off through marriage- and writing this analysis of the love interest made her dare herself do it BETTER, ultimately leading to her realization that she could, actually, and leaving her so attached to these two characters that she couldn't dare drop them. And by extension, I have to wonder if The Nine Tailors came from a similar challenge to herself- "this is overdone but I bet I could make it ART." Which obviously she did.

I think that one of the many, many things I love about Sayers is how much she loved and devoted herself to a genre that was, simultaneously, not the main place where her gifts and literary interests lay. She loved detective stories but eventually chafed at writing them, and comparing this section of the Omnibus introduction to the discussions that Harriet and Peter have about the book she's writing in Gaudy Night is instructive- as is comparing it to what she ended up writing in Gaudy Night as a whole. By then, she's completely disposed of the idea that "the mystery must, by hypothesis, take first place"- the main linchpin of her argument here! It's genuinely fascinating.

Dorothy Sayers in 1932: "Church clocks and bodies in belfries are rather overdone lately."

Dorothy Sayers in 1934: lol jk I have a new special interest so strap in

[general-grey]

out of nowhere confession, abaddon gives me the weirdest gender envy ive ever experienced, truly no lie

"oh but his hair is so ugly" its metal as fuck and i want it

"he is described as ugly in the books" idc i also want his face

[incorrect-primarchs-quotes]

How did you feel about Konrad's primarch novel- I just got into 40k and have so far read the first four horus heresy novels, started fulgrim and started the primarchs series. Just finished Konrad and holy shit-I feel so bad for him...mans never had a chance fr

Curious how you felt since I like your memes and you like the legion

Also loved sevetar- onto prince of crows

Maaan i love Konrad.

It's funny to see how different Night Lords are written, based on 1. Who is the writer 2. Who are the 'protagonists' of the book. This because unfortunately they act like stupid classic Disney villains when playing the 'enemy' characters in someone's else story, yet if you read their own stories you see that they are deeper than we initially thought.

(Legions/chapters/characters suffering this fate are actually pretty common, because people will usually associate them with random stereotypical memes and will refuse to actually check the sources. Other misunderstood legions, for example, are World Eaters or Emperor's Children - and this is coming from someone who hates the EC)

If you wish to continue reading good stuff with them, the Night Lords Omnibus is a masterpiece🙏🏻

Regarding the other primarch serie books, may I recommend you Magnus' one?

Also Valdor/Alpharius ones are soo good too (read Valdor first, Alpharius second tho😤)

[blizz4rd12033333333333]

you got any warhammer book recommendations?

Storm of Iron, the night lords omnibus, brutal kunnin, Ciaphas Cain.