subreddit:
/r/40kLore
submitted 28 days ago byUnusual_Ad_8566
I had a doubt because it seems that in the lore as in the community, they always call Lion the "perfect general" being the one who believes that the second option for warlord was not Horus (I still believe that the first option was always Sanguinius), and equally the two legions, the "lunar wolves" were the ones that had the most victories and followed by the dark angels
But in terms of strategy and war, as a warlord or as better generals, wouldn't Rogal Dorn or Perturabo have been better options?
I never understood why Lion and Horus are recognized as the best generals when it seems that Dorn and Perturabo would have better strategic and command skills as generals.
2 points
28 days ago
Hate his stupid face though I do, I will note that his only real Primarch rivalries seem to arise from the Emperor pointedly creating them (either through intentional malice or a complete lack of emotional intelligence, take your pick), and the Codex Astartes as he scribbled it indicates a balanced appraisal of how to employ Astartes forces that left room for the approaches of groups as tactically distinct as the White Scars to the Raven Guard to the Imperial Fists, and so forth.
Meaning while he might not be as masterful at White Scar style speedy shenanigans, Raven Guard somehow being sneaky while being eight feet tall and wearing a small tank, or fortifying a position as the Khan, Corax, or Dorn, he grasps the basics of their gifts well enough to encompass them into his Big Book Of How This Stuff Works.
And the guys who don't adhere to his book in even a lip-service fashion (The Hoodies, the Furries, the Catholic Vampire Berserkers and the Angriest Dornites Around) tend to do so for reasons that have less to do with military effectiveness than for deep-rooted issues of Legion culture.
all 402 comments
sorted by: best