奇幻/科幻

其實版上了解40k的或多或少都了解40k沒有劇情連續性(正史)，這個東東，畢竟是GW作者都承認的事情。

只是想要問一下一個蠢問題，如果一個系列像40k那樣"沒有正史"然後全部的故事都同時設存在(或不存在)在同一個世界觀完全要消費者自己解釋會發生甚麼問題，好像這已經變成一部分人拒追40k的原因了。

下面是這些作者說過的話為了，避免某些不想接受事實的來亂我順便把一部分作者說過的話貼一下，，這只是我再網上搜尋二十分鐘就找到的，不騙人不信的可以倒搜回去。

"With Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy. [...] Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000 exist as tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers. None of those interpretations is wrong."

Gav Thorpe, Lead Designer, Games Workshop

"It all stems from the assumption that there's a binding contract between author and reader to adhere to some nonexistent subjective construct or 'true' representation of the setting. There is no such contract, and no such objective truth."

Andy Hoare, Game Designer GW

"There is no canon. There are several hundred creators all adding to the melting pot of the IP."

Aaron Dembski-Bowden, co-author Horus Heresy series

I think the real problem for me, and I speak for no other, is that the topic as a "big question" doesn't matter. It's all as true as everything else, and all just as false/half-remembered/sort-of-true. The answer you are seeking is "Yes and no" or perhaps "Sometimes". And for me, that's the end of it. Now, ask us some specifics, eg can Black Templars spit acid and we can answer that one, and many others. But again note that answer may well be "sometimes" or "it varies" or "depends". But is it all true? Yes and no. Even though some of it is plainly contradictory? Yes and no. Do we deliberately contradict, retell with differences? Yes we do. Is the newer the stuff the truer it is? Yes and no. In some cases is it true that the older stuff is the truest? Yes and no. Maybe and sometimes. Depends and it varies.

Marc Gascoigne, former head and chief editor of the Black Library