Talk:Cato Sicarius
I feel like the statement that Ventris is a dumbass who deserved a trial is pure opinion and is in no way backed up after the assertion. The editor who made this statement should be free to express his/her (probably his) opnion, but should back it up. I am hesitant to edit the page, but I think such OBVIOUS statements of opinion should be clearly labelled as opinion and nothing more. I would further argue that Ventris did the right thing on Ursa, both tactically and morally. Tactically, he was the only captain present who had served in the Deathwatch and for that reason alone was the best choice to lead them. His contribution on the ground would have been negligible. Strict adherence to the Codex is NEVER shown to have any effect on loyalty, so Severus can suck it too. So I definitely take issue with stating an opinion and pretending it is fact.--OmnipotentBystander (talk) 04:45, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Sounds more like dudes just the writers pet who's always right and always the best and anyone who doesn't like him is bad. And why would a deathwatch team need a leader anyway?
Well, they brought one with them and he was killed in action. Clearly they felt they needed one or why would he have been there? Further, I agree the writer was clearly intending to make Sicarius out to be an ass, but that is his right as an author. Given the general correctness of the tactics used by Uriel, the only rationale for the vindictive pettiness of Sicarius is that he wrongly attributed the death of Idaeus to Uriel. Further, it is implied that Cato along with Severus and Learchus BLINDLY follow the codex, which the author seems to think is a negative quality. Had Uriel acted in a tactically unsound manner AND Cato was still made out to be a jerk I would agree with you, but that is not the case in this instance. As written, Uriel was in the right, Cato was a dick.--OmnipotentBystander (talk) 00:25, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
On the matter of Cato's titles[edit]
Cato Sicarius isn't only the Master of the watch, he's also Knight Champion of Macragge. If you'd like verrification of this and his duties I'd refer you to the Warhammer40k wiki or lexicanum. Even if you don't agree with his title's meaning, the fact that he's stood as champion to the chapter in more than one honor duel in the fluff means he's the chapter champion in spirit if not title, though being the "Knight-Champion of Macragge," the "not title" part is dubious at best. If you want to edit the wiki I'd suggest you check official lore sources before making changes. Josman (talk) 21:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
- I'd be careful about that, the Ultramarines specifically already have an unnamed Chapter Champion in their ranks, he's the guy with the two blades that comes with in Marneus Calgar's box set, so Sicarius specifically isn't his Chapter's champion. Coincidentally, Several characters have the term "Champion" somewhere in their titles, like Captains Sumatris of the Astral Claws (Tyrants Champion), Elam Courbray of the Fire Hawks (Grand Champion of the Tournament of Flame), Zarchariah Kersh (Champion of the Feast of Blades) but none of those are necessarily Chapter Champions. It's just a cool title that they get for doing something. We know so little about the specific obligations that come with the titles to make any solid judgements though. Nearly all captains get into honour duels in their fluff (even though they have Company Champions for that, Sicarius included - see Gaius Prebian) and each one is undoubtedly a "Champion" in some way or another and rightly deserves it, but it doesn't make them "Chapter Champion" --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 23:56, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
- Strictly speaking, even the Emperor's Champion in the Black Templars is not the Chapter Champion and the Chapter can have both at the same time, as one would be in the High Marshal's Honour Guard while the other is ratified after receiving a vision. --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 00:02, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I'm aware that the honour guards have a champion, as does each individual company. This is obviously just an oversite on game's workshop's part, getting their fluff and crunch confused, but at the same time it's easy to justify if you look at the context of Cato's lore. "As Knight Champion, Sicarius must answer challenges addressed to the Chapter as a whole and he has done so with startling and bloody results on many occasions." There is only duel of his that the lore goes into at all: his duel on behalf of the chapter against the champion of Inquisitor Orchaedes, who was shit-talking the Ultramarines (hear that TG? Shit talk the smurfs and Cato Sicarius will find you). It can be inferred that Cato Sicarius stands as the Chapter Champion to the entirety of the Ultramarines, whereas the champion from the Honour Guard is simply the champion of the first company. Josman (talk) 00:33, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
- That doesn't necessarily make his position a deviancy from the codex though, as you point out, the "Chapter Champion" is the guy in the honour guard who stands in front of the Chapter Master, where-as Cato Sicarius is the champion for the Chapter. I don't see that being a problem or anything revelatory --Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 05:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I'm aware that the honour guards have a champion, as does each individual company. This is obviously just an oversite on game's workshop's part, getting their fluff and crunch confused, but at the same time it's easy to justify if you look at the context of Cato's lore. "As Knight Champion, Sicarius must answer challenges addressed to the Chapter as a whole and he has done so with startling and bloody results on many occasions." There is only duel of his that the lore goes into at all: his duel on behalf of the chapter against the champion of Inquisitor Orchaedes, who was shit-talking the Ultramarines (hear that TG? Shit talk the smurfs and Cato Sicarius will find you). It can be inferred that Cato Sicarius stands as the Chapter Champion to the entirety of the Ultramarines, whereas the champion from the Honour Guard is simply the champion of the first company. Josman (talk) 00:33, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, I see, the important distinction between the chapter champion, who serves as a champion to the chapter, and the champion of the chapter, who serves as the chapter's champion. Yes, of course, how didn't I see it! Look, I think when it comes down to it this was just a fuckup on GW's part by giving the Ultramarines 2 chapter champions. Maybe I'm wrong, but there's enough solid evidence that I'd like to leave it on the page, as it's funny that unintentionally GW has their poster boys violating their own code. There is a lot less substantiated info taken as canon on this wiki, so even though this is a tiny bit shaky, I'd like to leave it up. None of what I said is actually incorrect. Josman (talk) 19:39, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
- (-Shrugs-) Dark Angel 2020 (talk) 20:19, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, I see, the important distinction between the chapter champion, who serves as a champion to the chapter, and the champion of the chapter, who serves as the chapter's champion. Yes, of course, how didn't I see it! Look, I think when it comes down to it this was just a fuckup on GW's part by giving the Ultramarines 2 chapter champions. Maybe I'm wrong, but there's enough solid evidence that I'd like to leave it on the page, as it's funny that unintentionally GW has their poster boys violating their own code. There is a lot less substantiated info taken as canon on this wiki, so even though this is a tiny bit shaky, I'd like to leave it up. None of what I said is actually incorrect. Josman (talk) 19:39, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
