Would be a solid point, but the majority of traitor marines are still around from the Heresy, or directly recruited from fallen marines from other chapters *cough* Dark Angels *cough cough* in either case they are -definite- traitors. One could argue that as time goes on the fleshcrafters actually make a decent chunk of new marines, but they'd still have been taught and tutored by the ancients that were proud of being traitors and referred to each other as such. TL;DR: Consider it a cultural thing that traitors are still called traitors even if they're brand new and don't realize they betrayed all of mankind.
"The majority" No, they aren't actually. A lot of them were created entirely from new geneseed, much of the original legions on both sides are dead, and there are collections of renegades in their ranks who's reasons for existing can range from them believing the Imperium is the greater traitor to itself to being crafted wholecloth from stolen geneseed. Nevermind that not all the original Legions even viewed themselves as traitors to begin with(See: The Thousand Sons.) so it's not even consistent within marines from the Horus Heresy!
And we've come full circle. The players, that is these guys who started this thread, don't want to feel that way, don't think that's fair, and are frustrated because they voted on names that they liked and instead GW picked the name they hate. Yes, you can call them traitors, that's ok. Other people don't like that though, and even if I disagree or don't understand, they are still entitled to that opinion. They have my support, even if I disagree. And that's enough rant by me on this thread. Good luck Marauders, see you on the battlefield (I am a sorc, so I am still supporting you there as well). Unless I am an apoth, at which point I am running away with my stupid boltgun.
It's not like the Word Bearers see themselves as the ones betrayed by the Emperor or anything... They just decided one day that siding with the big muscled golden guy sucks let's go look at this red giant, multicoloured flashing thing, rotting green thing and some giant blue mass of tentacles that keeps changing it's form just because... Seems like something people do just on a whim...
That's you're perspective, you're in fact answering your own question as to why this is an issue, it was supposed to be about the Chaos perspective for once, but we ended up with a term rooted in the loyalist perspective instead. Now I'm sure you don't actually care about the Chaos perspective, their motivations or how they see themselves, but as it also is less fitting than you think from your own perspective. To a loyalist the fact that a chaos marine (may have, you can't betray something you were never a part of) betrayed the Emperor is essentially the only thing that matters about them. That means that Raptors are traitors, Havoks are traitors, the Daemon Primarchs are traitors, and Abbadon the Despoiler and his Chapter of Terminators are all just traitors. Point being, Traitor is not specific to a class type or battlefield role, it is exactly like referring to Loyalist Space Marines as Loyalists, it means nothing because every Space Marine regardless of role is a Loyalist. That and the fact that loyalists don't refer to themselves as loyalists, Chaos Marines are the ones that use it. To put it even more simply Traitor is a non-descriptive term that comes from the loyalist perspective and received most of its very small amount of support from LSM fanboys not Chaos ones. For a parallel it would be like if Space Marines were given the chance to rename their classes and ended up with; Tactical=Scum Apothecary=Lapdog Devastator=Lickspittle Assault=Bootlick It's lore accurate from a chaos persepective so it's fine Now I can go on, but lore views are one thing, the fact that Traitor as a class name only has a 30% approval rating and had very little support to begin with is a statistically proven fact. Since I think my sarcasm detector is going off, it's both true and inaccurate. For the Word Bearers, Lorgar especially, their loyalty to the Imperium was based on their belief that as a Just God he had a Divine Right to rule the galaxy. That he would destroy a peaceful planet of his own citizens that were absolutely loyal to him just to make a point to Lorgar disillusioned him, as for one it was certainly not an act of justice. Combining that with his discovery that the Emperor was lying to everyone in the galaxy meant to Lorgar that every world he'd conquered and every culture they destroyed was in the name of lies and injustice. So no, I do not think that Word Bearers in lore see themselves as the betrayers, they either think that the Emperor betrayed them with his lies and the injustice done against Monarchia, or, that discovering that their imperative was based on deception invalidated the oaths. You know, like if you enter a contract that you later discover is fraudulent you (and most legal systems) will consider that contract void, even if the other guy still wants to hold you to the terms.
Of the Nine Legions that turned to chaos, all recognised it was a betrayal of their oath of loyalty to the Emperor. For some, it was a justified response in the face of the Emperor's own various lies, manipulations and betrayals in kind. For others, it was a valid casus belli to indulge in their newfound exploration of the full potential of chaos. But for the most part, the legions considered themselves rebels rather than traitors - Horus' war, and Abaddon's subsequent crusades, are a battle for control of humanity's destiny as opposed to stamping on the Imperium for the giggles. 10,000 years later? The most common reference to 'traitors' will come from the loyalist chapters and the various pieces of the Imperium. While some might take that name and revel in it as a way of shoving it back in the faces of the loyalists, not all do. The decision to rebel against the Imperium was the defining moment for any astartes that began life under its yoke, but it was a decision which defines why we are here rather than who we are and our reasons for fighting on Arkhona. And, as others have said, for astartes raised from stolen geneseed (now a key recruitment method, as many of the Nine Legions' geneseed has become corrupted beyond use) the likely response to being called a traitor would be a wry chuckle at the ignorance of the Imperium. It's definitely not an ideal name. That said, I'm not wholly against it, because it broadly works - it's just a shame that it implies we're being defined as 'not loyalists' rather than as a faction in our own right. However, Legionnaire or Legionary could be problematic if the game subsequently expands beyond the Nine Legions. Marauder, Raider and Reaver are all workable, but not ideal as it better suits the roving warbands and the Black Legion rather than the more organised forces such as the Word Bearers. Personally, I preferred Chaos (class title). Arguably bland, but having Tactical Marine, Assault Marine and Devastator Marine squaring off against Chaos Tactical, Chaos Assault and Chaos Devastator is clear for people irrespective of their lore knowledge, and is non-judgemental. Of course, that was an even less popular solution than Traitor amongst the Chaos players... I'll get my coat.
No, the chaos marines -did- betray the Imperium, it's a thing we've known about for some time now. It's a highly descriptive term that manages to be simple to say and label them with the crime they're guilty of. They(chaos marines) are only too happy to flaunt that they broke off from the Imperium, so why wouldn't they be proud to be called traitors? If you'd like to argue that you'd prefer they were called something else, fine. But let's not pretend that calling them traitors is somehow offensive. Know what I'd do if I didn't want to be called a traitor? I wouldn't betray my people. Edited to be less of a jerk.
Pretty much this ^ Which is why i posted about Honsou and his bioengineered marines. I just don't think traitor is appropriate honestly. I do see some of the points being made in this thread though but still
