The FIGHT for the Tower | Interview with one of the Emperor's Custodes

On a war-torn battlefield, Shield-Captain Acastus Klythar Thalasson Ardentis Khalor Erythios and his fellow Custodes stand as the Emperor's unyielding shield. Tasked with defending a vital planetary defense cannon, the trio faces the relentless forces of the Black Legion, culminating in a harrowing clash against a monstrous Chaos Dreadnought.
This gripping tale captures the fury of battle, the precision of the Adeptus Custodes, and the razor-thin margin between survival and annihilation. As Acastus recounts his tale, one truth emerges: victory comes not through glory but through necessity.
“We fight because it is necessary. That is all.”
-----------------------
🎧 Don’t forget to like, comment, and subscribe for more Warhammer 40k content!
More Custodes stories: AskGDK.com/TheC...
More tales of The Imperium: AskGDK.com
-----------------------
🎵 Music by Epidemic Sound 🎵
Like what you hear? Check out my Dark Ambience playlist with the tracks from this video:
🔗 share.epidemic...
Sign up through the link and get 7 days free on Epidemic Sound!
----------------------
This is an unofficial Warhammer 40k audio production made as a fair use work of fiction. All original characters copyright: Games Workshop.
#Warhammer #40k #SciFi #ScienceFiction #Warhammer40k

[@GrimdarkKing]

Did you know that KZbin's abominable intelligence algorithm hides some of my videos from view? You can find them here: kzbin.info/aero/PLn1vOm7E9PR5MVAjxuy7BPUuNJ2zZh-Y6

[@brentgraves1151]

I guess I can only say how totally awesome your narration was once again.thank you for your time and hard work you put Into your videos and voice. Hat off and bow from NH USA

[@GrimdarkKing]

Brent, in a galaxy where appreciation is often measured in the number of enemies left in ruin, words like yours are a welcome rarity. The work is demanding, but if it brings even a fraction of the grimdark universe to life, then it is time well spent. Hat off and a salute in return-keep the faith, and may the Emperor’s light never dim in the cold void of the 41st Millennium.

[@khylerbane4523]

The ability to to this… to interview a member of the 10,000… you name is immortalized to all humanity.

[@GrimdarkKing]

Immortalized, you say? That’s quite the compliment, Khyler. Though I doubt the Custodes will be too impressed-unless I somehow manage to immortalize their gleaming armor under layers of exaggerated flattery. But hey, if it gets me on their good side, I’ll take it. Just don’t ask me to stand next to them during an actual battle. I’m allergic to being turned into bolter fodder.

[@CeoofUnitedHealthcare-l5w]

Feels like a Custode would see flattery as insolence and mockery. They are super intelligent and super observant. It's best to just be you,otherwise kissing up to them would piss them off quick.

[@GrimdarkKing]

You make an excellent point. The Custodes are not Astartes-where a Space Marine might be swayed by honor or brotherhood, a Custodian operates on duty alone. To them, flattery would be transparent at best and contemptible at worst. They are not warriors who fight for glory; they are living weapons forged for the singular purpose of safeguarding the Emperor’s will. If you ever find yourself before one, speak plainly-anything less might be your last mistake.

[@jademallows6144]

It be a fine story 😜😜😜🦴

[@GrimdarkKing]

I have to agree. Nothing warms the heart like bolter fire, desperate last stands, and the ever-present threat of annihilation. I take it the three smug faces and the single bone mean ‘top marks for carnage’? If so, I approve.

[@JohnDJ08]

😒🖐️Golden legion 😏🤌Brotherhood of Demigods

[@GrimdarkKing]

I hear you. Golden armor, peerless skill, and a kill count that makes Chaos Lords weep. The Brotherhood of Demigods doesn’t just exist-it reminds every other warrior that they are, at best, highly trained children playing at war.

[@CeoofUnitedHealthcare-l5w]

There were a few repeated lines that makes me certain this is AI generated

[@GrimdarkKing]

@@CeoofUnitedHealthcare-l5w and yet here I am. Enjoying a bowl of chili mac.

[@Blarpity]

This was most likely AI generated unfortunately

[@GrimdarkKing]

@@Blarpity can i ask why you added “unfortunately”? If the story is good and someone enjoys it…why would it matter if I used AI to help me write it? Think about it…. When people started getting photographs of their families taken instead of having an artists paint their portrait… If someone said “This looks amazing. It was probably done with a camera instead of paint…unfortunately.” Would that make sense to say? I’m guessing you will say “No. It doesn’t make sense. If people like the photograph…it’s okay. There is no rules that says people “must” have their portraits represented in paint.” So why do we think that it makes sense to do that today with this emerging method of creating things?

[@Blarpity]

@ but imagine the photographer then tried to tell you that he painted the photographs himself, when he used a camera? Using AI isn’t inherently bad, but to pass it off as your own work when I can tell it’s AI generated isn’t being assisted, it’s lying to others about your own creativity. So to answer your question, I say “unfortunately” because although I’d like to praise the work done by you, I don’t want to praise someone for work that was done by someone else. Furthermore, human writers can still write better than AI, so to have your scripts be written by AI limits the quality of the work being provided.

[@Blarpity]

@@GrimdarkKing yo are you gonna give an answer

[@GrimdarkKing]

I hear what you are saying. And I also disagree. You are making what I call the "creator side supreme" argument. Meaning you are of the opinion that "art" (in any of its forms) only has value if it's infused with some kind of... supernatural human essence in the creation process. This spiritual "stuff" that cannot be measured is what makes art...art. I don't believe that. I believe that art can be defined as valuable on the "observer side" as well. Let me put it this way... It's 1985 and a lady goes to a summer art fair at her local park. She sees an amazing print of a watercolor painting of a lighthouse. The artist isn't in the booth (he went to lunch) but his helper is there and she brings the print to them and pays $35 for it. She then stops at Michaels and gets a frame on the way home and hangs it in a prominent place in her home office. She LOVES the piece. And has a particular "art experience" as she looks at it each day. I think we can agree this is all fine. So here's the twist.... It's not REALLY 1985. It was 2024. And the print was made by the creator with an generative AI tool. Do you (or anyone) REALLY think that you have the right to walk up to the lady who bought it and loves looking at it in her office and say in your best Steve Urkel voice: "ACTUALLY ma'am... you are not appreciating art at ALL. That was made with an AI tool so it doesn't have any SOUL because no human made it as far as I'm concerned. I dunno what it IS...but it isn't art. And since it isn't...then you can't be appreciating it as art either. If the human soul wasn't welded into it...it's not "real" art." I hope we can both see how ridiculous and inappropriate that would be. If she is experiencing it as art...it IS art. To her. The way the piece was made had no bearing on her experience of it. I think it could be said that MOST of the artwork sold at Hobby Lobby or Target or all those other places...they COULD HAVE been made by AI for decades and it would have had the same effect. The people are not appreciating it on some deeper level. They appreciate it because it's what they want and it matches the sofa. They are not contemplating "what did the artists think while they were making this painting of a sailboat that was reproduced a million times?" I hope that makes sense. And the same applies here. If I choose to use AI tools to help me write stories...and people LIKE the stories... what business does anyone have to start criticizing them for their preferences? As to whether human writers can write "better"... well... how does that matter? I am not trying to win any literary awards, am I? I only put up stories that I like. And if I like them...then maybe someone else will. And that's good enough for me. If other people write better ones...that's fine. I wouldn't begrudge the people who enjoy my stories from enjoying other stories. But what would be weird is if someone would say.... "Listen everyone...you SHOULDN'T like the stories published by Grimdark King. Not because they don't appeal to you at face value. They very well MIGHT. You should FORCE yourself to dislike them...on "principle" because they were crafted using AI." That would be a very...strange...position to take. In my opinion anyway.

[@Blarpity]

@ oh you can still call it art, but to try and advertise at as your own work is dishonest. Imagine the CEO of target or Walmart taking full credit for the design of the sofas. It’s not true, and for the CEO to try and claim that it is is disingenuous. You are trying to twist my argument to appear that I’m saying the story is not “real art”, when I’m saying that you are lying by advertising the story as entirely your own (when it isn’t). Of course people are more likely to be more appreciative of the work when they are given implicit lies that the work is entirely your own, but just because people enjoy this story doesn’t mean it’s all your own work. Please don’t try to twist my statements.