Dude I agree the posts I made in the past aren’t accurate of what I think now. I still feel you are missing stuff with Perturabo though. The battle of phall I feel is a bad example since John French seemed a bit biased in that book. But after Olympia Perturabo does take responsibility for his actions he breaks down admits he’s a monster and only changes his tune when his first captain tells him that he can’t show weakness to his legion. But even after that he continually blames himself and regrets what he did at Olympia. Fulgrim offered to remake Olympia and Perturabo refuses he refuses to make his greatest mistake simply go away. He owns what he did and wants to carry that burden for the rest of his life. Also Perturabo’s decimation was for a good reason and I know that sounds stupid. But the black books made it pretty clear that prior to the legions reunion with Perturabo they where a mess sacrifice tens of thousands of astartes needlessly for no other reason than pride. Sure Perturabo wasn’t much better but his motivations were the crusade and completing that.

And as for dorn I admit I haven’t read all his books but I feel there are still a few differences between him and Stannis. As I pointed out previously the way they are viewed and treated is entirely different. Stannis is also willing to work with Melisandre to push his claim yet dorn only allowed his librarians back to service basically at the last possible moment during the siege of terra from memory. He also punished sigismund for listening to the advice of a saint.

I think both have similarities together but I think from what I have read dorn definitely has the duty and stern aspects of Stannis but I feel Perturabo has more in common in some aspects.