Pouncey wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
What would happen in the lore if people saw the Ecclesiarchy fielding an army of power armored men with bolters?

That would be a gross and deliberate violation of the Decree Passive. As a rival Inquisitor, I might take it upon myself to second a number of Space Marines, Navy and Guard assets to destroy that "rogue" Eccelesarcy force, and bring their leaders to summary justice.

Correct.

Now realize that completely practical power armor, especially with a helmet on, means Sisters of Battle would be easily mistaken for men. And that many people in the Imperium have really, really bad eyesight due to poor medical care.

That's a rather gross error on your part to suggest that just because you can't see their face makes them male.

If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

Adding extra emphasis to this. This is the crux of my argument to begin with, and it is also why making the armour more functional would not destroy its identity.

 Ashiraya wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Marines are very secularized monks, the imagery and language are dramatically less religious than the Sisters'. They've lost touch with their monastic roots in favour of their own distinct sci-fi persona.

Tell that to the Chaplains.

Monks don't need Chaplains. Traditionally a 'chaplain' is a cleric or lay clergyman attached to a secular institution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:


If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

Adding extra emphasis to this. This is the crux of my argument to begin with, and it is also why making the armour more functional would not destroy its identity.

Counterpoint to this, though, 'feminine' and 'impractical' aren't synonymous. I hate to be a broken record but I'm going to link the Eisenkern Panzerjagers up here again: http://dreamforge-games.com/products/eisenkern-panzerjagers-10-female-tank-hunters

Feminine? Yes. Practical/sensible? Also yes.

I'd argue the Astartes Chaplain is anything but traditional.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
So then, do you, or do you not oppose the redesigning of the Dark Eldar? The Scions? CSM Raptors?
Or is this an isolated case?

I don't play those factions either way, so I leave it up to their actual fans to decide whether they like the updates at all.

I also tend to choose whether I like a faction's looks or not based on what they currently look like. If I don't like them enough to play them, then I won't. I'll find a faction that works for me. In Planetside 2 I actually have a situation where I like all three of the factions for different reasons, but no one faction offers everything I actually want. So what I do there, is I have one character of each faction, and whenever I log on to play I decide which character I'm going to play based on which reason for liking them is most important to me at the moment.

I would disagree with you on that point. Looking female is not the main point. Actually saving the lives of females is.

If I saw men in the lore fighting directly for the Ecclesiarchy, I'd have an issue, as it breaks the Decree Passive. However, we're talking about women, not men. Unless you automatically assume that anyone in power armour is a man, that issue shouldn't come up if the Sisters have a recognisable armour set (Sallet Helms) and can be visually identified by armour alone as SOB.

Practical armor on humans generally makes people look more masculine. And I'm pretty sure people are going to start thinking the Ecclesiarchy might be fielding men against the law if their soldiers start actually looking like men.

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Counterpoint to this, though, 'feminine' and 'impractical' aren't synonymous. I hate to be a broken record but I'm going to link the Eisenkern Panzerjagers up here again: http://dreamforge-games.com/products/eisenkern-panzerjagers-10-female-tank-hunters

Feminine? Yes. Practical/sensible? Also yes.

Oh, those are fine.

I doubt you will get Pouncey to agree to a silhoette like that, though, no matter how much gothic bling, sallet helmets and fleur de lis you apply.

Unfortunately the Eisenkerns are all but alone in their niche.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Practical armor on humans generally makes people look more masculine.

No, it makes them look androgynous.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I'd argue the Astartes Chaplain is anything but traditional.

Then why does he do the same sort of things (and get described as filling the same role) as Priests in Guard armies/Dark Apostles to Cultists, which are chaplains in the traditional sense?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

That's a rather gross error on your part to suggest that just because you can't see their face makes them male.

If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

I did not know it was the Chaplain's traditional role to ensure the psykers among his troops stop using their powers.
Which is the traditional Chaplain role in Warhammer I might add. The faith thing was actually a later development.

i like the bob-cut, the corsets, the boob-plate, and combat heels...
my only beef with Sisters is that my collection was stolen :(
i can't be bothered to replace it with the same metal minis again, but if they were re-released in glorious plastic, i'd be all over that...

i have no desire for the re-imagining of a great concept...
nuns with guns are badass

the only minis that i didn't like enough to buy were the Repentia...
had they looked more like the art, with all of the scrolls pinned to their flesh, i definitely would have bought them...

almost everything else was awesome...
the Canoness, did survive the loss of my collection, and she will have the crossbars filed off of her boob-plate...
those are a bit much, even for me, because they break up the clean lines...

i am a big fan of Sisters because of their aesthetic, not despite it
sad to see that the range has been so gutted, and i really hope for a reboot of the whole line in plastic...

cheers
jah

 Ashiraya wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Counterpoint to this, though, 'feminine' and 'impractical' aren't synonymous. I hate to be a broken record but I'm going to link the Eisenkern Panzerjagers up here again: http://dreamforge-games.com/products/eisenkern-panzerjagers-10-female-tank-hunters

Feminine? Yes. Practical/sensible? Also yes.

Oh, those are fine.

I doubt you will get Pouncey to agree to a silhoette like that, though, no matter how much gothic bling, sallet helmets and fleur de lis you apply.

There's a lot of work to do, I grant.

(As a sidenote 'silhouette' is an awful, awful word. Has anyone ever been able to write it down correctly the first time without resorting to a spellchecker?)

 Ashiraya wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Practical armor on humans generally makes people look more masculine.

No, it makes them look androgynous.

By removing everything distinctly female about them, yes.

And they NEED to look like women even while wearing their battle armor.

 Pouncey wrote:
If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

I think you are overestimating how triggerhappy people are over the first excuse to doubt.

SoB have been around for millennia.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

That's a rather gross error on your part to suggest that just because you can't see their face makes them male.

If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

It doesn't really matter if people wonder at all. Nobody will draw a pistol and randomly execute Sisters. Anyone in a position to care would actually investigate things first.

 Ashiraya wrote:
I did not know it was the Chaplain's traditional role to ensure the psykers among his troops stop using their powers.
Which is the traditional Chaplain role in Warhammer I might add. The faith thing was actually a later development.

'Traditional' in the sense of the normal usage of the word 'chaplain' in the English language, not in the sense of the traditions of the setting.

 Pouncey wrote:

By removing everything distinctly female about them, yes.

And adding nothing male. No pecs, no penis, nothing.

And they NEED to look like women even while wearing their battle armor.

This is still fanfiction.

 jah-joshua wrote:
i like the bob-cut, the corsets, the boob-plate, and combat heels...
my only beef with Sisters is that my collection was stolen :(
i can't be bothered to replace it with the same metal minis again, but if they were re-released in glorious plastic, i'd be all over that...

i have no desire for the re-imagining of a great concept...
nuns with guns are badass

the only minis that i didn't like enough to buy were the Repentia...
had they looked more like the art, with all of the scrolls pinned to their flesh, i definitely would have bought them...

almost everything else was awesome...
the Canoness, did survive the loss of my collection, and she will have the crossbars filed off of her boob-plate...
those are a bit much, even for me, because they break up the clean lines...

i am a big fan of Sisters because of their aesthetic, not despite it
sad to see that the range has been so gutted, and i really hope for a reboot of the whole line in plastic...

cheers
jah

Fun fact: Despite Blanche's art, not a single Sister of Battle model actually has high heels at all. And much of the more recent art eschews the high heels entirely.

pm713 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

That's a rather gross error on your part to suggest that just because you can't see their face makes them male.

If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

It doesn't really matter if people wonder at all. Nobody will draw a pistol and randomly execute Sisters. Anyone in a position to care would actually investigate things first.

And the Sisters aren't about to stand about and let people randomly execute them. They have a large arsenal and a fondness for firing back.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

I think you are overestimating how triggerhappy people are over the first excuse to doubt.

SoB have been around for millennia.

And the aesthetic they have used for millennia is very exaggeratedly feminine.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

pm713 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

That's a rather gross error on your part to suggest that just because you can't see their face makes them male.

If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

It doesn't really matter if people wonder at all. Nobody will draw a pistol and randomly execute Sisters. Anyone in a position to care would actually investigate things first.

And the Sisters aren't about to stand about and let people randomly execute them. They have a large arsenal and a fondness for firing back.

Note the keyword nobody. As in the situation will not occur.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
'Traditional' in the sense of the normal usage of the word 'chaplain' in the English language, not in the sense of the traditions of the setting.

But it is not the traditional usage. Take a school chaplain for instance:

School chaplains are a fixture in religious and, more recently, secular schools.

Chaplains vary in whether they are attached to secular or religious environments.

pm713 wrote:

It doesn't really matter if people wonder at all. Nobody will draw a pistol and randomly execute Sisters. Anyone in a position to care would actually investigate things first.

This.

 Ashiraya wrote:
This is still fanfiction.

Every bit of the reasoning that goes into it only requires currently established lore.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pm713 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

That's a rather gross error on your part to suggest that just because you can't see their face makes them male.

If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

It doesn't really matter if people wonder at all. Nobody will draw a pistol and randomly execute Sisters. Anyone in a position to care would actually investigate things first.

Yup. They probably would check first

As a Sister of Battle Canoness, how much would you appreciate it if your armor design frequently led to Inquisitors checking all of your troops to make sure they're actually female?

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
This is still fanfiction.

Every bit of the reasoning that goes into it only requires currently established lore.

Irrelevant. That you do not have to retcon anything to add your lore does not make it canon.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
'Traditional' in the sense of the normal usage of the word 'chaplain' in the English language, not in the sense of the traditions of the setting.

But it is not the traditional usage. Take a school chaplain for instance:

School chaplains are a fixture in religious and, more recently, secular schools.

Chaplains vary in whether they are attached to secular or religious environments.

...Are you telling me students in religious schools are monks?

There's a pretty large difference of degree here.

 Pouncey wrote:
As a Sister of Battle Canoness, how much would you appreciate it if your armor design frequently led to Inquisitors checking all of your troops to make sure they're actually female?

Why doesn't this happen now? You can squeeze men into SoB armour. If they are this paranoid they would do searches already.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
As a Sister of Battle Canoness, how much would you appreciate it if your armor design frequently led to Inquisitors checking all of your troops to make sure they're actually female?

Why doesn't this happen now? You can squeeze men into SoB armour. If they are this paranoid they would do searches already.

Specifically because their current aesthetic leaves no one with any reason whatsoever to suspect that they might be men, because...

THEY. LOOK. FEMALE.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
...Are you telling me students in religious schools are monks?

There's a pretty large difference of degree here.

No, but apothecaries are not attached to any historic monk organisation I know of either. Nor are engineers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:


Specifically because their current aesthetic leaves no one with any reason whatsoever to suspect that they might be men, because...

THEY. LOOK. FEMALE.

So 'Imperium is dumb lol'?

Why don't they just ride in tanks and put tits on the tanks then. That should convince them.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Practical armor on humans generally makes people look more masculine.

No, it makes them look androgynous.

By removing everything distinctly female about them, yes.

And they NEED to look like women even while wearing their battle armor.

So you are saying that the baroque power armor, the fleur de lis, the ecclesiarchy logos and robes are insufficient to mark them out as Sisters of Battle. That doesn't make a lick of sense! All members of the Imperium are indoctrinated into the Imperial Cult and thus would be at the very least familiar with the symbols of the Ecclesiarchy and their practices. And anyone in a command position would likely know what a Sororitas looks like especially if they are going to be serving in the same warzone. Further, your hypothesis fails since such a misunderstanding could be cleared up by a suspicious Imperial official asking a Sororitas to speak. Or if he is particularly inquisitive, asking her to take off her helmet. The Imperium isn't so stupid as to engage in open warfare with one of it's largest institutions over such an easily resolved misunderstanding.

I mean, if the Imperium is so stupid as you claim the Sororitas might as well paint a massive vagina on their tanks.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
'Traditional' in the sense of the normal usage of the word 'chaplain' in the English language, not in the sense of the traditions of the setting.

But it is not the traditional usage. Take a school chaplain for instance:

School chaplains are a fixture in religious and, more recently, secular schools.

Chaplains vary in whether they are attached to secular or religious environments.

Also an amusing bit at the bottom of the Wikipedia page we're both reading off of now is that 'chaplain' can refer to a priest attached to a Roman Catholic convent, which means (by a weird parallel leap of logic) the Battle Sisters would be a more theologically appropriate army to have a unit called a 'Chaplain' than the Space Marines are.

Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

That's a rather gross error on your part to suggest that just because you can't see their face makes them male.

If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

Except - and here's the kicker - wouldn't the citizenry of the Imperium know to recognise a certain armour mark belonging to the SOB?
I mean, they can identify Mark VII Astartes Power Armour - why would they not also be told that anything wearing "this" mark is a Sister of Battle?

Plus, I'll echo the points above - the people who would care would also investigate.

Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

I think you are overestimating how triggerhappy people are over the first excuse to doubt.

SoB have been around for millennia.

And the aesthetic they have used for millennia is very exaggeratedly feminine.

Which is what we want to change.
Incidentally, if the armour is completely retconned, and Imperial citizens are taught that anything wearing X armour piece is a SOB, wouldn't that solve the issue?

Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
This is still fanfiction.

Every bit of the reasoning that goes into it only requires currently established lore.

And STILL fanfiction. Until that is confirmed in writing in the lore, it is not canon.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

pm713 wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

That's a rather gross error on your part to suggest that just because you can't see their face makes them male.

If the SOB armour is sufficiently different in appearance to SM armour, in that it is instantly recognisable as belonging to the SOB, what is the problem?
And note - it doesn't need to look feminine to stand out as different.

If SoB armor doesn't make her look like a woman, even if the aesthetic is different, people are going to start wondering if there's really a woman in there at all.

It doesn't really matter if people wonder at all. Nobody will draw a pistol and randomly execute Sisters. Anyone in a position to care would actually investigate things first.

Yup. They probably would check first

As a Sister of Battle Canoness, how much would you appreciate it if your armor design frequently led to Inquisitors checking all of your troops to make sure they're actually female?

Unless, as I've said before, it is assumed anything in the armour is female.
And Astartes armour has no masculine features (bar BA). Do Inquistors pop open Space Marine suits to see if they're all male?

considering how much complaining and fighting has been done on the topic of sister of battle and how they need a new model line, if GW ever does release new SoB codex and model line I would want them to sell out instantly and if they didn't I would want GW to say Feth it and Squat the whole line

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Practical armor on humans generally makes people look more masculine.

No, it makes them look androgynous.

By removing everything distinctly female about them, yes.

And they NEED to look like women even while wearing their battle armor.

So you are saying that the baroque power armor, the fleur de lis, the ecclesiarchy logos and robes are insufficient to mark them out as Sisters of Battle. That doesn't make a lick of sense! All members of the Imperium are indoctrinated into the Imperial Cult and thus would be at the very least familiar with the symbols of the Ecclesiarchy and their practices. And anyone in a command position would likely know what a Sororitas looks like especially if they are going to be serving in the same warzone. Further, your hypothesis fails since such a misunderstanding could be cleared up by a suspicious Imperial official asking a Sororitas to speak. Or if he is particularly inquisitive, asking her to take off her helmet. The Imperium isn't so stupid as to engage in open warfare with one of it's largest institutions over such an easily resolved misunderstanding.

I'm pointing out that there's a good reason for the Sisters of Battle to leave everyone who sees them with no doubt whatsoever that they are actually female.

And the way to do that, is to make them look so exaggeratedly female at all times that any excessively paranoid person who suggested they might be men would be laughed at and not taken seriously whatsoever.

Which necessitates their plate armor being shaped with exaggerated female traits.

Pouncey wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Practical armor on humans generally makes people look more masculine.

No, it makes them look androgynous.

By removing everything distinctly female about them, yes.

And they NEED to look like women even while wearing their battle armor.

So you are saying that the baroque power armor, the fleur de lis, the ecclesiarchy logos and robes are insufficient to mark them out as Sisters of Battle. That doesn't make a lick of sense! All members of the Imperium are indoctrinated into the Imperial Cult and thus would be at the very least familiar with the symbols of the Ecclesiarchy and their practices. And anyone in a command position would likely know what a Sororitas looks like especially if they are going to be serving in the same warzone. Further, your hypothesis fails since such a misunderstanding could be cleared up by a suspicious Imperial official asking a Sororitas to speak. Or if he is particularly inquisitive, asking her to take off her helmet. The Imperium isn't so stupid as to engage in open warfare with one of it's largest institutions over such an easily resolved misunderstanding.

I'm pointing out that there's a good reason for the Sisters of Battle to leave everyone who sees them with no doubt whatsoever that they are actually female.

And the way to do that, is to make them look so exaggeratedly female at all times that any excessively paranoid person who suggested they might be men would be laughed at and not taken seriously whatsoever.

Which necessitates their plate armor being shaped with exaggerated female traits.

So why haven't Space Marines got giant penises hanging off their power armour to show they're male?

 Ashiraya wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
...Are you telling me students in religious schools are monks?

There's a pretty large difference of degree here.

No, but apothecaries are not attached to any historic monk organisation I know of either. Nor are engineers.

Nope. Historical monks provided their own doctors/apothecaries, as Space Marines do. And the techpriest is the brother in the monastery who went away to be trained in IT, apparently. That one's harder, if we're drawing historical parallels and we're assuming Space Marines are 'monks' they're definitely from a military order, and those started to get disbanded before 'engineer' as a profession existed.

Also last I checked I was asserting that monks are ordained members of the clergy and shouldn't need an ambassador from the organized clergy to help with their religious needs, thus Space Marines seem to be losing touch with their monastic side.

Also while I talk around the issue in circles according to the definition of a 'chaplain' the Techpriest is the chaplain from the Machine Cult in amongst the Space Marines, so technically Techpriests should be Chaplains and Chaplains should be something else?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
...So why haven't Space Marines got giant penises hanging off their power armour to show they're male?

Some of the codpeices are pushing it.

Also because the legal justification for the existence of Space Marines isn't gender-dependent.

"WE DEMAND AN UPDATE TO THE ONLY FEMALE MODEL LINE!"

Ok we can do that

"WE DON'T WANT THEM TO LOOK LIKE GIRLS THOUGH!"

Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a predominantly female army? How would you tell as a passerby that your looking at a female army?

"TRIGGERED!"

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Except - and here's the kicker - wouldn't the citizenry of the Imperium know to recognise a certain armour mark belonging to the SOB?
I mean, they can identify Mark VII Astartes Power Armour - why would they not also be told that anything wearing "this" mark is a Sister of Battle?

Yeah, they know what Sisters of Battle look like. They're around more Sororitas than Astartes. What's your point?

Plus, I'll echo the points above - the people who would care would also investigate.

And thus inconvenience every Sister of Battle who needed to be inspected. Huge hassle.

Incidentally, if the armour is completely retconned, and Imperial citizens are taught that anything wearing X armour piece is a SOB, wouldn't that solve the issue?

Imperial Citizen A: Hey, you know those Sisters of Battle?
Imperial Citizen B: Yeah, what about them?
Imperial Citizen A: How do you even know they're a "Sister" of Battle?
Imperial Citizen B: I dunno, really. They keep their helmets on all the time.
Imperial Citizen A: You ever wonder if they might actually be men under that armor instead of women?

That is the conversation you want to avoid having happen at all. Because rumors would spread, and eventually an Inquisitor would take notice and investigate. Which would hassle the Sisters of Battle.

Unless, as I've said before, it is assumed anything in the armour is female.

If it doesn't actually look female, rumors are going to start that they might be men. You want to stop those rumors from even starting.

And Astartes armour has no masculine features (bar BA). Do Inquistors pop open Space Marine suits to see if they're all male?

What would happen if a Space Marine actually WERE female?

Would anyone even CARE, other than marvelling at the oddity?

Would anyone even do anything to stop that woman from being a Space Marine?

Space Marines being all-male is only because they ARE all male, not because they HAVE to be male to continue to exist.

Trying to talk this whole discussion of chaplains back around to being on-topic does anyone ever wonder why there aren't tech-adept Battle Sisters? Every other Imperial army either has Mechanicum adepts sent from elsewhere or their own people sent off and trained by the Mechanicum, shouldn't there be a Techpriestess?

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Trying to talk this whole discussion of chaplains back around to being on-topic does anyone ever wonder why there aren't tech-adept Battle Sisters? Every other Imperial army either has Mechanicum adepts sent from elsewhere or their own people sent off and trained by the Mechanicum, shouldn't there be a Techpriestess?

There should also be Techpriestesses in the Imperial Guard, since I don't think the Mechanicum are actually male-only in any way.

Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
...So why haven't Space Marines got giant penises hanging off their power armour to show they're male?

Some of the codpeices are pushing it.

Also because the legal justification for the existence of Space Marines isn't gender-dependent.

The codpieces are protective. Not symbolic.

And I'm afraid you must have missed every single reference to Space Marines as "Brothers", a "Brotherhood", the Emperor's "Sons", or just the entire recruiting process, which only goes through boys, either due to tradition, active misogyny, or inability for women to accept gene-seed.
Space Marines are required to be male.
Sisters of Battle are required to be female.

Neither needs to have overt sigils of their gender on their armour. All they need is for their armour to display their faction - Astartes, or Ecclesiarchy.

 Pouncey wrote:
Make your own models and don't try to mess with the current ones.

Was it not clear from our discussion earlier in the thread that this is exactly what I am planning to do?

I am not proposing ideas I would like to see Games Workshop use in any future plastic Sisters of Battle release, (and I am fairly certain that if they ever do make plastic Sisters of Battle they will look more-or-less identical to the metal ones, the only differences will be what using plastic sprues forces them to do compared to what using metal moulds stopped them from doing) what I am talking about, are ideas for models I intend to make now.

Anyway, it may be almost morbid to add more images to the thread but, here are a few more pictures, culled from the interwebs (absolutely not my artwork, I can't draw for toffee) that are all in my inspiration folder. And I know I'm only just introducing the word 'inspiration' to my posts but it might be useful to couch everything I say in terms of 'inspiration' and not as examples that I would slavishly and literally adhere to.



And lastly just a bit of fun, y'know, a joke image...

 Pouncey wrote:
If it doesn't actually look female, rumors are going to start that they might be men.

This discussion is getting pointless. You are asking us to disprove your fanfiction. The burden of proof is on you.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
...So why haven't Space Marines got giant penises hanging off their power armour to show they're male?

Some of the codpeices are pushing it.

Also because the legal justification for the existence of Space Marines isn't gender-dependent.

The codpieces are protective. Not symbolic.

And I'm afraid you must have missed every single reference to Space Marines as "Brothers", a "Brotherhood", the Emperor's "Sons", or just the entire recruiting process, which only goes through boys, either due to tradition, active misogyny, or inability for women to accept gene-seed.
Space Marines are required to be male.
Sisters of Battle are required to be female.

Neither needs to have overt sigils of their gender on their armour. All they need is for their armour to display their faction - Astartes, or Ecclesiarchy.

The actual reasons why Astartes are all-male and the Sisterhood are all-female are different though.

It is, in the lore, a biological impossibility for Space Marines to be female.

In the lore, the only thing stopping a man from going through Sororitas training and becoming a full Sister of Battle is that the Ecclesiarchy isn't allowed to do that by law. And people break laws all the time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
If it doesn't actually look female, rumors are going to start that they might be men.

This discussion is getting pointless. You are asking us to disprove your fanfiction. The burden of proof is on you.

. . . The amount of things that we believe go on in 40k lore that we only assume to be the case because it makes sense with the existing lore is staggering. Why is this special case suddenly "fanfiction" when it doesn't require a single bit of lore that doesn't actually exist, but instead extrapolating from the actual lore we know to be true?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
...So why haven't Space Marines got giant penises hanging off their power armour to show they're male?

Some of the codpeices are pushing it.

Also because the legal justification for the existence of Space Marines isn't gender-dependent.

The codpieces are protective. Not symbolic.

And I'm afraid you must have missed every single reference to Space Marines as "Brothers", a "Brotherhood", the Emperor's "Sons", or just the entire recruiting process, which only goes through boys, either due to tradition, active misogyny, or inability for women to accept gene-seed.
Space Marines are required to be male.
Sisters of Battle are required to be female.

Neither needs to have overt sigils of their gender on their armour. All they need is for their armour to display their faction - Astartes, or Ecclesiarchy.

'Some of the codpeices are pushing it' means 'yes, I know the codpeices are protective, but now and again you see one and go '...is that really necessary?''. At least I think it does.

Similarly 'Space Marines are all male' is a different statement from 'the only reason Space Marines exist as an army is that someone once made a rule saying the Emperor couldn't do genetic engineering experiments on women'. The Imperial Guard is segregated as a practicality/uptightness thing, but we aren't getting up in arms about whether they should make a big point out of their gender in the army's identity, are we?

 Pouncey wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Practical armor on humans generally makes people look more masculine.

No, it makes them look androgynous.

By removing everything distinctly female about them, yes.

And they NEED to look like women even while wearing their battle armor.

So you are saying that the baroque power armor, the fleur de lis, the ecclesiarchy logos and robes are insufficient to mark them out as Sisters of Battle. That doesn't make a lick of sense! All members of the Imperium are indoctrinated into the Imperial Cult and thus would be at the very least familiar with the symbols of the Ecclesiarchy and their practices. And anyone in a command position would likely know what a Sororitas looks like especially if they are going to be serving in the same warzone. Further, your hypothesis fails since such a misunderstanding could be cleared up by a suspicious Imperial official asking a Sororitas to speak. Or if he is particularly inquisitive, asking her to take off her helmet. The Imperium isn't so stupid as to engage in open warfare with one of it's largest institutions over such an easily resolved misunderstanding.

I'm pointing out that there's a good reason for the Sisters of Battle to leave everyone who sees them with no doubt whatsoever that they are actually female.

And the way to do that, is to make them look so exaggeratedly female at all times that any excessively paranoid person who suggested they might be men would be laughed at and not taken seriously whatsoever.

Which necessitates their plate armor being shaped with exaggerated female traits.

What? That still makes no sense. Any Imperial with enough the authority to challenge Sororitas would know what they look like. And further, anyone stupid enough to make such a mistake would find themselved with a bolter shell to the head.

I mean, if boob plate is the make or break according to you males could get away as being Sororitas if they wore it.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Except - and here's the kicker - wouldn't the citizenry of the Imperium know to recognise a certain armour mark belonging to the SOB?
I mean, they can identify Mark VII Astartes Power Armour - why would they not also be told that anything wearing "this" mark is a Sister of Battle?

Yeah, they know what Sisters of Battle look like. They're around more Sororitas than Astartes. What's your point?

Precisely. If the armour is retconned completely, they will assume anything in that armour is a Sororias, no? Like they currently do with Space Marines. No need to hypersexualise it.

Plus, I'll echo the points above - the people who would care would also investigate.

And thus inconvenience every Sister of Battle who needed to be inspected. Huge hassle.

None more so than these mandatory gender inspection tests they must do on Space Marines, eh?

Incidentally, if the armour is completely retconned, and Imperial citizens are taught that anything wearing X armour piece is a SOB, wouldn't that solve the issue?

Imperial Citizen A: Hey, you know those Sisters of Battle?
Imperial Citizen B: Yeah, what about them?
Imperial Citizen A: How do you even know they're a "Sister" of Battle?
Imperial Citizen B: I dunno, really. They keep their helmets on all the time.
Imperial Citizen A: You ever wonder if they might actually be men under that armor instead of women?

That is the conversation you want to avoid having happen at all. Because rumors would spread, and eventually an Inquisitor would take notice and investigate. Which would hassle the Sisters of Battle.

What about the ones they must obviously have about Space Marines:

"Hey, how do we know that Space Marines aren't Orks in disguise?"
"They keep their helmets on at all times!"
"And they don't show their human appendages which Orks don't have!"
"#orkmarinesconfirmed"

"Hey, how do we know that those Space Marines aren't Chaos Space Marines?"

"How do we know they aren't Eldar?"

Etc etc.

Unless, as I've said before, it is assumed anything in the armour is female.

If it doesn't actually look female, rumors are going to start that they might be men. You want to stop those rumors from even starting.

So what's to stop people wondering if Astartes are female?
Also, sorry to bring IRL into this, but does your view extend to trans and genderfluid? Do they need to show their gender externally too?

And Astartes armour has no masculine features (bar BA). Do Inquistors pop open Space Marine suits to see if they're all male?

What would happen if a Space Marine actually WERE female?

Would anyone even CARE, other than marvelling at the oddity?

Would anyone even do anything to stop that woman from being a Space Marine?

Space Marines being all-male is only because they ARE all male, not because they HAVE to be male to continue to exist.

Check my note on it either being tradition (which is sancrosanct in the Imperium) or because geneseed only affects males.
If tradition is the case, then Femarines is HERESY.

Seeing as we aren't given a reason as to why only men can be Astartes, only that only men are accepted, it could be either.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
If it doesn't actually look female, rumors are going to start that they might be men.

This discussion is getting pointless. You are asking us to disprove your fanfiction. The burden of proof is on you.

. . . The amount of things that we believe go on in 40k lore that we only assume to be the case because it makes sense with the existing lore is staggering. Why is this special case suddenly "fanfiction" when it doesn't require a single bit of lore that doesn't actually exist, but instead extrapolating from the actual lore we know to be true?

'The 2,200 Grey Knights and all the Inquisitorial Stormtroopers that disappeared between the 3e and 5e GK books are still out there doing their own thing, but Terra has declared them renegade and doesn't talk about them anymore'. is an example of fanfiction.

'The Battle Sisters have obviously female armour designs because they're exploiting a loophole in the laws of a bloated bureaucratic state in a politically expedient manner.' is an example of reading between the lines.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Practical armor on humans generally makes people look more masculine.

No, it makes them look androgynous.

By removing everything distinctly female about them, yes.

And they NEED to look like women even while wearing their battle armor.

So you are saying that the baroque power armor, the fleur de lis, the ecclesiarchy logos and robes are insufficient to mark them out as Sisters of Battle. That doesn't make a lick of sense! All members of the Imperium are indoctrinated into the Imperial Cult and thus would be at the very least familiar with the symbols of the Ecclesiarchy and their practices. And anyone in a command position would likely know what a Sororitas looks like especially if they are going to be serving in the same warzone. Further, your hypothesis fails since such a misunderstanding could be cleared up by a suspicious Imperial official asking a Sororitas to speak. Or if he is particularly inquisitive, asking her to take off her helmet. The Imperium isn't so stupid as to engage in open warfare with one of it's largest institutions over such an easily resolved misunderstanding.

I'm pointing out that there's a good reason for the Sisters of Battle to leave everyone who sees them with no doubt whatsoever that they are actually female.

And the way to do that, is to make them look so exaggeratedly female at all times that any excessively paranoid person who suggested they might be men would be laughed at and not taken seriously whatsoever.

Which necessitates their plate armor being shaped with exaggerated female traits.

What? That still makes no sense. Any Imperial with enough the authority to challenge Sororitas would know what they look like. And further, anyone stupid enough to make such a mistake would find themselved with a bolter shell to the head.

I mean, if boob plate is the make or break according to you males could get away as being Sororitas if they wore it.

Yup, they probably could get away with it. They may in fact be getting away with it already by simply never taking their helmet or armor off. But no one would even question it, for the same reason when you see someone in real life who is obviously a woman, or obviously a man, you don't even question, "Are they actually the sex they obviously aren't?" but when you see someone who appears androgynous, you do actually consider both as options. And when Sisters of Battle are only allowed to exist because they're female, you don't want people questioning whether they're a man or a woman under that armor. If their armor gives off an excessively feminine appearance, no one's going to question it but the most die-hard paranoid people, and they're going to question it no matter what. This way, not a single other person takes them seriously.

Pouncey, people aren't as dumb as you are making out. Not even the Imperium is that stupid. As matter of fact, such incompetency is what gets you killed in Imperial politics.

Years ago when my friend first introduced me to this game he showed me a handful of models from this game. And I do mean handful - one of the models was a space marine with a power fist. My initial reaction was 'how stupid is this...a soldier's gauntlet is the size of his chest'!

But then I got it. It's all an over the top space fantasy with crazy elements all around. So why are so many now griping about how the Sisters' armor isn't 'realistic' enough? Or it somehow offends their 21st century sensibilities?

Seriously? Like space marine armor is realistic or practical? Where a man could barely walk in those ridiculous bell-bottom armor pants and couldn't look over his shoulder to save his life. C'mon people, if anything the Sisters' armor is MORE realistic. But it hardly matters. Their whole look is intertwined to their background story as woven into the 40K background, not any current social paradigm.

If one doesn't like the look that's fine but I think they look pretty good. I'd keep any changes to a minimum and keep their distinctive look. It fits the theme of the game very nicely, I think.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Precisely. If the armour is retconned completely, they will assume anything in that armour is a Sororias, no? Like they currently do with Space Marines. No need to hypersexualise it.

Is there any actual reason a Sororitas can't be a man if the Ecclesiarchy chose to break the law that says they can't?

None more so than these mandatory gender inspection tests they must do on Space Marines, eh?

There's no law that says a Space Marine has to be male. If a Space Marine were female for some reason, it would be a divine miracle, but it wouldn't break any laws.

What about the ones they must obviously have about Space Marines:

"Hey, how do we know that Space Marines aren't Orks in disguise?"

"Silly, Orks don't use infiltrators."
"Oh yeah."

"Hey, how do we know that those Space Marines aren't Chaos Space Marines?"

"They don't have spikes and skulls on their armor and aren't killing us. Also, what's Chaos, and why is there a cyclonic torpedo aimed at us now?"

"How do we know they aren't Eldar?"

"Eldar consider us to be beneath them, they'd never lower themselves to impersonating a human."

Etc etc.

"Astartes Power Armor requires the Black Carapace to work, and that armor's moving."
"Oh yeah."

Unless, as I've said before, it is assumed anything in the armour is female.

If it doesn't actually look female, rumors are going to start that they might be men. You want to stop those rumors from even starting.

So what's to stop people wondering if Astartes are all male?
Also, sorry to bring IRL into this, but does this view extend to trans and genderfluid? Do they need to show their gender externally too?

Nothing would stop people from wondering if Astartes were actually male.

And no one would even really care if an Astartes were female, other than marveling at what should be biologically impossible.

Check my note on it either being tradition (which is sancrosanct in the Imperium) or because geneseed only affects males.
If tradition is the case, then Femarines is HERESY.

Does anyone actually look at a suit of Astartes power armor and even wonder if the person inside is female?

No.

Because everyone knows Astartes are biologically required to be male.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Pouncey, people aren't as dumb as you are making out. Not even the Imperium is that stupid. As matter of fact, such incompetency is what gets you killed in Imperial politics.

Maybe I'm basing it on what I've gleaned from Internet discussions on various subjects over the years. Just look at all the thought that's been put into figuring out whether TF2's Pyro is male or female. Now look at all the thought that's been put into figuring out whether TF2's Heavy is male or female.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Pouncey, people aren't as dumb as you are making out. Not even the Imperium is that stupid. As matter of fact, such incompetency is what gets you killed in Imperial politics.

The point that you all seem to be missing is what gender the people in the power armour are is almost completely irrelevant. The question isn't whether an individual soldier or a leader of some sort believes that any specific soldier under the Ecclesiarchy's command is male or female, the question is whether they can make use of the possibility.

If the Ecclesiarchy were to have troops that were ambiguous or masculine in appearance someone else in the mechanism of the Imperial government could use that to accuse them of flaunting or violating the Decree Passive, and use that as leverage to damage the Ecclesiarchy's political position in some way.

People in politics and government don't usually believe the rhetoric they're tossing around, especially where religion is involved, and even more especially in the sort of Stalinist nightmare state that the Imperium is usually presented as.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Pouncey, people aren't as dumb as you are making out. Not even the Imperium is that stupid. As matter of fact, such incompetency is what gets you killed in Imperial politics.

The point that you all seem to be missing is what gender the people in the power armour are is almost completely irrelevant. The question isn't whether an individual soldier or a leader of some sort believes that any specific soldier under the Ecclesiarchy's command is male or female, the question is whether they can make use of the possibility.

If the Ecclesiarchy were to have troops that were ambiguous or masculine in appearance someone else in the mechanism of the Imperial government could use that to accuse them of flaunting or violating the Decree Passive, and use that as leverage to damage the Ecclesiarchy's political position in some way.

People in politics and government don't usually believe the rhetoric they're tossing around, especially where religion is involved, and even more especially in the sort of Stalinist nightmare state that the Imperium is usually presented as.

Yup. I didn't consider that, but it's a better point than the one I was trying to make.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Pouncey, people aren't as dumb as you are making out. Not even the Imperium is that stupid. As matter of fact, such incompetency is what gets you killed in Imperial politics.

The point that you all seem to be missing is what gender the people in the power armour are is almost completely irrelevant. The question isn't whether an individual soldier or a leader of some sort believes that any specific soldier under the Ecclesiarchy's command is male or female, the question is whether they can make use of the possibility.

If the Ecclesiarchy were to have troops that were ambiguous or masculine in appearance someone else in the mechanism of the Imperial government could use that to accuse them of flaunting or violating the Decree Passive, and use that as leverage to damage the Ecclesiarchy's political position in some way.

People in politics and government don't usually believe the rhetoric they're tossing around, especially where religion is involved, and even more especially in the sort of Stalinist nightmare state that the Imperium is usually presented as.

Except such accusations could easily be rebuffed by a simple examination of the individual involved. Plus, the Adepta Sororitas are an institution that has existed for Millennia. A removal of boob plate to us would be a sudden new radical change that would make the gender of the individuals involved be questioned. To the people of the Imperium it would just be the armor the SoB wear. Plus, boob plate wouldn't make a difference to disuade political opponents. By your logic if they found a butch Sororitas in boob plate they could just as easily claim that the Ecclesiarchy is flaunting the Degree Passive and using boob plate to hide it.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Snip

Rubbish.

If that sort of political gambit were going to be played it would be much easier to do with the Frateris Militia, it would be simplicity itself to claim that some random priest with a lasgun was directly contravening the Decree Passive and was in fact proof of a return to the bad old days of the Frateris Templars.

The entire discussion about SoB armour needing to be hyper-feminine to prove they are actually women is specious nonsense.

http://dreamforge-games.com/products/eisenkern-panzerjagers-10-female-tank-hunters


More realistic, no boob plate, $2.20 a model, and I see pretty much no one using them as Adepta Sororitas.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
...Except such accusations could easily be rebuffed by a simple examination of the individual involved...

I'm going to repeat myself here. "The gender of the people in the army is irrelevant." The point isn't whether the people throwing out the accusations are correct, the point is that they can make a political point out of it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gogsnik wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Snip

Rubbish.

If that sort of political gambit were going to be played it would be much easier to do with the Frateris Militia, it would be simplicity itself to claim that some random priest with a lasgun was directly contravening the Decree Passive and was in fact proof of a return to the bad old days of the Frateris Templars.

The entire discussion about SoB armour needing to be hyper-feminine to prove they are actually women is specious nonsense.

It's actually getting strawmanned both ways a bit and getting turned into specious nonsense. I hopped in here because Pouncey was making what I thought was a valid point about the political environment of the setting and it managed to get sent off into the weeds where people were arguing about whether a soldier in the field would know or care what gender the power-armoured detachment next to him was.

And the Frateris militia are a dispirate rabble with no chain of command and very loosely associated with the Ecclesiarchy, last I checked. The Decree Passive doesn't say the Ecclesiarchy can't dump an agitator outside their formal hierarchy in a slum with a crate of lasguns, look the other way, and whistle, it says they can't maintain a standing army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 adamsouza wrote:
http://dreamforge-games.com/products/eisenkern-panzerjagers-10-female-tank-hunters


More realistic, no boob plate, $2.20 a model, and I see pretty much no one using them as Adepta Sororitas.

I was trying to give an example of a model that managed to look both feminine and practical, not an example of a perfect Battle Sisters proxy.

I'm going to work on some and see what I come up with, but given the time/greenstuff likely to be required I doubt it'll be a widespread solution.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
...Except such accusations could easily be rebuffed by a simple examination of the individual involved...

I'm going to repeat myself here. "The gender of the people in the army is irrelevant." The point isn't whether the people throwing out the accusations are correct, the point is that they can make a political point out of it.

And my point is that boob plate would do nothing to disuade those people from making that point. They could point to any butch sister and declare them a man. They could declare they saw a man regardless of the attractiveness of the sisters he saw. He could declare he saw a man even if he never saw a sister in his life. Anyone willing to make such ridiculous accusations because he didn't find a Sister attractive probably doesn't care or need evidence. Even you yourself admit this since that is the crux of your argument.

My overall point is that no one of importance would believe them because it would be such a ridiculous claim. And if they did boob plate wouldn't make an iota of difference.

To use your own words to show why this whole line of discussion is specious:

The point isn't whether the people throwing out the accusations are correct, the point is that they can make a political point out of it.

The Frateris Militia encompasses all manner of individuals with associations to the Ministorum. A political opponent, as per the example used, could simply claim that the Ecclesiarchy were raising 'men under arms' and thereby breaking the Decree Passive thus allowing this political opponent to do whatever it is they hope to do by making such a claim.

And just as you have already said, "The point isn't whether the people throwing out the accusations are correct, the point is that they can make a political point out of it."


This is why it is a specious argument (amongst us real people in the thread, not in-universe), seemingly plausible yet, with very little critical thinking applied, utterly ridiculous.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
...Except such accusations could easily be rebuffed by a simple examination of the individual involved...

I'm going to repeat myself here. "The gender of the people in the army is irrelevant." The point isn't whether the people throwing out the accusations are correct, the point is that they can make a political point out of it.

And my point is that boob plate would do nothing to disuade those people from making that point. They could point to any butch sister and declare them a man. They could declare they saw a man regardless of the attractiveness of the sisters he saw. He could declare he saw a man even if he never saw a sister in his life. Anyone willing to make such ridiculous accusations because he didn't find a Sister attractive probably doesn't care or need evidence. Even you yourself admit this since that is the crux of your argument.

My overall point is that no one of importance would believe them because it would be such a ridiculous claim. And if they did boob plate wouldn't make an iota of difference.

You're wandering off into the weeds here. 'Attractiveness' is an irrelevant point, and this isn't about an individual trying to convince a person in power. This is about the delicate balance of power that is large bureaucratic systems and the power of political theatre.

The Imperium (like any large state) is composed of a mishmash of departments trying to push their own agenda. If someone in power (let's call him Lord Fargle from the Munitorium) wants something that conflicts with the Ecclesiarchy's agenda (let's say he wants to divert a shipment of fine Ultramar marble destined for Ecclesiarch Hans' new palace to his own) he could stand up in a meeting of the High Lords and say 'Ecclesiarch Hans is flaunting the Decree Passive! Look at these images of the men under arms he's maintaining! Look at these witnesses I've collected who agree with me! He should be handed over to the Inquisition for investigation!'.

And nobody in the room is going to care what the genitals behind the armour look like. They're going to take one side or the other based on their own agendas; it may suit them at that point to look like Fargle's evidence is convincing, it may suit them to remain unconvinced. They may want something from one or the other. They may need to appear to be more or less zealous at that point in time.

And yes, Lord Fargle could absolutely do all of this without the Battle Sisters as a sticking point. He could pick on something else, he could make up an illegitimate abhuman child or cult involvement or something else entirely, but the more strictly Ecclesiarch Hans APPEARS to toe the line the harder it is for Fargle to make something stick.

My point is that the facts of the case are vastly less important than the theater, and the costuming in this case is a component of the theater.

Personally I'd be really happy to just avoid the lore discussions and stick with just maintaining an aesthetic that still looks good after 20 years, and disregard the notion of practical design even being a consideration in a technologically backwards faction that makes things like the Taurox where it has four treads but none of the treads are actually long enough to be more useful than wheels.

SemperMortis wrote:
considering how much complaining and fighting has been done on the topic of sister of battle and how they need a new model line, if GW ever does release new SoB codex and model line I would want them to sell out instantly and if they didn't I would want GW to say Feth it and Squat the whole line

For all the complaining and fighting that goes on page after page.... you'll note it's the same handful of people throughout the thread, which is the same handful of people through the previous thread, which was they same handful of people through the previous previous thread

Goodness knows realistically how many people would want Sisters if new models came out, these days because of the extremely lax 40k rules I guess a lot of people might want to buy allied contingents of them.

 Gogsnik wrote:
To use your own words to show why this whole line of discussion is specious:

The point isn't whether the people throwing out the accusations are correct, the point is that they can make a political point out of it.

The Frateris Militia encompasses all manner of individuals with associations to the Ministorum. A political opponent, as per the example used, could simply claim that the Ecclesiarchy were raising 'men under arms' and thereby breaking the Decree Passive thus allowing this political opponent to do whatever it is they hope to do by making such a claim.

And just as you have already said, "The point isn't whether the people throwing out the accusations are correct, the point is that they can make a political point out of it."


This is why it is a specious argument (amongst us real people in the thread, not in-universe), seemingly plausible yet, with very little critical thinking applied, utterly ridiculous.

You seem to be running off a very simplified interpretation of how politics work. An opponent could try and score points by claiming that either the Sisters or the Frateris are breaches of the Decree Passive. Whether those attacks would work or not is dependent on how well they were prepared, and the Ecclesiarchy spends time and energy defending itself from potential attacks by keeping the Frateris decentralized and informal ('men', not necessarily 'under arms'), and by playing up the theatrical role of the Sisters as 'women under arms' rather than 'men under arms'.

The fact that they're vulnerable to attack from one angle doesn't override the fact that they're vulnerable to attack from another angle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Personally I'd be really happy to just avoid the lore discussions and stick with just maintaining an aesthetic that still looks good after 20 years, and disregard the notion of practical design even being a consideration in a technologically backwards faction that makes things like the Taurox where it has four treads but none of the treads are actually long enough to be more useful than wheels.

I was trying, but apparently a simple clarification of an earlier lore point is too complicated to get over with in a post or two.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
considering how much complaining and fighting has been done on the topic of sister of battle and how they need a new model line, if GW ever does release new SoB codex and model line I would want them to sell out instantly and if they didn't I would want GW to say Feth it and Squat the whole line

For all the complaining and fighting that goes on page after page.... you'll note it's the same handful of people throughout the thread, which is the same handful of people through the previous thread, which was they same handful of people through the previous previous thread

Goodness knows realistically how many people would want Sisters if new models came out, these days because of the extremely lax 40k rules I guess a lot of people might want to buy allied contingents of them.

I brought up plastic Sisters of Battle with my local gaming store's... employee who happened to be working that day. He said I'd never be able to buy any of the store's supply because he was going to buy it all.

Maybe it's just that most of the people who might play the faction if it had plastic models simply avoid these threads since they're not very fun, and they realize posting about it's not going to make it happen.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
...Except such accusations could easily be rebuffed by a simple examination of the individual involved...

I'm going to repeat myself here. "The gender of the people in the army is irrelevant." The point isn't whether the people throwing out the accusations are correct, the point is that they can make a political point out of it.

And my point is that boob plate would do nothing to disuade those people from making that point. They could point to any butch sister and declare them a man. They could declare they saw a man regardless of the attractiveness of the sisters he saw. He could declare he saw a man even if he never saw a sister in his life. Anyone willing to make such ridiculous accusations because he didn't find a Sister attractive probably doesn't care or need evidence. Even you yourself admit this since that is the crux of your argument.

My overall point is that no one of importance would believe them because it would be such a ridiculous claim. And if they did boob plate wouldn't make an iota of difference.

You're wandering off into the weeds here. 'Attractiveness' is an irrelevant point, and this isn't about an individual trying to convince a person in power. This is about the delicate balance of power that is large bureaucratic systems and the power of political theatre.

The Imperium (like any large state) is composed of a mishmash of departments trying to push their own agenda. If someone in power (let's call him Lord Fargle from the Munitorium) wants something that conflicts with the Ecclesiarchy's agenda (let's say he wants to divert a shipment of fine Ultramar marble destined for Ecclesiarch Hans' new palace to his own) he could stand up in a meeting of the High Lords and say 'Ecclesiarch Hans is flaunting the Decree Passive! Look at these images of the men under arms he's maintaining! Look at these witnesses I've collected who agree with me! He should be handed over to the Inquisition for investigation!'.

And nobody in the room is going to care what the genitals behind the armour look like. They're going to take one side or the other based on their own agendas; it may suit them at that point to look like Fargle's evidence is convincing, it may suit them to remain unconvinced. They may want something from one or the other. They may need to appear to be more or less zealous at that point in time.

And yes, Lord Fargle could absolutely do all of this without the Battle Sisters as a sticking point. He could pick on something else, he could make up an illegitimate abhuman child or cult involvement or something else entirely, but the more strictly Ecclesiarch Hans APPEARS to toe the line the harder it is for Fargle to make something stick.

My point is that the facts of the case are vastly less important than the theater, and the costuming in this case is a component of the theater.

Okay, and my point is that the boob plate is largely irrelevant since it is hardly a bullet proof defence against such ridiculous accusations. In your scenario, Fargle could make any insinuation of violations of the degree passive. Evidence can be falsified. Witnesses can be bribed.

But this is pretty much hypothetical v hypothetical. So why don't we just agree to disagree before we drag this on for pages?

 Pouncey wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
considering how much complaining and fighting has been done on the topic of sister of battle and how they need a new model line, if GW ever does release new SoB codex and model line I would want them to sell out instantly and if they didn't I would want GW to say Feth it and Squat the whole line

For all the complaining and fighting that goes on page after page.... you'll note it's the same handful of people throughout the thread, which is the same handful of people through the previous thread, which was they same handful of people through the previous previous thread

Goodness knows realistically how many people would want Sisters if new models came out, these days because of the extremely lax 40k rules I guess a lot of people might want to buy allied contingents of them.

I brought up plastic Sisters of Battle with my local gaming store's... employee who happened to be working that day. He said I'd never be able to buy any of the store's supply because he was going to buy it all.

Maybe it's just that most of the people who might play the faction if it had plastic models simply avoid these threads since they're not very fun, and they realize posting about it's not going to make it happen.

Anecdotal evidence like that is mostly useless. Quirky things will often have small groups of fans who'll buy out a store's supply in one hit, but overall might struggle to break even.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
considering how much complaining and fighting has been done on the topic of sister of battle and how they need a new model line, if GW ever does release new SoB codex and model line I would want them to sell out instantly and if they didn't I would want GW to say Feth it and Squat the whole line

For all the complaining and fighting that goes on page after page.... you'll note it's the same handful of people throughout the thread, which is the same handful of people through the previous thread, which was they same handful of people through the previous previous thread

Goodness knows realistically how many people would want Sisters if new models came out, these days because of the extremely lax 40k rules I guess a lot of people might want to buy allied contingents of them.

I brought up plastic Sisters of Battle with my local gaming store's... employee who happened to be working that day. He said I'd never be able to buy any of the store's supply because he was going to buy it all.

Maybe it's just that most of the people who might play the faction if it had plastic models simply avoid these threads since they're not very fun, and they realize posting about it's not going to make it happen.

Anecdotal evidence like that is mostly useless. Quirky things will often have small groups of fans who'll buy out a store's supply in one hit, but overall might struggle to break even.

I don't think we can really answer how many people would buy plastic Sisters of Battle without doing a poll that extends beyond Dakka and covers every major 40k wargaming community that we can find.

So... anecdotal evidence is the best I can do, unfortunately.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
You seem to be running off a very simplified interpretation of how politics work.

Am I really? And here I thought I was calling absolute BS on this line of reasoning as to why models of Sisters of Battle must have hyper-feminised armour.

 Gogsnik wrote:

This is why it is a specious argument (amongst us real people in the thread, not in-universe), seemingly plausible yet, with very little critical thinking applied, utterly ridiculous.

 Pouncey wrote:
And they NEED to look like women even while wearing their battle armor.

Actually, they just need to look different from Space Marines, and they need to look different from Eldars, and they need to look different from Stormtroopers. There is a lot of design space to play with that doesn't necessarily mandate sexualization, much less the hypersexualization / bondage / fetish look from 2E.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
And they NEED to look like women even while wearing their battle armor.

Actually, they just need to look different from Space Marines, and they need to look different from Eldars, and they need to look different from Stormtroopers. There is a lot of design space to play with that doesn't necessarily mandate sexualization, much less the hypersexualization / bondage / fetish look from 2E.

How much did the look of Space Marines change from what it used to be in 2nd edition?

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
...So why haven't Space Marines got giant penises hanging off their power armour to show they're male?

Some of the codpeices are pushing it.

Also because the legal justification for the existence of Space Marines isn't gender-dependent.

More importantly, official canon states unequivocally that the SM process is not possible for females. Full stop. It's an all He-Man Woman-Hater's Club.

Now, that doesn't preclude SMs from being ragingly gay (they totally are!), but that's another discussion.

 Gogsnik wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
You seem to be running off a very simplified interpretation of how politics work.

Am I really? And here I thought I was calling absolute BS on this line of reasoning as to why models of Sisters of Battle must have hyper-feminised armour.

Last I checked I was trying to clarify an in-universe justification for Battle Sisters having distinctly feminine as opposed to androgynous armour, not giving an argument why they must have 'hyper-feminised' armour. I was trying to help with an argument I thought was getting off track, I wasn't trying to hop in on the deep end of an extreme position.

I realize I didn't clarify that particularly well when I hopped into this fight and that's my bad, but I'd appreciate not being strawmanned now that I've made my actual position clear.

 Gogsnik wrote:

OMFG. Dying.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
If the Ecclesiarchy were to have troops that were ambiguous or masculine in appearance someone else in the mechanism of the Imperial government could use that to accuse them of flaunting or violating the Decree Passive, and use that as leverage to damage the Ecclesiarchy's political position in some way.

Except such accusations could easily be rebuffed by a simple examination of the individual involved.

As a rival Inquisitor, nothing would please me more than to subject a unit of Battle Sisters to such a "simple examination".

Which, BTW, is hugely invasive and degrading.

Which is why, as a rival Inquisitor, I'd do it. Not because I gave the slightest care as to the accusation or the result, but because it is a demonstration of power over the Ecclesiarchy.

And doing so to Battle Sisters is especially powerful, because you necessarily strip them of their armor in the process.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
...So why haven't Space Marines got giant penises hanging off their power armour to show they're male?

Some of the codpeices are pushing it.

Also because the legal justification for the existence of Space Marines isn't gender-dependent.

More importantly, official canon states unequivocally that the SM process is not possible for females. Full stop. It's an all He-Man Woman-Hater's Club.

Now, that doesn't preclude SMs from being ragingly gay (they totally are!), but that's another discussion.

You're making a bit of a leap here. 'Being female' is a large part of the Battle Sisters' identity in-universe because of the circumstances of their founding, not because they're all women. 'Being male' isn't a large part of the Space Marines' identity in-universe, whether they're all men or not.

No, I'm not. Official canon specifically stated that women cannot become Space Marines, that they do not survive the process.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
As a rival Inquisitor, nothing would please me more than to subject a unit of Battle Sisters to such a "simple examination".

Which, BTW, is hugely invasive and degrading.

Which is why, as a rival Inquisitor, I'd do it. Not because I gave the slightest care as to the accusation or the result, but because it is a demonstration of power over the Ecclesiarchy.

And doing so to Battle Sisters is especially powerful, because you necessarily strip them of their armor in the process.

Sounds like a good reason for the Ecclesiarchy to find a way to avoid that happening.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
No, I'm not. Official canon specifically stated that women cannot become Space Marines, that they do not survive the process.

I think they meant that Space Marines generally don't care very much that they're all male, while Sisters of Battle care a lot more that they're all female because their origins.

I could be wrong though.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
No, I'm not. Official canon specifically stated that women cannot become Space Marines, that they do not survive the process.

I'm making no assertions about female Space Marines, I don't know why you're coming back to that.

'Gender is a large part of the army's identity' implies 'the army is all one gender', the reverse is not true. Unless you're suggesting Guard regiments should all be making a big deal out of their genders?

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Snip

I can see now why people get such high post counts when they spend time in General Discussion.

To clarify the last few pages as briefly as possible, and I hold my hands up and take full responsibility for the whole mess, it was my picture that started it all off after all... Anyway, I put a picture into the thread (Not. My. Artwork) to show the general gist of the sort of look I will use as a basis for some SoB models I am planning to make. This picture irked Pouncey and from that came a, frankly, stupid, in-universe justification for why the models must look overtly feminine. I read the back-and-forth for a page or so and then could contain myself no-longer and with Pouncey-like levels of frothing rage (well maybe not quite that rage-filled) I just had to say what utter, utter drivel such a line of reasoning is. I apologise for this, I just couldn't stop myself.

Anyway, yeah, I guess that's quite enough of all that.


EDIT: Spelling! Again!!

 Gogsnik wrote:
To clarify the last few pages as briefly as possible, and I hold my hands up and take full responsibility for the whole mess, it was my picture that started it all off after all... Anyway, I put a picture into the thread (Not. My. Artwork) to show the general gist of the sort of look I will use as a basis for some SoB models I am planning to make.

I did encourage you, and I'm not sure I should feel bad about that. I must say it's was a cool, interesting design, it's not the direction I went in, but then I'm unreasonably attached to the faux-corset part of the current SoB design.

 Gogsnik wrote:

Anyway, it may be almost morbid to add more images to the thread but, here are a few more pictures, culled from the interwebs (absolutely not my artwork, I can't draw for toffee) that are all in my inspiration folder. And I know I'm only just introducing the word 'inspiration' to my posts but it might be useful to couch everything I say in terms of 'inspiration' and not as examples that I would slavishly and literally adhere to.

Spoiler:

Those are also very cool, and I think I get a better idea where you're going. I look forward to the final results of the project.

 Gogsnik wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Snip

I can see now why people get such high post counts when they spend time in General Discussion.

To clarify the last few pages as briefly as possible, and I hold my hands up and take full responsibility for the whole mess, it was my picture that started it all off after all... Anyway, I put a picture into the thread (Not. My. Artwork) to show the general gist of the sort of look I will use as a basis for some SoB models I am planning to make. This picture irked Pouncey and from that came a, frankly, stupid, in-universe justification for why the models must look overtly feminine. I read the back-and-forth for a page or so and then could contain myself no-longer and with Pouncey-like levels of frothing rage (well maybe not quite that rage-filled) I just had to say what utter, utter drivel such a line of reasoning is. I apologise for this, I just couldn't stop myself.

Anyway, yeah, I guess that's quite enough of all that.


EDIT: Spelling! Again!!

Actually I've used that lore justification previously. It's not like I came up with it today.

And the reason for my irking was a lot of factors coming together in a bad way all at the same time, not just your picture.

I'm motivated to crack on with my models now, it's something I've been planning for a long time and I only recently got some bits a pieces to get started with so, no excuses now.

 Gogsnik wrote:
I'm motivated to crack on with my models now, it's something I've been planning for a long time and I only recently got some bits a pieces to get started with so, no excuses now.

Okay.

Have fun! : D

 Gogsnik wrote:
I'm motivated to crack on with my models now, it's something I've been planning for a long time and I only recently got some bits a pieces to get started with so, no excuses now.

Wooo! Good luck!

I wonder...

In what way is the Imperium deciding to do anything in a practical manner even supported by the lore?

Their 40th millennium tanks use design decisions that went out of style before World War 2. Their understanding of science is so lacking that it effectively no longer exists. Ignorance is considered a positive trait, and tradition is hugely important.

Do they even have the understanding of physics anymore that would be needed to design power armor that is actually practical?

 Pouncey wrote:
I don't think we can really answer how many people would buy plastic Sisters of Battle without doing a poll that extends beyond Dakka and covers every major 40k wargaming community that we can find.

So... anecdotal evidence is the best I can do, unfortunately.

It was a long time ago, but I can only imagine Sisters didn't sell well when they first came out back in 2nd edition otherwise GW surely would have pursued them harder.

Necrons also came out around the same time in all metal and managed to get picked up as a full army and converted to plastic in the next edition.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
I don't think we can really answer how many people would buy plastic Sisters of Battle without doing a poll that extends beyond Dakka and covers every major 40k wargaming community that we can find.

So... anecdotal evidence is the best I can do, unfortunately.

It was a long time ago, but I can only imagine Sisters didn't sell well when they first came out back in 2nd edition otherwise GW surely would have pursued them harder.

Necrons also came out around the same time in all metal and managed to get picked up as a full army and converted to plastic in the next edition.

2nd was almost 20 years ago...

And if you find people who like the Sisters of Battle and want to play them, but don't, and ask them why they don't have an army, the number 1 reason you'll get is that they're too expensive. The number 2 reason is that all their models are metal.

Going to plastic models solves both of those problems.

 Pouncey wrote:
And, as a schizophrenic, I rely heavily on being able to trust the people around me. My functioning as a human being relies on people not trying to deceive me, or lie to me, or trick me. Because my mind sometimes deceives itself, so I have to rely on the people around me telling me the truth to know what's going on. So, being lied to is one of the worst things that can happen to me. And I felt like you lied to me to get me in favor of changing the one army I love in Warhammer 40k, a game I've spent 15 years of my life being into, into something I wouldn't even recognize or even like whatsoever.

We were not trying to trick or deceive you. We just had a different appreciation of how different from the current look that fan-art was from the current aesthetic.
Subjective stuff is subjective but we were in good faith.

 Pouncey wrote:
Do you understand now, why I reacted the way I did?

Yeah, we do. That's why I didn't answer in an aggressive fashion, or report you, but rather tried to explain calmly and without being antagonistic why you went too far. It's okay, we understand.

 Pouncey wrote:
When the only reason the Ecclesiarchy even has an army of powered armored troops at all is because they're female, yes, yes I think they absolutely should look as female as possible.

I disagree with that statement. I mean, let's look at the timeline of the lore together. At the death ot the Emperor, when Guilliman (and possibly the other high lords) decided that not only should the marines be split into chapters, but also the Imperial Army should be split between between the Navy and the Guard, the Ecclesiarchy didn't even exist. So they were not affected by this. Then later, the Ecclesiarchy began growing and growing, ended up becoming the official religion of the Imperium, and having a lot of power. At this point, they started building a huge army, the Frateris Militia. When the leader of the Administratum, Goge Vandire, decided to kill the current Ecclesiarch and take his place, he did create the direct ancestor of the Sisters of Battle, i.e. the Brides of the Emperor. When he was deposed by a combined force of Space Marines and Mechanicum, the Imperium needed a new Ecclesiarch, someone who could bring the very, very much required stability at this time in the Imperium. And the only man that could do that was Sebastian Thor. But Sebastian Thor didn't want to. So they had to bargain with him. Part of the negotiation was about if the Ecclesiarchy should have armed forces or not. Thor wanted them to keep having some military might, at the very least to be able to defend themselves. The people that were trying to force him to become Ecclesiarch wanted to disband all the Ecclesiarchy's military forces. The middle ground they found was the Decree Passive, but it only worked as a middle ground because it allowed the Sisters of Battle to remain active. Else Thor wouldn't have agreed to it. So, basically, the only reason the Ecclesiarchy even has an army of powered armored troops at all is that Thor made this one of the condition for him to accept to be Ecclesiarch. The fact they are all women is a by-product of history.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:
And, as a schizophrenic, I rely heavily on being able to trust the people around me. My functioning as a human being relies on people not trying to deceive me, or lie to me, or trick me. Because my mind sometimes deceives itself, so I have to rely on the people around me telling me the truth to know what's going on. So, being lied to is one of the worst things that can happen to me. And I felt like you lied to me to get me in favor of changing the one army I love in Warhammer 40k, a game I've spent 15 years of my life being into, into something I wouldn't even recognize or even like whatsoever.

We were not trying to trick or deceive you. We just had a different appreciation of how different from the current look that fan-art was from the current aesthetic.
Subjective stuff is subjective but we were in good faith.

 Pouncey wrote:
Do you understand now, why I reacted the way I did?

Yeah, we do. That's why I didn't answer in an aggressive fashion, or report you, but rather tried to explain calmly and without being antagonistic why you went too far. It's okay, we understand.

 Pouncey wrote:
When the only reason the Ecclesiarchy even has an army of powered armored troops at all is because they're female, yes, yes I think they absolutely should look as female as possible.

I disagree with that statement. I mean, let's look at the timeline of the lore together. At the death ot the Emperor, when Guilliman (and possibly the other high lords) decided that not only should the marines be split into chapters, but also the Imperial Army should be split between between the Navy and the Guard, the Ecclesiarchy didn't even exist. So they were not affected by this. Then later, the Ecclesiarchy began growing and growing, ended up becoming the official religion of the Imperium, and having a lot of power. At this point, they started building a huge army, the Frateris Militia. When the leader of the Administratum, Goge Vandire, decided to kill the current Ecclesiarch and take his place, he did create the direct ancestor of the Sisters of Battle, i.e. the Brides of the Emperor. When he was deposed by a combined force of Space Marines and Mechanicum, the Imperium needed a new Ecclesiarch, someone who could bring the very, very much required stability at this time in the Imperium. And the only man that could do that was Sebastian Thor. But Sebastian Thor didn't want to. So they had to bargain with him. Part of the negotiation was about if the Ecclesiarchy should have armed forces or not. Thor wanted them to keep having some military might, at the very least to be able to defend themselves. The people that were trying to force him to become Ecclesiarch wanted to disband all the Ecclesiarchy's military forces. The middle ground they found was the Decree Passive, but it only worked as a middle ground because it allowed the Sisters of Battle to remain active. Else Thor wouldn't have agreed to it. So, basically, the only reason the Ecclesiarchy even has an army of powered armored troops at all is that Thor made this one of the condition for him to accept to be Ecclesiarch. The fact they are all women is a by-product of history.

Assuming all that's true, and I know almost all of it is, with some minor parts of it possibly being things I didn't know about before, that's a pretty good point.

So I'm going to abandon my attempts at justifying it the way I was. I was planning on doing so anyways, as it's never convinced anyone, only let to conclusionless arguments, and isn't much fun anyways.

So my new argument is really a counter-argument against changing the look of the armor. The changes to the aesthetic that are being suggested are from a point of practicality, but looking at the design of all of the Imperium's equipment and vehicles, it's impossible to come to the conclusion that they even consider practicality in their designs.

Leman Russes use design decisions in the shape of tanks that went out of style before World War 2 happened. The Taurox has treads but none of them are long enough to actually cross terrain that wheels couldn't. Space Marine aircraft lack enough aerodynamics to even stay airborne, yet include tiny, useless wings for some reason. Chimeras have treads so close to the hull that any ground that's softer than a solid road is going to get them stuck. Cadian flak vests protect the upper torso but leave the abdomen exposed. Catachans often wear a literal vest that doesn't even cover their hearts, and sometimes eschew flak armor at all. Titans in general are a war machine idea that even modern militaries would never develop due to their uselessness. The Exorcist and its missile launcher is an utterly bizarre and terrible way to even conceptualize a rocket artillery tank.

So why, in this one, particular case, would the Imperium choose to make something practical when they devote so many resources to vehicles and equipment that have little to no practicality in them whatsoever?

 Ashiraya wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Marines are very secularized monks, the imagery and language are dramatically less religious than the Sisters'. They've lost touch with their monastic roots in favour of their own distinct sci-fi persona.

Tell that to the Chaplains.

Do you know who else has chaplains? And I mean people that are literally called chaplains, and are religious officers that takes care of the spiritual needs of the troops just like SM chaplains.
The French military.
Are they monks?

 Gogsnik wrote:

Spoiler:

And lastly just a bit of fun, y'know, a joke image...

Spoiler:

Lovely images .

 AnomanderRake wrote:
The Imperium (like any large state) is composed of a mishmash of departments trying to push their own agenda. If someone in power (let's call him Lord Fargle from the Munitorium) wants something that conflicts with the Ecclesiarchy's agenda (let's say he wants to divert a shipment of fine Ultramar marble destined for Ecclesiarch Hans' new palace to his own) he could stand up in a meeting of the High Lords and say 'Ecclesiarch Hans is flaunting the Decree Passive! Look at these images of the men under arms he's maintaining! Look at these witnesses I've collected who agree with me! He should be handed over to the Inquisition for investigation!'.

That's a great political move. And by political move, I mean assisted suicide. Enjoy being an arco-flagellant, Lord Fargle .
Wasting an Inquisitor's time with baseless rumors, and making baseless accusation on one of the most powerful organization of the Imperium is not going to be good for one's health. Especially since that kind of extremely dumb move is not going to get you any support from the higher ups in your own organization.


Really, that's the dumbest move ever that you are proposing here. Surely the Sisters of Battle want to protect themselves from their political enemies commuting political suicide and ending up as a disposable part of their armies, waiting for the trigger word to start running and killing heretics. Unless you can develop your previous example into something that actually profits the accuser in any way? And that wouldn't be possible, or would be harder, by just accusing them of being corrupt?

 Pouncey wrote:
Assuming all that's true, and I know almost all of it is, with some minor parts of it possibly being things I didn't know about before, that's a pretty good point.

The details of the transition from Vandire to Thor come from Codex: Sisters of Battle from 2nd edition, and have never been mentioned since afaik.

 Pouncey wrote:
So my new argument is really a counter-argument against changing the look of the armor. The changes to the aesthetic that are being suggested are from a point of practicality, but looking at the design of all of the Imperium's equipment and vehicles, it's impossible to come to the conclusion that they even consider practicality in their designs.

Well, I explicitly said before in this conversation that I didn't want the Sisters' armor to look practical, so… ^^.
I would just enjoy a slightly different kind of impractical.

 Pouncey wrote:


I don't think we can really answer how many people would buy plastic Sisters of Battle without doing a poll that extends beyond Dakka and covers every major 40k wargaming community that we can find.

So... anecdotal evidence is the best I can do, unfortunately.

Hurray,
22 pages in and we're starting to move in the right direction...
So why can't we do this?
Make a very large poll/survey and present it to GW.
Cover online communities / GW stores / third party gaming communities.
Time and effort it the only reason that comes to mind but having spoken directly to easily more than 10 different people in the last month who agreed they'd buy sisters if GW made new models it may be worth that effort.
If we as a community can target multiple areas and provide stats that can be verified then we will be able to see whether we exist in bubbles or there really is demand.
In the end GW may well ignore the results (as I'd be inclined to suspect) but it'd like to know whether I have a point.
I'd say 60/70% of people in my gaming community have agreed they'd buy sisters even if only as an allied force and I'd like to see if that is reflected in other areas.

 Gogsnik wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Snip

I can see now why people get such high post counts when they spend time in General Discussion.

To clarify the last few pages as briefly as possible, and I hold my hands up and take full responsibility for the whole mess, it was my picture that started it all off after all... Anyway, I put a picture into the thread (Not. My. Artwork) to show the general gist of the sort of look I will use as a basis for some SoB models I am planning to make. This picture irked Pouncey and from that came a, frankly, stupid, in-universe justification for why the models must look overtly feminine. I read the back-and-forth for a page or so and then could contain myself no-longer and with Pouncey-like levels of frothing rage (well maybe not quite that rage-filled) I just had to say what utter, utter drivel such a line of reasoning is. I apologise for this, I just couldn't stop myself.

Anyway, yeah, I guess that's quite enough of all that.


EDIT: Spelling! Again!!

Passive-aggressiveness aside I appear to have a different understanding of how the Imperium works, from which the last few pages made perfect sense to me and looked like gibberish to people who view it as a more honest, monolithic, and well-organized system. This has gone far off track and isn't particularly productive anymore, I'll remark on other things but I'm done with this line of conversation.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Passive-aggressiveness aside I appear to have a different understanding of how the Imperium works, from which the last few pages made perfect sense to me and looked like gibberish to people who view it as a more honest, monolithic, and well-organized system.

I could maybe image how the Imperium being less monolithic, honest or well organized could means that baseless, easily provable as false accusations would work better, maybe. But I still cannot see how having armors that don't look (emphasis on look, because it really has no bearing on which gender can actually wear it) explicitely female would help in making those baseless accusations…

 JohnHwangDD wrote:


As a rival Inquisitor, nothing would please me more than to subject a unit of Battle Sisters to such a "simple examination".

Which, BTW, is hugely invasive and degrading.

Which is why, as a rival Inquisitor, I'd do it. Not because I gave the slightest care as to the accusation or the result, but because it is a demonstration of power over the Ecclesiarchy.

And doing so to Battle Sisters is especially powerful, because you necessarily strip them of their armor in the process.

One thing that I feel is sometimes overlooked is that the majority of the people of the Imperium actually believe in and honestly worship the God-Emperor in a way that is often alien to us but would be more familiar to those of centuries past.

So even cynical individuals like Commissar Cain and Amberley Vail who have seen the best and worst the galaxy has to offer are in fact still true believers in Him.

The fact that the Sororitas do seem to be above all else faithful servants of His will does given them, IMO at least a unique place in the 40k universe.

Besides, blood tests aren't especially invasive or degrading...

I don't even know what happened to the question i originally asked....

I'm beyond hoping that this thread will ever get back on topic but it has kept me entertained for a while at least.

Well the basic premise that you opened the thread with is something only GW, and even then a limited number of employees of GW, can answer.

Consequently it wasn't ever going to go beyond "nobody knows" and stay on topic.

We can never no for sure, but let me offer this.

Grey Knights got a printed codex, without any new models or units.

Adepta Sororitas could have gotten a Grey Knights style codex with minimal effort, and produced a profit. The codexes would have sold to existing AS players, the codex completionists, and players looking to add a new army to their collection. The model sales would have increased as well, because some people would ineviatabley been tempted.

Seeing that an Adepta Sororitas Codex release, even Grey Knights style, would have been profitable, what are logical reasons it hasn';t been done ?

I. GW has no faith in Adepta Sororitas sales, but hasn't squatted them, because the minimal cost of producing existing models means it's still profitable to sell them.

II. Grey Knights sytle codex release is in the works

III. Dark Eldar Style Revamp, with new plastic models and Codex is in the works

 Azreal13 wrote:
Well the basic premise that you opened the thread with is something only GW, and even then a limited number of employees of GW, can answer.

Consequently it wasn't ever going to go beyond "nobody knows" and stay on topic.

The first question was what are games workshop doing and it was pretty quickly established that it was most likely nothing...
That then led to a follow up question of what can we, if there is a demand (as i believe there to be), to motivate GW to stick some resources on it.

Essentially what we found was there was a discussion on whether there was actually a large enough demand for GW to see any business sense in dedicating resources to a project like reviving sisters. That is a fair argument to have as we have no real data to support either conclusion. What we can say though is that neither do GW.

Therefore it would make sense to actually try to gather this information. Once you have that data you can then see whether there is a high demand for new sisters models and this could be put to GW. They are a PLC therefore they have an AGM and members are entitled to attend and are then in a position to put any findings forward and demand that GW look into it further in front of other shareholders, essentially calling the board out.

This may well be ignored by GW but there is a maybe 1% chance that GW might actively source further data if it is presented on the grounds that it would be in GWs interest to do it to increase revenue.

This is not beyond the realms of possibility and based on a number of assumptions not least the notion that GW bases its business decisions on logic (as they dont appear to) but is either way a means of putting the whole argument about sisters to bed.

What we got instead was a debate on the femininity of the armour on SOB and whether it was appropriate and tangent upon tangent.

What i would like to do is have a discussion on whether a questionnaire could be put together and circulated in a number of communities in a format that could be verified to give a reasoned statistical analysis of where sisters lie in terms of popularity and the interest and potential buying power of gamers and collectors across GWs target market.

Would anyone be up for this kind of thing?
I know I would put some hours into it. I personally travel across the country for work and so would have no issue in gaining data from a number of communities in the UK. What i would also need is for other people to collect data from people at their GW, gaming club etc. and return it for it all the be collated and analysed.
If at that point it became evident there was insufficient evidence to support the notion that it was in the company's interest to pursue a development of the sisters line i would leave it there and publish the results on the main 40k forums.

Otherwise I'd personally buy shares in the company to attend the AGM in Nottingham. I work half the time in Birmingham as it is so it's not far away to present my findings and urge GW to do something.

Now I have seen through this forum, and another which popped up about the same time and ran alongside this one, a number of different views on the SoB line I see there is some support and people with similar experience of speaking to others who share their interest in a potential new AS release it gives me more inclination to put a plan like this in to action..

At least if GW don't utilise and finding it may produce it may at least help settle the debate on the supply and demand issue.

EDIT ... spelling

 adamsouza wrote:
Grey Knights got a printed codex, without any new models or units.

We got that twice so far. Actually we have fewer minis for sale than any other time than second edition.

It also very difficult to guess what GW will or won;t do next

They have recently been brinign out niche armies - anyone thought a couple of years ago we would have see the Harlequins, Deathwatch or Gensetealer Cult stuff - especially the latter?

Sisters would fit nicely in here - so there is perhaps even less reason than normal to suggest they will not happen.

Deathwatch and GS cult was a genuine shock, but Harlequins got brought back in 4th edition. That was more of "we're tired of trying to make one unit entry in two books identical" (note that Daemon Princes and the five flavours of power armor technically have different rules) so they just shunted them into their own dex.

The Skitarii were a bigger shock; I doubt many of the current players even knew what Skitarii meant until they were introduced.

 Melissia wrote:
We got that twice so far.

Well, not really: he said printed codex .
I think he did meant that we got even less than GK, so his argument is fair.

Oooh. I stand corrected.

Pouncey wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
considering how much complaining and fighting has been done on the topic of sister of battle and how they need a new model line, if GW ever does release new SoB codex and model line I would want them to sell out instantly and if they didn't I would want GW to say Feth it and Squat the whole line

For all the complaining and fighting that goes on page after page.... you'll note it's the same handful of people throughout the thread, which is the same handful of people through the previous thread, which was they same handful of people through the previous previous thread

Goodness knows realistically how many people would want Sisters if new models came out, these days because of the extremely lax 40k rules I guess a lot of people might want to buy allied contingents of them.

I brought up plastic Sisters of Battle with my local gaming store's... employee who happened to be working that day. He said I'd never be able to buy any of the store's supply because he was going to buy it all.

Maybe it's just that most of the people who might play the faction if it had plastic models simply avoid these threads since they're not very fun, and they realize posting about it's not going to make it happen.

Pouncey wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
considering how much complaining and fighting has been done on the topic of sister of battle and how they need a new model line, if GW ever does release new SoB codex and model line I would want them to sell out instantly and if they didn't I would want GW to say Feth it and Squat the whole line

For all the complaining and fighting that goes on page after page.... you'll note it's the same handful of people throughout the thread, which is the same handful of people through the previous thread, which was they same handful of people through the previous previous thread

Goodness knows realistically how many people would want Sisters if new models came out, these days because of the extremely lax 40k rules I guess a lot of people might want to buy allied contingents of them.

I brought up plastic Sisters of Battle with my local gaming store's... employee who happened to be working that day. He said I'd never be able to buy any of the store's supply because he was going to buy it all.

Maybe it's just that most of the people who might play the faction if it had plastic models simply avoid these threads since they're not very fun, and they realize posting about it's not going to make it happen.

So there are two people on the entire planet who will buy them by your example. Extrapolating that out doesn't mean that every customer at every LGS across the world and every employee at every LGS across the world will buy them.

With their current social media presence, I'm shocked nobody has tried to get some sort of poll or something going on their Facebook page for people to try to register interest in SOB. I'd vote.

Petitions have been done, they didnt work. The buy a sister day didnt work. It makes no sense to think GW is waiting to sell off models they could just drop in the pot, melt down and sell the metal off from before they move on to plastic sisters. Housing them for decades already boxed makes no sense. Nevermind that the molds wouldnt go bad if they hadnt been being used and they wouldnt come in white blisters if they were packaged oh so long ago.

Sisters may be in the pipeline, nothing we do will change whether they are or arent. We keep resetting the clock on "plastic sisters" vs "squat sisters" rumors ever few months for how long now? We are doing just fine with our dex, a sisters update will come "if" and "when". I will believe it when I can buy it, and am praying they dont mess it up.

I count a handful of codexes far more needy of an update than Sisters. Chaos Marines and Orks qualify for sure.

Though personally I think I would rather just keep waiting.

I’m not going to address all these recent comments as it’s too much, so I’ll just make a general statement of how I feel. I like the current aesthetic for Sisters throwing sexual imagery, sci-fi tech, bob cuts and medieval religious themes into a blender creates a distinct and iconic look which is

something that is hard to achieve (someone earlier said they were generic which I strongly disagree). That being said some posters have talked about concerns "cheese cake" while I don't think sexualizing in itself is bad, I do find it hard to find a female GW mini that isn't sexualized or an

attempt at being conventionally attractive to some degree. Where as with the male ones you get all kinds of different representation which I feel is problematic in these settings where sex and sexuality isn't that important of a theme. Some people have proposed a more "sensible" or "bulky"

look for Sisters which I think is wrong-headed too because we already have an imperial faction that empathizes a more practical look called Imperial Guard and on the bulky side of things we have Space Marines. I feel by going for styles that more closely resemble that, Sisters become less

distinguished from other Imperials and therefore less interesting in their aesthetic, Sisters ought to be over the top not believable. So, keep the current visual style of emphasizing female form with sci-fi gothic as it allows them to stand out, just update it since GW has become more

technically gifted at making miniatures. And expand the variety of other female minis (as well as some unconventional looking gals like the female Ogre Maneater) through armies that do have a “utilitarian” look like Tau and Imperial Guard (this wouldn’t work with Eldar and their more evil kin

as they have designs that emphasizes body shape both amongst males and females). I feel like this would reduce some of the complaints of “cheese cake” while still satisfying the fans who like the current sisters.

 dracpanzer wrote:
We are doing just fine with our dex

Not really. At best, we're in the lower end of the metagame, if you build your list in a very specific way and your opponent doesn't know what to expect from Sisters. And that says nothing about the expensive, mediocre metal miniatures.

 Melissia wrote:
Not really. At best, we're in the lower end of the metagame, if you build your list in a very specific way and your opponent doesn't know what to expect from Sisters. And that says nothing about the expensive, mediocre metal miniatures.

There are really only three stinkerish units in the dex. Repentia are problematic to use, but still good when they get stuck in. PenEngines are in my mind a few too many points for what they give me. If they could ride in a drop pod I would take them every game, but in competitive games they stay at home. Celestians just dont seem to have a proper focus, biggest disappointment of the dex. Ive had and seen a hundred ways to "fix" them but as of now they are just not worth playing.

On the flip side there are a lot of really great units in the dex. Dominions, St. Celestine, Priests and the Repressor are all top notch. The Exorcist, Retributors, Seraphim, Immolator/Rhino with 6++, Uriah, and even the BSS in a transport are all what I would call not great, but above average. YMMV of course, but I disagree completely that you have to tailor your list just to get to the lower end of the metagame.

Being predictable with an army isnt the fault of the armies codex. I have spent a small fortune on my Sisters, and have been collecting them since they first arrived in stores. That isnt the fault of the codex. I have always enjoyed the look of the figures and think they have held up really well. Its a matter of taste, nothing new about folks being divided over an armies aesthetic. I like my Sisters way over the top religious types of crazy and for me at least they deliver.

i wouldn't call the majority of the models mediocre at all...
i love the look of everything but the Repentia, and even those are better than some of the stinkers in other ranges...
i'm looking at you, Mutilators :(

Celestine, Uriah, and all the PA girls are awesome minis...
i don't even mind metal at all, but if i am going to replace mine, plastic would definitely give me more incentive

cheers
jah

 dracpanzer wrote:
There are really only three stinkerish units in the dex.

In a codex with barely a dozen or so units, "only" three units sucking is a big deal.

 jah-joshua wrote:
i wouldn't call the majority of the models mediocre at all...
i love the look of everything but the Repentia, and even those are better than some of the stinkers in other ranges...
i'm looking at you, Mutilators :(

Celestine, Uriah, and all the PA girls are awesome minis...
i don't even mind metal at all, but if i am going to replace mine, plastic would definitely give me more incentive

cheers
jah

Yeah, the Repentia models look lame compared to the art, in the art they're like mutilating themselves with religious artifacts that's fethed up and cool, instead we get leather S&M girls...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
I am not sure what you are trying to argue?

Nothing you posted either refuted or added to what you quoted. Did you intend to quote someone else?

WTF? You said armor didn't have to express gender.

Via the enormous armored codpiece, I demonstrated that it definitely did.

Just because armor can be used to express gender (which on one is disagreeing with) doesn't mean it has to.

I've stayed out of this for a while because the discussion got a bit daft.

I like the current aesthetic. I like the idea of wimples, indeed there's some 2nd Edition art of a Canoness with a wimple smiting heretics.

I really, really like the style of armour - the robes, the clean lines, the over-corset, the medieval-religious-gothic-SF baroque feel - it's all part and parcel of the Ecclesiarchy in general and the Sisters in particular.

I don't think that any update would need to make any actual aesthetic changes! Just shift the existing style into plastic, and give us some more head options - scarred, bionic-eyed, wimple, helmets, etc.

 Melissia wrote:

 dracpanzer wrote:
There are really only three stinkerish units in the dex.

In a codex with barely a dozen or so units, "only" three units sucking is a big deal.

I didnt say they suck. Two of them only smell off because they struggle to hold a candle to how good the rest are.

Repentia are awesome when they get close and are very good at killing Tanks of all kinds, takes work to get them there but the reward is well worth it. Rhino castle across the table with a mantle canoness to tank and they will get stuck in. Invisibility of course makes them very interesting, if you like witch filth in your lists.....

I struggle with PenEngines because they are instantly targeted the moment they have a glimmer of hope of getting stuck in. Its hard to quantify the value a unit has when it draws fire better spent on other targets, I dont even try. Mine usually kill something or act as a huge area denial threat. They just dont usually kill 80 points each. Probably more than equals out in the end, but its opponent dependent enough for me to usually leave them at home when I know I will be playing against meta packed lists.

They actually look to be getting a buff from the FAQ's but nobody here is using them for anything until they are "official" so I couldnt say.

Personally I would consider both Repentia and PenEngines "top notch" if they had a formation (tank canoness, 2-3 units of Repentia, 1-3 units of PenEngines) that gave them +1 to their Shield of Faith and the ability to attack in close combat even if they were slain before making their own attacks at their initiative.

Which leads the only real "stinker" unit being the Celestians. Simply because the unit just seems like nobody knew what to do with them. Furious assault just doesnt amount to much on a model that cant be equipped with close combat weapons. Consequently they dont compare to Repentia in assaults OR compare to the BSS in shooting. If they could be taken in squads of 20 it might be entertaining to use them for a Priest blob, I like that idea. But again, you cant. They arent horrible as they are, they just dont measure up compared to the BSS, which is why nobody tells anyone on the internet to take them.

Like I said hundreds of ways to fix Celestians, and still nobody at GW knows what they want to do with them.

I wouldnt disagree that Celestians "suck" compared to the rest in the dex. Or that Repentia and PenEngines are problematic to use but great when they work, so call them, average? They definitely do not "suck". The rest of the units in the dex are easily in the "good" category and at least three I would elevate into the "great" category.

All of which adds up to the point of my original point. The Sisters codex is just fine compared to others, and a good handful are far more deserving of an update.

You're showing some very low standards for what does and does not suck considering today's metagame.

Well they work well for me. Repentia have shown well in recent tourneys out west (panzer leader iirc? not sure which event) so I can only go off what I know.

I dont need or want the Sisters dex to be an auto win.

Sisters arent as bad as you think.

There are dex's out there that are far worse.

Most of the units are good - they don't have any formations and also most importantly the super OP cheese formations of the 7.5 edition dexes.

Adepta Sororitas just need a formation that allows them free transports, and they'll be good as gold.

 dracpanzer wrote:


There are dex's out there that are far worse.

I'd say Sisters need an update more than anyone.

I've been digging through the Exorcist kit and I'm now wondering just how many different vehicles you could stick in one kit. Two upper hulls (the normal one and the Repressor one), extra armour inserts, the Immolator turret, the Exorcist launcher, and a couple of pintle weapon options and you've got four vehicles in one box (five, if you can stick a Predator-variant main turret in there).

(Also one of the flagpole topper bits (which I'm not sure has a more correct name, though Wikipedia suggests 'finial') is a single skull in a reliquary, and the next one is four skulls on top of each other, and I suddenly had a mental image of a pair of Sororitas vehicle crews having a one-upmanship competition with the size of their reliquaries)

(That or an Aesop-style ending. 'And how many skulls are in your reliquary, Sister Ophelia?' 'One. But that one is Saint Yorick.')

 adamsouza wrote:
Adepta Sororitas just need a formation that allows them free transports, and they'll be good as gold.

Nope. We need far more than that. In fact, GW could afford to triple the size of the army list and it'd be just about right, with plenty of room for future expansion.

Having the same things as before repetitively shat out with minimal effort is what we currently get, we don't need more of that. We need GW to put some actual effort in to it, not this lazy non-solution you're suggesting.

I know you think it's okay for GW to be lazy, but I don't.

REDACTED

Apparently, it's okay for you to incessantly argue your beliefs for page after page after page, but not for me to argue for mine. Go figure.

 Melissia wrote:
Nope. We need far more than that. In fact, GW could afford to triple the size of the army list and it'd be just about right, with plenty of room for future expansion.

Having the same things as before repetitively shat out with minimal effort is what we currently get, we don't need more of that. We need GW to put some actual effort in to it, not this lazy non-solution you're suggesting.

I know you think it's okay for GW to be lazy, but I don't.

I'd like for the SoB to be revived, like I have for quite some time now; however, even if they do decide it's a worthwhile procedure, it'd probably be a slow one. Honestly, I'd be fine with them trickling in, as I'd rather them take their time and bring some interesting units that reflect the personality of the Adeptus Sororitas rather than "here's what a female Space Marine would look like!" models. Give me intrigue, that gothic looking Power Armour and flamers galore and I'm sold - to hell with the rules attached to them.

Should make that clear though - SoB aren't Space Marines, nor should they ever be, in their lore, in their style and most especially in their models.

G.A

 Melissia wrote:

 adamsouza wrote:
Adepta Sororitas just need a formation that allows them free transports, and they'll be good as gold.

Nope. We need far more than that. In fact, GW could afford to triple the size of the army list and it'd be just about right, with plenty of room for future expansion.

Having the same things as before repetitively shat out with minimal effort is what we currently get, we don't need more of that. We need GW to put some actual effort in to it, not this lazy non-solution you're suggesting.

I know you think it's okay for GW to be lazy, but I don't.

...Quick interjection: Who doesn't get a Codex that's been repetitively shat out with minimal effort? Most Codexes are fairly bare-bones and uncreative these days...

Most of htem at least get SOMETHING new. Sisters don't.

 Melissia wrote:
Most of them at least get SOMETHING new. Sisters don't.

If I were to hazard a guess, GW are worried about the longevity and popularity of SoB. They weren't very popular when they were first released in model form, they sure as hell aren't now. Why they have been sitting on them and only releasing codex updates I don't know; we can only speculate why that is, usually it's the bandwagon of "well they're female so the manchildren/children don't like them". I personally think it's more down to them not having enough diversity to form an interesting model collection, since even a single squad of Sisters nets you multiples of the same model, something I hate a lot when it comes to old GW metals.

 General Annoyance wrote:
If I were to hazard a guess, GW are worried about the longevity and popularity of SoB.

If they were worried about that, they'd add something new to entice more sales. By refusing to support something NOW, all you're doing is signaling to your customers that you don't really plan on supporting it in the future. See: the Sega 32x and Sega CD, which no one bought because they knew with the Saturn coming out Sega would never support it.

As has been pointed out countless times, they don't really follow standard economics knowledge.

 Melissia wrote:

If they were worried about that, they'd add something new to entice more sales.

Potentially, or we can have lots of shiny new Knight variants and Space Marines that they know sell well! Basically they could risk it or not risk it and probably get the money anyway.

By refusing to support something NOW, all you're doing is signaling to your customers that you don't really plan on supporting it in the future. See: the Sega 32x and Sega CD, which no one bought because they knew with the Saturn coming out Sega would never support it.

Apologies for being 18, probably wasn't even born when that debacle was about; I get what you're saying, but again, risk a new product line that wasn't successful last time around, or continue with stuff we know that sells? Granted SoB weren't given enough time and love to be successful, but I reckon that's what the execs are thinking over at GW evil base.

As has been pointed out countless times, they don't really follow standard economics knowledge.

Right, but we still don't have a reason why though do we? I'm only speculating about what they're thinking - for all we know they're snorting warp dust and putting forward whatever product line is labelled to a cup they get the ball in in a game of beer pong.

Now that's a thought

 Ashiraya wrote:
Frankly, you repeating the false dilemma 'keep SoB exactly as they are or change absolutely everything about them' is getting tiring now. You and Manchu had a field day painting that fallacy all over the walls earlier.

What a lot of rot you do talk. In reality, you perfectly epitomize the biggest issue facing Sisters on these boards: you admit to not caring about the faction except as a "problem" that requires GW to revamp Sisters according your personal preferences, which in turn have nothing to with the faction in question specifically or even 40k generally, in order to be "fixed" - and then MAYBE you might like them. Actually, Sisters are not a problem for you to solve. And actually there are already people who like them. The fact that you can only see them as a problem to fix just demonstrates that you don't like them. That is an issue with YOU, not them.

What the codex needs is to go back to its roots, put baack in the mailitia and add in the clergy. The SOB are only part of the the Church's army, Change the name to defenders of the Faith and flesh it back out.

Oh and formations should be added with some using elements of the AM.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I've been digging through the Exorcist kit and I'm now wondering just how many different vehicles you could stick in one kit. Two upper hulls (the normal one and the Repressor one), extra armour inserts, the Immolator turret, the Exorcist launcher, and a couple of pintle weapon options and you've got four vehicles in one box (five, if you can stick a Predator-variant main turret in there).

I suppose the Exorcist kit is nearly there anyway; if they included the clear plastic parts for the turret front you'd get Rhino, Immolator, and Exorcist. It'd be SO AWESOME to get a Repressor though.

 Manchu wrote:
What a lot of rot you do talk.

Are you a mod, and if I report your messages, will you be the one treating the report?
I have quite a sizable Sisters army, and I agree with most of what Ashiraya say.

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
I've stayed out of this for a while because the discussion got a bit daft.

I like the current aesthetic. I like the idea of wimples, indeed there's some 2nd Edition art of a Canoness with a wimple smiting heretics.

I really, really like the style of armour - the robes, the clean lines, the over-corset, the medieval-religious-gothic-SF baroque feel - it's all part and parcel of the Ecclesiarchy in general and the Sisters in particular.

I don't think that any update would need to make any actual aesthetic changes! Just shift the existing style into plastic, and give us some more head options - scarred, bionic-eyed, wimple, helmets, etc.

I still wish someone would finally explain to me what a "wimple" is, because I don't know.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
I've stayed out of this for a while because the discussion got a bit daft.

I like the current aesthetic. I like the idea of wimples, indeed there's some 2nd Edition art of a Canoness with a wimple smiting heretics.

I really, really like the style of armour - the robes, the clean lines, the over-corset, the medieval-religious-gothic-SF baroque feel - it's all part and parcel of the Ecclesiarchy in general and the Sisters in particular.

I don't think that any update would need to make any actual aesthetic changes! Just shift the existing style into plastic, and give us some more head options - scarred, bionic-eyed, wimple, helmets, etc.

I still wish someone would finally explain to me what a "wimple" is, because I don't know.

It's the shroud that Nuns wear over their heads

 Bi'ios wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
I've stayed out of this for a while because the discussion got a bit daft.

I like the current aesthetic. I like the idea of wimples, indeed there's some 2nd Edition art of a Canoness with a wimple smiting heretics.

I really, really like the style of armour - the robes, the clean lines, the over-corset, the medieval-religious-gothic-SF baroque feel - it's all part and parcel of the Ecclesiarchy in general and the Sisters in particular.

I don't think that any update would need to make any actual aesthetic changes! Just shift the existing style into plastic, and give us some more head options - scarred, bionic-eyed, wimple, helmets, etc.

I still wish someone would finally explain to me what a "wimple" is, because I don't know.

It's the shroud that Nuns wear over their heads

Ahh, thanks. : D

Yeah, it'd be pretty neat to see a Sororitas seeing an Ecclesiarchial version of one of those. Would sell the nun part of their lore a bit more solidly on the models.

 Gen.Steiner wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I've been digging through the Exorcist kit and I'm now wondering just how many different vehicles you could stick in one kit. Two upper hulls (the normal one and the Repressor one), extra armour inserts, the Immolator turret, the Exorcist launcher, and a couple of pintle weapon options and you've got four vehicles in one box (five, if you can stick a Predator-variant main turret in there).

I suppose the Exorcist kit is nearly there anyway; if they included the clear plastic parts for the turret front you'd get Rhino, Immolator, and Exorcist. It'd be SO AWESOME to get a Repressor though.

You'd need to get a plastic Repressor roof, a plastic organ, and plastic extra armour panels in alongside the current plastic components. I bet they could do it.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I have quite a sizable Sisters army, and I agree with most of what Ashiraya say.

So what? All this tells me is that you bought a bunch of miniatures you don't much like or at least no longer like. I liked my Sisters miniatures when I bought them and I still like them - which is why I hope that plastic Sisters would look pretty much the same way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pouncey wrote:
Would sell the nun part of their lore a bit more solidly on the models.

Seems unnecessary to me, at least for militant Sisters. Their "habit" is a white bob and baroque PA. (I also think DA waering robes over their PA is dumb.)

 Pouncey wrote:
Would sell the nun part of their lore a bit more solidly on the models.

Sisters aren't really like nuns, in the sense that beside being an organization of religious women, they don't have much in common with nuns. Especially, nuns are similar to monks, with asceticism being a virtue (in 40k, that's Dark Angels and their robes and lack of bling), while Sisters are more akin to high-level priests that showers themselves in ostentatious wealth (see: the Vatican officials).
I have seen artworks of Sisters with a wimple, and I don't like the result.

 Manchu wrote:
All this tells me is that you bought a bunch of miniatures you don't much like or at least no longer like.

I like them. Doesn't mean I don't see room for improvement. I'd be pretty happy if Sisters come out the same. I'd be happier if they came out even better. By your own logic I would say you don't like your miniatures anymore because you want to replace them with a plastic version.
Anyway, you skipped my version. If I feel like some of your post break the Dakka rules and I report the message, will you be the one treating the report?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Sisters aren't really like nuns, in the sense that beside being an organization of religious women, they don't have much in common with nuns.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I have seen artworks of Sisters with a wimple, and I don't like the result.

Here at least are two points we can agree on! Calling SoB "nuns" is more of a joke than anything or, at best, an oversimplification based on there being no better common term for a female member of a religious order.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
By your own logic I would say you don't like your miniatures anymore because you want to replace them with a plastic version.

That's not my logic - I would not conflate a point about the design concept of the faction with a point about the material the miniatures are made out of.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Anyway, you skipped my version.

I skipped it because Rule Number Two is Stay On Topic. If you want to have an off-topic discussion, please feel free to PM me.

So little of the SoB range would survive a full shift to plastic I could see GW throw the rest out in favor of a complete overhaul of the aesthetic.

Unfortunately, as much as I'd like to see SoB expanded I can't help but feel they'll end up as one of these smaller codices, like Harlequin or Mechanicus. Let's be honest with ourselves some of the SoB units are rather forced, conceptually weak, and are really built around trying to get the most out of a limited model range. It is in ways akin to how Veteran marine were before they became Sternguard and Vanguard. I think we'll see some similar alterations to SoB whenever they do get revamped.

 Manchu wrote:
which in turn have nothing to with the faction in question specifically or even 40k generally

Pretty much the only things I have said - in fact, the only problems I have mentioned that I feel need adressing - are the breastplate design and overall armour sturdiness. Which, while a change for the faction, is hardly new to 40k!

You can throw venom at me as many ways as you like, telling me I am a hater who doesn't understand anything or whatever, but it boils down to me wanting one part of SoB changed and being absolutely fine with the rest, and you telling me that means I want destroy everything that the faction is.

Do you usually go into Grey Knight threads where people say they are portrayed as too powerful and tell them to throw their opinions in the thrash because their massive power is one of the Grey Knights' shticks? No? So what is it with suggesting alternate armour designs that makes you give me derisive comment after comment? As I also said many times, I think I understand SoB better than you if you seriously think the faction will be destroyed if another armour design is introduced, one that retains the same helmet style, decoration, half-robes, colouration...

The armour is not all that relevant, who is inside it is. If you doubt me, let's replace all SoB, with them all actually being very skilled Ork kommandos. Do you feel that would destroy the faction?

 Manchu wrote:
you admit to not caring about the faction except as a "problem" that requires GW to revamp Sisters according your personal preferences

What is so unacceptable with 'I like faction X and might well play it if not for this one problem, perhaps it should be changed?'

You make it sound like I am trying to impose my will on everybody, but you forget both that I have no power to actually do so and that the very topic of the thread is discussing how they might be updated in the future, so offering ideas for exactly that is as thread-appropriate as you can get.

You are complaining that a suggested change would change things, which seems a bit redundant.

Edited by Moderator - Rule Two is Stay On Topic

 aka_mythos wrote:
So little of the SoB range would survive a full shift to plastic I could see GW throw the rest out in favor of a complete overhaul of the aesthetic.

All of the armored Sisters would survive as multi-part models. The Immolator / Exorcist 2-in-1 is easy enough.

I think it's just the Repentia at become a problem, but it's not like the metals can't carry on.

 aka_mythos wrote:
So little of the SoB range would survive a full shift to plastic I could see GW throw the rest out in favor of a complete overhaul of the aesthetic.

Unfortunately, as much as I'd like to see SoB expanded I can't help but feel they'll end up as one of these smaller codices, like Harlequin or Mechanicus. Let's be honest with ourselves some of the SoB units are rather forced, conceptually weak, and are really built around trying to get the most out of a limited model range. It is in ways akin to how Veteran marine were before they became Sternguard and Vanguard. I think we'll see some similar alterations to SoB whenever they do get revamped.

Sort of? The Acts of Faith setup gives them a lot more variety already than most of the mini-Codexes; GW took two Grey Knight units, stretched them into six, and called them an army back in 5e, Sisters have six units already, making a Codex out of them doesn't have anywhere near as much design-space overlap.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
So little of the SoB range would survive a full shift to plastic I could see GW throw the rest out in favor of a complete overhaul of the aesthetic.

All of the armored Sisters would survive as multi-part models. The Immolator / Exorcist 2-in-1 is easy enough.

I think it's just the Repentia at become a problem, but it's not like the metals can't carry on.

Looking at what happened to the Dark Eldar, I suspect aka_mythos may be right.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
So little of the SoB range would survive a full shift to plastic I could see GW throw the rest out in favor of a complete overhaul of the aesthetic.

All of the armored Sisters would survive as multi-part models. The Immolator / Exorcist 2-in-1 is easy enough.

I think it's just the Repentia at become a problem, but it's not like the metals can't carry on.

Looking at what happened to the Dark Eldar, I suspect aka_mythos may be right.

Why look at Dark Eldar? Why not Grey Knights? Their entire look survived the shift to plastic minus changing faux latin to english.

I suspect SOBs won't change too much unless it becomes nesscarily, I could see repenta sisters being changed or even abandoned though

 Ashiraya wrote:
it boils down to me wanting one part of SoB changed and being absolutely fine with the rest, and you telling me that means I want destroy everything that the faction is

For the third time ITT you have made up an argument and assigned it to me. First, you claimed that I was obsessed with Sisters' boobs (when it is actually you focusing on them - even in the text quoted above). Second, you claimed I argued that Sisters should either be kept the same or changed completely. And now you claim that I'm ranting about how you want to destroy the faction, even though you obviously have no "power" to do so. So many strawmen.

Maybe we are just talking past each other at this point, both sides misunderstanding the other. So for the sake clarity here is my actual point (my first post ITT):

 Manchu wrote:
Sisters do not require any amount of redesign, apart from purely technical considerations (such as the classic cloth drapery issue). I would say redesign beyond the technical is much more likely to be a detriment than a positive. They have a very unique and striking look. It ought to be preserved.

As to this:

 Ashiraya wrote:
What is so unacceptable with 'I like faction X and might well play it if not for this one problem, perhaps it should be changed?'

It's nothing to do with you personally. It is the overall approach that people seem to have toward SoB; namely, there is something wrong with them that needs to be fixed. Your specific problem/fix is boob-related. That is a pretty common one because, I think, a lot of people want to talk about "the gender issue" (in one form or another) rather than Sisters of Battle. But the larger issue is assuming that this faction's design needs to be fixed. It doesn't.

 Manchu wrote:
Maybe we are just talking past each other at this point

Probably. I have made my points, it is up to everyone else to agree or disagree.

I was about to say, it just comes down to whether you think Sisters should change or stay the same. But that's not really true here. "What would it take to get Poster XYZ to collect Sisters?" is a completely different and honestly unrelated question. But I think that is the beginning, middle, and end of how a lot of posters discuss SoB.

 Manchu wrote:
I was about to say, it just comes down to whether you think Sisters should change or the stay the same. But that's not really true here. "What would it take to get Poster XYZ to collect Sisters?" is a completely different and honestly unrelated question.

I guess most people just don't see this as “Should they change” but rather as “Would this change make them better”. And in this case, it is related to “Would that get poster XYZ to collect them” : generally, if you find a change would make them better, it will also find this change would make you more likely to collect them.

It seems like you are using "X makes them better" and "X makes me personally like them more" interchangeably - but these are not the same. What if Poster XYZ declares, well I would like Sisters if they were all bald. Okay, but so what?

If you think about it, what is a good argument for changing the visual design of Sisters? Probably the first one you think of is, to sell more models. But there is no evidence that the existing design suppresses sales. (Again - the "problem" here seems to be with GW, not the faction.) Is there another good argument for changing them? Yeah probably; that would be a profitable line of discussion.

Maybe changing the design would make the figures more flexible in terms of pose or configuration. When you raise a point like that, however, it just makes you realize that the existing design is already good on that score.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
So little of the SoB range would survive a full shift to plastic I could see GW throw the rest out in favor of a complete overhaul of the aesthetic.

All of the armored Sisters would survive as multi-part models. The Immolator / Exorcist 2-in-1 is easy enough.

I think it's just the Repentia at become a problem, but it's not like the metals can't carry on.

Looking at what happened to the Dark Eldar, I suspect aka_mythos may be right.

Why look at Dark Eldar? Why not Grey Knights? Their entire look survived the shift to plastic minus changing faux latin to english.

Um, what? I have the original RT-era GK stuff, and they were completely redone. Back in RT, GK are primarily non-Psykers, but the few they have are Mary Sue powerful; new GK are *all* Psykers, with these new GKPAs and ridiculous Baby Bjornoughts. My SM were supposed to be non-psyker GKs, and now they can't be.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
So little of the SoB range would survive a full shift to plastic I could see GW throw the rest out in favor of a complete overhaul of the aesthetic.

All of the armored Sisters would survive as multi-part models. The Immolator / Exorcist 2-in-1 is easy enough.

I think it's just the Repentia at become a problem, but it's not like the metals can't carry on.

Looking at what happened to the Dark Eldar, I suspect aka_mythos may be right.

Why look at Dark Eldar? Why not Grey Knights? Their entire look survived the shift to plastic minus changing faux latin to english.

Um, what? I have the original RT-era GK stuff, and they were completely redone. Back in RT, GK are primarily non-Psykers, but the few they have are Mary Sue powerful; new GK are *all* Psykers, with these new GKPAs and ridiculous Baby Bjornoughts. My SM were supposed to be non-psyker GKs, and now they can't be.

Models.

We're talking about models.

Not fluff.

And I had a metal Grey Knight Terminator. Not sure it was RT-era, but it was the version before the current plastic ones. It looked pretty much exactly the same as the plastic ones did when they came out.

The non GKT models are dramatically different. Not even close to being a match, what with their now mandatory forearm guns.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The non GKT models are dramatically different. Not even close to being a match, what with their now mandatory forearm guns.

Pewter PAGK from 3rd Edition all had them with mandatory forearm guns too, they've been that way for a while now.

 Pouncey wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
So little of the SoB range would survive a full shift to plastic I could see GW throw the rest out in favor of a complete overhaul of the aesthetic.

All of the armored Sisters would survive as multi-part models. The Immolator / Exorcist 2-in-1 is easy enough.

I think it's just the Repentia at become a problem, but it's not like the metals can't carry on.

Looking at what happened to the Dark Eldar, I suspect aka_mythos may be right.

Why look at Dark Eldar? Why not Grey Knights? Their entire look survived the shift to plastic minus changing faux latin to english.

DE changed quite a bit in the 5e release, but their old models were terrible on a scale difficult to surpass. They came out looking like evil Craftworlders in a nice bit of visual consistency.

In the history of 40K, post Rogue Trader era, the only armies I can think of that got radical overhauls in appearance are Dark Eldar, who's original models where terrible looking, Tyranids, who got bigger, badder, and better looking, and Necrons, who slimmed down.

I don't feel radically redesigning Sororitas aesthetic is what they need.

The concept of using them either appeals to you or it does not.

If your a 14 year old boy that won't play with them because they are girls, changing the aesthetic isn't going to change that.
If your a Space Marine enthusiast that won't play sister because they are inferior to Space Marines, changing the aesthetic isn't going to change that.

If you are waiting for them to have a printed codex, a new codex will fill your needs.
If you are waiting for them to have affordable plastics, new plastic models fill your needs.

If they recut the molds to produce metal molds with slightly smaller boobs, but the models were still expensive and not supported with a current codex, they aren't doing what is needed.

Also remember that radically altering the Sororitas aesthetic is effectively giving a middle finger to the players who currently have and enjoy their Sororitas forces.

Now, granted if new plastic sisters had less pronounced boob plate, and their design didn't clash with existing models, I'd be okay with it, and boob plate isn't an issue for me, but boob plate is not a major issue, availability is.

Also, for the last time, Sisters don't have high heels. Reguardless of what some 20 year old cover art depicts, the models themselves don't have high heels. Modern depictions of them have been less "Heavy Metal" magazine cover for a long, long time.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The non GKT models are dramatically different. Not even close to being a match, what with their now mandatory forearm guns.

Pewter PAGK from 3rd Edition all had them with mandatory forearm guns too, they've been that way for a while now.

As I noted, my GK go back to RT/2E, not merely 3E...

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The non GKT models are dramatically different. Not even close to being a match, what with their now mandatory forearm guns.

Pewter PAGK from 3rd Edition all had them with mandatory forearm guns too, they've been that way for a while now.

As I noted, my GK go back to RT/2E, not merely 3E...

Fair enough, but wouldn't they have still been not even close to being a match in 3rd Edition? I just don't see the difference between your statement regarding the old design and the plastic design when the same would be true of their other old design.

Right. As adamsouze notes, stop using Blanche's "art" as a basis. It sucks (like 99% of what he's ever produced) and it has thankfully been mostly ignored by the majority of Sisters writers, artists, and sculptors since.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The non GKT models are dramatically different. Not even close to being a match, what with their now mandatory forearm guns.

Pewter PAGK from 3rd Edition all had them with mandatory forearm guns too, they've been that way for a while now.

As I noted, my GK go back to RT/2E, not merely 3E...

Fair enough, but wouldn't they have still been not even close to being a match in 3rd Edition? I just don't see the difference between your statement regarding the old design and the plastic design when the same would be true of their other old design.

When GK got a Codex and new-look minis, I stopped playing "GK". The visual look was so far off, I was out. That they are now plastic doesn't change that they don't match the classic GKs.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
When GK got a Codex and new-look minis, I stopped playing "GK". The visual look was so far off, I was out. That they are now plastic doesn't change that they don't match the classic GKs.

I'm not sure how that's relevant.

The change to their looks happened when the new models were still metal.

The shift to plastic didn't create much of a change other than faux latin being replaced with English.

And we're talking about going from metal Sisters of Battle to plastic Sisters of Battle in this thread.

Their looks don't have to be changed by the shift from metal to plastic, because shifting from metal to plastic didn't change much about Grey Knights. Those changes occurred independently of the shift to plastic.

Which isn't to say that we can't change their looks, just that we don't have to. Therefor the argument on whether or not to change looks is purely on the merits of the current looks vs the merits any other potential ideas for their looks put forth.

 Melissia wrote:
Which isn't to say that we can't change their looks, just that we don't have to.

Correct.

If GW wants to, they could change how they look at the same time. They don't have to, but they could.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The non GKT models are dramatically different. Not even close to being a match, what with their now mandatory forearm guns.

Pewter PAGK from 3rd Edition all had them with mandatory forearm guns too, they've been that way for a while now.

As I noted, my GK go back to RT/2E, not merely 3E...

Fair enough, but wouldn't they have still been not even close to being a match in 3rd Edition? I just don't see the difference between your statement regarding the old design and the plastic design when the same would be true of their other old design.

When GK got a Codex and new-look minis, I stopped playing "GK". The visual look was so far off, I was out. That they are now plastic doesn't change that they don't match the classic GKs.

Ok, I get what you are putting down.

 Melissia wrote:
Right. As adamsouze notes, stop using Blanche's "art" as a basis. It sucks (like 99% of what he's ever produced) and it has thankfully been mostly ignored by the majority of Sisters writers, artists, and sculptors since.

You finally said something I agree with, and triply with the bolded.

 Just Tony wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Right. As adamsouze notes, stop using Blanche's "art" as a basis. It sucks (like 99% of what he's ever produced) and it has thankfully been mostly ignored by the majority of Sisters writers, artists, and sculptors since.

You finally said something I agree with, and triply with the bolded.

that is certainly one opinion...
thankfully, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and i think his work is quite nice...

his style of drawing Sisters is suitably Gothic, and i really liked the heels on his Femme Militant line...
i like the Combat Heels on my Infinity minis (which are pretty tame, in my opinion), but i don't think that Blanche's style would be a good fit for a redesign of the Sisters, as it would put off too many potential customers...
the current look works perfectly well to show them as badass female warrior-nuns...
the bob-cut is a nice alternative to the wimple...

cheers
jah

 Manchu wrote:
It seems like you are using "X makes them better" and "X makes me personally like them more" interchangeably

Nah. I did imply that "X makes them better" very, very often means that "X makes me personally like them more" is true to. But it's not always the case the other way around.

 Manchu wrote:
If you think about it, what is a good argument for changing the visual design of Sisters?

Making them look even better. I can't seem to find anything that wouldn't boil down to that. You can go the cynical route and just focus on sale, though, but really how will you prove that a new design won't sell better without before hearing about what the new design would be?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Making them look even better. I can't seem to find anything that wouldn't boil down to that. You can go the cynical route and just focus on sale, though, but really how will you prove that a new design won't sell better without before hearing about what the new design would be?

Do you have artwork showing what your improvements would turn the Sororitas into?

I.E. Concept art. I would like to see it.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Um, what? I have the original RT-era GK stuff, and they were completely redone. Back in RT, GK are primarily non-Psykers, but the few they have are Mary Sue powerful; new GK are *all* Psykers, with these new GKPAs and ridiculous Baby Bjornoughts. My SM were supposed to be non-psyker GKs, and now they can't be.

Ha, I had this exact same thought

I loved and still have my original Grey Knights, in fact, I bought some more just recently off eBay and have yet to get around to buying some plastic ones. The entire look of the models, particularly the iconic Nemesis Force Weapons were, well, they aren't even anything alike, there is very little about the original Grey Knights that survived the revamp in either look or lore. I don't think anyone in the thread has suggested such a radical overhaul of the models and background for the Sisters of Battle.

In any case, customers have every right to wish-list changes to a product they support, but would support more, if in any future updates of that product, the manufacturer tweaked it in certain ways. It is an entirely reasonable line of discussion and to suggest these customers are "giving the middle finger" to those who are happy to see zero changes to the product is very silly and clearly not the case.

For those who don't recall way back when...

I particularly like the #2 and #3 bodies, but I have a #1 body to make the squad.

I detest the frog helms and wrist guns replacing the baroque details and sculpted armor.

I was never too keen on No 1 Body compared to the other two, especially since it was basically a reworked Librarian, but like you say, my favourite thing about them were the baroque helmet designs and the weapons, and they went. It's one of the aspects of SoB that people constantly state they like most about them, the helmet design, and yet in this instance it was completely and utterly reworked. Not that I don't say the new GK don't look "iconic" but it's not the same at all, as the older, and equally iconic, look.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
For those who don't recall way back when...

Spoiler:

I particularly like the #2 and #3 bodies, but I have a #1 body to make the squad.

I detest the frog helms and wrist guns replacing the baroque details and sculpted armor.

Spoiler:

i still have the originals, too...
lovely models

of course, i don't have a problem with the new style Termies, but the PA guys just never resonated with me...
i like the wrist guns on the plastic Termies, but the plastic PA ones don't look cool to me...
the metal PA minis with a belt feed looked better...

that is the crap-shoot with redesigns...
some have been an improvement, and others have been a crying shame...
losing the Diaz Daemonettes will be lamented for many more years to come :(

i need to get around to finally painting an OG Grey Knight...
it's only been 25 years since i bought 'em

cheers
jah

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
For those who don't recall way back when...

I don't, I started playing GK in 3e. I do agree about the frog helmets, I put the Paladin helmets on all my plastic Terminators.

Wrist guns I'm less sure about. There's been a push towards standardizing the size of the same weapon on different models, storm bolters most places are big enough these days they wouldn't fit onto the weapons.

I do miss the ammo belts from the 3e-era models, though.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I detest the frog helms and wrist guns replacing the baroque details and sculpted armor.

They remind me of the Garthim from The Dark Crystal, the only reason I like them. If I got the army, I'd paint it weathered copper for that exact reason.

 jah-joshua wrote:
that is the crap-shoot with redesigns...
some have been an improvement, and others have been a crying shame...

losing the Diaz Daemonettes will be lamented for many more years to come :(

i need to get around to finally painting an OG Grey Knight...
it's only been 25 years since i bought 'em

cheers
jah

That fear of a bad change is not unwarranted.

Yeah, the changes in the Daemons are huge. The old Rt/2E stuff was so goofy. Then we got the Diaz Daemonettes and the squid Horrors, which were great! And then we got the current plastics, which are not. At all.

I probably oughta get around to doing something with my Diaz Daemonettes, get them playable...

 Gogsnik wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
Um, what? I have the original RT-era GK stuff, and they were completely redone. Back in RT, GK are primarily non-Psykers, but the few they have are Mary Sue powerful; new GK are *all* Psykers, with these new GKPAs and ridiculous Baby Bjornoughts. My SM were supposed to be non-psyker GKs, and now they can't be.

Ha, I had this exact same thought

I loved and still have my original Grey Knights, in fact, I bought some more just recently off eBay and have yet to get around to buying some plastic ones. The entire look of the models, particularly the iconic Nemesis Force Weapons were, well, they aren't even anything alike, there is very little about the original Grey Knights that survived the revamp in either look or lore. I don't think anyone in the thread has suggested such a radical overhaul of the models and background for the Sisters of Battle.

In any case, customers have every right to wish-list changes to a product they support, but would support more, if in any future updates of that product, the manufacturer tweaked it in certain ways. It is an entirely reasonable line of discussion and to suggest these customers are "giving the middle finger" to those who are happy to see zero changes to the product is very silly and clearly not the case.

Some of the suggestions people have mentioned for changing the Sisters of Battle in this thread have involved drastic changes like going with shaved heads instead of the current haircut and very practical armor instead of ceremonial gothic armor.

Also, uh, I dunno whose side you two are on, because you're saying you hate the changes made to the Grey Knights' original aesthetics but seem to be pushing for changing the Sororitas' original aesthetics. Is it that you just want other people to suffer what you have suffered, or do you not realize you're suggesting the kind of thing you hated when it happened to your own favorite army?

I fail to see how me wanting alternate heads is anywhere close to a full redesign anywhere close to what the GK got.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I fail to see how me wanting alternate heads is anywhere close to a full redesign anywhere close to what the GK got.

Alternate heads? That hasn't been my impression of what you've been arguing for. You seemed to very strongly believe that Sisters of Battle would look better if they all had buzzcuts, and the concept of these being alternative, optional pieces to the current haircut was either never brought up or lost on me entirely.

And despite asking three times, I have yet to see any concept art of the changes people would like to see made to the armor. I am very, very wary of the potential changes to the armor people are pushing for when they fail to provide any concept art of those changes and rely on very, very vague alterations to video game characters in poor focus and low graphics settings that do not look anything like Sisters of Battle to begin with.

I am telling you in no uncertain terms that Sisters would look dramatically better with shaved heads, or wimples, or the existing Sallet helms. The first is unabashedly military; the second is iconic from the Rogue Trader rulebook; the helmets from the original release in 2E. If I call out 3 different head styles, that obviously means I'm asking for a varied selection of alternate heads if we should ever get plastic Sisters. I've also said that I would gladly replace all of my bob cut heads, which should also be obvious that I want alternate heads.

I have not called for changes to the armor's look. I have called for a reduction to Sv4+ with faith-based a 5++ invulnerable save, because that is what I think that their armor looks like.

You, however, have been resisting any changes at all, saying that any change, no matter how slight, makes them not Sisters. I don't agree with that at all.

The buzz cut heads are shown in other official Sisters artwork, notably the Repentia / Penitent artwork in C:WH. Also Inquisitor. The buzzcuts are just as canon as the bobs and Sallets. However, your call for "femininity" seems a bit off, given that most painted Sisters models look like men in drag..

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I am telling you in no uncertain terms that Sisters would look dramatically better with shaved heads, or wimples, or the existing Sallet helms. The first is unabashedly military; the second is iconic from the Rogue Trader rulebook; the helmets from the original release in 2E. If I call out 3 different head styles, that obviously means I'm asking for a varied selection of alternate heads if we should ever get plastic Sisters. I've also said that I would gladly replace all of my bob cut heads, which should also be obvious that I want alternate heads.

Fine then.

[I have not called for changes to the armor's look. I have called for a reduction to Sv4+ with faith-based a 5++ invulnerable save, because that is what I think that their armor looks like.

Other people have called for changes. Hence why I said "people" and not "you".

Also, it's power armor, not carapace armor. It gets a 3+ armor save.

You, however, have been resisting any changes at all, saying that any change, no matter how slight, makes them not Sisters. I don't agree with that at all.

You have not been reading everything I've said.

I've said that I wouldn't be opposed to scaling down the boobplate so long as there's still some sort of upper-chest bulge in the armor. I'm not opposed to minor improvements. Wherever I start to revert to stating "no changes whatsoever" is when people seem to start pushing for a drastic revamp that would result in me hating the models that would result.

The buzz cut heads are shown in other official Sisters artwork, notably the Repentia / Penitent artwork in C:WH. Also Inquisitor. The buzzcuts are just as canon as the bobs and Sallets. However, your call for "femininity" seems a bit off, given that most painted Sisters models look like men in drag..

The repentia models do have shaved heads. The female Penitent Engine model has a hood so it's impossible to tell her hairstyle. Neither of those are an example of Sisters of Battle in general, as both are essentially being punished with death by combat. It's not inconceivable that that punishment could require a shaven head.

And if GW wants to make their faces look more feminine, they really should.

So this kind of justification keeps turning up: "I just want to change X." It's stated as if the visual concept of the Sororitas is a pile of non-interactive pieces simply placed next to each other. What should be done with Sisters' boobs? What should be done with Sisters' hair? As if each body part has it's own dedicated design committee. No, the design is a unified thing. It works because all the elements work together. "Just change X" sounds to me like an individual hobbyist's personal conversion project rather than an improvement on a product line.

Except, that is NOT true. Particularly in this case, where Sisters already have alternate heads.

Initial release was natural color hair or Sallet helm.

Others are in hoods (Penitent Engine pilot), or shaved (C:WH Repentia).

Making the C:WH shaved head available, along with the RT-style wimple is consistent with the SOB design elements already presented and shown in canon artwork by GW.

To act as if this is some kind of shocking change is ridiculous.

I think the SoB when redone should have a greater variety of heads, on a level similar to the Tempestus Scion models.

In an update such extra heads would better allow for the representation of different orders of sisters, or to just add another layer of visible distinction between unit types, or just to add greater aesthetic variation... All are positive.

As for boob armor, it should be as prominent as it is on female eldar. Some hate female boob armor on SoB for not being realistic, I'd be indifferent except for the fact that fictionally there is an improtance to the ecclesiarchy that everyone knows that they are women and as such even if it's just ornamental it is something central to representing their distinctiveness.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 aka_mythos wrote:
So little of the SoB range would survive a full shift to plastic I could see GW throw the rest out in favor of a complete overhaul of the aesthetic.

All of the armored Sisters would survive as multi-part models. The Immolator / Exorcist 2-in-1 is easy enough.

I think it's just the Repentia at become a problem, but it's not like the metals can't carry on.

What I mean is that with the Immolators having been the only plastic kit... If SoB see even a modest alteration to their design it's likely even the Immolator would get redone. At which point they could more drastically change the aesthetic across the whole line and it'd have a minimal impact on the amount of work they'd have to do.

I don't think Repentia would be too challenging for GW to do in plastic... If you look at some of the fantasy dark elves and dark eldar it's very apparent GW could reproduce them pretty closely to the current models but in plastic.

The design in question is the rank and file militant Sister. They come with bobs or, logically, with bobs under helmets. Repentia (including any strapped into a Penitent Engine) are irrelevant to this point as they shave their heads as part of penance (per Christian tradition/imagery). Actually, armored Sisters with shaven heads is specifically inconsistent with canon depictions; a shaven head already means something specific in the visual vocabulary of the faction.

I'm not prescribing any particular style of head just the need for more variety. You obviously disagree with JohnHwangDD, but he has presented styles of heads that exist within the range and while they might not be suitable they do show that there is within the range inspiration for greater diversity of head styles.

I think some sort of hood or cowl option would fit their aesthetic and be consistent with the visual themes.

Religious orders traditionally have fairly uniform standards of dress, not unlike (modern) militaries so there is a definite limit on variation here. Logically, there would be about as much room for variety as a there would be for a strictly Codex-adherent SM chapter: so maybe some Sister heads depicting scars or augments

Exactly.

@Manchu - nobody would force you to use the non-bob heads if you didn't want them. I would gladly take them off your hands..

I think having a variety in heads in that you are not forced to use duplicates of exactly the same piece is good, but I think uniformity in the hairstyle is characterful. This is an extremely dogmatic religious order. Individual expression would not be encouraged in any way.

I hope they do something with the boobs, like go uni-boob with a giant fleur-de-lis over the chest or something. The french bra look carries with it some serious groan factor.

Other than that, I think Sisters already have a very well designed look, and I hope they don't change it too much.

Assuming they actually do anything with the line at all lol.

Pouncey wrote:I still wish someone would finally explain to me what a "wimple" is, because I don't know.

Canoness wearing a wimple. There is an image of a Canoness wearing one in the 2nd Edition Codex, smiting heretics with power maul and bolter, but I can't find it online, and this is a nice image, so there we go.

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:Sisters aren't really like nuns, in the sense that beside being an organization of religious women, they don't have much in common with nuns. Especially, nuns are similar to monks, with asceticism being a virtue (in 40k, that's Dark Angels and their robes and lack of bling), while Sisters are more akin to high-level priests that showers themselves in ostentatious wealth (see: the Vatican officials).

Well, they are; there are several bits of background that show Sisters of Battle wearing uncomfortable clothing, and one short story in particular that has a Canoness using a pen studded with spikes to cause her suffering (as the Emperor suffered). Ever since they were first released in the late 1990s one of the key pillars of their background is that they are nuns. They belong to a series of religious orders, hold services of worship, and fight the enemies of the God-Emperor. Just because they aren't exactly the same as Christian nuns (which isn't surprising!) doesn't make them anything other than nuns.

Weboflies wrote:I think having a variety in heads in that you are not forced to use duplicates of exactly the same piece is good, but I think uniformity in the hairstyle is characterful. This is an extremely dogmatic religious order. Individual expression would not be encouraged in any way.

Which is absolutely right - in Faith and Fire and also Hammer and Anvil Miriya constantly comes under criticism and censure for behaving in a manner that isn't quite dogmatically correct. Of course, this enables her to save the day, but that's not really the point.

I like this concept art.

 Pouncey wrote:
Alternate heads? That hasn't been my impression of what you've been arguing for. You seemed to very strongly believe that Sisters of Battle would look better if they all had buzzcuts

I like the bobcut and I wish it stays an option. However, I would love to have the option to go full helmet on everyone (because it looks SO GOOD), and having also the option for some shaved head would be good, I guess. I really don't like the wimple which I feel don't integrate well visually with the rest, and makes them look like something they are not (i.e. Christian nuns). If the option is present I certainly won't use it, and I wouldn't be happy if it is mandatory on the models.

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
Well, they are; there are several bits of background that show Sisters of Battle wearing uncomfortable clothing, and one short story in particular that has a Canoness using a pen studded with spikes to cause her suffering (as the Emperor suffered).

That's penance. But really Sisters don't seem to hold vows of humility or poverty…

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
Just because they aren't exactly the same as Christian nuns (which isn't surprising!) doesn't make them anything other than nuns.

Well, the wimple is very much a Christian nun thing.

I remember reading a source (I believe it was the RPGs?) which implied that the helmet was a mark of a veteran.

Certainly it'd be nice to have a triple choice of wimple, bob and helm.

The artwork was used as concept art for an Inquisitor character - who (despite the armour) was supposed to be a repentia.

locarno24 wrote:
I remember reading a source (I believe it was the RPGs?) which implied that the helmet was a mark of a veteran.

I think the first printed codex had veteran helmets having extra bling.

Power armor is sealed all environment armor. If you don't have a helmet, you restrict its use to nice, safe atmospheres with no NBC warfare going on.

SoB come with bare faces so they look more individual, not because they don't let the newbies wear helmets.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I really don't like the wimple which I feel don't integrate well visually with the rest, and makes them look like something they are not (i.e. Christian nuns). If the option is present I certainly won't use it, and I wouldn't be happy if it is mandatory on the models.

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
Well, they are; there are several bits of background that show Sisters of Battle wearing uncomfortable clothing, and one short story in particular that has a Canoness using a pen studded with spikes to cause her suffering (as the Emperor suffered).

That's penance. But really Sisters don't seem to hold vows of humility or poverty…

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
Just because they aren't exactly the same as Christian nuns (which isn't surprising!) doesn't make them anything other than nuns.

Well, the wimple is very much a Christian nun thing.

I'm not mandating a head change, and I don't know where Pouncey got the idea that anyone was mandating an all new, all different look for Sisters. With the breadth of the Imperium, and the age of the Sisters, the idea that there wouldn't be any variation is very strange. Particularly as the artwork and models themselves demonstrate a level of variety that is not unreasonable. Also, WRT the wimple specifically, GW has already sculpted a version wearing one:

Note that she is also wearing a different version of the armor, along with completely different skirting vs the sleeve & tabard thing we see on Battle Sisters. This may be due to being a non-Militant Order, or it could be personal preference.

The spiked pen thing is not penance per se, as the Canoness is obviously not a penitent of some sort. It's a hair shirt to denote additional piety. And it's yet another BDSM fetish reference that is part and parcel of the Sisters concept.

The Sisters are very clearly concepted from Catholic nuns, using the whole sister / convent language, along with their original artwork:

While they aren't exactly Christian nuns, they are the 40k equivalent. And their first depiction is clearly wearing a Catholic wimple. BTW, who wants nipple spikes to come back?

Just a heads-up, the "Sisters of Silence" feature heavily in the latest "Beast Arises" novel called "Watchers in Death".

And there seems to be a bit of proto-Sisters of Battle armor design in there.

I think we can drop the references to Sister Sin. That is an example of a failed design.

RE: wimples & other nunnery

Like most garments now associated with religion, the wimple did not begin as part of the habit. Rather, it is a holdover from an earlier period of secular dress; namely, a cloth worn by married women to cover their hair. Although celibate, women religious have a long tradition of referring to themselves as brides of Christ. Wearing the wimple was an affectation of that metaphor. Retaining it, inverting a symbol of marriage into one of chastity, after the garment went out of style among women generally is down to the conservatism seemingly inherent to religious orders.

While their use of the wimple is ambiguous, it is very clear that Sisters of Battle have a dominant tradition of NOT covering their hair. To the contrary, they incorporate a specific hairstyle as a notable aspect of their "habit." So while the wimple could be rationalized as holdover from their days as "Brides of the Emperor," using the same kind of logic as real-world wimples, it is more likely the product of lazy/unimaginate borrowing from Christian imagery (in contrast to the striking, novel snow-white bobs).

Christians nuns are no doubt an inspiration for the Sisters of Battle. But I think the iconic SOB look relies not so much on that but rather on contrasting that image of prudishness with somewhat kinky sex appeal (JohnHwangDD is right to point out the BDSM influences here; the studio was cheeky in its heyday). Even the beautiful Sister Hospitaller figure wearing the wimple is extraordinarily feminine (her head covering creates the illusion of gorgeous flowing hair); she is certainly not at all frumpy. It pays to remember that SoB are not necessarily terrified of their feminine sexuality, perhaps unlike some people in the real world.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
I'm not mandating a head change

I didn't get that impression, I was just saying I don't really like this look and I am not interested in having it in my miniatures:

Ofc ymmv.

Me, either.

And practically speaking, bobs/helmets are really good for plastic miniatures, unlike long hair or a wimple that drapes down over the shoulders and down the back.

A wimple is certainly something that lends itself more to a character or other monopose model .

 Manchu wrote:
I think we can drop the references to Sister Sin. That is an example of a failed design.

Thing is, GW have a history of resurrecting old designs and repurposing them or redesigning them - see, for example, the Contemptor Dreadnought.

That makes three pieces of old GW-related artwork that include some sort of wimple (Sister Sin, the Hospitaller and the last image from Dark Heresy). I could totally see them including an option for a wimple head, maybe as a sergeant choice.

If GW were to release plastic sisters as a full new army a la Dark Eldar, I'd expect the following, mostly based on their current business practises:

- Some sort of armour redesign, with it mostly staying the same in style but maybe losing the separated boobs and the corset look. If anything, just for PR reasons when they print giant posters of SoBs and hang them in their store windows.

- Multiple head options, just like a lot of the other recent plastic kits. Bobs, helmets, some bald cybernetic ones, Sister Superior wimples, lots of options. Heads are the easiest thing to fit on the sprue to give buyers lots of options.

- Repentias having a total redesign, or being dropped altogether. I doubt naked bondage women pushed forward by whips is what GW want to be seen to be pushing to kiddies nowadays, so if they remain I could totally see them in sackcloth or penitents robes, with tonsured or shaved haircuts. Or making 'penitents' a type of imperial citizenry rather than naked sisters, so you have guys and girls all trying to atone through death in battle.

- Again for PR reasons I could see them releasing male and female priests and confessors. So we don't have GWs only female army led by three powerful guys. I could also see the return of Frateris Militia.

- Plastic penitent engine that would have to double as something else too.

- New flyer, probably not a plastic Avenger but something new and not as cool-looking, since copying FW kits in plastic isn't very common at the mo.

If they release them as a quick Deathwatch-style release then all of the above, but no Repentias or Penitent Engines, and I imagine the basic sister sprue would allow you options for enough special and heavy weapons spare that, after buying a few boxes, you could assemble Dominion and Retributor squads.

Please note, I'm not going to draw up some sort of concept sketch - I'm not submitting my ideas for approval by the Dakka Sisters Fanclub Judgement Panel - I'm trying to steer the topic on course by suggesting what GW might actually do if they wanted to rerelease plastic sisters.

If any of the above contradicts current fluff, they'll just change it. It's also kinda irrelevant if the current Sisters player like what they do - if they did a total redesign and it looked cool enough that lots of new people started playing (buying) Sisters armies, then it would be a great success, even if every current Sisters player hated it, and opted to remain with their current metals.