‘Just give us strong, smart and brave lads and the Sons of Russ will endure.’
‘Just sons?’ said Tyra, her humour edged with a hard look. ‘Perhaps there is more water that must learn to flow.’
Arjac looked at this fierce woman, the sharp spear held easily in her hand, and recalled that she had overcome her fear not with psychodoctrination but raw courage. She had been the first to run to aid him against the wyrm, whether he needed her or not. The spirit of Fenris was in all of its people, elder and child, man and woman. He had seen first-hand that Roboute Guilliman had brought back miracle warriors from the time of the Allfather Abroad. Space Marines moulded from even sharper steel. If that was possible, anything was. He laughed at the thought.
Tyra frowned at him, thinking he mocked her. He calmed his humour and bowed his head in apology, eyes never leaving hers.
‘Perhaps,’ he said.
After the siege of fenris only a few tribes left after the battle and grey knight purges, wolves are trying to protect them so they can recover. this a conversation arjac has with a tribeswoman
Edit: Just finished reading
Njal gets a 30k Thousand sons sourceror stuck in his head who tells him the 13th company are trapped on prospero in the mirror maze and that if they return him to his body they can save him. Njal, Arjac, Bjorn and Lukas go on a trip to prospero
Basically the wolves now have the none wulfen 13th compnay back who were stuck in the portal maze on prospero for 10k years. 200 30k marines + their vehicles including a stormbird, mastadon, spartans etc. all the current wolves are going around like what the hell is that thing, the 13th joke about Bjorn a bloodclaw being the most revered and ancinet warrior etc. Lukas outwits magnus allowing everyone to escape, the TS is disgusted with what magnus and Ts have become
If Cawl found a way to make Marines female, I'd accept that. Again, I won't go into whether it SHOULD be changed, but if that's how it was done, I could work with that.
If the Space Wolves just "magically" learned how to do it, and were the only ones who did, I'd be leading the new crusade to have Space Wolves take the coveted "Muh spiritual liege" trophy and let the Ultramarines have a break!
BrianDavion wrote:yeah well if anyone was going to just magicly break 30 years of real tradtion and 10k years of setting tradtion "because" it'd be the space wolves
Sgt_Smudge wrote:If Cawl found a way to make Marines female, I'd accept that. Again, I won't go into whether it SHOULD be changed, but if that's how it was done, I could work with that.
If the Space Wolves just "magically" learned how to do it, and were the only ones who did, I'd be leading the new crusade to have Space Wolves take the coveted "Muh spiritual liege" trophy and let the Ultramarines have a break!
Female marines... Sheild maidens... Space maidens, wild maidens, claw maidens...
Lol.
Only space wolves break rules almost to a 4th wall level!
BrianDavion wrote: yeah well if anyone was going to just magicly break 30 years of real tradtion and 10k years of setting tradtion "because" it'd be the space wolves
I can wholeheartedly get behind that view... If there is one legion that does things their own way and damn the codex, it's the Vlka Fenryka...
tneva82 wrote: Funny how people immediately seem to think this means female marines.
Not trying to create conflict here, but what ELSE is it supposed to mean?
Arjac mentions that he needs male fighters. Tyra says words along the lines of "Why just men? Surely that needs to change". Now, maybe by fighters, Arjac might be referring to the human auxiliaries of the Wolves, their "PDF" equivalent instead of or as well as the Astartes themselves. However, I was under the impression and wouldn't know why this wouldn't be the case, that there were women in the Fenris auxilia too. After all, not all auxilia is made up of failed aspirants - they can be self-managing stocks, recruitment, or made up of the failed stock.
So, as I understood, there were already women in this force. This would make the above train of thought that Arjac is referring to more than just the Space Marines incorrect - why would Tyra have that response? No, the only logical thing she can be referring to is Female Astartes. Arjac's own thought supports that - he goes on to think about the changes that have been made to Space Marines, how they've become even better than before, and wonders if similar changes could occur.
This doesn't mean Female Marines are a thing right now - but it is a reference to the idea of them, and could indicate a change in GW's attitude to it. Maybe Cawl will find a way. Maybe the Wolves will suddenly be able to. That's what people seem to be discussing.
Curious to hear other interpretations, but this seems pretty cut and dry.
BrianDavion wrote: yeah well if anyone was going to just magicly break 30 years of real tradtion and 10k years of setting tradtion "because" it'd be the space wolves
I can wholeheartedly get behind that view... If there is one legion that does things their own way and damn the codex, it's the Vlka Fenryka...
They have only one rule... We make them up as we go along.
Borbon45 wrote: ‘Just give us strong, smart and brave lads and the Sons of Russ will endure.’
‘Just sons?’ said Tyra, her humour edged with a hard look. ‘Perhaps there is more water that must learn to flow.’
Arjac looked at this fierce woman, the sharp spear held easily in her hand, and recalled that she had overcome her fear not with psychodoctrination but raw courage. She had been the first to run to aid him against the wyrm, whether he needed her or not. The spirit of Fenris was in all of its people, elder and child, man and woman. He had seen first-hand that Roboute Guilliman had brought back miracle warriors from the time of the Allfather Abroad. Space Marines moulded from even sharper steel. If that was possible, anything was. He laughed at the thought.
Tyra frowned at him, thinking he mocked her. He calmed his humour and bowed his head in apology, eyes never leaving hers.
‘Perhaps,’ he said.
After the siege of fenris only a few tribes left after the battle and grey knight purges, wolves are trying to protect them so they can recover. this a conversation arjac has with a tribeswoman
Edit: Just finished reading
Njal gets a 30k Thousand sons sourceror stuck in his head who tells him the 13th company are trapped on prospero in the mirror maze and that if they return him to his body they can save him. Njal, Arjac, Bjorn and Lukas go on a trip to prospero
Basically the wolves now have the none wulfen 13th compnay back who were stuck in the portal maze on prospero for 10k years. 200 30k marines + their vehicles including a stormbird, mastadon, spartans etc. all the current wolves are going around like what the hell is that thing, the 13th joke about Bjorn a bloodclaw being the most revered and ancinet warrior etc. Lukas outwits magnus allowing everyone to escape, the TS is disgusted with what magnus and Ts have become
Curious. No mention of why anyone on Fenris would need psycho indoctrination?
Just seems like they need some miracle marine models and give the TS the usual kicking.
Still why search for a joan of arc, when you could get 50 arturs for the effort.
Wasnt the the woman in BOTF a Inq?
Borbon45 wrote: ‘Just give us strong, smart and brave lads and the Sons of Russ will endure.’
‘Just sons?’ said Tyra, her humour edged with a hard look. ‘Perhaps there is more water that must learn to flow.’
Arjac looked at this fierce woman, the sharp spear held easily in her hand, and recalled that she had overcome her fear not with psychodoctrination but raw courage. She had been the first to run to aid him against the wyrm, whether he needed her or not. The spirit of Fenris was in all of its people, elder and child, man and woman. He had seen first-hand that Roboute Guilliman had brought back miracle warriors from the time of the Allfather Abroad. Space Marines moulded from even sharper steel. If that was possible, anything was. He laughed at the thought.
Tyra frowned at him, thinking he mocked her. He calmed his humour and bowed his head in apology, eyes never leaving hers.
‘Perhaps,’ he said.
After the siege of fenris only a few tribes left after the battle and grey knight purges, wolves are trying to protect them so they can recover. this a conversation arjac has with a tribeswoman
Edit: Just finished reading
Njal gets a 30k Thousand sons sourceror stuck in his head who tells him the 13th company are trapped on prospero in the mirror maze and that if they return him to his body they can save him. Njal, Arjac, Bjorn and Lukas go on a trip to prospero
Basically the wolves now have the none wulfen 13th compnay back who were stuck in the portal maze on prospero for 10k years. 200 30k marines + their vehicles including a stormbird, mastadon, spartans etc. all the current wolves are going around like what the hell is that thing, the 13th joke about Bjorn a bloodclaw being the most revered and ancinet warrior etc. Lukas outwits magnus allowing everyone to escape, the TS is disgusted with what magnus and Ts have become
Curious. No mention of why anyone on Fenris would need psycho indoctrination?
Just seems like they need some miracle marine models and give the TS the usual kicking.
Still why search for a joan of arc, when you could get 50 arturs for the effort.
Wasnt the the woman in BOTF a Inq?
Which kicking... Are they on the 3rd, 4th space wolf kick to the nether regions...
Magnus got a spear in the eye, beaten by Grimor, punched by Bjorn and more.
Personally, I think this is just Gav Thorpe having a bit of fun. When you get right down to it, the real reason space marines are exclusively male is because their original fluff was written in the 1980s. Back then, it just seemed obvious that a bunch of genetically-enhanced super-soldiers would be male. If they didn't already exist in the setting and were introduced today, things would probably be different (see the Stormcast in AoS). It doesn't mean GW are actually planning to give us female space marines. Gav's a freelancer these days and wouldn't even necessarily know if GW were planning such a thing.
Duskweaver wrote: It doesn't mean GW are actually planning to give us female space marines. Gav's a freelancer these days and wouldn't even necessarily know if GW were planning such a thing.
OTOH Fenrisian equivalent to SoBs won't really contradict nor lore nor SW attitude.
Not to mention that there always were rumours that SWs are ...less indoctrinated than other loyalist SMs considering 'everasked SM question'
That's my read as well, keep in mind Arjac doesn't exactly have much say in the creation of new marines, he could run around screaming "GIVE US FEMMARINES" all he wants but he's really not in a position to dictate.
tneva82 wrote: Funny how people immediately seem to think this means female marines.
Not trying to create conflict here, but what ELSE is it supposed to mean?
Howabout simply female warriors? It's not like space marines are Imperium's only fighting force? Leeeeet's seee....Howabout we imagine huge large army that fields human warriors. Let's give them flak armour. Then arm them with lasgun! And hey let's call them Imperial guard.
What a novel concept! Entirely new type of army in the world of warhammer 40k! IMAGINE THAT! Non-space marine force for Imperium. What an AMAZING CONCEPT!
BrianDavion wrote: yeah well if anyone was going to just magicly break 30 years of real tradtion and 10k years of setting tradtion "because" it'd be the space wolves
I can wholeheartedly get behind that view... If there is one legion that does things their own way and damn the codex, it's the Vlka Fenryka...
They have only one rule... We make them up as we go along.
The one rule of the wolves I think is best summarized in the famous meme:
-See that army?
-Yes, sir.
-I don't want to.
-Understood.
Curious. No mention of why anyone on Fenris would need psycho indoctrination?
Marines undergo psycho-indoctrination. It is part of what makes them Know No Fear. The point of that text is that the tribeswoman showed great bravery in coming to aid Arjac. She hasn't been psycho-indoctrinated, or physically enhanced, yet she quickly and knowingly exposes herself to danger.
If being brave is doing something despite your fear, then 'normal' humans are more brave than Marines who have had their fear inhibited/diminished/tailored to be more easily controlled. (All else being equal this could mean that humans can be more brave than a Marine can ever be. Depending on how you define being a hero it can also mean that Marines can never be as heroic as a human).
Female marines... Sheild maidens... Space maidens, wild maidens, claw maidens...
Lol.
Only space wolves break rules almost to a 4th wall level!
Knowing the level at which GW operates with their naming conventions for the Space Wolves, they are going to be named something like : Wolfshield wolfclawmaidens...
*insert image of Hodor*
Wolf wolf, wolf, wooolf wolf WOLF! Wolf.
tneva82 wrote: Funny how people immediately seem to think this means female marines.
Not trying to create conflict here, but what ELSE is it supposed to mean?
Howabout simply female warriors? It's not like space marines are Imperium's only fighting force? Leeeeet's seee....Howabout we imagine huge large army that fields human warriors. Let's give them flak armour. Then arm them with lasgun! And hey let's call them Imperial guard.
What a novel concept! Entirely new type of army in the world of warhammer 40k! IMAGINE THAT! Non-space marine force for Imperium. What an AMAZING CONCEPT!
So you didn't read a word of what I wrote except what you quoted. Nice.
I already said that he COULD have been referring to the Fenris auxilia (and other forms of simple human warriors), but it makes no sense in context because:
- Fenris ALREADY has female soldiers in it's PDF - perhaps Arjac called them all male ("sons") when he meant "sons and daughters", but this makes no sense, because his response to when he's called out on it isn't "sorry, I meant sons and daughters". If he was talking about an already mixed gender group, why would Tyra talk about water needing to flow differently - it already does?
- Guardsmen can already be women - again, for the same reasons as above, it makes no sense to talk about this. Arjac doesn't clear up the miscommunication, Tyra's statement wouldn't make sense if women couldn't already fight, and even more so, why would defending Fenris be a concern for normal Guardsmen? That's a Space Wolf and PDF thing -- not regular Imperial Guard.
- He then goes on to think about Space Marines and the changes that the Primaris have brought to their ranks. If he wasn't talking about Space Marines, this semantic field would make no sense. Why would he think about Space Marines when according to you, he meant Guardsmen? It's more logical in context to think he was talking about Space Marines - first, he mentions "sons". Tyra calls him out and suggests maybe women should be considered too, implying that they already aren't. Arjac then compares himself, a Space Marine, to her, and then thinks about all the changes that have recently occurred to Space Marine physiology. Logically, how is he NOT talking about female Space Marines?
I understand that you're sick to death of hearing about them, sick to death of Space Marines getting the attention, and maybe you dislike the idea itself. That doesn't take away from the fact that here, it's pretty much cut and dry he's talking about female Astartes, not female guardsmen. We already have that - if he was referring to that, why would Tyra imply that it's not happened yet, and why didn't he correct his mistake about his choice of pronoun?
So yeah, it'd be lovely if you actually read what I posted instead of making some snarky point which I disproved in the previous post.
At most, this shows that GW is thinking about female Space Marines and that they are considering introducing them in the future. After all, there are few reasons not to introduce them aside from tradition, and we all know how easily GW sweeps away tradition (see Guilliman, Cawl and the Primaris). And if there is any Space Marine group willing to break with tradition, it is the Space Wolves. Not to mention that a female Space Marine unit would fit with them thematically.
However, it is far more likely that it is just Gav Thorpe having a bit of fun. I think people read too much into it. Even in the novel Arjac is unsure about it. He says 'perhaps', which might just as well be a way for him to put an end to the awkward topic as an actual statement of 'perhaps it could happen'. So no, I do not think people need to fear the coming of the femmarines just yet
Borbon45 wrote: ‘Just give us strong, smart and brave lads and the Sons of Russ will endure.’
‘Just sons?’ said Tyra, her humour edged with a hard look. ‘Perhaps there is more water that must learn to flow.’
Arjac looked at this fierce woman, the sharp spear held easily in her hand, and recalled that she had overcome her fear not with psychodoctrination but raw courage. She had been the first to run to aid him against the wyrm, whether he needed her or not. The spirit of Fenris was in all of its people, elder and child, man and woman. He had seen first-hand that Roboute Guilliman had brought back miracle warriors from the time of the Allfather Abroad. Space Marines moulded from even sharper steel. If that was possible, anything was. He laughed at the thought.
Tyra frowned at him, thinking he mocked her. He calmed his humour and bowed his head in apology, eyes never leaving hers.
‘Perhaps,’ he said.
After the siege of fenris only a few tribes left after the battle and grey knight purges, wolves are trying to protect them so they can recover. this a conversation arjac has with a tribeswoman
Edit: Just finished reading
Njal gets a 30k Thousand sons sourceror stuck in his head who tells him the 13th company are trapped on prospero in the mirror maze and that if they return him to his body they can save him. Njal, Arjac, Bjorn and Lukas go on a trip to prospero
Basically the wolves now have the none wulfen 13th compnay back who were stuck in the portal maze on prospero for 10k years. 200 30k marines + their vehicles including a stormbird, mastadon, spartans etc. all the current wolves are going around like what the hell is that thing, the 13th joke about Bjorn a bloodclaw being the most revered and ancinet warrior etc. Lukas outwits magnus allowing everyone to escape, the TS is disgusted with what magnus and Ts have become
Curious. No mention of why anyone on Fenris would need psycho indoctrination?
Just seems like they need some miracle marine models and give the TS the usual kicking.
Still why search for a joan of arc, when you could get 50 arturs for the effort.
Wasnt the the woman in BOTF a Inq?
There wasn't an Inqusitor in Battle of the Fang. You might be thinking of the Emperor's Gift.
Maybe he just watched Lagetha on Vikings and went - Hell yeah.
And why wouldn't you.
There are already various warrior roles open to women - although the guard does not recruit from Fenris as has been said they have their own pdf.
They can be chosen by the Inquisition
It possible they may even feel the calling to join the Sisters.
Female Space marines could be interesting...not a major want for me but I am not auto against it.
BrianDavion wrote: yeah well if anyone was going to just magicly break 30 years of real tradtion and 10k years of setting tradtion "because" it'd be the space wolves
I can wholeheartedly get behind that view... If there is one legion that does things their own way and damn the codex, it's the Vlka Fenryka...
They have only one rule... We make them up as we go along.
The one rule of the wolves I think is best summarized in the famous meme:
-See that army?
-Yes, sir.
-I don't want to.
-Understood.
Female marines... Sheild maidens... Space maidens, wild maidens, claw maidens...
Lol.
Only space wolves break rules almost to a 4th wall level!
Knowing the level at which GW operates with their naming conventions for the Space Wolves, they are going to be named something like : Wolfshield wolfclawmaidens...
*insert image of Hodor*
Wolf wolf, wolf, wooolf wolf WOLF! Wolf.
Mr Morden wrote:Maybe he just watched Lagetha on Vikings and went - Hell yeah.
And why wouldn't you.
There are already various warrior roles open to women - although the guard does not recruit from Fenris as has been said they have their own pdf.
They can be chosen by the Inquisition
It possible they may even feel the calling to join the Sisters.
Female Space marines could be interesting...not a major want for me but I am not auto against it.
Lagatha, hell yeah!
Even a marine wants Lagathai in the PDF.
And lol... Space wolf naming is a tad... Tad broken...
Yep. Point wolves at enemy. Tell them they working for thousand sons... Profit.
Female Space marines could be interesting...not a major want for me but I am not auto against it.
But they better set background properly for that - one rabbit from the hat is enough for several editions at least .
OTOH outside geneseed - much of marine capabilities could be achieved via more common means of AM. It's not that genhanced and cybernized troops aren't dime a dozen as elites and among 'bodyguards' of influential people, imperial and heretical - and many of 'em give !SPESS MEHREENS! good run for they money.
Duskweaver wrote: When you get right down to it, the real reason space marines are exclusively male is because their original fluff was written in the 1980s. Back then, it just seemed obvious that a bunch of genetically-enhanced super-soldiers would be male.
Eh, even then it was backwards thinking, really. Vasquez was the most badass Space Marine in Aliens, despite it being made in 80s. That was following Lieutenant Ripley from Alien, made in 1979. There are lots more examples, really, but just to illustrate a point, if it was written for and worked for big blockbuster movie, it really couldn't have been that novel idea.
Sadly, even today, there's still small loud minority of people more fit for 80s, but these 500 years ago, thinks their army will somehow magically get cooties if it ceases to be all-cock club and dem wimmins dare to venture out of kitch... their containment ghetto single army. Just see above.
Yes lets make inferior space marines.
30% less muscle mass especially in the upper body where most combat strength is located.
Less bone density that only gets worse over time.
Toxic shock issues from poor hygiene in space armor suits for long periods of time in the field.
Yeah this will work well and not be an utter waste of time and resources to make a less effective super soldier.
Females already serve the Emperor in the Army and the Navy as well as in certain other specialty organizations because they can and do excel in them.
The Astartes is not suited to females at all. If you want women in powered armor please inquire with the Sororitas.
Certainly I cannot be the only one who enjoys watching the effects of what amounts to a throwaway line in a Space Wolves novel?
On account of genetically enhanced women, I believe Fabius Bile has already made significant progress. As such, it would not surprise me to see him turn a girl into a space marine at one point. Even if only to prove that he could do it, if so inclined.
Zakiriel wrote: Yes lets make inferior space marines.
30% less muscle mass especially in the upper body where most combat strength is located.
Less bone density that only gets worse over time.
Toxic shock issues from poor hygiene in space armor suits for long periods of time in the field.
Yeah this will work well and not be an utter waste of time and resources to make a less effective super soldier.
Females already serve the Emperor in the Army and the Navy as well as in certain other specialty organizations because they can and do excel in them.
The Astartes is not suited to females at all. If you want women in powered armor please inquire with the Sororitas.
As I said in the previous locked thread. None of that happens pre-puberty wich is when the SM implantation process begins. SM organs override normal development. This argument is invalid especially in a universe with space magic and ... well everything 40k has.
Zakiriel wrote: Yes lets make inferior space marines.
30% less muscle mass especially in the upper body where most combat strength is located.
Less bone density that only gets worse over time.
Toxic shock issues from poor hygiene in space armor suits for long periods of time in the field.
Yeah this will work well and not be an utter waste of time and resources to make a less effective super soldier.
Females already serve the Emperor in the Army and the Navy as well as in certain other specialty organizations because they can and do excel in them.
The Astartes is not suited to females at all. If you want women in powered armor please inquire with the Sororitas.
As I said in the previous locked thread. None of that happens pre-puberty wich is when the SM implantation process begins. SM organs override normal development. This argument is invalid especially in a universe with space magic and ... well everything 40k has.
I laughed out loud when I read his comments. Bone density issues? Yeah... space magic can add a second heart, lungs that grant immunity to toxic atmospheres and enough general durability to shrug off otherwise devastating damage... but the space magicians just can't figure out how to beat osteoporosis! Same for the other comments. Space magic fixes everything. The comments seem to say more about the commenter than about the proposed fluff changes.
Well someone had to light the promethium and throw it into the dumpster.
But in all honesty if you were to introduce female space marine types into the game it should come from the Emperor's Children and Fabius Bile.
Just to prove he can, and well, Slaanesh.
On a side note, a friend of mine raised the point that this is a "War Game" and do we really want more female representation to then violence up?
Already to much violence against women as it is.
Zakiriel wrote: Yes lets make inferior space marines.
30% less muscle mass especially in the upper body where most combat strength is located.
Less bone density that only gets worse over time.
Toxic shock issues from poor hygiene in space armor suits for long periods of time in the field.
Yeah this will work well and not be an utter waste of time and resources to make a less effective super soldier.
Females already serve the Emperor in the Army and the Navy as well as in certain other specialty organizations because they can and do excel in them.
The Astartes is not suited to females at all. If you want women in powered armor please inquire with the Sororitas.
As I said in the previous locked thread. None of that happens pre-puberty wich is when the SM implantation process begins. SM organs override normal development. This argument is invalid especially in a universe with space magic and ... well everything 40k has.
except you're talking increased bone density, increased muscle mass, increased size, all signs of male puberty, could it be space marine geneseed operates by harassing and "super charging" this? in effect part of what makes a space marine WORK could well be male puberty.
Yes, but if all the tampering is just going to make them turn out just like male space marines... what is the point? Either in universe or in reality? Would anyone really be all that exited about a space marine that looked and acted just like every other space marine, just because you're told it was made from a girl? It's not like you'll be able to see its uterus on the model. And it presumably wouldn't function anyway.
As for how anything works, as was pointed out recently in another thread, it doesn't work. None of it works.
The reason I'm strongly agaisnt female space marines is because it would make SoB even more obsolete than what they are allready now, and would basically mean that we aren't gonna receive new SoB models.
But at the same time I wouldn't be agaisnt a Space Wolf Valkirie unit.
Galas wrote: The reason I'm strongly agaisnt female space marines is because it would make SoB even more obsolete than what they are allready now, and would basically mean that we aren't gonna receive new SoB models.
But at the same time I wouldn't be agaisnt a Space Wolf Valkirie unit.
I'd be kinda intreasted in a "chapter serfs" codex come to think of it.
Watch the nerd rage as Space Wolves get power-armored Valkyries who are an intermediary between full Space Marines and Imperial Guard, almost like power-armored Scions.
All the biggest rage of both female Space Marines, and an army of women in power comes out that aren't Sisters of Battle?
Honestly, that would be a very unique and characterful Space Wolf thing, really. Helluva lot cooler than a Murderous totally-not-Khornate dreadnought and a wolf sleigh.
AegisGrimm wrote: Watch the nerd rage as Space Wolves get power-armored Valkyries who are an intermediary between full Space Marines and Imperial Guard, almost like power-armored Scions.
All the biggest rage of both female Space Marines, and an army of women in power comes out that aren't Sisters of Battle?
Honestly, that would be a very unique and characterful Space Wolf thing, really.
Zakiriel wrote: On a side note, a friend of mine raised the point that this is a "War Game" and do we really want more female representation to then violence up?
Already to much violence against women as it is.
We do.
No one is above the duty to live a horrible life and die an even more horrible death for the Emperor, heretic.
Zakiriel wrote: Well someone had to light the promethium and throw it into the dumpster.
But in all honesty if you were to introduce female space marine types into the game it should come from the Emperor's Children and Fabius Bile.
Just to prove he can, and well, Slaanesh.
On a side note, a friend of mine raised the point that this is a "War Game" and do we really want more female representation to then violence up?
Already to much violence against women as it is.
Food for thought.
Except that we already have plenty of violence against women (genestealer fluff, sisters of battle bloodbath/crimson slaughter cannibalism/sanctuary 101) we just don't get any of the cool tabletop models.
There's always going to be someone in the fluff/modeling department that's into the whole violence against women thing, it's pretty much inevitable in any kind of setting/fandom/whatever you have it. In terms of 40k, we're there already, sisters of battle are established to exist, rule 34 with a lovely helping of violence is already going to exist in abundance.
So sure, why not. Lets get some good female models out of it at least, so the folks whose jollies don't get rustled that way at least have something to enjoy.
Zakiriel wrote: Yes lets make inferior space marines.
30% less muscle mass especially in the upper body where most combat strength is located.
Less bone density that only gets worse over time.
Toxic shock issues from poor hygiene in space armor suits for long periods of time in the field.
Yeah this will work well and not be an utter waste of time and resources to make a less effective super soldier.
Females already serve the Emperor in the Army and the Navy as well as in certain other specialty organizations because they can and do excel in them.
The Astartes is not suited to females at all. If you want women in powered armor please inquire with the Sororitas.
As I said in the previous locked thread. None of that happens pre-puberty wich is when the SM implantation process begins. SM organs override normal development. This argument is invalid especially in a universe with space magic and ... well everything 40k has.
except you're talking increased bone density, increased muscle mass, increased size, all signs of male puberty, could it be space marine geneseed operates by harassing and "super charging" this? in effect part of what makes a space marine WORK could well be male puberty.
it could.
but probably not. I hate to break it to you, but there's nothing in tesdosterone that's gonna make your ribcage close into a solid mass and pimp you out with a second heart. You're gonna need a totally new hormone for that one.
Inevitably it all comes down to whatever hack writer gets put in charge of it comes up with. Come on folks, lets spin the "wheel o' pointless sexism and cringe-worthy inclusion for its own sake!" whatever result comes up, everybody loses!
Zakiriel wrote: Yes lets make inferior space marines.
30% less muscle mass especially in the upper body where most combat strength is located.
Less bone density that only gets worse over time.
Toxic shock issues from poor hygiene in space armor suits for long periods of time in the field.
Yeah this will work well and not be an utter waste of time and resources to make a less effective super soldier.
Females already serve the Emperor in the Army and the Navy as well as in certain other specialty organizations because they can and do excel in them.
The Astartes is not suited to females at all. If you want women in powered armor please inquire with the Sororitas.
You do know Space Marines get some 13 new organs inserted, as well as having their old organs, muschel mass and bone structure increased. They also in cannon grow by about a meter. Compared to that the 30% extra muscel do not really matter. Space Marines are so alien to humans they could count as a different race.
Reading over it I keep thinking your above comment is probably a troll post, although I do supose you are ill informed or have not thought about it a whole lot.
Update:
Zakiriel wrote: Well someone had to light the promethium and throw it into the dumpster.
But in all honesty if you were to introduce female space marine types into the game it should come from the Emperor's Children and Fabius Bile.
Just to prove he can, and well, Slaanesh.
On a side note, a friend of mine raised the point that this is a "War Game" and do we really want more female representation to then violence up?
Already to much violence against women as it is.
Food for thought.
Yeah, that pretty much confirms the troll. Hope you all got your oponions about Ashes of Prospero in because this thread closes in 3, 2, 1.
I throughly support Space Wolves getting a whole army of new power-armoured female warriors.
Except, this would obviously be a MIRACLE so they'd probably be very religious. And also, maybe they could really like flamers and meltas? That would be interesting. And also winged jump pacs so they look all angelic. And maybe a big organ tank. And lose all the wolf iconography, maybe some sort of flower symbol?
In plastic. Yeah. I think that would be great. COOL NEW ARMY
ArbitorIan wrote: I throughly support Space Wolves getting a whole army of new power-armoured female warriors.
Except, this would obviously be a MIRACLE so they'd probably be very religious. And also, maybe they could really like flamers and meltas? That would be interesting. And also winged jump pacs so they look all angelic. And maybe a big organ tank. And lose all the wolf iconography, maybe some sort of flower symbol?
In plastic. Yeah. I think that would be great. COOL NEW ARMY
Well if anyone can do its the Wolves - they get everythig
Im here nor there about FemMarines, its not something I personally put too much thought into.
Thinking about it now though, I'd much rather have a Valkyrie themed Sisters of Battle type thing for the Daughters of Fenris. To me a much more interesting concept.
But generally Im not a fan of forced diversity in any direction, if it makes sense in the universe, do it, if not don't.
Zakiriel wrote: Yes lets make inferior space marines.
30% less muscle mass especially in the upper body where most combat strength is located.
Less bone density that only gets worse over time.
Toxic shock issues from poor hygiene in space armor suits for long periods of time in the field.
Yeah this will work well and not be an utter waste of time and resources to make a less effective super soldier.
Females already serve the Emperor in the Army and the Navy as well as in certain other specialty organizations because they can and do excel in them.
The Astartes is not suited to females at all. If you want women in powered armor please inquire with the Sororitas.
You are bringing science to a space fantasy fight lol .
Zakiriel wrote: On a side note, a friend of mine raised the point that this is a "War Game" and do we really want more female representation to then violence up?
Already to much violence against women as it is.
Food for thought.
Let me introduce you to: science fiction war/violent conflict movies.
Spoiler:
First, there is the Starship Troopers series:
Also, the Alien series :
And the Star Wars series :
Oh and Mad Max:
Well, science fiction movies have stated loud and clear that they are totally fine with it, and their audience is too. It'll also get branded feminist and we'll have the silly insecure usual suspect men throwing a fit at it too, business as usual.
Sorry I hate all the food by answering your question, but I'm sure you'll find another way to feed your thought.
Galas wrote: The reason I'm strongly agaisnt female space marines is because it would make SoB even more obsolete than what they are allready now,
Only if you believe that the only thing SoB have for them is their gender, which is very very much wrong.
If the Imperium is short on recruiting stock, why not look to the other 50-60% of the population (possibly more if all the men keep dying in wars all over the place)?
It's not like Space Marines are really 'men' anyway, they are mules - genetically changed an unable to reproduce sexually. There could very easily be a 'female' under that armor and we would never know. Certain attributes that are non-conducive to combat would probably be reduced or removed along with the enhancements that make a Space Marine.
While I do see the idea of a Valkyrie unit for the Wolves being pretty cool, I do see the fear that it would invalidate the Sisters. On the other hand, if a female Wolves unit sold really well, it may signal the approval for female power armor...
vitki wrote: If the Imperium is short on recruiting stock, why not look to the other 50-60% of the population (possibly more if all the men keep dying in wars all over the place)?
I really don't think they are short on recruits for Space Marines. They could increase their recruitment a hundred-fold and it wouldn't affect the Imperium. The population of the Imperium is far too great compared to the number of Space Marines for recruiting stock to be an issue.
It's not recruits Chapters are short on - it's more the codex restrictions, geneseed, wargear and such that are the restrictive factors. I'd imagine the Codex restrictions are the main ones.
vitki wrote: If the Imperium is short on recruiting stock, why not look to the other 50-60% of the population (possibly more if all the men keep dying in wars all over the place)?
It's not like Space Marines are really 'men' anyway, they are mules - genetically changed an unable to reproduce sexually. There could very easily be a 'female' under that armor and we would never know. Certain attributes that are non-conducive to combat would probably be reduced or removed along with the enhancements that make a Space Marine.
While I do see the idea of a Valkyrie unit for the Wolves being pretty cool, I do see the fear that it would invalidate the Sisters. On the other hand, if a female Wolves unit sold really well, it may signal the approval for female power armor...
Good points. Female space marines would be just as buff but probably be virtually breastless. I remember Battletech trying to deal with this issue with the Clans - if you aren't going to be breeding the things might as well be reduced to be less out of the way.
On the plus side, this means you could do 'female' head swaps on your marines/space wolves and be done. Quick, cheap and easy compared to most other factions outside Tau.
ChargerIIC wrote: Good points. Female space marines would be just as buff but probably be virtually breastless.
Who cares? Most people, including me, have no idea what a male space marine torso look like either. It's irrelevant because we always see them in power armor anyway so…
Zakiriel wrote: Well someone had to light the promethium and throw it into the dumpster.
But in all honesty if you were to introduce female space marine types into the game it should come from the Emperor's Children and Fabius Bile.
Just to prove he can, and well, Slaanesh.
On a side note, a friend of mine raised the point that this is a "War Game" and do we really want more female representation to then violence up?
Already to much violence against women as it is.
Food for thought.
I like the idea of human women from Fenris in power armor. I think the female space marine idea is terrible and hope that doesn't happen.
I think partly it's because of what you mention. Even just being made into a space marine is pretty terrible. Obviously there's a lot of violence and terrible things that happen in the setting, but there are still limits to what people want in something that is supposed to be fun. Do we really want to read about little 10 year old girls being taken from their families, physically mutilated, and turned into hulking monsters? Not that it happening to boys is any better, really, but everyone's line is in a different place. I remember a lot of people being a little turned off by the Walking Dead game having Carl in it, because that means you may be in a game and, as part of the game, trying to kill a little kid. Some people would find that pretty distasteful. I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't want to play a game where the objective was to murder unarmed civilians. You don't want to get too close to something that might turn a lot of people off, especially for no real benefit.
ChargerIIC wrote: Good points. Female space marines would be just as buff but probably be virtually breastless.
Who cares? Most people, including me, have no idea what a male space marine torso look like either. It's irrelevant because we always see them in power armor anyway so…
It felt worth mentioning giveen the third party female space marines we see for sale. SOB have the silly corset of war aesthtic, but women space marines wouldn't need it. Likewise it wouldn't be a major change for GW's sculptors. Just include the occasional female head in a box.
ChargerIIC wrote: Good points. Female space marines would be just as buff but probably be virtually breastless.
Who cares? Most people, including me, have no idea what a male space marine torso look like either. It's irrelevant because we always see them in power armor anyway so…
It felt worth mentioning giveen the third party female space marines we see for sale. SOB have the silly corset of war aesthtic, but women space marines wouldn't need it. Likewise it wouldn't be a major change for GW's sculptors. Just include the occasional female head in a box.
Or GW can just come out and say "You thought all those helmeted Space Marines were guys? Surprise!"
Albino Squirrel wrote: Do we really want to read about little 10 year old girls being taken from their families, physically mutilated, and turned into hulking monsters?
I have bad news for you.
Dark eldars don't spare little girls.
If a little girl turns out to be a psyker, or even a blank, her fate will be way worse than this.
Thought the assassins have had a happy childhood? Think again.
Did you know that canonically, schola progenium used to be place where orphans were submitted to sexual exploitation?
Male humans are (on average) physically stronger and tougher than female humans.
The question is...would the SM process equalise that difference?
If women use steroids to boost testosterone and work out, they can approximate the muscle growth of men who don't use steroids and who work out. Ceterus paribus, men physically beat out women on average.
If the SM process is tied to the recruit's testosterone production, using males as first choice makes sense. You could use girls with the aid of steroids, but why not just use boys...or boys on steroids? You would only use girls when boys are unavailable or too few.
If the SM process is somehow tied to Y-chromosomes, then girls can't join the SM club. They can still become Assassins, Guardswomen, SoB, Navy crew, what have you...
I do think there is some thematic merit to keeping SM all-male. The type of fraternal bonding among many Loyalists (think the 300 Spartans or the Sacred Band of Thebes) and brutal competition for dominance among many Traitors (think male lions or chimps) are primarily male modes of behaviour. Violence and tribalistic/clan allegiances and conflict are male behavior patterns. SM take these male traits to an extreme.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: It's not recruits Chapters are short on - it's more the codex restrictions, geneseed, wargear and such that are the restrictive factors. I'd imagine the Codex restrictions are the main ones.
Not really. Sure codex limits # of marines per chapter. But number of chapters isn't limited. More of logistics of building all the ships and wargear and geneseed. With 1 marine providing geneseed for 2 more it takes time to get enough geneseed harvested. Especially when marines are constantly involved in warfare resulting in lost geneseed.
Tengri wrote: The question is...would the SM process equalise that difference?
Or... reverse! Because space magic science!
Tengri wrote: I do think there is some thematic merit to keeping SM all-male.
I don't. Space Marines are a blank state. I think there is some thematic merit to keeping the Dark Angels all male though. They have a strong monastic theme not found in other chapters.
So, if you really want more female models being brought into the game, I believe you should be petitioning GW for new Guard kits first, which contain a mix of male and female models.
This is a much more plausible starting point for the fans, and GW than going… “oh look! Female space marine!”.
Kdash wrote: So, if you really want more female models being brought into the game, I believe you should be petitioning GW for new Guard kits first, which contain a mix of male and female models.
Tengri wrote: I do think there is some thematic merit to keeping SM all-male.
I don't. Space Marines are a blank state. I think there is some thematic merit to keeping the Dark Angels all male though. They have a strong monastic theme not found in other chapters.
All space marines are warrior monks though. I mean, their base of operations is called a fortress monastery, they have chaplains and they follow a strict code of conduct. There's a very clear religious theme going on with most chapters. Wolves are an exception, not the rule. Not to mention that they were created in the Emperor's image, a man with the mother of all god complexes and they call each other battle brothers. The theme of them being an all male faction is pretty integral to their design, especially when you consider that the Horus Heresy was heavily inspired by Lucifer's fall from heaven, where God, Lucifer and pretty much every angel fighting is portrayed as male. Hence the marines frequently being referred to as angels in one way or another.
All space marines are warrior monks though. I mean, their base of operations is called a fortress monastery, they have chaplains and they follow a strict code of conduct. There's a very clear religious theme going on with most chapters.
Which is actually pretty weird considering that they actually are explicitly secular organisations.
All space marines are warrior monks though. I mean, their base of operations is called a fortress monastery, they have chaplains and they follow a strict code of conduct. There's a very clear religious theme going on with most chapters.
Which is actually pretty weird considering that they actually are explicitly secular organisations.
I find it deliciously ironic that for a man who wants to delete all religions and move humanity to an age of atheistic enlightenment, the Emperor sure loved making religious references, and that way after his internment in the throne the religious aspects only increased. I mean, Blood Angels is the original name of the chapter. You'd think a hardcore atheist like the Emperor would say "no Sanguinius, you can't name them that, try again" but I guess not. I always chalked that up to the parody aspect of 40k.
To expand upon the biblical analogy, the Emperor destroying all religions isn't really any different from the Christian church destroying the European pagan religions, and this is even more apparent when you consider that he is worshipped as a god in the Imperium that he created, where every other form of belief is heretical. He ended up becoming that which he wanted to destroy, and that's hilariously ironic.
Blood Angels are renaissance Italian vampires. Not much about them says "warrior monk". I'd even say that they are very very far from the monastic archetype.
Blood Angels are renaissance Italian vampires. Not much about them says "warrior monk". I'd even say that they are very very far from the monastic archetype.
They are called Angels, their Primarch had angel wings, and they have Priests, so I dare say that they close enough. They might not be monks per-se, but they are religiously themed like monks. And they still have a monastery. Like monks
CthuluIsSpy wrote: To expand upon the biblical analogy, the Emperor destroying all religions isn't really any different from the Christian church destroying the European pagan religions, and this is even more apparent when you consider that he is worshipped as a god in the Imperium that he created, where every other form of belief is heretical. He ended up becoming that which he wanted to destroy, and that's hilariously ironic.
Not really, considering christianity was more open to absorb them (and that's why a lot of their current rites can be traced to pagan origins from different parts of Europe).
As for the names and all within 40K, I'm more pragmatic and say "when they created the game, they never considered all this and now they can't 'fix' it". If I try to make sense of it, I'll run into your same issues xD
And yet you have the Northern Crusades against the pagans in the Baltic and West Slavic regions. Or the Saxon wars which were religiously motivated.
Whilst the Church did absorb pagan practices, it was still more to destroy the pagan religions by attracting followers to the church. And they still condoned quite a bit of killing.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: They are called Angels, their Primarch had angel wings
Uh? Are you somehow mixing an angel and a monk?
Saint Celestine is very obviously referencing an angel, with her wings and all, and yet she is a woman.
There is no strong association between being an angel and being male...
Priests. Not monks.
Priests talk to women. Often enough for it to be completely mundane.
Monks very rarely talk to women, they usually live recluse among other men.
And, I dare add, among other monks. There usually aren't priests in monasteries.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: They might not be monks per-se, but they are religiously themed like monks.
There is a huge difference between being religiously themed and being monastically themed. The Dark Angels are very obviously monastically themed. The Blood Angels are religiously themed, but they are much more close to the pop-culture version of the angels in Renaissance art.
Here is what Wikipedia has to say about it :
As a matter of theology, they are spiritual beings who do not eat or excrete and are genderless. Many angels in art may appear to the modern eye to be gendered as either male or female by their dress or actions, but until the 19th century, even the most female looking will normally lack breasts, and the figures should normally be considered as genderless.
The untrained eye looking at some Renaissance painting will see a mix of male and female angels, and therefore the pop-culture version of those angels work just as well for male and female angels.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: They are called Angels, their Primarch had angel wings
Uh? Are you somehow mixing an angel and a monk?
Saint Celestine is very obviously referencing an angel, with her wings and all, and yet she is a woman.
There is no strong association between being an angel and being male...
Not quite true. The Archangels are generally portrayed as male. Even in renaissance art they tended to look male, albeit very pretty men. If we are to assume that the Blood Angels are based off of Michael, then yeah, there's a association with them being male
Priests. Not monks.
Priests talk to women. Often enough for it to be completely mundane.
Monks very rarely talk to women, they usually live recluse among other men.
And, I dare add, among other monks. There usually aren't priests in monasteries.
Priests talk to women. They generally aren't women. At least in the medieval or renaissance church.
So people are now literally arguing that a word 'angel' has such masculine connotations that it totally means that there cannot thematically be female Blood Angels? This has to be a textbook example of grasping at straw!
Crimson wrote: So people are now literally arguing that a word 'angel' has such masculine connotations that it totally means that there cannot thematically be female Blood Angels? This has to be a textbook example of grasping at straw!
SO MANLY!
That is not a renaissance portrayal of an archangel.
What the hell is wrong with both of you?
The angels, in the bible, don't have any mentioned gender.
In art, they are usually portrayed in an androgynous manner suiting their lack of gender.
All of this is basically already mentioned in the Wikipedia quote that I included in my message.
As a result, pop culture portrays angels as both men and women. Do you want a list of popular female angels in pop fiction? Are you somehow saying that Saint Celestine doesn't work as an angelic figure because she is a woman?
Priests talk to women. They generally aren't women.
What? There are female priests in many religions and denominations. Hell, there were already priestesses in ancient Egypt about seven thousand years ago!
No. Monasteries and the Church are both male dominated religious organisations, at least in the medieval and renaissance periods. They are hardly "very different" things.
Priests talk to women. They generally aren't women.
What? There are female priests in many religions and denominations. Hell, there were already priestesses in ancient Egypt about seven thousand years ago!
In the medieval and renaissance Catholic church? You know, what the IoM is based off of?
Hey look, I understand that you don't want your marines to include women, because after all, aren't they nicknamed the RENAISSANCE ARCHangels of death?
Except for the fact they are called the angels of death, not archangels. The Renaissance part only applies to Blood Angels, and doesn't even matter, because pop-culture reference have never been about accuracy. So, well :
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Priests talk to women. They generally aren't women. At least in the medieval or renaissance church.
It's good that the marines are not an order of priest warriors, then. I'm interested into how you are somehow linking the White Scars' "Voice of the Storm" to the medieval or renaissance church. Marines are a blank state. They have some Priest category that is going to be filled by whatever kind of Priest is relevant to the kind of marines you want to make. A "mongol golden horde" style chapter is going to have shamanistic priests, that can just as well be women.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: No. Monasteries and the Church are both male dominated religious organisations, at least in the medieval and renaissance periods.
Monasteries are gender-segregated organization, and that gender segregation is an important part of their identity. The church includes members of both sex. The angels canonically have no gender but in the widely accepted pop culture interpretation include both genders. That's why keeping Dark Angels male-only is relevant to their theme while it isn't for White Scars or Blood Angels.
In the medieval and renaissance Catholic church? You know, what the IoM is based off of?
Super vaguely based on that. You do realise the real Catholic Church didn't have cathedral shaped giant tanks either?
Furthermore, that is Ecclesiarchy imagery, and doesn't really apply to the Blood Angels, who are a weird mix of vampires and angels, bot of which have a fair amount of feminine associations.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Marines are a blank state. They have some Priest category that is going to be filled by whatever kind of Priest is relevant to the kind of marines you want to make. A "mongol golden horde" style chapter is going to have shamanistic priests, that can just as well be women.
Remember how Iron Hands replaced Chaplains with Iron Fathers, that are techmarines that focus on the Machine God?
Marines are a blank state army that is just there to receive some identity. For White Scars it's the Golden Horde Mongols. For Blood Angels it's Renaissance Italians Vampire Angels. For Dark Angels it's Paranoid Monks. For Iron Hands it's Machine Obsessed. All of those chapters will receive a kind of priest fitting to that theme. Only the Dark Angels have some thematic reason for being all male.
Duskweaver wrote: Personally, I think this is just Gav Thorpe having a bit of fun. When you get right down to it, the real reason space marines are exclusively male is because their original fluff was written in the 1980s. Back then, it just seemed obvious that a bunch of genetically-enhanced super-soldiers would be male. If they didn't already exist in the setting and were introduced today, things would probably be different (see the Stormcast in AoS). It doesn't mean GW are actually planning to give us female space marines. Gav's a freelancer these days and wouldn't even necessarily know if GW were planning such a thing.
I think you're right, but think about the list of fluff things that have changed since the 80's.
Albino Squirrel wrote: I think if they were made today they'd probably still be all male. There are definite thematic reason for it.
They made the movie GI Jane in the 90's. I can not stil belive this is an issue. Israel has 3 years mandatory military duty for wimen, One third of Norways recruits are now wimen. Women can fight. But all of these arguments are irrelewant. By the time you introduce space wizardry anything can be defended from inside the cannon. There are plenty of times the fluff has been changed over night retroactivly. Tyranids has gotten new units eddited in as old units all the time. Look at the necron re-write. OK, so then it makes no sence to defense it from an in-game perspective. Allow people to be part of the hobby, just include women into the setting. Just ad a small spruce with female heads into SM boxes. That is literarly all that is needed. Because of the power armour and genetic retrofit backstory you do not need to change anything else. Heck, on units that have all helmets on them, you do not need to include female heads, just retcon them in. Next time you do some IG models just add in some female opper bodies and heads and problem solved.
But no, you people are so afraid of your plastic toys having female cromosomes under that armour. Can you tell me what the argument from outside of the setting is that prevents the females to be represented in 40K? I do not understand the argument. And I would not presume to know your intension behind this rescentment, I would like to know. Because I do not understand it.
Albino Squirrel wrote: I think if they were made today they'd probably still be all male. There are definite thematic reason for it.
They made the movie GI Jane in the 90's. I can not stil belive this is an issue. Israel has 3 years mandatory military duty for wimen, One third of Norways recruits are now wimen. Women can fight. But all of these arguments are irrelewant. By the time you introduce space wizardry anything can be defended from inside the cannon. There are plenty of times the fluff has been changed over night retroactivly. Tyranids has gotten new units eddited in as old units all the time. Look at the necron re-write. OK, so then it makes no sence to defense it from an in-game perspective. Allow people to be part of the hobby, just include women into the setting. Just ad a small spruce with female heads into SM boxes. That is literarly all that is needed. Because of the power armour and genetic retrofit backstory you do not need to change anything else. Heck, on units that have all helmets on them, you do not need to include female heads, just retcon them in. Next time you do some IG models just add in some female opper bodies and heads and problem solved.
But no, you people are so afraid of your plastic toys having female cromosomes under that armour. Can you tell me what the argument from outside of the setting is that prevents the females to be represented in 40K? I do not understand the argument. And I would not presume to know your intension behind this rescentment, I would like to know. Because I do not understand it.
You do not understand it, because you got it wrong. We have nothing against "female chromosomes under that armor." There is nothing wrong with guardswomen and plastic sisters of battle. Just space marines, because of 30 years of background and because the entire point of the Horus Heresy is to be Paradise Lost in space, with the Emperor as God who creates primarchs and marines from his DNA (in his "image". Basically clones, except not identical). Except everything goes wrong. Its entirely possible that the Emperor deliberately designed the Space Marine process to work on women, as he is that much of a narcissistic bastard with a god-complex. Going "nope, girls can be marines too now!" would undermine that aspect, and they'll just be yet another superhuman without any of the thematic elements.
Female Space Marines would give GW an excuse to further ignore the Sisters of Battle, who are about a thousand times more interesting, so no thank you.
pm713 wrote: Do you even need female heads? Most Marines are bald and the faces are hardly detailed.
I do not know. The only female heads I have seen from GW are Dark Elder models. I would like to see their version of female space marine heads. Can you pull of female while doing the ultramarine buss cut? How about cool female SW heads? I would like to see Viking haircuts, the male cuts are cool. Chaos female heads could also be really cool. ^_^
That is not a renaissance portrayal of an archangel.
MANLY AS HELL!
Eh, fair enough. That is Gabriel. I was thinking more Archangel Michael, who would probably be a source of inspiration for blood angels, considering how he's a warrior angel and all. He even has nipple armor in this one painting
Spoiler:
His face is still pretty feminine, but he does have a more masculine build, going by the torso and musculature. In Paradise Lost (written in the 17th century) he's referred to as a guy as well. As it was written in the renaissance, it would seem that they considered Michael a guy angel back then.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arbitrator wrote: Female Space Marines would give GW an excuse to further ignore the Sisters of Battle, who are about a thousand times more interesting, so no thank you.
Oof, yeah, that is a possibility. I would much rather have plastic sisters than female space marines.
It would also be pretty stupid to make male sisters of battle, for the same reason. That wouldn't really fit the theme. Why would you want male space nuns?
I don't think you understand what word 'clone' means...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Arbitrator wrote: Female Space Marines would give GW an excuse to further ignore the Sisters of Battle, who are about a thousand times more interesting, so no thank you.
Well, yeah. That is absolutely the best reason to be sceptical about the female Astartes.
I don't think you understand what word 'clone' means...
What would you call a genetically engineered organism that posses the genetic makeup of its creator then? Because that's what the primarchs are. They aren't clones, but they were made in a test tube from the Emperor's DNA. That sounds really close to a clone to me.
What would you call a genetically engineered organism that posses the genetic makeup of its creator? A son?
Because that's what the primarchs are. They certainly aren't clones, but they were made in a test tube from the Emperors DNA.
They cannot be solely made from Emperor's DNA, because they're not identical to him.
What would you call a genetically engineered organism that posses the genetic makeup of its creator? A son? Because that's what the primarchs are. They certainly aren't clones, but they were made in a test tube from the Emperors DNA.
They cannot be solely made from Emperor's DNA, because they're not identical to him.
Eh, I don't know about that. Its possible that they started off identical, but got mutated when they got stolen by chaos. Hence the bird wings on Sanguinious. Or maybe the Emperor made the modifications himself so they would serve some other purpose. Or maybe the Emperor's genetic makeup is super messed up from centuries of being a psyker, resulting in...curious results. Its not very clear. It is implied that he used sorcery, so maybe that had an effect.
You do not understand it, because you got it wrong. We have nothing against "female chromosomes under that armor." There is nothing wrong with guardswomen and plastic sisters of battle. Just space marines, because of 30 years of background and because the entire point of the Horus Heresy is to be Paradise Lost in space, with the Emperor as God who creates primarchs and marines from his DNA (in his "image". Basically clones, except not identical). Except everything goes wrong.
Its entirely possible that the Emperor deliberately designed the Space Marine process to work on women, as he is that much of a narcissistic bastard with a god-complex.
Going "nope, girls can be marines too now!" would undermine that aspect, and they'll just be yet another superhuman without any of the thematic elements.
So if I am to break up your argument it has to parts to it.
1. - The Horus Heresey part of the setting is Paradice Lost in space.
2. - If space marines can be made from women it would not be paradice lost in space.
I find these arguments a bit weak.
1. While there are some similaraties with Paradise Lost, it is hardly based on it. The first incarantion of warhammer was rogue trader. Back then the space marines where gloryfied policemen (there is a nice drawing of one beating up a punk doing grafity in a wall.) Except for the basic idea of good people on one side, and some of them breaking of and becoming evil on the other side it has very little to do with Paradise Lost. Paradice Lost also has a second story arch with Adam and Eve, where is this in the comparison? The Horus heresey is also fleshed out in the Horus Heresey book series. This removes them much further from Paradise Lost. And while the primarch might have been based on his DNA, and the legions are based on the DNA of the primarchs, the Grey Knights are the only Space Marines that are based on his DNA. And they make no aperance in the whole Horus Heresey. (If you include things outside Horus Heresey as part of the paradise lost the inspiration argument fals even further apart as the other xenos make no sence in this inspiration.)
However, the biggest problem with your compareson between Horus Heresey and Paradise Lost is that the emperor apparantly planed to kill off the space marines after galaxy unifcation. God had no plan like this with the angels. It is unclear what his plan was for the Primarchs. (Was Magnus the Red ment to be a component in the golden throne? Good parenting dad.) But the Space Marines where just the best the Emperir could mass produce. They even come with their own toolkit 10 000 years later. If one breaks, crack it open and you get two more. The warriors best comparable to the angels would be the custodians.
2. So even if the horus heresye is paradise lost how does having space marines based on females prevent this? Page 3 and 4 of this thread has people posting the same argument, with people responding of depiction of femenine angels. This argument has been refuded ad nausium by now.
It seems to me that you have an opinion on the subject, and then you just ad arguments after the fact. I do not want to put intensions behind your words, because I do not know them. But the arguments seems very flimsy.
Albino Squirrel wrote: Yeah, no kidding. That's what everyone is doing. Stating their opinions on the subject.
This.
All everyone is doing is spouting opinions, for, against, in-between. However, no matter how many times this is talked about, until GW do something, it's useless.
It seems to me that you have an opinion on the subject, and then you just ad arguments after the fact. I do not want to put intensions behind your words, because I do not know them. But the arguments seems very flimsy.
Albino Squirrel wrote: Yeah, no kidding. That's what everyone is doing. Stating their opinions on the subject.
I can not speak for all here, but I would asume that many people look at the arguments and then they make up their mind afterwards. That is generally how you get the best relationship with reallaty. "Do I have a million dollars so I can go crazy on Amazon?" as opposed to "I have a million dollars and therefore I can go crazy on Amazon." One of these is a better tactic if you do in fact not have a million dollars.
To move this over to the can space marines be based on females:
- Can I find reasons for space marines to be based on females? Yes / No.
- Do I want space marines to be based on females? Yes / No. And then grab all arguments I find and dig in.
There are two very different aproaches to the subject, and the last one is very dishonest.
All everyone is doing is spouting opinions, for, against, in-between. However, no matter how many times this is talked about, until GW do something, it's useless.
That is an argument for the status quo if I ever heard one.
For what I read here, it'd be better a full revamp of the Sisters, maybe with an updated look (less silly boob-plate) and who knows? Maybe an elite option that's aaaaaalmost on par with Marines, but using exoskeletons and such rather than bio modification.
You do not understand it, because you got it wrong. We have nothing against "female chromosomes under that armor." There is nothing wrong with guardswomen and plastic sisters of battle. Just space marines, because of 30 years of background and because the entire point of the Horus Heresy is to be Paradise Lost in space, with the Emperor as God who creates primarchs and marines from his DNA (in his "image". Basically clones, except not identical). Except everything goes wrong.
Its entirely possible that the Emperor deliberately designed the Space Marine process to work on women, as he is that much of a narcissistic bastard with a god-complex.
Going "nope, girls can be marines too now!" would undermine that aspect, and they'll just be yet another superhuman without any of the thematic elements.
So if I am to break up your argument it has to parts to it.
1. - The Horus Heresey part of the setting is Paradice Lost in space.
2. - If space marines can be made from women it would not be paradice lost in space.
I find these arguments a bit weak.
1. While there are some similaraties with Paradise Lost, it is hardly based on it. The first incarantion of warhammer was rogue trader. Back then the space marines where gloryfied policemen (there is a nice drawing of one beating up a punk doing grafity in a wall.) Except for the basic idea of good people on one side, and some of them breaking of and becoming evil on the other side it has very little to do with Paradise Lost. Paradice Lost also has a second story arch with Adam and Eve, where is this in the comparison? The Horus heresey is also fleshed out in the Horus Heresey book series. This removes them much further from Paradise Lost. And while the primarch might have been based on his DNA, and the legions are based on the DNA of the primarchs, the Grey Knights are the only Space Marines that are based on his DNA. And they make no aperance in the whole Horus Heresey. (If you include things outside Horus Heresey as part of the paradise lost the inspiration argument fals even further apart as the other xenos make no sence in this inspiration.)
However, the biggest problem with your compareson between Horus Heresey and Paradise Lost is that the emperor apparantly planed to kill off the space marines after galaxy unifcation. God had no plan like this with the angels. It is unclear what his plan was for the Primarchs. (Was Magnus the Red ment to be a component in the golden throne? Good parenting dad.) But the Space Marines where just the best the Emperir could mass produce. They even come with their own toolkit 10 000 years later. If one breaks, crack it open and you get two more. The warriors best comparable to the angels would be the custodians.
So since the Horus Heresy doesn't match Paradise Lost 100%, it could not have been based off of a Paradise Lost? What?
Horus turning against the Emperor out of Hubris, just as Lucifer has done to God, is the entire point of Paradise Lost, which is a poem about Lucifer's fall from Heaven. That is the primary comparison.
2. So even if the horus heresye is paradise lost how does having space marines based on females prevent this? Page 3 and 4 of this thread has people posting the same argument, with people responding of depiction of femenine angels. This argument has been refuded ad nausium by now.
First off, Feminine =/= female. Just because the subject has feminine features doesn't make it a woman.
See Bishounen, or that depiction of Louis XIV as Jupiter.
Spoiler:
Seems they had a thing for giving feminine faces to men back in the 17th century.
In Paradise Lost, God is presented as a man, and the Angels, created by him are all male.
The Emperor is a man who created the space marines. The Emperor is shown several times to have huge god-complex and a bit of dick.
As such, it is likely that he would only design this process to work on males, as he was a male and couldn't be arsed to rig it to work on women.
Which is a pretty bleak portrayal of the setting, really. As if the setting's god-analogue, a figure typically seen as good, is a complete donkey-cave, well, that doesn't bode well for everyone now does it?
There is a big difference between 'inspiered by something so much you can not put in females because it is essential to the setting' and 'happens to be similar'.
There is a big difference between happen to be similar and being stated as inspiration. Warhammer first edition even statet Michael Moorcock as a big inspiration for Chaos. It draws heavily on Moorcock's “Man vs. Himself” theme and the issues related to Chaos. It is in the end notes. The end notes says nothing about paradise lost. I do not think your paradise lost argument is very good.
You have not even commented on the second problem, even if it was based on paradise lost it would not prevent wimen for being the chassis for a space marine. As stated previusly the space marine procces changes musclel mass, bones structure, hight by 80 cm, all the organs and the implants of 13 new organs. I hardly see how that chunk of magic-sci-fi can not get past the subject being a woman.
Edit: I read the posts above, and it stil seems like you decide on the fact first and then you look for evidence afterwards, instead of the other way around.
So since the Horus Heresy doesn't match Paradise Lost 100%, it could not have been based off of a Paradise Lost? What?
Horus turning against the Emperor out of Hubris, just as Lucifer has done to God, is the entire point of Paradise Lost, which is a poem about Lucifer's fall from Heaven. That is the primary comparison.
So? It is partly vaguely inspired by it. Why should the genders of the actors be the one thing that cannot be altered while so much else is?
The Emperor is a man who created the space marines. The Emperor is shown several times to have huge god-complex and a bit of dick.
As such, it is likely that he would only design this process to work on males, as he was a male and couldn't be arsed to rig it to work on women.
Which is a pretty bleak portrayal of the setting, really. As if the setting's god-analogue, a figure typically seen as good, is a complete donkey-cave, well, that doesn't bode well for everyone now does it?
Makes about as much sense than him making the process to only work on dark haired people because he himself was one.
The Emperor is a man who created the space marines. The Emperor is shown several times to have huge god-complex and a bit of dick.
As such, it is likely that he would only design this process to work on males, as he was a male and couldn't be arsed to rig it to work on women.
Which is a pretty bleak portrayal of the setting, really. As if the setting's god-analogue, a figure typically seen as good, is a complete donkey-cave, well, that doesn't bode well for everyone now does it?
Makes about as much sense than him making the process to only work on dark haired people because he himself was one.
Though, let's say the Emperor never made female marines in his time because either there was no need, or didn't felt like doing the needed tinkering to adapt the process (and again, let's just speculate on this); then I wouldn't put past the 40K Empire to not induct females onto Space Marine chapters, even if possible, because "that's not how the emperor himself did it". While we can be progressists on this, the Empire can be self-harmingly stubborn on certain things.
Though, let's say the Emperor never made female marines in his time because either there was no need, or didn't felt like doing the needed tinkering to adapt the process (and again, let's just speculate on this); then I wouldn't put past the 40K Empire to not induct females onto Space Marine chapters, even if possible, because "that's not how the emperor himself did it". While we can be progressists on this, the Empire can be self-harmingly stubborn on certain things.
Sure. And that is pretty much what the current fluff is, and I don't have a huge problem with it. But it could easily be changed. Or not. It is just that some people make absolutely ludicrous justifications to why it absolutely must be this way. It doesn't. Just say you don't can't handle the change. It's fine, I get it.
The Emperor is a man who created the space marines. The Emperor is shown several times to have huge god-complex and a bit of dick.
As such, it is likely that he would only design this process to work on males, as he was a male and couldn't be arsed to rig it to work on women.
Which is a pretty bleak portrayal of the setting, really. As if the setting's god-analogue, a figure typically seen as good, is a complete donkey-cave, well, that doesn't bode well for everyone now does it?
Makes about as much sense than him making the process to only work on dark haired people because he himself was one.
Though, let's say the Emperor never made female marines in his time because either there was no need, or didn't felt like doing the needed tinkering to adapt the process (and again, let's just speculate on this); then I wouldn't put past the 40K Empire to not induct females onto Space Marine chapters, even if possible, because "that's not how the emperor himself did it". While we can be progressists on this, the Empire can be self-harmingly stubborn on certain things.
Would that argument just be another in-game setting for not having female space marines, as supposed to an argument from outside the game to have female space marines. To sound like a broken recond GW retcons their setting all the time. Every edition of tyranids has new units being retroactivly being inserted from the beggining, they do not 'evolve' as the swarm holds on. (Although they do evolve as well, none of this is used for the new unit entries.) This happens relativly often, but are small changes. If you look at 5th edition Necrons you see a really big change in the setting. It worked. I would argue that 'oh by the way, females can be used to make space marines' is an very small change. It would not look any diferent before anybody take of their power helmets. This would requier some ad on spuces. More for SW as they have more bare heads. Stil, no biggie.
The Emperor is a man who created the space marines. The Emperor is shown several times to have huge god-complex and a bit of dick. As such, it is likely that he would only design this process to work on males, as he was a male and couldn't be arsed to rig it to work on women. Which is a pretty bleak portrayal of the setting, really. As if the setting's god-analogue, a figure typically seen as good, is a complete donkey-cave, well, that doesn't bode well for everyone now does it?
Makes about as much sense than him making the process to only work on dark haired people because he himself was one.
Though, let's say the Emperor never made female marines in his time because either there was no need, or didn't felt like doing the needed tinkering to adapt the process (and again, let's just speculate on this); then I wouldn't put past the 40K Empire to not induct females onto Space Marine chapters, even if possible, because "that's not how the emperor himself did it". While we can be progressists on this, the Empire can be self-harmingly stubborn on certain things.
If you look at 5th edition Necrons you see a really big change in the setting. It worked.
No it didn't. It killed off any uniqueness or atmosphere they had and made them Egypt in space. They turned a joke into a reality, and made them jump the shark even higher. I find it amusing that people bitched about how the Nightbringer was the cause of the fear of death in the 3rd ed book (which was pretty cringeworthy, don't get me wrong), but are fine with Necrons being able to delete star systems with the press of a button, necrons shattering star gods (yet haven't won yet against everyone else), and how their doomsday arks can explode with enough strength to destroy a planet. And yet still haven't worked out how to put plating on a cockpit of a fighter. Just because they can retcon something doesn't mean they should.
Though, let's say the Emperor never made female marines in his time because either there was no need, or didn't felt like doing the needed tinkering to adapt the process (and again, let's just speculate on this); then I wouldn't put past the 40K Empire to not induct females onto Space Marine chapters, even if possible, because "that's not how the emperor himself did it". While we can be progressists on this, the Empire can be self-harmingly stubborn on certain things.
Sure. And that is pretty much what the current fluff is, and I don't have a huge problem with it. But it could easily be changed. Or not. It is just that some people make absolutely ludicrous justifications to why it absolutely must be this way. It doesn't. Just say you don't can't handle the change. It's fine, I get it.
I don't like the change because I think its a bad idea from a consistency stand point and is at odds with various themes which I already mentioned. If they can come up with a very, very good and logical reason that fits in universe other than waving a magic wand around and pulling them out of thin air (like they usually do with retcons. Which is bs), then I might be more accepting.
retconning a type of unit in is something GW has always done (although with GS it seems GW is trying to move past that) is one thing, retconning a minorish race is another thing, doing a massive lore retcon of thier core race though is a bit riskier,
Is it as massive core retcon to make space marines being based on females? For me it would be a very small retcon. I think perhaps there the crux of the problem is.
Every time this subject comes up there is always this little tappdance. The people who do not like the change make an argument, either in the fluff or outside the fluff. Upon taking a close examination of the argument it does not stand up to examination. The next argument gets launches. Upon closer examination the argument does not stand up to examination. A third argument gets launched etc.
It is always this tap dance. Some one gets frustrated with the adnasium discussion and people starts attacking the players instead of the ball, or it gets out of hand in some other way. And then the thread closes, only to pop up another place. Look at the title of this thread 'Re:Ashes of Prospero spoilers'. Currently we are not discussing Ashes or Prospero.
Buttom line is there are many bad arguments for not having space marines based on females, but not any good once. Continuing discussing this will just be one side swatting down the bad arguments from the other side, whereas the other side starts to dance and come up with new arguments.
Crimson wrote: Sure. And that is pretty much what the current fluff is, and I don't have a huge problem with it. But it could easily be changed. Or not. It is just that some people make absolutely ludicrous justifications to why it absolutely must be this way. It doesn't. Just say you don't can't handle the change. It's fine, I get it.
However, implying that everyone who doesn't like Female Space Marines "can't handle the change" is an incredibly reductionist, and some may argue, condescending, approach.
Do you genuinely believe that's the only reason people don't want it?
It seems to me that you have an opinion on the subject, and then you just ad arguments after the fact. I do not want to put intensions behind your words, because I do not know them. But the arguments seems very flimsy.
Albino Squirrel wrote: Yeah, no kidding. That's what everyone is doing. Stating their opinions on the subject.
I can not speak for all here, but I would asume that many people look at the arguments and then they make up their mind afterwards. That is generally how you get the best relationship with reallaty. "Do I have a million dollars so I can go crazy on Amazon?" as opposed to "I have a million dollars and therefore I can go crazy on Amazon." One of these is a better tactic if you do in fact not have a million dollars.
To move this over to the can space marines be based on females:
- Can I find reasons for space marines to be based on females? Yes / No.
- Do I want space marines to be based on females? Yes / No. And then grab all arguments I find and dig in.
There are two very different aproaches to the subject, and the last one is very dishonest.
All everyone is doing is spouting opinions, for, against, in-between. However, no matter how many times this is talked about, until GW do something, it's useless.
That is an argument for the status quo if I ever heard one.
Um... No. You're doing exactly what everyone is doing. You have an opinion on what you'd like, and you're telling people about it. But you are (for some bizarre reason) trying to convince others that they should share your opinion. The difference is that you're trying to pretend that your opinion is somehow based on fact and arrived at by some logical process, but it isn't. It's just your opinion.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Person A: I think they should make some models of Orks possessed by Daemons! (or whatever)
Person B: According to the background, Orks can't get possessed by Daemons.
Person A: But they could just change the background!
Person B: Yes, but I like the background and don't really want them to do that.
Person A: But they could just change the background! So you're wrong for not liking the same things as me.
Niiai wrote: Is it as massive core retcon to make space marines being based on females? For me it would be a very small retcon. I think perhaps there the crux of the problem is.
Agreed - to some people it matters. To others, not so much. Neither is wrong.
Every time this subject comes up there is always this little tappdance. The people who do not like the change make an argument, either in the fluff or outside the fluff. Upon taking a close examination of the argument it does not stand up to examination. The next argument gets launches. Upon closer examination the argument does not stand up to examination. A third argument gets launched etc.
And vice versa. It's not just the opposers who make bad arguments - changers do too.
It is always this tap dance. Some one gets frustrated with the adnasium discussion and people starts attacking the players instead of the ball, or it gets out of hand in some other way. And then the thread closes, only to pop up another place. Look at the title of this thread 'Re:Ashes of Prospero spoilers'. Currently we are not discussing Ashes or Prospero.
To be fair, the OP is mainly about the female thing anyways.
Buttom line is there are many bad arguments for not having space marines based on females, but not any good once. Continuing discussing this will just be one side swatting down the bad arguments from the other side, whereas the other side starts to dance and come up with new arguments.
Very subjective to say "bad arguments" and not mentioning that again, people see other arguments on the change side as as bad.
From how I'm reading what you're saying, you're very much implying that the opposers are in the wrong by default, and that there's no fault in the people advocating change. That hopefully isn't the case, but that's how it's coming across.
Albino Squirrel, at face value, that's very much exactly what it is.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: However, implying that everyone who doesn't like Female Space Marines "can't handle the change" is an incredibly reductionist, and some may argue, condescending, approach.
Not wanting things to change is pretty normal. I didn't want Necrons to be shoehorned into the Eldar background and when that was already done, I didn't want the Necrons to be changed from merciless automatons to emo-robot-space-Egyptians. I absolutely didn't wan to see a loyalist to Primarch return, nor did I want the Cawl to alter marine gene-seed to create super marines (nor did I want to see Klingons redesigned yet again, though that's not a matter for this forum.) But all that happened regardless. Then again, some changes can be good. The Primaris models are nice, Tau were a welcome addition to the setting and Ynnari seem potentially intresting.
Do you genuinely believe that's the only reason people don't want it?
No, some people unfortunately have other reasons too. But I don't want to assume more unsavoury motivations without any substantial evidence. (I am absolutely not talking about any specific individuals in this thread, only in general.)
Sgt_Smudge wrote: However, implying that everyone who doesn't like Female Space Marines "can't handle the change" is an incredibly reductionist, and some may argue, condescending, approach.
Not wanting things to change is pretty normal. I didn't want Necrons to be shoehorned into the Eldar background and when that was already done, I didn't want the Necrons to be changed from merciless automatons to emo-robot-space-Egyptians. I absolutely didn't wan to see a loyalist to Primarch return, nor did I want the Cawl to alter marine gene-seed to create super marines (nor did I want to see Klingons redesigned yet again, though that's not a matter for this forum.) But all that happened regardless. Then again, some changes can be good. The Primaris models are nice, Tau were a welcome addition to the setting and Ynnari seem potentially intresting.
Do you genuinely believe that's the only reason people don't want it?
No, some people unfortunately have other reasons too. But I don't want to assume more unsavoury motivations without any substantial evidence. (I am absolutely not talking about any specific individuals in this thread, only in general.)
I think one can appreciate the Marines as a boys only club without nesscarily being sexist. Me I'd rather they simply explain WHY Marines are "men only" and perhaps use it as a way to insert a degree of Grimdark into it.
I think one can appreciate the Marines as a boys only club without nesscarily being sexist.
Oh absolutely! Though I think a lot of 'not wanting things to change' thing is about inertia and what we're used to. Though that is ultimately fine. I know I'm like that about other things.
Me I'd rather they simply explain WHY Marines are "men only" and perhaps use it as a way to insert a degree of Grimdark into it.
Well, I don't think there can be any better explanation than there already is. It is ultimately a made up explanation, and some people will find it unsatisfying regardless.
But if GW doesn't want to introduce female marines, the best thing to do would just introduce plenty of female models and characters to other ranges and give more spotlight to those factions. People are so obsessed about representation in marines, because 40K is like 90% about marines.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: However, implying that everyone who doesn't like Female Space Marines "can't handle the change" is an incredibly reductionist, and some may argue, condescending, approach.
Not wanting things to change is pretty normal. I didn't want Necrons to be shoehorned into the Eldar background and when that was already done, I didn't want the Necrons to be changed from merciless automatons to emo-robot-space-Egyptians. I absolutely didn't wan to see a loyalist to Primarch return, nor did I want the Cawl to alter marine gene-seed to create super marines (nor did I want to see Klingons redesigned yet again, though that's not a matter for this forum.) But all that happened regardless. Then again, some changes can be good. The Primaris models are nice, Tau were a welcome addition to the setting and Ynnari seem potentially intresting.
Do you genuinely believe that's the only reason people don't want it?
No, some people unfortunately have other reasons too. But I don't want to assume more unsavoury motivations without any substantial evidence. (I am absolutely not talking about any specific individuals in this thread, only in general.)
I think one can appreciate the Marines as a boys only club without nesscarily being sexist. Me I'd rather they simply explain WHY Marines are "men only" and perhaps use it as a way to insert a degree of Grimdark into it.
Yep. Hence my interpretation of the Emperor being a rather cruel narcissist. If you look at his actions during the unification wars, the great crusade and how he treated his "sons" then many today would consider him to be a tyrant, a monster. The fact he's considered to be humanity's best hope speaks volume about how dire the situation is.
Niiai wrote: Is it as massive core retcon to make space marines being based on females? For me it would be a very small retcon. I think perhaps there the crux of the problem is.
Agreed - to some people it matters. To others, not so much. Neither is wrong.
Every time this subject comes up there is always this little tappdance. The people who do not like the change make an argument, either in the fluff or outside the fluff. Upon taking a close examination of the argument it does not stand up to examination. The next argument gets launches. Upon closer examination the argument does not stand up to examination. A third argument gets launched etc.
And vice versa. It's not just the opposers who make bad arguments - changers do too.
It is always this tap dance. Some one gets frustrated with the adnasium discussion and people starts attacking the players instead of the ball, or it gets out of hand in some other way. And then the thread closes, only to pop up another place. Look at the title of this thread 'Re:Ashes of Prospero spoilers'. Currently we are not discussing Ashes or Prospero.
To be fair, the OP is mainly about the female thing anyways.
Buttom line is there are many bad arguments for not having space marines based on females, but not any good once. Continuing discussing this will just be one side swatting down the bad arguments from the other side, whereas the other side starts to dance and come up with new arguments.
Very subjective to say "bad arguments" and not mentioning that again, people see other arguments on the change side as as bad.
From how I'm reading what you're saying, you're very much implying that the opposers are in the wrong by default, and that there's no fault in the people advocating change. That hopefully isn't the case, but that's how it's coming across.
Spoiler:
Albino Squirrel, at face value, that's very much exactly what it is.
The default possition in any situation is neutral. Some one claims that space marines can not be made from females, that is a posetive claim, and that means they need to provide evidence for theur claim.
I am saying that none of the arguments presented are any good. If their argument does not stand up to examination we move back to the default position. The default position is there are no reason space marines can not be based on women.
The burden of proof is on the argument that deviates from the default. That is the side that says space marines can not be based on females. We are in fact not 'both arguing either side' because the side I am on is the default postion.
How is that the default position? The default position is that the setting remain unchanged. "Default" refers to the current state of the setting. It does not refer to whatever you believe the setting should be. You are taking your own opinion and claiming that is the default.
Because that side of the argument are making the posetive claim that this can not happen. Then they have to prove it. That is where all these bad arguments and tap dances come in.
Niiai wrote: Because that side of the argument are making the posetive claim that this can not happen. Then they have to prove it. That is where all these bad arguments and tap dances come in.
You are making absolutely no sense whatsoever.
According to the current fluff, there aren't female space marines. I don't see how that's up for debate.
Niiai wrote: Because that side of the argument are making the posetive claim that this can not happen. Then they have to prove it. That is where all these bad arguments and tap dances come in.
I can prove the default position actually - it's the one GW have made.
I can prove why it can't happen - GW said so.
That's the default. Change for the sake of it isn't default in the slightest. To change, you should have a reason to, and explain why that reason outweighs the default (which is unchanged).
Niiai wrote: Because that side of the argument are making the posetive claim that this can not happen. Then they have to prove it. That is where all these bad arguments and tap dances come in.
You are making absolutely no sense whatsoever.
According to the current fluff, there aren't female space marines. I don't see how that's up for debate.
Let me sum up the arguments so far.
Why can there be no female space marines? (Neutral position.)
They cannot be (possetive claim) It is not currently in the setting in the setting.
They have changed the setting many times though. So that is not really a good argument.
Why can there be no female space marines? (Neutral position.)
They cannot be (possetive claim) It is to odd for the science of it.
They grow 80 cm, get new muscel mass, a massive bonestructure upgrade, all organs get changed and they implant 13 new organs. So that is not really a good argument.
Why can there be no female space marines? (Neutral position.)
They cannot be (possetive claim) Space Marines are suppose to be angels.
Angels are gender neatrual and are often depicted very femenine. So that is not really a good argument.
Why can there be no female space marines? (Neutral position.)
They cannot be (possetive claim) It is based on Paradise Lost, there where no females there.
This is the angel argument all over again. And the similaraties to Paradise Lost ar really loose. 1st edition Source book even claims they are inspiered by Michael Moorcock as a big inspiration for Chaos. It draws heavily on Moorcock's “Man vs. Himself” theme and the issues related to Chaos, not paradise lost. Alsos sources says the plan was to dispose of the SM after their use was done, much like the previus wariors. The closest analagy to the angels are the custodians, that the emperor cared for. So that is not really a good argument.
Why can there be no female space marines? (Neutral position.)
They cannot be (possetive claim) The Emperor based them on his image, they need his DNA.
That is a lot like claiming they cannot be space marines because the subject has black hair. Some of the space marines even have canine DNA in there. So that is not really a good argument.
Why can there be no female space marines? (Neutral position.)
They cannot be (possetive claim) It would be to brutal to expose wimen like this. (I thought this one was bad, but it was said.)
Far worse is done to wimen in the setting. So that is not really a good argument.
So what are the remaining good arguments to deviate from the neutral position. In fact have one argument that stands up to examination so it can default from the neutral position.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I can prove the default position actually - it's the one GW have made.
I can prove why it can't happen - GW said so.
That's the default. Change for the sake of it isn't default in the slightest. To change, you should have a reason to, and explain why that reason outweighs the default (which is unchanged).
Though interestingly this time we're having this discussion because there is a hint in GW publication that the position could change. It probably is just Gav being cheeky, but who knows, they occasionally foreshadow fluff developments like this.
Well I will grant you the argument 'because there are currently no female space marines' is the current best argument for why there can be no female space marines, but it is not a good argument.
And while Crimson is right here, it is hinted in the book. It is also hinted elsewhere that more female models will be in the setting, though if this are SM or not we do not know.
Niiai wrote: Because that side of the argument are making the posetive claim that this can not happen. Then they have to prove it. That is where all these bad arguments and tap dances come in.
You are making absolutely no sense whatsoever.
According to the current fluff, there aren't female space marines. I don't see how that's up for debate.
It isn't. The whole argument is pushing goalposts on what is "allowed" to be an argument. Reading this thread has been painful.
Niiai wrote: Because that side of the argument are making the posetive claim that this can not happen. Then they have to prove it. That is where all these bad arguments and tap dances come in.
You are making absolutely no sense whatsoever.
According to the current fluff, there aren't female space marines. I don't see how that's up for debate.
It isn't. The whole argument is pushing goalposts on what is "allowed" to be an argument. Reading this thread has been painful.
If they never have a good argument it is not moving the goal post. All I want is one good argument. I would asume people would start with their best one. So far none has been presented.
You're deciding established lore are not good arguments. You're quite literally acting as a gatekeeper for this "argument" due to what is likely an emotional attachment to the setting "moving forward".
Edit: And I'm not saying that's WRONG, either. People are attached to the game and lore as it is, as well, and that's equally an emotional attachment. I'm just saying acting as the arbiter for what you claim has to be a "good point" makes the discussion moot, because you alone are the judge of that quality, and you won't accept others input without your own standard.
Cephalobeard wrote: You're deciding established lore are not good arguments. You're quite literally acting as a gatekeeper for this "argument" due to what is likely an emotional attachment to the setting "moving forward".
Edit: And I'm not saying that's WRONG, either. People are attached to the game and lore as it is, as well, and that's equally an emotional attachment. I'm just saying acting as the arbiter for what you claim has to be a "good point" makes the discussion moot, because you alone are the judge of that quality, and you won't accept others input without your own standard.
OK.
So in order to keep the discussion healthy, and I think it has been good so far, can we agree on the default possition in this case? And then afterwards you can say what arguments presented opposed to the default possition you thought of as good.
If the response to all counterclaims is "that's not good enough" then there is no purpose to the discussion. Have fun screaming into the void that everyone is wrong.
I imagine it's a rather boring position.
Edit:
I have no hat in the ring here. I'm, relatively, indifferent. You're welcome to your thread, I am simply responding to that aspect of the conversation. Enjoy.
I don't even remember the last time someone used the words "Ashes" "Prospero" or "Spoilers" in this thread. Maybe it was on page one?
They can do whatever they like with the Space Marine Fluff. Just for gods sake don't make ANOTHER SPACE MARINE PLASTIC KIT.
All this whining is going to accomplish is getting another Space Marine kit out, meaning another release gets pushed back. We've got perfectly good _Female_ Eldar Aspect Warriors in desperate need of a kit. Go champion that if you want more plastic representation.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: the entire point of the Horus Heresy is to be Paradise Lost in space
You've never actually read Paradise Lost, have you?
If you had, you'd know that Milton described angels as able to assume either sex at will, or even both at once. He explicitly claimed that several pagan 'goddesses' were really fallen angels.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Default is unchanged - aka Space Marines being as they are right this moment.
But if I ask 'Why can not space marines be based upon females' you responce is 'that is the current setting'. Is that correct?
I'd say the laws of the setting dictate that such a thing is improbable to the point of impossibility.
Your response, as would be the only natural one to that question, is "we shouldn't we change the lore" - my response would be "why should we?" Yours is then the statement which requires evidence. After all - as the status quo, mine doesn't need validation, because it's the default.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Default is unchanged - aka Space Marines being as they are right this moment.
But if I ask 'Why can not space marines be based upon females' you responce is 'that is the current setting'. Is that correct?
I'd say the laws of the setting dictate that such a thing is improbable to the point of impossibility.
Your response, as would be the only natural one to that question, is "we shouldn't we change the lore" - my response would be "why should we?" Yours is then the statement which requires evidence. After all - as the status quo, mine doesn't need validation, because it's the default.
So the reasons why there no space marines can not be based upon females are this, please clearify if I am missrepresenting you here:
- I'd say the laws of the setting dictate that such a thing is improbable to the point of impossibility.
- It is currently in the setting.
Is that correct? I am not trying to lure you into anything here. I just want to uderstand you clearly.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: the entire point of the Horus Heresy is to be Paradise Lost in space
You've never actually read Paradise Lost, have you?
If you had, you'd know that Milton described angels as able to assume either sex at will, or even both at once. He explicitly claimed that several pagan 'goddesses' were really fallen angels.
It was a long time ago. It is likely that I forgot parts of it.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: the entire point of the Horus Heresy is to be Paradise Lost in space
You've never actually read Paradise Lost, have you?
If you had, you'd know that Milton described angels as able to assume either sex at will, or even both at once. He explicitly claimed that several pagan 'goddesses' were really fallen angels.
It was a long time ago. It is likely that I forgot parts of it.
Does not look so good for that particular argument though. Sorry, could not resist.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: the entire point of the Horus Heresy is to be Paradise Lost in space
You've never actually read Paradise Lost, have you?
If you had, you'd know that Milton described angels as able to assume either sex at will, or even both at once. He explicitly claimed that several pagan 'goddesses' were really fallen angels.
It was a long time ago. It is likely that I forgot parts of it.
Does not look so good for that particular argument though. Sorry, could not resist.
I still remember that Michael is referred to as a he quite often, so there's that.
I'll have to read up on it again. Its been a few years.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: the entire point of the Horus Heresy is to be Paradise Lost in space
You've never actually read Paradise Lost, have you?
If you had, you'd know that Milton described angels as able to assume either sex at will, or even both at once. He explicitly claimed that several pagan 'goddesses' were really fallen angels.
It was a long time ago. It is likely that I forgot parts of it.
Does not look so good for that particular argument though. Sorry, could not resist.
I still remember that Michael is referred to as a he quite often, so there's that.
I'll have to read up on it again. Its been a few years.
OK. But more importantly, do you stil stand by that argument? Or am I mowing the goal post in this particular instance. As some body else pointed out I keep doing.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Default is unchanged - aka Space Marines being as they are right this moment.
But if I ask 'Why can not space marines be based upon females' you responce is 'that is the current setting'. Is that correct?
I'd say the laws of the setting dictate that such a thing is improbable to the point of impossibility.
Your response, as would be the only natural one to that question, is "we shouldn't we change the lore" - my response would be "why should we?" Yours is then the statement which requires evidence. After all - as the status quo, mine doesn't need validation, because it's the default.
So the reasons why there no space marines can not be based upon females are this, please clearify if I am missrepresenting you here:
- I'd say the laws of the setting dictate that such a thing is improbable to the point of impossibility.
- It is currently in the setting.
Is that correct? I am not trying to lure you into anything here. I just want to uderstand you clearly.
Those are my personal main reasons, yes. I can't speak for everyone, mind, but my main reasons are that the rules of the setting say so, and I see no reason to change that, because, as I see it, "what isn't broken doesn't need to be fixed".
Do not mistake this as some kind of sexism or avoidance of female models - I'm a staunch advocate for better female representation where the setting would encourage it (Guardsmen, Eldar, Sisters, etc etc).
Why we've not had plastic sisters is a wonder to me, and not the good kind.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kastelen wrote: There are two ways I can think of GW could introduce female marines and/or custodes.
1. They were already here and basically all the fluff needs to be rewritten.
2. They're made by cawl or someone else. Why would cawl test gene seed on women?
For what it's worth, I oppose female Astartes, but female Custodes sounds amazing to me. I'd love if GW gave us the clear on that.
kastelen wrote: There are two ways I can think of GW could introduce female marines and/or custodes.
1. They were already here and basically all the fluff needs to be rewritten.
2. They're made by cawl or someone else. Why would cawl test gene seed on women?
1. works for Custodes just fine. There is very little established fluff about them and unlike with Space Marines it has never been explicitly stated that the process doesn't work on women.
Whilst I personally don't feel that retconning in female Marines would be a huge deal, I somehow suspect that there is non-insignificant amount of people who feel otherwise, so something like 2. would probably work better. Perhaps just state that there are some divergent chapters who have been provided with experimental gene-seed that works on women, but most chapters won't use it. That way the overall idea of the marines being usually men would be preserved, while officially sanctioning the possibility of making make female or mixed-gender custom chapters.
kastelen wrote: There are two ways I can think of GW could introduce female marines and/or custodes.
1. They were already here and basically all the fluff needs to be rewritten.
2. They're made by cawl or someone else. Why would cawl test gene seed on women?
This such a great question! Because we come full circle! It is very suptly hintet at, or at least it can be interpeded in a way, that the females on fenris can kick ass. And further speculation followed that since SW home system is in a spot of trouble after the 1000 Sons operations in the system the SW would need some sort of intervention. Could such a thing be Cawl tweaking the genseed so that SW can be recruited from among wimen on Fenris. This I belive started this whole thread, and from where I stand it would be a very cool option on option 2. Although it would mean that I would not see any cool female chaos space marines for some time.
Keep in mind that space wolves can only recruit from Fenris (as far as I know?) SW on other places just turned into very odd where wolf like creatures and was deemed a bad idea. SW are one of the most unortodox chapters out there, so make them even more unique snow flakes. It's that cold on Fenris.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Default is unchanged - aka Space Marines being as they are right this moment.
But if I ask 'Why can not space marines be based upon females' you responce is 'that is the current setting'. Is that correct?
I'd say the laws of the setting dictate that such a thing is improbable to the point of impossibility.
Your response, as would be the only natural one to that question, is "we shouldn't we change the lore" - my response would be "why should we?" Yours is then the statement which requires evidence. After all - as the status quo, mine doesn't need validation, because it's the default.
So the reasons why there no space marines can not be based upon females are this, please clearify if I am missrepresenting you here:
- I'd say the laws of the setting dictate that such a thing is improbable to the point of impossibility.
- It is currently in the setting.
Is that correct? I am not trying to lure you into anything here. I just want to uderstand you clearly.
Those are my personal main reasons, yes. I can't speak for everyone, mind, but my main reasons are that the rules of the setting say so, and I see no reason to change that, because, as I see it, "what isn't broken doesn't need to be fixed".
Do not mistake this as some kind of sexism or avoidance of female models - I'm a staunch advocate for better female representation where the setting would encourage it (Guardsmen, Eldar, Sisters, etc etc).
Why we've not had plastic sisters is a wonder to me, and not the good kind.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kastelen wrote: There are two ways I can think of GW could introduce female marines and/or custodes.
1. They were already here and basically all the fluff needs to be rewritten.
2. They're made by cawl or someone else. Why would cawl test gene seed on women?
For what it's worth, I oppose female Astartes, but female Custodes sounds amazing to me. I'd love if GW gave us the clear on that.
Thanks you Sgt_Smudge I feel this thread has been much more productive then most other threads so far.
I agree with your earlier statement that if I want to claim some form of reforming of the setting I am making a posetive claim and we would need to put my posetive statement and compare it to the other posetive statement and make a judgement in comparison between that. While I belive that such an argument weight heavaly on one side (and you think it weights heavaly on the other side) I do not want to poke that particular bear in this thread, as that always turns into a metaphorical nuclear apocalypse of a thread.
That being said the setting has been retconned before before, both in a progress of the timeline and in retroactivly changing something already established in the setting. (Examples include the minor nid changes in every codex, the major change in the necron codex and the timeline jump over the last 100 years in game time.) The setting will change again, it always does. I am holding fingers crossed for female space marines.
The harsh reality of Space Marines being exclusively male is that in general, we are the throwaway gender.
Many, many more of us can be submitted to a meatgrinder of a war before the continuation of the human race becomes an issue. Especially in a soldier-class that has a high failure rate just in creation, so not ending up with a high return on your time investment in female Space Marines would be a double- failure.
Female troops equipped like Sisters of Battle, where they end up with a very high percentage of the combat capabilities of a male Space Marine but without the drawbacks, just makes more sense.
Frankly, in a setting other than Warhammer 40k, it makes sense for male troops, too.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Going "nope, girls can be marines too now!" would undermine that aspect, and they'll just be yet another superhuman without any of the thematic elements.
What thematic element? It used to be about Marines being warrior-monks, and it came to Marines being angel-analogs, and we already have in setting at least one very obvious angel-analog who is a female model so I'm a bit lost.
Arbitrator wrote: Female Space Marines would give GW an excuse to further ignore the Sisters of Battle
So you mean that female space marines wouldn't change anything for Sisters of Battle because Sisters of Battle already get nothing ?
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How is that the default position? The default position is that the setting remain unchanged.
That's not neutral, that's text-book conservatism. Neutral would be “I don't care whether or not the settings change”. And given how much the setting has changed lately, it's too late for it to stay the same…
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How is that the default position? The default position is that the setting remain unchanged.
That's not neutral, that's text-book conservatism. Neutral would be “I don't care whether or not the settings change”. And given how much the setting has changed lately, it's too late for it to stay the same…
Not really, saying that you'd rather keep the setting the same as it always was is the neutral thing. Saying you don't care is apathetic, not neutral.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How is that the default position? The default position is that the setting remain unchanged.
That's not neutral, that's text-book conservatism. Neutral would be “I don't care whether or not the settings change”. And given how much the setting has changed lately, it's too late for it to stay the same…
Not really, saying that you'd rather keep the setting the same as it always was is the neutral thing. Saying you don't care is apathetic, not neutral.
In all respect to those who do not wish for females to be marines , I can get where you're coming from. but since this is a fictitious universe where we have magic, elves, Orks, etc it doesn't matter what one group does or does not want. GW can do whatever they feel like would make them the most money, fluff is not set in stone. if you really have a problem with female marines I don't know what to tell you. I don't like what they did with star wars, but I'm not going to waste time/effort thinking about something I literally have no control over. GW squatted my Squats a long time ago and I was (13) and really really pissed, but I got over it and realized that it wasn't gonna change due to me wanting it. if you don't want female space marines, nobody is holding a volkite charger to your head. I would happily include them in my army, but I would much much rather have plastic sisters.
Now i do understand where the vehemence comes from and if you are that broken up about it....go play with something else.
kastelen wrote: There are two ways I can think of GW could introduce female marines and/or custodes.
1. They were already here and basically all the fluff needs to be rewritten.
2. They're made by cawl or someone else. Why would cawl test gene seed on women?
1. works for Custodes just fine. There is very little established fluff about them and unlike with Space Marines it has never been explicitly stated that the process doesn't work on women.
While it doesn't explicitly state the process doesn't work on women, the current AC book does specifically call out the sons of the noble households on Terra being submitted for suitability, even entire generations of them.
It wouldn't take much to tweak that, and it was an odd call to write it like that, but that is how it is described at present.
While it doesn't explicitly state the process doesn't work on women, the current AC book does specifically call out the sons of the noble households on Terra being submitted for suitability, even entire generations of them.
It wouldn't take much to tweak that, and it was an odd call to write it like that, but that is how it is described at present.
I know and it is unfortunate. But it is less explicit that with marines. it is more like with Imperial Knights, with which the first codex said that the pilots are sons of the knightly households, but that got changed by the next codex.
Racerguy180 wrote: In all respect to those who do not wish for females to be marines , I can get where you're coming from. but since this is a fictitious universe where we have magic, elves, Orks, etc it doesn't matter what one group does or does not want. GW can do whatever they feel like would make them the most money, fluff is not set in stone. if you really have a problem with female marines I don't know what to tell you. I don't like what they did with star wars, but I'm not going to waste time/effort thinking about something I literally have no control over. GW squatted my Squats a long time ago and I was (13) and really really pissed, but I got over it and realized that it wasn't gonna change due to me wanting it. if you don't want female space marines, nobody is holding a volkite charger to your head. I would happily include them in my army, but I would much much rather have plastic sisters.
Now i do understand where the vehemence comes from and if you are that broken up about it....go play with something else.
Wow... such arrogance, such condescension, and I bet your not even self aware enough to see what you have done here and probably think what you have said is totally fine
AegisGrimm wrote: The harsh reality of Space Marines being exclusively male is that in general, we are the throwaway gender.
Many, many more of us can be submitted to a meatgrinder of a war before the continuation of the human race becomes an issue. Especially in a soldier-class that has a high failure rate just in creation, so not ending up with a high return on your time investment in female Space Marines would be a double- failure.
Female troops equipped like Sisters of Battle, where they end up with a very high percentage of the combat capabilities of a male Space Marine but without the drawbacks, just makes more sense.
Frankly, in a setting other than Warhammer 40k, it makes sense for male troops, too.
This is a good point I think (purely fluff driven which is good imho) and one that may tend to be overlooked because it gets perhaps a bit TOO grimdark.
Men can't make more humans, women can, and very few man can get a great many women pregnant. When humans are the greatest resource in the imperium, sending women who could possible be creating new soldiers into a process that very few aspirants survive at all, to become a super soldier seems like a waste. At least if they serve as guardsmen they can still get pregnant. It sounds crass and vulgar but it's really just a numbers game in the end and men are more of a disposable resource as far as continuation of the species than women. Pretty much the only reason Sisters of Battle exist as an entirely female military branch is because the Imperial Cult likes wordplay and couldn't have and MEN-at-arms in its service.
Personally I'm all for women being in the Imperial Guard, PDF (seriously beyond plastic greatcoat troops, wtfGW give us female guardsmen) what have you cause it makes me think of the Soviet Union in WWII which seems appropriate for those factions, but at least those women are fertile throughout their careers and retirement as far as the Imperium is concerned. Once again sorry if I ruffle feathers but trying to stick strictly with the fluff on this one (this is the background forum after all).
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Going "nope, girls can be marines too now!" would undermine that aspect, and they'll just be yet another superhuman without any of the thematic elements.
What thematic element? It used to be about Marines being warrior-monks, and it came to Marines being angel-analogs, and we already have in setting at least one very obvious angel-analog who is a female model so I'm a bit lost.
Sorry, I wasn't quite clear with my points about the portrayal of angels. I did not mean to say that all angels were male, I meant to say that Archangels, such as Michael, tended to be portrayed as male. Today archangels tend to have male pronouns, in art Michael is often portrayed as male, albeit with a feminine face (it seems it was a trend back then to give noble characters feminine faces, like that one painting of Louis XIV as Jupiter), and in Paradise Lost Michael was referred to with male pronouns. As Michael is the archetypical warrior angel as well as having the title of angel of death, it would seem likely that GW took inspiration from him whilst creating the marines as the Angels of Death. Its also likely that marines are both warrior-monks as well as being archangel-analogues. They are a mix of things, after all. Nothing to stop them from being both. I do not agree that they are a blank slate, as that would imply they possess no unifying characteristics. They are all male, genetically engineered super soldiers with religious and monastic undertones.
Celestine, to me, looks like a Jeanne D'arc analogue with strong angelic themes. I mean, you have the Fleur De Lys motif, which is a French symbol, Celestine inspires her soldiers, just as Jeanne did and was believed to have been personally touched by the Emperor himself, just as Jeanne. Now, whilst Jeanne D'arc wasn't an angel per se, she is a saint, just like Celestine. The angel wings are so that she stands out as a particularly "holy" character, so that she stands out from every other model and ties with the theme about being an embodiment of the Emperor's will, something that descended from heaven. There's also the Angel of Mons legend, wherein Joanne D'arc came down as an angel to help British soldiers, which was most likely a strong source of inspiration.
In May 1915 a full-blown controversy was erupting, with the angels being used as proof of the action of divine providence on the side of the Allies in sermons across Britain, and then spreading into newspaper reports published widely across the world. Machen, bemused by all this, attempted to end the rumours by republishing the story in August in book form, with a long preface stating the rumours were false and originated in his story. It became a bestseller, and resulted in a vast series of other publications claiming to provide evidence of the Angels' existence.[1] Machen tried to set the record straight, but any attempt to lessen the impact of such an inspiring story was seen as bordering on treason by some. These new publications included popular songs and artists' renderings of the angels. There were more reports of angels and apparitions from the front including Joan of Arc.
So while one can say that GW designed the marines to be themed after archangels, Celestine was designed to be a Jeanne D'arc Angel.
Speaking of Sisters of Battle, they are an all female faction, right? Wouldn't it make sense to have a all male faction to run parallel to that? Marines are an elite force of all powered armored men. Sisters are a elite force of powered armored women. That's kind of their theme. You also see that with the Custodes and the Sisters of Silence; one is all male, the other is all female, both were personally formed and hand picked by the Emperor himself to serve as his elite cadre, the Talons of the Emperor. Suddenly making one of them mixed would ruin that parallel, and I don't think that's a good thing.
AegisGrimm wrote: The harsh reality of Space Marines being exclusively male is that in general, we are the throwaway gender.
Many, many more of us can be submitted to a meatgrinder of a war before the continuation of the human race becomes an issue. Especially in a soldier-class that has a high failure rate just in creation, so not ending up with a high return on your time investment in female Space Marines would be a double- failure.
Female troops equipped like Sisters of Battle, where they end up with a very high percentage of the combat capabilities of a male Space Marine but without the drawbacks, just makes more sense.
Frankly, in a setting other than Warhammer 40k, it makes sense for male troops, too.
This is a good point I think (purely fluff driven which is good imho) and one that may tend to be overlooked because it gets perhaps a bit TOO grimdark.
Men can't make more humans, women can, and very few man can get a great many women pregnant. When humans are the greatest resource in the imperium, sending women who could possible be creating new soldiers into a process that very few aspirants survive at all, to become a super soldier seems like a waste. At least if they serve as guardsmen they can still get pregnant. It sounds crass and vulgar but it's really just a numbers game in the end and men are more of a disposable resource as far as continuation of the species than women. Pretty much the only reason Sisters of Battle exist as an entirely female military branch is because the Imperial Cult likes wordplay and couldn't have and MEN-at-arms in its service.
Personally I'm all for women being in the Imperial Guard, PDF (seriously beyond plastic greatcoat troops, wtfGW give us female guardsmen) what have you cause it makes me think of the Soviet Union in WWII which seems appropriate for those factions, but at least those women are fertile throughout their careers and retirement as far as the Imperium is concerned. Once again sorry if I ruffle feathers but trying to stick strictly with the fluff on this one (this is the background forum after all).
huh, yeah, that does make sense. Wasn't there a Cadian thing where women were allowed to take leave so they can have babies to keep the recruitment pool going? Can't do that with Marines. They're infertile.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: How is that the default position? The default position is that the setting remain unchanged.
That's not neutral, that's text-book conservatism. Neutral would be “I don't care whether or not the settings change”. And given how much the setting has changed lately, it's too late for it to stay the same…
Good thing I didn't say neutral, I said default. So because the setting changed it means it should keep getting changed for the sake of change? Are you a servant of Tzeentch or something? Its not too late to stay the same. Just don't keep changing it. You might as well say "well, Lucas introduced midochrolorians, thus changing how the force is supposed to work. Might as well give Yoda a gundam"
There aren't enough Marines, even pre-Heresy, compared to the Imperium's total population, for it to make any difference whether you recruit just boys or girls too. Humanity isn't going to die out because you take a (relative) handful of girls out of the gene pool to make more Marines. Even on the scale of a single planet per chapter, we're talking trivial numbers.
The whole "men are the expendable gender" argument is bunk in the context of the 40K Imperium. Nobody spares civilians anyway, so refusing to arm women, or refusing to augment them to make them better fighters won't save them from dieing horribly. The opposite is more likely to be true.
The only in-setting argument for Marines being exclusively male that makes sense to me is that the Emperor designed Astartes geneseed to only work on boys. Not because males are more expendable, or even because they're innately stronger or tougher (because that cannot plausibly be true across every world in the Imperium after tens of thousands of years of divergent evolution), but because the Emperor wanted Astartes to be unable to procreate independently. Astartes were intended as a tool, to serve Humanity, not a superior being that might replace it.
Self propagating Astartes, hmmm, screw that, lets make them male and then stop their junk from working.
Seems legit!
Either way all i see here is people demanding that 40k conforms to THEIR idea of how it should work, and anyone that disagrees is backward, sexist or stupid.... great way to win over people to your side of the argument
Formosa wrote: Self propagating Astartes, hmmm, screw that, lets make them male and then stop their junk from working.
Seems legit!
Either way all i see here is people demanding that 40k conforms to THEIR idea of how it should work, and anyone that disagrees is backward, sexist or stupid.... great way to win over people to your side of the argument
Wait, don't they already self propagate in a way? I mean, that's technically what the progenoid gland is for, right? To make more marines from a marine?
Formosa wrote: Self propagating Astartes, hmmm, screw that, lets make them male and then stop their junk from working.
Seems legit!
Either way all i see here is people demanding that 40k conforms to THEIR idea of how it should work, and anyone that disagrees is backward, sexist or stupid.... great way to win over people to your side of the argument
Wait, don't they already self propagate in a way? I mean, that's technically what the progenoid gland is for, right? To make more marines from a marine?
Its not the same as a woman getting knocked up and making a "natural" marine, the gene seed process is very complicated (probably purposefully so).
Imagine if marines could "reproduce" in such a manner, a woman finds some lucky (or unlucky) bloke for Snu Snu and suddenly you have a self replicating species of Astartes (if its possible to reproduce with a normal human that is)
Oh that's what you mean by self replication. You mean in terms sexual reproduction.
When I hear self replication, I think more in terms of mitosis or asexual reproduction.
Imagine if marines could "reproduce" in such a manner, a woman finds some lucky (or unlucky) bloke for Snu Snu and suddenly you have a self replicating species of Astartes (if its possible to reproduce with a normal human that is)
Or alternatively, a male astartes coming onto a human woman. And considering how the astartes tend to recruit from barbaric worlds...well, as you imagine the implication isn't pretty.
Perhaps that's why they decided to write them in as sterile, to avoid such implications.
Speaking of Sisters of Battle, they are an all female faction, right? Wouldn't it make sense to have a all male faction to run parallel to that? Marines are an elite force of all powered armored men. Sisters are a elite force of powered armored women. That's kind of their theme.
In theory, one could say that's fair, but in practice it isn't. Marines are posterboys of the setting, there several different codices dedicated to them, they get more new models than other factions and most of the fluff is about them. Sisters on the other hand are completely neglected line with most models being decades old. So if these factions would have even somewhat comparable prominence in the game and in the setting then you might have a point, but that is not even remotely the case.
The only in-setting argument for Marines being exclusively male that makes sense to me is that the Emperor designed Astartes geneseed to only work on boys. Not because males are more expendable, or even because they're innately stronger or tougher (because that cannot plausibly be true across every world in the Imperium after tens of thousands of years of divergent evolution), but because the Emperor wanted Astartes to be unable to procreate independently. Astartes were intended as a tool, to serve Humanity, not a superior being that might replace it.
Considering that the marine organs are implanted after the birth, and not based on the person's normal DNA, I really don't think that marineness would be an inheritable quality. Even if marines could have children, those children would be normal humans.
Speaking of Sisters of Battle, they are an all female faction, right? Wouldn't it make sense to have a all male faction to run parallel to that? Marines are an elite force of all powered armored men. Sisters are a elite force of powered armored women. That's kind of their theme.
In theory, one could say that's fair, but in practice it isn't. Marines are posterboys of the setting, there several different codices dedicated to them, they get more new models than other factions and most of the fluff is about them. Sisters on the other hand are completely neglected line with most models being decades old. So if these factions would have even somewhat comparable prominence in the game and in the setting then you might have a point, but that is not even remotely the case.
The only in-setting argument for Marines being exclusively male that makes sense to me is that the Emperor designed Astartes geneseed to only work on boys. Not because males are more expendable, or even because they're innately stronger or tougher (because that cannot plausibly be true across every world in the Imperium after tens of thousands of years of divergent evolution), but because the Emperor wanted Astartes to be unable to procreate independently. Astartes were intended as a tool, to serve Humanity, not a superior being that might replace it.
Considering that the marine organs are implanted after the birth, and not based on the person's normal DNA, I really don't think that marineness would be an inheritable quality. Even if marines could have children, those children would be normal humans.
The book Fulgrim shows that its very much dependent on the DNA of the Hosts, but thats more to do with organ compatibility than anything else really.
Also the DNA is clearly changed in the hosts, it changes features, brain chemistry etc. all these are determined by DNA, so I doubt it would produce Humans, more likely it would produce some mutant hybrid of the two, which would make for an interesting story in its own right.
Speaking of Sisters of Battle, they are an all female faction, right? Wouldn't it make sense to have a all male faction to run parallel to that? Marines are an elite force of all powered armored men. Sisters are a elite force of powered armored women. That's kind of their theme.
In theory, one could say that's fair, but in practice it isn't. Marines are posterboys of the setting, there several different codices dedicated to them, they get more new models than other factions and most of the fluff is about them. Sisters on the other hand are completely neglected line with most models being decades old. So if these factions would have even somewhat comparable prominence in the game and in the setting then you might have a point, but that is not even remotely the case.
Wouldn't the more logical solution be then to promote Sororitas rather than ruining the parallel? Its not as if Sisters are completely forgotten. Wasn't there a series of novel about them in 2015, Hammer and Anvil, I believe it was called? Whilst they are in dire need of a complete plastic release, they did at least receive Celestine in plastic, their most iconic character.
Speaking of Sisters of Battle, they are an all female faction, right? Wouldn't it make sense to have a all male faction to run parallel to that? Marines are an elite force of all powered armored men. Sisters are a elite force of powered armored women. That's kind of their theme.
In theory, one could say that's fair, but in practice it isn't. Marines are posterboys of the setting, there several different codices dedicated to them, they get more new models than other factions and most of the fluff is about them. Sisters on the other hand are completely neglected line with most models being decades old. So if these factions would have even somewhat comparable prominence in the game and in the setting then you might have a point, but that is not even remotely the case.
Wouldn't the more logical solution be then to promote Sororitas rather than ruining the parallel? Its not as if Sisters are completely forgotten. Wasn't there a series of novel about them in 2015, Hammer and Anvil, I believe it was called? Whilst they are in dire need of a complete plastic release, they did at least receive Celestine in plastic, their most iconic character.
My thoughts exactly.
Promote SoB, reduce SM exposure (although seeing as they ARE the more recognisable GW property, this would need to be carefully moderated), and add female models where the lore supports it.
There's no need to change the lore - it's the real world stuff that's the issue.
It can't be not noted that the all male marines are predominant and the all female sisters less so...
But the playing base is vastly male, too. We sell a lot of male models, to a lot of men.
A few are women, and some of them play sisters. Some of the men play sisters too, and some of the women play not sisters.
But ultimately the predominance of marine sales matches the predominance of male fans.
Isn't the arguement that plastic sisters won't happen based on the fact GW doesn't sell that many sisters? [And never did?] People have always been able to buy female power armour, but they don't buy it anywhere near as much as the male power armour, even when they were both equally old. If the sales supported the data otherwise, we'd all be here whining about why we can't have male sisters of battle, and why the Space Marine range is long overdue a plastic release.
AdmiralHalsey wrote: It can't be not noted that the all male marines are predominant and the all female sisters less so...
But the playing base is vastly male, too. We sell a lot of male models, to a lot of men.
A few are women, and some of them play sisters. Some of the men play sisters too, and some of the women play not sisters.
But ultimately the predominance of marine sales matches the predominance of male fans.
Isn't the arguement that plastic sisters won't happen based on the fact GW doesn't sell that many sisters? [And never did?] People have always been able to buy female power armour, but they don't buy it anywhere near as much as the male power armour, even when they were both equally old. If the sales supported the data otherwise, we'd all be here whining about why we can't have male sisters of battle, and why the Space Marine range is long overdue a plastic release.
They don't sell many sisters because there aren't plastic sisters. Its hard to buy an army when its disproportionately more expensive than the other ranges due to still being metal and not even being in stores.
I tried, really, really hard to repeatedly reference that the sales figures [As admitted by GW] for metal sisters were bad _When other lines were comprable_. Sisters havn't been made plastic because no-one has been that interested in them, compared to the other factions.
While at present one can go, 'Yeah but they're not plastic so...' Historically other armies also had sisters, and they still wern't popular then.
I mean. It doesn't even seem like you read the post before you replied there.
Or are you seriously saying that if sisters were plastic, they'd be the new Marines?
No, I'm saying that if there were plastic sisters in the same level of quality as their more recent releases, there might be a noticeable increase of sales and as well new sisters players. I'm saying there may be an increase, not that they will eclipse marines. I don't know how you reached that conclusion, but I doubt they, like any other army, will surpass marine sales in the long term.
Also, would you not speculate that due to the release of Daughters of Khaine and Sisters of Silence, it might be viable to make a predominantly female faction? If its possible for them, I don't see why it wouldn't work for SoB.
Racerguy180 wrote: In all respect to those who do not wish for females to be marines , I can get where you're coming from. but since this is a fictitious universe where we have magic, elves, Orks, etc it doesn't matter what one group does or does not want. GW can do whatever they feel like would make them the most money, fluff is not set in stone. if you really have a problem with female marines I don't know what to tell you. I don't like what they did with star wars, but I'm not going to waste time/effort thinking about something I literally have no control over. GW squatted my Squats a long time ago and I was (13) and really really pissed, but I got over it and realized that it wasn't gonna change due to me wanting it. if you don't want female space marines, nobody is holding a volkite charger to your head. I would happily include them in my army, but I would much much rather have plastic sisters.
Now i do understand where the vehemence comes from and if you are that broken up about it....go play with something else.
Wow... such arrogance, such condescension, and I bet your not even self aware enough to see what you have done here and probably think what you have said is totally fine
You couldn't have proven my point any better than you just did
Automatically Appended Next Post:
CthuluIsSpy wrote: No, I'm saying that if there were plastic sisters in the same level of quality as their more recent releases, there might be a noticeable increase of sales and as well new sisters players. I'm saying there may be an increase, not that they will eclipse marines. I don't know how you reached that conclusion, but I doubt they, like any other army, will surpass marine sales in the long term.
Also, would you not speculate that due to the release of Daughters of Khaine and Sisters of Silence, it might be viable to make a predominantly female faction? If its possible for them, I don't see why it wouldn't work for SoB.
It would work for sisters, for so many reasons but the main one being that it's a NEW army, yep it would be NEW, the radical change that sisters need across the entire range would mean just that, I would snap up plastic sisters as long as they were old school grim dark looking and not modern cartoon GW style.
Person A: I think they should make some models of Orks possessed by Daemons! (or whatever)
Person B: According to the background, Orks can't get possessed by Daemons.
Person A: But they could just change the background!
Person B: Yes, but I like the background and don't really want them to do that.
Person A: But they could just change the background! So you're wrong for not liking the same things as me.
Does that about sum it up?
Except that fluff/BL includes parts that can be enterpreted as 'Orks can be possessed...but such weaklings don't last as they makes good sport for rest of Boyz'.
Anyway, for Emperor's sake! Imperium is xenophobic, ignorant, stagnant dystopia knee-deep in senseless beliefs and non-understood rituals. Even if female SMs are possible 'physically'- are they possible 'culturally' without total retcon?
PS Given SW situation - they ESPECIALLY in need of keeping fenrissian women protected, fertile and procreating, not culled in SM trials - unless they want to follow Krieg's example of course.
PS And just for general rant - diversity demands go far these days at expense of common sense. Like demands 'there must be people of colour' in representations of medieval Northern Europe (and not meaning 'where's gypsies?') or political gender-based quotas.
I don't get the "the base is mostly men so they wan male models arguments". Note I'm against changing the status quo. Personally I went to great lengths to aquire decent female models from Victoria Miniatures for a mixed gender Imperialis Militia battalion, because it makes sense in the fluff. Women are often seen in direct combat roles in the background outside of the sisters of battle (Gaunts Ghosts is my favorite example of that). So promote women in 40k sure, but do it without breaking with the established background.
Anyway, for Emperor's sake! Imperium is xenophobic, ignorant, stagnant dystopia knee-deep in senseless beliefs and non-understood rituals. Even if female SMs are possible 'physically'- are they possible 'culturally' without total retcon?
Imperium has never been depicted as particularly sexist, nor should it be. It is quite different thing for them to be depicted as bigoted towards fictional space aliens, because those do not really exist, than against people who are actually present in the playerbase. Space marine limitation has always been depicted as technical, not cultural, and if that limitation remains, that should also remain as the reasoning.
PS And just for general rant - diversity demands go far these days at expense of common sense. Like demands 'there must be people of colour' in representations of medieval Northern Europe (and not meaning 'where's gypsies?') or political gender-based quotas.
Legend of Sir Morien (13th century) wrote:
He was all black, even as I tell ye: his head, his body, and his hands were all black, saving only his teeth. His shield and his armour were even those of a Moor, and black as a raven…
Had they not heard him call upon God no man had dared face him, deeming that he was the devil or one of his fellows out of hell, for that his steed was so great, and he was taller even than Sir Lancelot, and black withal, as I said afore…
When the Moor heard these words he laughed with heart and mouth (his teeth were white as chalk, otherwise was he altogether black)…
You know Sir Morien was conceived in the South of Spain with a Moor princess when his father Anglovale was searching for Lancelot, don't you?. He wasnt from or wasnt living in the northern parts of europe until he did go there searching for his father.
And, even then, is not like those knights are real historical characters. (Not gonna enter in the whole female space marines thing, i said what I wanted to say, just want to give context to Sir Morien)
Galas wrote: You know Sir Morien was conceived in the South of Spain with a Moor princess when his father Anglovale was searching for Lancelot, don't you?. He wasnt from or wasnt living in the northern parts of europe until he did go there searching for his father.
So he wasn't in the northern Europe until he went there? But he went there. And then he became a Knight of the Round Table.
And, even then, is not like those knights are real historical characters.
But it was plausible enough story for the people at those times.
There were black people in northern Europe in the middle ages. Obviously not terriibly many, but they existed. So if there are some black people in a period drama, it is not PC revisionism gone mad, it is being accurate.
Galas wrote: You know Sir Morien was conceived in the South of Spain with a Moor princess when his father Anglovale was searching for Lancelot, don't you?. He wasnt from or wasnt living in the northern parts of europe until he did go there searching for his father.
So he wasn't in the northern Europe until he went there? But he went there. And then he became a Knight of the Round Table.
And, even then, is not like those knights are real historical characters.
But it was plausible enough story for the people at those times.
There were black people in northern Europe in the middle ages. Obviously not terriibly many, but they existed. So if there are some black people in a period drama, it is not PC revisionism gone mad, it is being accurate.
keep in mind the referance I think is mostly to a supposed scandal in video games where Kingdom Come: Deliverance features only white characters. the useal PC crowd are complaining about the lack of diversity in 15th century bohemia.
Crimson wrote: Imperium has never been depicted as particularly sexist, nor should it be. It is quite different thing for them to be depicted as bigoted towards fictional space aliens, because those do not really exist, than against people who are actually present in the playerbase. Space marine limitation has always been depicted as technical, not cultural, and if that limitation remains, that should also remain as the reasoning.
You misunderstood - i meant aspect of Imperium where adjusting few lines in the drawing or questioning "wouln't it be better this way?" can easily promote you to envious job of bein' servitor or human torch. And unless retcon - there's no femarines made by Big E.
As for SIr Moriaen - well, wasn't exactly COMMON RL occurence in North ( not to mention that BRITISH tale was most probably inspired by Crusade-era and out-of-region experiences, if not by Roman era one). But problem is that 'in the name of political correctness' IJWs are demanding exceptions and fables turned in mainstream depiction. And this is small potatoes compared to demands of 'positive discrimination' based on gender,sexuality, or race and religion.
So since I was away the three new reasons as to why we can not have femalen space marines are as follows.
- There would not be enough wimen left to make babies.
Others have pointed out how this is a bad argument. One of the reasons why being that the population is to big for it to leave a dent compared to how many marines there are, and I will leave thatbone at that.
- Space Marines would get out of hand as they could self populate.
This runs into the problem that nothing prevents marines from self populating right now if they so chosed (astra claws in the badab war anyone) and that all space marines are sterile by design. Just like SM can not create children Space Marines would stil not be able to make children.
- We already have female SM in sisters of battle.
That is hardly the same. Sisters are often cast as exstreme bad guys claims everything must be purged. S3 and T3 does not a SM make. Wheras marines excist in all the colours of the rainbow bothbin colour and culture and are the iconic character of the setting. This is like comparing a lame ass car that does not sell well with several of the most iconic cars in the world and say they are the same.
I guess I am 'moving the goal post again' but none of those are good arguments. You can tell by the amount of people who points out they are not good arguments. Put please continue this tapdance where you present your best reasons, and then come with more reasons when they do not stick.
You misunderstood - i meant aspect of Imperium where adjusting few lines in the drawing or questioning "wouln't it be better this way?" can easily promote you to envious job of bein' servitor or human torch. And unless retcon - there's no femarines made by Big E.
That argument would have sounded far more convincing before the whole Primaris mess!
As for SIr Moriaen - well, wasn't exactly COMMON RL occurence in North ( not to mention that BRITISH tale was most probably inspired by Crusade-era and out-of-region experiences, if not by Roman era one). But problem is that 'in the name of political correctness' IJWs are demanding exceptions and fables turned in mainstream depiction. And this is small potatoes compared to demands of 'positive discrimination' based on gender,sexuality, or race and religion.
Black people were not invented in the 19th century, and travelling did happen, especially during Roman Empire. It is actually the 'SJWs' who are in this instance better informed about the actual history. Though I suggest we drop this topic, as it is about real world politics, and there is no need to derail the thread with that.
- We already have female SM in sisters of battle. That is hardly the same. Sisters are often cast as exstreme bad guys claims everything must be purged.
Oh yes, and space marines are always so noble and pleasant. Like those Marines Malevolent Guys. Or Black Templars. Or Flesh Tearers And sisters are presented as good guys. They are presented as extremely loyal to the Emperor and will not be corrupted or surrender. If you want bad guys, look at Chao and Dark Eldar. The fact that they purge is irrelevant, as marines do the same damned thing. I find it ironic how you go on about bad arguments, when that argument is pretty terrible and is extremely divorced from reality.
- We already have female SM in sisters of battle.
That is hardly the same. Sisters are often cast as exstreme bad guys claims everything must be purged.
Oh yes, and space marines are always so noble and pleasant. Like those Marines Malevolent Guys. Or Black Templars. Or Flesh Tearers And sisters are presented as good guys. They are presented as extremely loyal to the Emperor and will not be corrupted or surrender. If you want bad guys, look at Chao and Dark Eldar. The fact that they purge is irrelevant, as marines do the same damned thing.
I find it ironic how you go on about bad arguments, when that argument is pretty terrible and is extremely divorced from reality.
You are sort of awnsering your own objection there. Space Marines are not always noble and pleasant, they are in fact very versatile in their representation. Double up so when you include chaos space marines as well. That is why is use the plural of cars in my car comparison metaphore. You have just so many cool space marines chapters to chose from out there. Wheras sisters of battle, well say what you want about them, but they are not as versatile as space marines when it comes to pick your flavour. I stil claim it is like comparing one lame car to all of the cool cars in the world. Even if you like that lame car, and many do, comparing them is doing injustice to all the cool cars (who are the space marines well all know and love in this metaphore.)
- We already have female SM in sisters of battle. That is hardly the same. Sisters are often cast as exstreme bad guys claims everything must be purged.
Oh yes, and space marines are always so noble and pleasant. Like those Marines Malevolent Guys. Or Black Templars. Or Flesh Tearers And sisters are presented as good guys. They are presented as extremely loyal to the Emperor and will not be corrupted or surrender. If you want bad guys, look at Chao and Dark Eldar. The fact that they purge is irrelevant, as marines do the same damned thing. I find it ironic how you go on about bad arguments, when that argument is pretty terrible and is extremely divorced from reality.
You are sort of awnsering your own objection there. Space Marines are not always noble and pleasant, they are in fact very versatile in their representation. Double up so when you include chaos space marines as well. That is why is use the plural of cars in my car comparison metaphore. You have just so many cool space marines chapters to chose from out there. Wheras sisters of battle, well say what you want about them, but they are not as versatile as space marines when it comes to pick your flavour.
Except you have different orders of sisters who are similar to chapters, and each act in a certain way. The Order of the Bloody Rose, for example, favors dominion squads and are rather aggressive and ferocious in battle. The Order of the Argent Shroud is silent and are known for acts of selfless heroism. They are not all the same. And extra characterization is something that could always be added to them and developed upon. The fact that there are something like 7 flavors of marine codices is irrelevant, as no other army gets those. You might as well claim that every army should be marine, as they just aren't as versatile.
Niiai wrote: I stil claim it is like comparing one lame car to all of the cool cars in the world. Even if you like that lame car, and many do, comparing them is doing injustice to all the cool cars (who are the space marines well all know and love in this metaphore.)
You are aware that you are basically stating that every army that isn't marine is lame, right?
As someone who does not collect marines, I'm actually rather annoyed that you would imply that my army is a "lame car" as it doesn't reach your perceptions of cool.
- We already have female SM in sisters of battle. That is hardly the same. Sisters are often cast as exstreme bad guys claims everything must be purged.
Oh yes, and space marines are always so noble and pleasant. Like those Marines Malevolent Guys. Or Black Templars. Or Flesh Tearers And sisters are presented as good guys. They are presented as extremely loyal to the Emperor and will not be corrupted or surrender. If you want bad guys, look at Chao and Dark Eldar. The fact that they purge is irrelevant, as marines do the same damned thing. I find it ironic how you go on about bad arguments, when that argument is pretty terrible and is extremely divorced from reality.
You are sort of awnsering your own objection there. Space Marines are not always noble and pleasant, they are in fact very versatile in their representation. Double up so when you include chaos space marines as well. That is why is use the plural of cars in my car comparison metaphore. You have just so many cool space marines chapters to chose from out there. Wheras sisters of battle, well say what you want about them, but they are not as versatile as space marines when it comes to pick your flavour. I stil claim it is like comparing one lame car to all of the cool cars in the world. Even if you like that lame car, and many do, comparing them is doing injustice to all the cool cars (who are the space marines well all know and love in this metaphore.)
Have we not considered making Sisters more diverse? Creating precedent for a variety of Orders and Minor Orders, with their own flair and styles? After all GW has done it with the Scions - why couldn't they with Sisters?
The ONLY requirements of the Sisterhood is that they are fanatically loyal to the God-Emperor via the Ecclesiarchy. Everything else, really, from that, can follow. Why can't we expand the Sisters?
As Cthulu'sSpy says - we already deviation between Orders - bring that out more, encourage it with new plastic kits, and that's a faction waiting to be exploited.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I did not mean to say that all angels were male, I meant to say that Archangels, such as Michael, tended to be portrayed as male.
And that marines are heavily inspired by specifically archangels.
Well, they aren't. Nothing supports this. Archangels are not associated with the idea of having a thousand armies of a thousand people each. They are associated with a dozen at most people that extremely powerful but not organized as armies.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: As Michael is the archetypical warrior angel as well as having the title of angel of death
Azrael is much more famous in pop culture than Michael as the angel of death. Just saying.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Its also likely that marines are both warrior-monks as well as being archangel-analogues. They are a mix of things, after all.
Woah. They sure are a mix of a bunch of completely unrelated and quite contradictory things, that just somehow happen to all point about them not being allowed to be women, despite all logic.
Do you want a list of pop-culture version of female angels, most of whom are warrior?
CthuluIsSpy wrote: I do not agree that they are a blank slate, as that would imply they possess no unifying characteristics. They are with religious and monastic undertones.
They are a blank canvas. The “all male, genetically engineered super soldiers” part is the canvas that is there to be filled with personality. The religiousness is pervasive in the whole Imperium, and the monastic undertones are a Dark Angel thing, not a general thing.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Celestine, to me, looks like a Jeanne D'arc analogue with strong angelic themes. I mean, you have the Fleur De Lys motif, which is a French symbol, Celestine inspires her soldiers, just as Jeanne did and was believed to have been personally touched by the Emperor himself, just as Jeanne.
Yeah we got the whole Jeanne d'Arc package. Celestine was a small peasant before hearing the Emperor speak to her, she then raised armies to push back some invaders, and then she was tried and killed as a witch.
Except for the fact that all of this is false. Celestine was already a Sister before ascending to Sainthood, not a civilian. She isn't famous for leading armies, more for appearing in time of need. She was never in disgrace. So, what do we have? Celestine has a fleur de lys, like Sisters did long before Celestine was introduced into the setting. Celestine inspire her soldiers, like every charismatic leader in the whole setting does, and god that means a LOOOOOOOT of them. Now let's look at Celestine signature abilities: she flies, and she can resurrect. Yep, Jeanne didn't come close to doing either.
Your affirmation is flimsy and that's putting it lightly.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Speaking of Sisters of Battle, they are an all female faction, right? Wouldn't it make sense to have a all male faction to run parallel to that?
Yeah, I mentioned those. Dark Angels.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Sisters are a elite force of powered armored women. That's kind of their theme.
No that's not their theme. That's one of their characteristic. Their theme is being the elite army of a giant, incredibly wealthy and powerful and zealous religious organization.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: Suddenly making one of them mixed would ruin that parallel, and I don't think that's a good thing.
I have 0 problems with this and it sounds more like an ad hoc excuse than a genuine concern to me.
CthuluIsSpy wrote: So because the setting changed it means it should keep getting changed for the sake of change? Are you a servant of Tzeentch or something?
I really disliked the change that were introduced, so I'd really want to have at least a few good changes to go along with it. I mean, it's already too late for keeping things as they were, so…
chyron wrote: Even if female SMs are possible 'physically'- are they possible 'culturally' without total retcon?
Yes.
(Female Inquisitor boss people all around the galaxy)
kastelen wrote: Not really, saying that you'd rather keep the setting the same as it always was is the neutral thing.
How is that neutral? Neutral between what and what?
kastelen wrote: Saying you don't care is apathetic, not neutral.
I want Valkirie SoB, Vampire SoB, Bizantine/Slavic SoB, Zulu based Sob, Arabic Based SoB... and I'm not joking. SoB, just like Imperial Guard Regiments and Space Marines can be made totally diverse.
I will admitt I know next to nothing about sisters. The last time I saw sisters of battle was in Dawn of War soulstorm and that came out in 2008. Today is 2018, so the last time I saw some sisters was 10 years ago, and that was not even a plastic model. There is no last time I saw a Space Marine because I am currently looking at one. Sgt_Smudge has a fun forum avatar where a warhammer space marine is holding up the helmet of a star wars storm trooper implying some rather funny jokes. Has the space marine killed the storm trooper in a ironic gloryfied 40K pulpy gore fashion, does he conteplate the similareties between them or is he just practesing his hamlet impressions. It is a rather good avatar. Space Marines makes rather good poster boys.
If you claim sisters of battle are just as diverse as space marines, or as well represented in the setting you are just lying. If you say women in power armour are the same as geneticaly manipulated space marines with beefy S4T4 you are also lying. I will grant you sisters of battle has a cultural footprint within the setting, but it is hardly the same in scope.
I belive the reasons GW chooses not to expand on sisters is because they are not as well liked, and they do not sell as much. When you are trying to have an income in global market with many competors you focus on your streanghts.
As of October 2017 there are 46 published volumes of the horus heresey franchise, pluss several other books with space marines as the main antagonist. There is a horus heresye game with their own models and rules popularly refered to as 30K. There are currently 3 loylalist codexes, with SW on the rumour will, and 3 chaos codexes.
Sisters of battle has... well if I walk into a store they have no models I can buy. That is a problem. They have their army entry in an index, that is a good thing. You have the sisters of battle novel series (2 books and an audio drama) and some other books but I have a hard time tracking them down. Do not compare sisters to space marines and say they are the same, for they really are not.
For GW to go hard in on sisters of battle makes as much sence as continuing tomb kings in age of sigmar. It is a miracle sisters of battle are stil around. Making some elaberate plan that GW can expand on sisters in a big way is ludacriss. Even if they did, that stil do not change the fact that there are no good reasons to not have female space marines.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Have we not considered making Sisters more diverse? Creating precedent for a variety of Orders and Minor Orders, with their own flair and styles? After all GW has done it with the Scions - why couldn't they with Sisters?
Sisters aren't designed as a blank canvas army. They already have a very strong personality. They are a monolithic organization, unlike marines, that have one supreme leader (the only one to have this, there is no supreme Marine leader in charge of all the marine chapters, there is no Imperial Guard supreme leader either, and I never heard about one for Mechanicus), they are stated as being the one with the least variation, etc.
Of course you could change all that. But what's the point of making a pretty nice faction with a very strong personality into a blank canvas faction instead of simply extending the already existing blank canvas faction?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Have we not considered making Sisters more diverse? Creating precedent for a variety of Orders and Minor Orders, with their own flair and styles? After all GW has done it with the Scions - why couldn't they with Sisters?
Sisters aren't designed as a blank canvas army. They already have a very strong personality. They are a monolithic organization, unlike marines, that have one supreme leader (the only one to have this, there is no supreme Marine leader in charge of all the marine chapters, there is no Imperial Guard supreme leader either, and I never heard about one for Mechanicus), they are stated as being the one with the least variation, etc.
Of course you could change all that. But what's the point of making a pretty nice faction with a very strong personality into a blank canvas faction instead of simply extending the already existing blank canvas faction?
Imperial Guard and Adeptus Mechanicus both have a High Lord of Terra as their supreme leader just like Sisters of Battle. Sisters of Battle have a strong personality thats right but they are too world-based, and even by GW canon the Imperial Creed is very, very diverse in all of the Imperium. The Echlesiarchy isn't a monolithic religious where everywhere is the same. They have some strong core that don't change, but the rest? The rest is open and based in the world/sector.
Galas wrote: I want Valkirie SoB, Vampire SoB, Bizantine/Slavic SoB, Zulu based Sob, Arabic Based SoB... and I'm not joking. SoB, just like Imperial Guard Regiments and Space Marines can be made totally diverse.
I'm actually really curious how Zulu SoB would turn out. How would you even design that?
Galas wrote: I want Valkirie SoB, Vampire SoB, Bizantine/Slavic SoB, Zulu based Sob, Arabic Based SoB... and I'm not joking. SoB, just like Imperial Guard Regiments and Space Marines can be made totally diverse.
I'm actually really curious how Zulu SoB would turn out. How would you even design that?
Less armour, more based in fast attack options, with spear+shield special units, etc... and obviously all the designs based in that culture just like Space Wolves.
Galas wrote: Sisters of Battle have a strong personality thats right but they are too world-based, and even by GW canon the Imperial Creed is very, very diverse in all of the Imperium.
Yes but the Sisters aren't. The traditions of the Sisters, etc, are extremely codified. The Sisters are very different from the rest of the Ecclesiarchy in this regard.
Note that unlike Imperial Guards, the Sisters aren't raised in the culture of their world. They are raised into the schola progenium.
Galas wrote: Sisters of Battle have a strong personality thats right but they are too world-based, and even by GW canon the Imperial Creed is very, very diverse in all of the Imperium.
Yes but the Sisters aren't. The traditions of the Sisters, etc, are extremely codified. The Sisters are very different from the rest of the Ecclesiarchy in this regard.
Note that unlike Imperial Guards, the Sisters aren't raised in the culture of their world. They are raised into the schola progenium.
You are right, but being raised in the Schola Progenium doesn't change the fact that the Orders are World-Based. Even Tempestus Scions squads have a great diversity, based in how they fight, where they fight, etc... and they have much less reasons to be diverse than SoB, lacking really any world that they could call home, etc...
And, just like with fem-marines, SoB lore hasn't been really expanded or changed for 20 years (You had the "Sisters are 12k... no, now they are billions. Nah they are just six orders... nah billions again"). If GW would come back to expand them, they totally should make them more apealling and customizable. They did it with Necrons...
I'm actually really curious how Zulu SoB would turn out. How would you even design that?
If you got sisters of battle zulu edition like depicted in the picture from black panther would they still be sisters of battle? As Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl pointed out sisters of battle is a very cultural spesific army (it is not a blank canvas army was the words he used.)
There zulu where characteristed by a lot of things culturally. But from an army perspective the zulu had 3 things going for them:
- They had the honn strategy, where you come at the enemy from 2 flanks, and then you had a small group that snuck behind enemy lines and come at the back.
- They had a fleet of foot army as they where all veyr mobile.
- They had leather on their shield and dipped them in some hardening substances that made the shield turn away bullits, or at least stopped their effectivness for the guns of that era.
So an army presented with these strategies would need to me a mid- or close ranged army, to present the horns. Preferrably they would need to have melee units. To represent the outflank, they would need some form of deepstrike/outflanking posabilaty. They would need some mobilaty to represent their fleet of foot. Some form of storm shoulds would need to make an aperance to represent the shields.
Those 3 points do not mesh well with the army doctrine of the sisters of battle, unless you are really bending the rules. Ssietsr of battle are all about faith, fire based (melta flamer) and bolter based weapons (bolt pistol, bolter gun, heavy bolter.) It is not really a good fit.
Wheras if you wanne represent this with marines you can do some fast moving CC to represent the horns. They have outflanking units. They are mobile. And they have shields already in the game. More importantly Space Marines do not come with a lot of cultural bagga that would be conflicting with the zulu consept. Instead, the few cultural aspects SM do come with lends itself very well to the zulu consept. This is in part why SM lends itself so many things, they are designed this way.
Niiai wrote:I will admitt I know next to nothing about sisters. The last time I saw sisters of battle was in Dawn of War soulstorm and that came out in 2008. Today is 2018, so the last time I saw some sisters was 10 years ago, and that was not even a plastic model. There is no last time I saw a Space Marine because I am currently looking at one.
And I would love to change that. Sisters should have more exposure: plastic would be a perfect medium.
Sgt_Smudge has a fun forum avatar where a warhammer space marine is holding up the helmet of a star wars storm trooper implying some rather funny jokes. Has the space marine killed the storm trooper in a ironic gloryfied 40K pulpy gore fashion, does he conteplate the similareties between them or is he just practesing his hamlet impressions. It is a rather good avatar. Space Marines makes rather good poster boys.
It's for the Hamlet impression, in matter of fact. I'd have preferred if it was an Ultramarine with a Mark 7 helmet, but hey, what can you do. Space Marines do make good poster boys, but that's because GW have saturated them into their setting. If SoB were given similar saturation (and they ARE a very recognizable aspect of 40k - frequently cosplayed, in fact), then their power armoured aesthetic would be similar enough to the already popular SMs to give them a stronger foothold in the IP of 40k.
If you claim sisters of battle are just as diverse as space marines, or as well represented in the setting you are just lying.
I beg to differ. I'm not saying they're quite as diverse now, but they have the potential to be, with very little to stop that. So long as the criteria are met, then all can follow.
If you say women in power armour are the same as geneticaly manipulated space marines with beefy S4T4 you are also lying. I will grant you sisters of battle has a cultural footprint within the setting, but it is hardly the same in scope.
I thought we wanted women in 40k, not specifically superhuman women. A woman is a woman, whether with a second heart or not. It shouldn't matter if they're a Space Marine, necessarily - only that they have the same influence as one.
And agreed on the latter - this is something that I want to fix. I'm not saying it's perfect right now, but that's the avenue I want to go down to reach the desired goal.
I belive the reasons GW chooses not to expand on sisters is because they are not as well liked, and they do not sell as much. When you are trying to have an income in global market with many competors you focus on your streanghts.
However, GW's methods are self-perpetuating.
If they only make Space Marines, that's all they'll sell. If they expanded out to the ever-growing market of SoB fans, then there's a solid chance they'd be snapped up. After all - look how well Celestine sold in plastic. Canoness Veridyan, the House Escher gang, their AoS scuplts - all very popular.
As of October 2017 there are 46 published volumes of the horus heresey franchise, pluss several other books with space marines as the main antagonist. There is a horus heresye game with their own models and rules popularly refered to as 30K. There are currently 3 loylalist codexes, with SW on the rumour will, and 3 chaos codexes.
Sisters of battle has... well if I walk into a store they have no models I can buy. That is a problem. They have their army entry in an index, that is a good thing. You have the sisters of battle novel series (2 books and an audio drama) and some other books but I have a hard time tracking them down. Do not compare sisters to space marines and say they are the same, for they really are not.
I'm not saying that they ARE the same. I haven't said that. I've made it clear that I WANT them to be the same, that I want Sisters to have that exposure.
I understand that you may be misreading my argument, and that's not deliberate, but I hope I've made it clear that I don't think SoB have anywhere near the exposure of SM. I still very much want that to change.
For GW to go hard in on sisters of battle makes as much sence as continuing tomb kings in age of sigmar. It is a miracle sisters of battle are stil around. Making some elaberate plan that GW can expand on sisters in a big way is ludacriss. Even if they did, that stil do not change the fact that there are no good reasons to not have female space marines.
Good in YOUR OPINION. I have my reason why not, and it's a solid reason TO ME. That's just my opinion. Yours is yours. You don't have the power to say your opinion is the overriding one here.
If you feel there are no good reasons, I have just as much authority to say that there are plenty of good reasons, and neither of us is more right than the other.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Have we not considered making Sisters more diverse? Creating precedent for a variety of Orders and Minor Orders, with their own flair and styles? After all GW has done it with the Scions - why couldn't they with Sisters?
Sisters aren't designed as a blank canvas army. They already have a very strong personality. They are a monolithic organization, unlike marines, that have one supreme leader (the only one to have this, there is no supreme Marine leader in charge of all the marine chapters, there is no Imperial Guard supreme leader either, and I never heard about one for Mechanicus), they are stated as being the one with the least variation, etc. Of course you could change all that. But what's the point of making a pretty nice faction with a very strong personality into a blank canvas faction instead of simply extending the already existing blank canvas faction?
The entire Imperium, barring perhaps the Mechanicus, is a monolithic organisation in it's entirety. That doesn't mean that every fighting force within it is the same, and nor should it mean the same for the Sisters.
The Imperial Guard have one, the Lord Commander Militant. The Lord Solar is also a noted position, occupied once by Macharius. I can understand missing this one, however.
The AdMech have their Fabricator General. I am more surprised you didn't know of this one, as it's been a noted position since before the Heresy itself. And, of course despite both these factions having a "supreme leader" (except the Emperor himself), they're incredibly diverse, Guardsmen especially. The various AdMech groups have been different enough to go to civil war (see Moirae Schism) - so why are the Sisters so monolithic?
Nothing about them explains WHY they are - they just are. We also see differences between orders, as CthulusSpy pointed out - what's really stopping us from that? If there's a lore reason as to why not - fair enough. That then warrants the discussion on "if that lore should be changed", which is the current debate on SMs.
If not, then more diverse Sisters can ABSOLUTELY be a thing. As long as the central tenet of the Sisters' design philosophy is met (an all-female holy order acting as the militant arm of the Ecclesiarchy) then anything can follow.
Who says that devotion can't take it's place in the form of tribal worship, or fortification of the Emperor's Lands, or in massed Exorcist volleys?
Galas wrote: Sisters of Battle have a strong personality thats right but they are too world-based, and even by GW canon the Imperial Creed is very, very diverse in all of the Imperium.
Yes but the Sisters aren't. The traditions of the Sisters, etc, are extremely codified. The Sisters are very different from the rest of the Ecclesiarchy in this regard. Note that unlike Imperial Guards, the Sisters aren't raised in the culture of their world. They are raised into the schola progenium.
Like Scions? And they're all totally the same- wait. Nope, that's not true.
Niiai wrote: So since I was away the three new reasons as to why we can not have femalen space marines are as follows.
- There would not be enough wimen left to make babies.
Others have pointed out how this is a bad argument. One of the reasons why being that the population is to big for it to leave a dent compared to how many marines there are, and I will leave thatbone at that.
- Space Marines would get out of hand as they could self populate.
This runs into the problem that nothing prevents marines from self populating right now if they so chosed (astra claws in the badab war anyone) and that all space marines are sterile by design. Just like SM can not create children Space Marines would stil not be able to make children.
- We already have female SM in sisters of battle.
That is hardly the same. Sisters are often cast as exstreme bad guys claims everything must be purged. S3 and T3 does not a SM make. Wheras marines excist in all the colours of the rainbow bothbin colour and culture and are the iconic character of the setting. This is like comparing a lame ass car that does not sell well with several of the most iconic cars in the world and say they are the same.
I guess I am 'moving the goal post again' but none of those are good arguments. You can tell by the amount of people who points out they are not good arguments. Put please continue this tapdance where you present your best reasons, and then come with more reasons when they do not stick.
1: yep thats a dim reason
2: not remotely the same and you know it, if female marines can theoretically create more marines WITHOUT the implantation process, natural male and female astartes, then it would get out of hand very very quickly, if marines could reproduce naturally, then they would rule the universe already, billions of marines instead of humans, marines making other marines badab war style takes decades to do properly, making all marines male to make sure that at no point no one works out how to make them able to give birth make perfect sense for a disposable force, and thats what the marines are, imagine if fabious worked out how to allow female marines to have children during a female heresy, its a whole new can of worms, so like it or lump it, this is a valid in universe reason not to have female marines, if I were the Emperor, I would not even want the hint of a risk of that happening.
3: who said sisters are female marines? sure they are a MEQ but thats about it.
Again, just bacause so much is being said, even if we had the most glorius sisters of batle in en every store that is no reason not to have space marines based on females.
Niiai wrote: Again, just bacause so much is being said, even if we had the most glorius sisters of batle in en every store that is no reason not to have space marines based on females.
Why?
The main reason people are asking for Female Space Marines isn't because they're Space Marines specifically.
It's because Space Marines are popular.
If SoB were as popular as SM, that reaches the goal set.
There is a perfectly good reason why women can't be SM. That's the lore. As I personally see it, there is no reason to change it, because increasing exposure of the Sisters of Battle, without even having to change their lore, would achieve the same result - increased female exposure.
Niiai wrote: Again, just bacause so much is being said, even if we had the most glorius sisters of batle in en every store that is no reason not to have space marines based on females.
Why?
The main reason people are asking for Female Space Marines isn't because they're Space Marines specifically.
It's because Space Marines are popular.
If SoB were as popular as SM, that reaches the goal set.
There is a perfectly good reason why women can't be SM. That's the lore. As I personally see it, there is no reason to change it, because increasing exposure of the Sisters of Battle, without even having to change their lore, would achieve the same result - increased female exposure.
Niiai wrote: Again, just bacause so much is being said, even if we had the most glorius sisters of batle in en every store that is no reason not to have space marines based on females.
Why?
The main reason people are asking for Female Space Marines isn't because they're Space Marines specifically.
It's because Space Marines are popular.
If SoB were as popular as SM, that reaches the goal set.
Spoiler:
There is a perfectly good reason why women can't be SM. That's the lore. As I personally see it, there is no reason to change it, because increasing exposure of the Sisters of Battle, without even having to change their lore, would achieve the same result - increased female exposure.
That is a really big if.
What is the timeline you predict for this? Ever since Space Marines have been established around rogue trader first- or secondedition space marines has been an instant hit. Some time ago GW celbrated their 30 year aniversary, that is near 30 years of Space Marines iconicness. Your big if, is not very realistic.
Wheras spacae marines females GW would just need to point to the tactical squad and say 'Do you know that SM can be based on females as well as males?". No models would need to be changed, they are clad in power armour. No changes. Over times, ad some female heads as options for the helmetless squad leaderes.
What goal sett would that be? Female Space Marines? I want female space marines.
Niiai wrote: So since I was away the three new reasons as to why we can not have femalen space marines are as follows.
- There would not be enough wimen left to make babies.
Others have pointed out how this is a bad argument. One of the reasons why being that the population is to big for it to leave a dent compared to how many marines there are, and I will leave thatbone at that.
- Space Marines would get out of hand as they could self populate.
This runs into the problem that nothing prevents marines from self populating right now if they so chosed (astra claws in the badab war anyone) and that all space marines are sterile by design. Just like SM can not create children Space Marines would stil not be able to make children.
- We already have female SM in sisters of battle.
That is hardly the same. Sisters are often cast as exstreme bad guys claims everything must be purged. S3 and T3 does not a SM make. Wheras marines excist in all the colours of the rainbow bothbin colour and culture and are the iconic character of the setting. This is like comparing a lame ass car that does not sell well with several of the most iconic cars in the world and say they are the same.
I guess I am 'moving the goal post again' but none of those are good arguments. You can tell by the amount of people who points out they are not good arguments. Put please continue this tapdance where you present your best reasons, and then come with more reasons when they do not stick.
1: yep thats a dim reason
2: not remotely the same and you know it, if female marines can theoretically create more marines WITHOUT the implantation process, natural male and female astartes, then it would get out of hand very very quickly, if marines could reproduce naturally, then they would rule the universe already, billions of marines instead of humans, marines making other marines badab war style takes decades to do properly, making all marines male to make sure that at no point no one works out how to make them able to give birth make perfect sense for a disposable force, and thats what the marines are, imagine if fabious worked out how to allow female marines to have children during a female heresy, its a whole new can of worms, so like it or lump it, this is a valid in universe reason not to have female marines, if I were the Emperor, I would not even want the hint of a risk of that happening.
3: who said sisters are female marines? sure they are a MEQ but thats about it.
What do you mean 'if female marines can theoretically create more marines WITHOUT the implant process...]'? (The without was written in caps, I am not emphesasing it.) Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting. Do you think if you can base space marines on females suddenly space marines can birth babies, let alone space marine babies? There is literarly nothing else that changes if Space Marines can be based on females. Why on earth would that introduce space marine babies? Can you seperate these to notions from each other? It is well estrablished how you make a space marine. You take a young promesing person and start the process, including inplanting the literal seed other space marines carries with them.
The badap war is a great example of how you make a lot of marines. And they even did it partly incidentaly. Horun did not plan the badab war. He was depleated of resources, his suplies streched to wide. There where not enough Astra Claws so cover the work load, so he overstepped the allowed quota and posted them in remote outposts so it would be hard for outsiders to get a good overview on how many marines the astra claws had. But this is perhaps a bad example as the production was out of necesaty and not a mass production as such.
But we have example of mass production asllready. Several on both side whips up new space marines all the time, the lords of terra name them after 'generations'. There is nothing in the setting that prevents this from happening currently, as it is currently happening if so inclined.Space Marines based on females would change this in any way.
Formosa wrote: 3: who said sisters are female marines? sure they are a MEQ but thats about it.
Who says sisters are female marines? Well you do in the following sentence after you ask the question. Do you know what MEQ actualy stands for?
Niiai wrote: Again, just bacause so much is being said, even if we had the most glorius sisters of batle in en every store that is no reason not to have space marines based on females.
Why?
The main reason people are asking for Female Space Marines isn't because they're Space Marines specifically.
It's because Space Marines are popular.
If SoB were as popular as SM, that reaches the goal set.
Spoiler:
There is a perfectly good reason why women can't be SM. That's the lore. As I personally see it, there is no reason to change it, because increasing exposure of the Sisters of Battle, without even having to change their lore, would achieve the same result - increased female exposure.
That is a really big if.
What is the timeline you predict for this? Ever since Space Marines have been established around rogue trader first- or secondedition space marines has been an instant hit. Some time ago GW celbrated their 30 year aniversary, that is near 30 years of Space Marines iconicness. Your big if, is not very realistic.
Wheras spacae marines females GW would just need to point to the tactical squad and say 'Do you know that SM can be based on females as well as males?". No models would need to be changed, they are clad in power armour. No changes. Over times, ad some female heads as options for the helmetless squad leaderes.
What goal sett would that be? Female Space Marines? I want female space marines.
Niiai wrote: So since I was away the three new reasons as to why we can not have femalen space marines are as follows.
- There would not be enough wimen left to make babies.
Others have pointed out how this is a bad argument. One of the reasons why being that the population is to big for it to leave a dent compared to how many marines there are, and I will leave thatbone at that.
- Space Marines would get out of hand as they could self populate.
This runs into the problem that nothing prevents marines from self populating right now if they so chosed (astra claws in the badab war anyone) and that all space marines are sterile by design. Just like SM can not create children Space Marines would stil not be able to make children.
- We already have female SM in sisters of battle.
That is hardly the same. Sisters are often cast as exstreme bad guys claims everything must be purged. S3 and T3 does not a SM make. Wheras marines excist in all the colours of the rainbow bothbin colour and culture and are the iconic character of the setting. This is like comparing a lame ass car that does not sell well with several of the most iconic cars in the world and say they are the same.
I guess I am 'moving the goal post again' but none of those are good arguments. You can tell by the amount of people who points out they are not good arguments. Put please continue this tapdance where you present your best reasons, and then come with more reasons when they do not stick.
1: yep thats a dim reason
2: not remotely the same and you know it, if female marines can theoretically create more marines WITHOUT the implantation process, natural male and female astartes, then it would get out of hand very very quickly, if marines could reproduce naturally, then they would rule the universe already, billions of marines instead of humans, marines making other marines badab war style takes decades to do properly, making all marines male to make sure that at no point no one works out how to make them able to give birth make perfect sense for a disposable force, and thats what the marines are, imagine if fabious worked out how to allow female marines to have children during a female heresy, its a whole new can of worms, so like it or lump it, this is a valid in universe reason not to have female marines, if I were the Emperor, I would not even want the hint of a risk of that happening.
3: who said sisters are female marines? sure they are a MEQ but thats about it.
What do you mean 'if female marines can theoretically create more marines WITHOUT the implant process...]'? (The without was written in caps, I am not emphesasing it.) Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting. Do you think if you can base space marines on females suddenly space marines can birth babies, let alone space marine babies? There is literarly nothing else that changes if Space Marines can be based on females. Why on earth would that introduce space marine babies? Can you seperate these to notions from each other? It is well estrablished how you make a space marine. You take a young promesing person and start the process, including inplanting the literal seed other space marines carries with them.
The badap war is a great example of how you make a lot of marines. And they even did it partly incidentaly. Horun did not plan the badab war. He was depleated of resources, his suplies streched to wide. There where not enough Astra Claws so cover the work load, so he overstepped the allowed quota and posted them in remote outposts so it would be hard for outsiders to get a good overview on how many marines the astra claws had. But this is perhaps a bad example as the production was out of necesaty and not a mass production as such.
But we have example of mass production asllready. Several on both side whips up new space marines all the time, the lords of terra name them after 'generations'. There is nothing in the setting that prevents this from happening currently, as it is currently happening if so inclined.Space Marines based on females would change this in any way.
Formosa wrote: 3: who said sisters are female marines? sure they are a MEQ but thats about it.
Who says sisters are female marines? Well you do in the following sentence after you ask the question. Do you know what MEQ actualy stands for?
space marines cannot have children for several reasons, anatomy being one of them, hyperthetically if you make a male marine fertile you have the issue that a female would likely not be able to carry the much larger (theoretically) fetus to term, it would likely kill her, now reverse this and apply the same theory to a female marine, make her fertile (something that Fabious would likely be able to do) and replicate this across the legions, suddenly you have a massive threat on your hands, its just not worth it.
Why would it introduce space marine babies, because thats what woman do, make babies, they replicate the species, in this case it would be Femstartes, if you lot want female marines, you need to consider all the implications, not just cherry pick what you like, making male marines fertile isnt as big a deal as making female marines fertile.
Chaos have a hard time mass producing marines, its even stated in several books, Imperial space marines cannot mass produce marines at all, if they start to hoard gene seed to try it, well, Badab war happens, the High lords are able to mass produce marines from the massive stockpiles of gene seed, thats it.
Ok before asking do I know what MEQ stands for
equivalent
"a person or thing that is equal to or corresponds with another in value, amount, function, meaning, etc"
corresponds
"have a close similarity; match or agree almost exactly."
Perhaps you should learn what equivalent means, Sisters have a close similarity to marines, hence "MEQ" but they are not literally marines, thats plain stupid.
They are not marines in culture, and they are T3, that is not equalant as marines. Sister of battles is not the same as marines.
And why do you thing being able to base the creation of a space marine on a woman would mean babies are inbound? This is so rong on all account. Least of that is not how you enginer space marines. They are not a race that can reproduce that way. You have to take the genseed and inplant it into a young person cross your t's and dot your i's and hope theys urvive the process and training. Why are you brining in all of this other gakk?
Niiai wrote: They are not marines in culture, and they are T3, that is not equalant as marines. Sister of battles is not the same as marines.
And why do you thing being able to base the creation of a space marine on a woman would mean babies are inbound? This is so rong on all account. Least of that is not how you enginer space marines. They are not a race that can reproduce that way. You have to take the genseed and inplant it into a young person cross your t's and dot your i's and hope theys urvive the process and training. Why are you brining in all of this other gakk?
I put a quote of what equivalent means, and you still argue
The gene seed changes the genetics of the host, females reproduce, so I'm working off the hyperthetical possibilty of self replicating astartes, during the great crusade they had issue with keeping the numbers up and during the heresy even more issues, so taking your want of female marines to its logical conclusion means in universe they would try to find a way to speed up the recruitment process, so use the resources you have... woman, if you can find a way (thousands of apothecaries and Fabius) to allow woman to give birth to Astartes (demonculaba shows it's possible) then you now have a very large threat.
They are not a race that can reproduce, but they are also all male, so to be frank, if you can have you nonsense, so can I, like I said before, you want female marines, then this is a valid reason why the Emperor would not want it, you don't like it, tough, you can't have your cake and eat it too.
You are using the word equivalent wrong here. Is T4 equalent to T3?
And for us to have space marines based on females you would need to change one thing. Have space marines be compatable with female starting bodies. To have space marines that are not only based on females but that can have babies you would need to change two things. You must be able to base space marines onf emale starting bodies. And reproductive orangs would have to survive becomming a space marine, and the genetic traits of the 13 extra organgs must be coded into the DNA blueprint of the host, and you must some how be able to give birth. And why would space marines be able to do that? They are geneticly enginered warriors, made for battle. It just seems odd you would try to change their purpose in the setting. It seems far less justefied and would requier a bigger detachment from the setting, the tagline is literarly 'there only war'.
In rethoric they would call the thing you do as building a straw man argument. You build a straw man that space marines build on females would mean a lot of pregnate space marines. That is a wrong way to present the argument. And you are presenting a false dilemma that either keep the space marines as is, or you will have pregnant space marines. That these are the only two options. I think that is a very dishonest way to argue.
Niiai wrote: You are using the word equivalent wrong here. Is T4 equalent to T3?
Similar. Similar is the operative word. Similar =/= the same. Sisters have a 6" move, a 3+ save, 3+ to hit in ranged, LD 7 and the same loadout; a boltgun. That makes them a MEQ, as Marines tend to share those stats and equipment as well. The sisters have several points of similarity with marines, which is why there's a strong case for classing them as a MEQ.
Lychguard are also considered MEQ. They have T5, LD10 and RP. Do marines have that? No. Some people refer to them as TEQ, but's a very loose classification, as they miss the 2+ save. They have 2 wounds like terminators, but so do Primaris, so I guess one could say that Lychguard are Primaris equivalents. Who are MEQ.
Immortals are considered MEQ as well. They have T4, but still LD10, a S5 AP-2 gun and RP. Do marines have that? Nope again, and marines move an inch faster too. If you really want to split hairs, Sisters are a cross between GEQ and MEQ. Which does make them somewhat unique. Still close enough though, especially once you consider their loadout.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Niiai wrote: They are not marines in culture, and they are T3, that is not equalant as marines. Sister of battles is not the same as marines.
Necrons are also not marines in culture. They are still considered MEQs.
Niiai wrote: Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting.
Wait, what?
Space Marines cannot be female it is clearly established in the setting.
You've just defeated your own argument. Either the established setting is important, or it isn't. Pick one.
You are also preseneting a straw man argument. Space marines can not reproduse in that way. They are grown and enginered, not bred in the traditional sence. Why would any of that change?
Niiai wrote: You are using the word equivalent wrong here. Is T4 equalent to T3?
And for us to have space marines based on females you would need to change one thing. Have space marines be compatable with female starting bodies. To have space marines that are not only based on females but that can have babies you would need to change two things. You must be able to base space marines onf emale starting bodies. And reproductive orangs would have to survive becomming a space marine, and the genetic traits of the 13 extra organgs must be coded into the DNA blueprint of the host, and you must some how be able to give birth. And why would space marines be able to do that? They are geneticly enginered warriors, made for battle. It just seems odd you would try to change their purpose in the setting. It seems far less justefied and would requier a bigger detachment from the setting, the tagline is literarly 'there only war'.
In rethoric they would call the thing you do as building a straw man argument. You build a straw man that space marines build on females would mean a lot of pregnate space marines. That is a wrong way to present the argument. And you are presenting a false dilemma that either keep the space marines as is, or you will have pregnant space marines. That these are the only two options. I think that is a very dishonest way to argue.
Yep Sisters a MEQ, as the above poster aptly showed.
Nope not a strawman, as you seem to be forgetting the massive elephant in the room, chaos, you introduce that into the mix and suddenly things like
"And reproductive orangs would have to survive becomming a space marine, and the genetic traits of the 13 extra organgs must be coded into the DNA blueprint of the host"
Stop mattering as much, Fabious was able to clone a primarch, which is a super advanced marine (kind of) with all the above organs naturally grown in the body, minus the gene seed, so again its highly unlikely, but possible to reproduce this method for marines, we also have Corax producing marines from children in a matter of weeks, so advanced growth can also be done.
So take say.... a well known master apothecary, dark mechanicum, and a lot of time to monkey with the Astartes process (hmmm sure this happened recently with Cawl), so nope, not a massive disconnect with the setting, infact its completely in line with the setting as it is today.
You call it a strawman, I call it drawing a logical conclusion, you see it boils down to this, if I were the Emperor, and I even thought it was slightly possible for marines to become self replicating, I wouldnt take the risk, you are the one articficially creating barriers here, claiming to be the keeper of the lore, that other peoples arguments are worthless, thing is, you cant do it with this argument, because it would be something that would attempted by Chaos marines at the very least, were they female, you are the one being dishonest here, especially as I have said several times that the story of how this could come about would be interesting.
Niiai wrote: Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting.
Wait, what?
Space Marines cannot be female it is clearly established in the setting.
You've just defeated your own argument. Either the established setting is important, or it isn't. Pick one.
You are also preseneting a straw man argument. Space marines can not reproduse in that way. They are grown and enginered, not bred in the traditional sence. Why would any of that change?
Nope he isnt mr goal post mover, answer his question.
Either the setting doesnt matter, or it does, pick one.
Also primarchs are grown, space marine clones are grown, Demonculaba space marines are grown and born with all the relevent organs, so you are wrong, flat wrong, super wrong, not all marines are engineered, chaos has shown they can be bred.
Niiai wrote: Again, just bacause so much is being said, even if we had the most glorius sisters of batle in en every store that is no reason not to have space marines based on females.
Why?
The main reason people are asking for Female Space Marines isn't because they're Space Marines specifically. It's because Space Marines are popular.
If SoB were as popular as SM, that reaches the goal set.
Spoiler:
There is a perfectly good reason why women can't be SM. That's the lore. As I personally see it, there is no reason to change it, because increasing exposure of the Sisters of Battle, without even having to change their lore, would achieve the same result - increased female exposure.
That is a really big if.
Really, it's not. They're exactly the same, because my opinions and desires will have no effect either way. You can say "If GW changed their lore" - that's also an If. Anything we suggest is an If because none of us are GW employees who could have any influence on this.
What is the timeline you predict for this? Ever since Space Marines have been established around rogue trader first- or secondedition space marines has been an instant hit. Some time ago GW celbrated their 30 year aniversary, that is near 30 years of Space Marines iconicness. Your big if, is not very realistic.
I didn't say it was reaslistic. I saud it was what I wanted. All this bleating about wanting female marines is unrealistic, because it probably won't amount to anything. Knowing GW, it'll fall on deaf ears, making it all useless. All we can said is what we'd like to happen - without any hope of it actually happening.
But yes, you mention Space Marines being an instant hit - why is that? What is it about Space Marines that make them more appealing than Guardsmen, Sisters, etc etc? Is it that they're overexposed and that's the first thing new people see? If people like Space Marines, then they shouldn't be changed. Change the Sisters to make them more appealing instead then.
Wheras spacae marines females GW would just need to point to the tactical squad and say 'Do you know that SM can be based on females as well as males?". No models would need to be changed, they are clad in power armour. No changes. Over times, ad some female heads as options for the helmetless squad leaderes.
But as some people have said, they want noticablely female parts on their Space Marines. And again - if they're going to look just like normal Marines, what's the point?
With female Space Marines, GW needs to change the lore. With Sisters, no lore needs changing - only new models. It's not hard. The ingredients to make Sisters more popular and diverse are there - they only need to be used.
What goal sett would that be? Female Space Marines? I want female space marines.
WHY.
Why specifically Space Marines.
The vast majority of people want Female Space Marines because the existing female army, Sisters, is unsupported. If that army were more supported, then I can assure that most of the female Space Marine advocates would be appeased.
At the end of the day, what's the difference between the Space Marines and Sisters?
Space Marines: Monogender Power armour Bolters Elite Fanatical devotion to the Imperium (not necessarily to the Emperor himself as a God) Superhuman biology
Sisters: Monogender Power armour Bolters Elite Fanatical devotion to the Imperium (via the Church, seeing the Emperor as divine) Holy powers
The ONLY difference I'm seeing is that the Sisters draw strength from their faith, instead of from superhuman biology. Seriously, the fundamentals of the factions are identical.
So what is it about Space Marines themselves, ignoring the popularity of the Astartes (because as I said, if popularity is the only reason, then we should instead be bolstering the Sisters popularity instead).
Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting.
The setting also says women can't be Space Marines.
You can't use the setting to say "you can't have X" and then ignore it to have Y. That's not how an argument works.
If you can say "Space Marines can't reproduce because of the setting", I have every right to say "Space Marines must be male because of the setting".
Formosa wrote: 3: who said sisters are female marines? sure they are a MEQ but thats about it.
Who says sisters are female marines? Well you do in the following sentence after you ask the question. Do you know what MEQ actualy stands for?
MEQ = Marines and Equivalents. Sisters, because they wear power armour and carry bolters, with a high BS and morale, classify as them, despite some differences.
Niiai wrote: Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting.
Wait, what?
Space Marines cannot be female it is clearly established in the setting.
You've just defeated your own argument. Either the established setting is important, or it isn't. Pick one.
You are also preseneting a straw man argument. Space marines can not reproduse in that way. They are grown and enginered, not bred in the traditional sence. Why would any of that change?
Do you even know what a straw man is?
You state that space marines cannot have children, as its clearly established in the setting. According to you, this cannot be changed. It is also clearly established in the setting that marines cannot be women. But you believe this can be changed.
That is a logical disconnect. If they can be written to be women, they can just as easily be written to support sexual reproduction.
Whilst I wouldn't mind having both, if I had to choose between having female Astartes and fully supported SoB, it would be no contest at all. SoB win hands down, they're one of the coolest factions in the setting.
I do like their aesthetic direction. Has a nice sort of militant baroque appeal, which makes sense thematically, considering how baroque art came about as a reaction to rise of Protestantism during the reformation and wars of religion.
Crimson wrote: Whilst I wouldn't mind having both, if I had to choose between having female Astartes and fully supported SoB, it would be no contest at all. SoB win hands down, they're one of the coolest factions in the setting.
Aside from the having both part, agreed.
Sisters are a whole faction with their own lore and nuances that could be expanded outwards to fill that "strong female soldiers" role that people have wanted from Female Space Marines.
Space Marines remain unchanged, pleasing the "remainers". Sisters get expanded and their own love, pleasing the "changers".
Crimson wrote: Whilst I wouldn't mind having both, if I had to choose between having female Astartes and fully supported SoB, it would be no contest at all. SoB win hands down, they're one of the coolest factions in the setting.
Totally agree, marines are boring to me now, sisters (regardless of the gender nonsense) are a lot more interesting, a new model line would mean new unit types too and that would also be cool.
Niiai wrote: Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting.
Wait, what?
Space Marines cannot be female it is clearly established in the setting.
You've just defeated your own argument. Either the established setting is important, or it isn't. Pick one.
You are also preseneting a straw man argument. Space marines can not reproduse in that way. They are grown and enginered, not bred in the traditional sence. Why would any of that change?
Do you even know what a straw man is?
You state that space marines cannot have children, as its clearly established in the setting. According to you, this cannot be changed.
It is also clearly established in the setting that marines cannot be women. But you believe this can be changed.
That is a logical disconnect. If they can be written to be women, they can just as easily be written to support sexual reproduction.
A strawman is when you present one persons position and argulent as something they are not actually saying, and then you follow up by arguing that possition.
The fact that females can be made into SM is established in the setting. The fact how SM are made is established in the setting. How is it changing the first premmis changes the second premmis? Because if you read the above posts that is what some people are saying. And then they attack the idea of SM being potensially based on females because of it. Is that not a textbook example of a strawman argument?
Niiai wrote: Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting.
Wait, what?
Space Marines cannot be female it is clearly established in the setting.
You've just defeated your own argument. Either the established setting is important, or it isn't. Pick one.
You are also preseneting a straw man argument. Space marines can not reproduse in that way. They are grown and enginered, not bred in the traditional sence. Why would any of that change?
Do you even know what a straw man is?
You state that space marines cannot have children, as its clearly established in the setting. According to you, this cannot be changed.
It is also clearly established in the setting that marines cannot be women. But you believe this can be changed.
That is a logical disconnect. If they can be written to be women, they can just as easily be written to support sexual reproduction.
A strawman is when you present one persons position and argulent as something they are not actually saying, and then you follow up by arguing that possition.
The fact that females can be made into SM is established in the setting. The fact how SM are made is established in the setting. How is it changing the first premmis changes the second premmis? Because if you read the above posts that is what some people are saying. And then they attack the idea of SM being potensially based on females because of it. Is that not a textbook example of a strawman argument?
It's because what you're doing is wanting to change one thing, which people want to stay the same due to the lore, and then when other people change something else, you use the lore to say it should also stay the same.
You're being hypocritical - either the lore is something that should stay the same or shouldn't.
The lore says that females can't be Space Marines. It also says they can't reproduce. Why should I accept one as sacrosanct and the other not?
Niiai wrote: Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting.
Wait, what?
Space Marines cannot be female it is clearly established in the setting.
You've just defeated your own argument. Either the established setting is important, or it isn't. Pick one.
You are also preseneting a straw man argument. Space marines can not reproduse in that way. They are grown and enginered, not bred in the traditional sence. Why would any of that change?
Do you even know what a straw man is?
You state that space marines cannot have children, as its clearly established in the setting. According to you, this cannot be changed. It is also clearly established in the setting that marines cannot be women. But you believe this can be changed.
That is a logical disconnect. If they can be written to be women, they can just as easily be written to support sexual reproduction.
A strawman is when you present one persons position and argulent as something they are not actually saying, and then you follow up by arguing that possition.
The fact that females can be made into SM is established in the setting.
No it isn't. That is something that you made up. The lore explicitly states that the process is designed to work on men. That is established in the setting. The idea that women can be made into space marines is not established in the background, and is your opinion that contradicts established fluff.
From lexicanum
Recruits must be fairly young, because implants often do not become fully functional if the recipient has reached a certain level of physical maturity. They must be male because the zygotes are keyed to male hormones and tissue types.
Which in turn is taken from page 16 of White Dwarf Issue 98, in an article about the creation of space marines, written by Rick Priestly, the man who designed the setting as we know it, and is described by Andy Chambers as being the original Emperor of the 40,000 universe
They are stil using the straw man argument though. The difference being I actually want to see space marines being based on females. And then right out of left field, right out of the blue, somebody jumps inn and starts arguing against a possition nobody has sugested at all. Why on earth are they brining up a possition nobody have talked about, nobody has sugested yet and they themselves do not want? Either they are being falacius or they are clearly missrepresenting the argument. They are muddeling the subject being discussed in order to seed confusion about the positions in the debate. What does the one have to do with the other, and why are they debating the one thing nobody has brought up? If you change one thing in the setting you are not automatically changing everything else, that is the straw man argument teqnicue.
Niiai wrote: [A strawman is when you present one persons position and argulent as something they are not actually saying, and then you follow up by arguing that possition.
The fact that females can be made into SM is established in the setting. The fact how SM are made is established in the setting. How is it changing the first premmis changes the second premmis? Because if you read the above posts that is what some people are saying. And then they attack the idea of SM being potensially based on females because of it. Is that not a textbook example of a strawman argument?
That isn't anywhere near to the argument I was making (ironically!)
I was highlighting the blatant hypocrisy of your position/thought process.
The marine baby argument is absurd. That is not automatic end result of having female Astartes, the fluff could be written so that this problem would not occur. These two things are really not related.
Crimson wrote: The marine baby argument is absurd. That is not automatic end result of having female Astartes, the fluff could be written so that this problem would not occur. These two things are really not related.
Agreed - the issue I have is that apparently "the lore says so" can be used as a reason for why marine babies can't be a thing, but can't be used to defend mono-gender marines.
Either the lore can be used as a defence or it can't.
Crimson wrote: The marine baby argument is absurd. That is not automatic end result of having female Astartes, the fluff could be written so that this problem would not occur. These two things are really not related.
Agreed - the issue I have is that apparently "the lore says so" can be used as a reason for why marine babies can't be a thing, but can't be used to defend mono-gender marines.
Either the lore can be used as a defence or it can't.
So from your perspective changing one thing in the lore means you are now changing anything else at the same time. You might as well say having females compatable with SM means the emperor is an actual dinosaur elephant hybrid. Nobody has sugested this change to the lore and arguing against it does not dent the SM based upon females, more then changing how SM are made dent the SM based upon female argument does.
Changing that the fictional zygotes is is keyed to humans instead of human males does not change how SM are made.
Reproductive organs do not survive the astrates process. You stil inplant 13 extarnal organgs into the subject. For this to happen you would also need to rewritte how DNA works in the setting becquse from that argument the human DNA now comes equipped with the blueprint of how and when to grow those organs. That is a huge change.
Crimson wrote: The marine baby argument is absurd. That is not automatic end result of having female Astartes, the fluff could be written so that this problem would not occur. These two things are really not related.
Agreed - the issue I have is that apparently "the lore says so" can be used as a reason for why marine babies can't be a thing, but can't be used to defend mono-gender marines.
Either the lore can be used as a defence or it can't.
So from you perspective changing one thing in the lore means you are now changing anything else at the same time. You might as well say haing female compatable with SM means the emperor is an actual dinosaur elephant hybrid. Nobody has sugested this change to the lore and arguing against it does not dent the SM based upon females more then changing how SM are made dent the SM based upon female argument does.
Now THAT'S a strawman. I haven't suggested Dinosaur Elephant Hybrids anywhere. Again - if you can't tell that two very closely linked aspects of Space Marine creation are different to Space Marine creation and what the Emperor is, I'm afraid I'm wasting my time on you.
Changing that the fictional zygotes is is keyed to humans instead of human males does not change how SM are made.
And changing the process so that reproductive organs are unharmed doesn't change how Space Marines are made either, right?
You can't change one important thing about a very specific subject and say that other similarly important things shouldn't be changed too without sounding like a hypocrite.
Reproductive organs do not survive the astrates process. You stil inplant 13 extarnal organgs into the subject. For this to happen you would also need to rewritte how DNA works in the setting becquse from that argument the human DNA now comes equipped with the blueprint of how and when to grow those organs. That is a huge change.
That same article states that all of those organs cannot be implanted into women. Stop making it out that one is more important than the other, or more "valid". Both are treated the same, so why should be one be more important than another.
So stop arguing against the straw man.
I'm not saying that changing one thing changes everything.
I'm saying that both points are about fundamentals of Space Marine biology - yet apparently one is set in stone, and the other isn't. Maybe because your own opinions are saying that one is less imprtant than the other. However, that's JUST your opinion.
Stop using buzzwords to defend hypocrisy.
I'd also note that you've not answered WHY specifically females must be in the form of Space Marines and not SoB, without mentioning Space Marine popularity.
Everyone does realise that "Female Space Marines" wouldn't actually be female, right?
By the time they'd be turned into Space Marines, they'd just be the sexless defenders of humanity. They wouldn't look female, likely being bald, breastless giants, they couldn't have kids, and their personalities would be brainwashed wrecks. [Ya know, like the rest of the space marines. CLENSE PURGE KILL] Space Marines are barely human, they're not particularly male either. They're generic stompy supersoliders.
What do you think would be particularly 'Female Representative', aside from a changed line in background fluff most people might not even bother to read on page 64 of Codex Ultra-Ultramarines?
I'm not sure going, 'This hulking killing marine was once a girl before we ripped her insides out in childhood, took away her ability to have children, brainwashed her, and surgically implanted a bunch of organs inside her', is really the pro-women approch we're looking for...
Is it?
Or are we saying the only way to represent women in 40k in a major way is to introduce themselves in a way in which they're unrecongiseably female and have to be surgically butchered to be any use?
Sisters of battle are just girls. They kick ass. In spite of being girls. They fight and win, or die, as normal human women. Sounds a lot more positive to me.
OK, so everybody on both sides of the argument seems to have misunderstood the point I was making about the Emperor making Astartes all-male as a way of stopping them replacing normal humans.
As things stand, the Astartes are completely dependent on regular humans to recruit from. They have to keep a large population of regular humans around in order for the Astartes themselves to continue to exist. You need both a regular human child and a set of geneseed to create a new Space Marine. But Astartes can only produce one of those two things independently. This is just as important culturally/philosophically as biologically/practically: all-male Astartes are emphatically not an independent species.
If Astartes could mate with each other and produce children, of course those children would still need geneseed implantation to become new Marines, but the Astartes would now have the capability to produce both 'components' of a new Marine themselves. There would be no need for any humans who are not either Astartes or the pre-implantation offspring of Astartes. At this point, regular humans are obsolete, on the way to being replaced by a new and superior species. This is what the Emperor sought to avoid.
AFAIK, the whole "Marines are sterile" thing has never been official fluff, merely a fan theory. The reason Marines don't have kids is that they don't get the opportunity. But even if they are sterile, if you introduce female Astartes, they may well start to feel like they are their own (superior) species rather than dutiful guardians of Humanity. Or at least so the Emperor presumably thought.
FWIW, while I am personally on the "keep Marines as they are but give female IG and SoB (and female non-Astartes Chaos worshippers) much more prominence in the fluff and artwork" side of the argument, I would also be absolutely fine with it if GW decided to introduce female Marines. Just as long as they do a better job of it than they did with the Primaris...
Crimson wrote: The marine baby argument is absurd. That is not automatic end result of having female Astartes, the fluff could be written so that this problem would not occur. These two things are really not related.
Agreed - the issue I have is that apparently "the lore says so" can be used as a reason for why marine babies can't be a thing, but can't be used to defend mono-gender marines.
Either the lore can be used as a defence or it can't.
So from your perspective changing one thing in the lore means you are now changing anything else at the same time. You might as well say having females compatable with SM means the emperor is an actual dinosaur elephant hybrid. Nobody has sugested this change to the lore and arguing against it does not dent the SM based upon females, more then changing how SM are made dent the SM based upon female argument does.
Changing that the fictional zygotes is is keyed to humans instead of human males does not change how SM are made.
Reproductive organs do not survive the astrates process. You stil inplant 13 extarnal organgs into the subject. For this to happen you would also need to rewritte how DNA works in the setting becquse from that argument the human DNA now comes equipped with the blueprint of how and when to grow those organs. That is a huge change.
Primarchs have full set of astartes organs bar the gene seed.
Demonculaba produces fully grown astartes with full set of organs, bar the skin.
Corax produced fully grown superior astartes in a manner of weeks, having tinkered with the primarch goo.
Fabulous bill has tinkered with astartes genetics with varied results, has created fully grown primarchs (ferus and Horus), created new organs from alien sources and bonded them to astartes.
Cawl tinkered with astartes genetics to produce primaris
But no, with all this tinkering you find it hard to believe that even the mere possibility of "marine babies" could happen, never mind that the fluff supports such a possibility, if you support female marines being made from the same lore stand point, then engineered pregnancy for natural marine births is also part of that, chaos marines would try it, possibly succeed too, since you know.... they have before.
Honestly, after multiple threadstorms on the subject, by now there's a pretty snarky part of me that thinks the majority of people who want female space marines just like the arguments it produces, rather than a burning need for it to be an inclusion in the fiction.
This subject certainly does seem to attract "passionate" advocates for both sides I'm not sure I'd count myself among those who want female marines, but I'm not against it. Over the many years that I've been a fan of 40k I don't think I've ever considered maleness to be a defining trait of the Astartes.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: If not, then more diverse Sisters can ABSOLUTELY be a thing.
Yeah, we could change the Sisters of Battle into a blank canvas faction, sure. Then you'd have two blank canvas to chose from every time. “Do I want the male blank canvas or the female blank canvas?”.
Or we could allows female space marines, and then people would just be “How do I fill the blank canvas that allows for all male factions, all female factions, or mixed factions, like a good blank canvas should”.
I like the second one better.
I would love Sisters to get a bit more diversity between orders, yeah, just like there is diversity between different craftworlds, klans, hive fleets, etc. But not to the point of being a blank state army.
Of course I think your solution is better than nothing but I still like mine more ^^.
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: Marines are a blank state. They have some Priest category that is going to be filled by whatever kind of Priest is relevant to the kind of marines you want to make. A "mongol golden horde" style chapter is going to have shamanistic priests, that can just as well be women.
Remember how Iron Hands replaced Chaplains with Iron Fathers, that are techmarines that focus on the Machine God?
Marines are a blank state army that is just there to receive some identity. For White Scars it's the Golden Horde Mongols. For Blood Angels it's Renaissance Italians Vampire Angels. For Dark Angels it's Paranoid Monks. For Iron Hands it's Machine Obsessed. All of those chapters will receive a kind of priest fitting to that theme. Only the Dark Angels have some thematic reason for being all male.
I can't wait until the Sisters get their own models so these types of posts can finally stop.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: If not, then more diverse Sisters can ABSOLUTELY be a thing.
Yeah, we could change the Sisters of Battle into a blank canvas faction, sure. Then you'd have two blank canvas to chose from every time. “Do I want the male blank canvas or the female blank canvas?”.
Or we could allows female space marines, and then people would just be “How do I fill the blank canvas that allows for all male factions, all female factions, or mixed factions, like a good blank canvas should”.
I like the second one better.
However, as far as the Imperium goes, that would be absolutely possible for this.
Space Marines - Male Blank Canvas
Sisters of Battle - Female Blank Canvas
Astra Militarum/Tempestus Scions/Custodes (because they REALLY should be mixed) - Mixed Blank Canvas
No faction's genders are retconned, only expanded upon (except Custodes, but their lore is more recent and less entrenched, a la Knights).
I would love Sisters to get a bit more diversity between orders, yeah, just like there is diversity between different craftworlds, klans, hive fleets, etc. But not to the point of being a blank state army.
Of course I think your solution is better than nothing but I still like mine more ^^.
That's fair enough. Again, I prefer my solution, but compromise is the only thing we can expect to get out of this.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: However, as far as the Imperium goes, that would be absolutely possible for this.
Space Marines - Male Blank Canvas
Sisters of Battle - Female Blank Canvas
Astra Militarum/Tempestus Scions/Custodes (because they REALLY should be mixed) - Mixed Blank Canvas
That seems like a whole lot of blank canvas, which makes me afraid that I didn't make myself clear about what I consider a blank canvas . It's more than “There are slight variation on the basic concept” like there are with CWE, it's really when it's some very open base used to create flavorful armies, but that's not that flavorful by itself.
That would lead to some severe saturation if we get multiple marines codex, multiple Sisters of Battle codex, and multiple Imperial Guard codex, no?
Also I really, really don't see the point in expanding the Custodes into yet another a blank canvas on top of it .
Sgt_Smudge wrote: However, as far as the Imperium goes, that would be absolutely possible for this.
Space Marines - Male Blank Canvas
Sisters of Battle - Female Blank Canvas
Astra Militarum/Tempestus Scions/Custodes (because they REALLY should be mixed) - Mixed Blank Canvas
That seems like a whole lot of blank canvas, which makes me afraid that I didn't make myself clear about what I consider a blank canvas . It's more than “There are slight variation on the basic concept” like there are with CWE, it's really when it's some very open base used to create flavorful armies, but that's not that flavorful by itself.
That would lead to some severe saturation if we get multiple marines codex, multiple Sisters of Battle codex, and multiple Imperial Guard codex, no?
Also I really, really don't see the point in expanding the Custodes into yet another a blank canvas on top of it .
That's assuming there is a need to have so many Codices. I'm all for consolidating the Angels chapters into the main codex for example.
AegisGrimm wrote: Honestly, after multiple threadstorms on the subject, by now there's a pretty snarky part of me that thinks the majority of people who want female space marines just like the arguments it produces, rather than a burning need for it to be an inclusion in the fiction.
this, immensely this. despite what my redacted post would lead a certain person to think
Sgt_Smudge wrote: If Cawl found a way to make Marines female, I'd accept that. Again, I won't go into whether it SHOULD be changed, but if that's how it was done, I could work with that.
Considering that the biological differences between men and women are miniscule compared to the biological differences between human and space marine, there's never been a good in-universe argument as to why space marines have to be men. When the end result is basically unrecognisable from the starting point would those relatively small biological differences actually matter? I mean, think about it, with our current medical knowledge and capabilities we can perform transplantation, we can harvest stem cells which can become pretty much any cell in the human body in the correct conditions, we can physically transition a biological man into a woman and vice versa (with only lack of reproductive capacity after transition as the real biological obstacle which, in the case of infertile post-transformation space marines, is not an issue).
AegisGrimm wrote: Honestly, after multiple threadstorms on the subject, by now there's a pretty snarky part of me that thinks the majority of people who want female space marines just like the arguments it produces, rather than a burning need for it to be an inclusion in the fiction.
As one who would like to see marines being able to be based on women, how am I to respond to this? Baisicly your argument is 'This standpoint is so far removed from my own world view or opinion that it can not be true.'. There is no defence against this where you can not simply say 'That just confirm's what I said.' Not to take into account how dishonest it is to say 'You are lying, so I am not gonne consider your argument'. That means you are projecting intent onto the othern person arguing, that is very arogant.
I realise this is the internett, but I stil expect better.
I am one of them that would like space marines being able to be based on females. In fact I would like to see more female models (inclduing space marines in particurlar.) I have TK and Nids, they are for the most part gender neutral (Tomb Kings even have the tomb queen model.) I have dark eldar and they are quite gender diverse with male heads in the wytches kits, and female heads in the cabal kits. I also have SW that I had in 5th edition. I have yet to find any good heads that look SW to me so I can do some head swaps on them. If I pick them up later again in 8th edition I might look into it, there are more 3rd party companies after the chapterhouse lawsuit.
That being said, I am converting up some female models. My green stuff skills are very bad, but in making some allies for my tyranids I wanted to have 2 primuses. That was a very good opertunaty to get some females. I am not greenstuffing 5 point models, but a kick ass character? Hell yeah.
Anyway, I do not know how to defend against "Everything you say is a lie." When you do not belive me because you know what I am thinking better then the words that I use to say I am thinking, the basis for having a conversation is pretty much gone.
Yeah I know. To upload the photo I need to post from the phone. And dakka on the phone gets some fits as the text lines go over the button you need to press to upload and post the post. Perhaps there is a dakka app that I do not know about? But editing them now would stil leave 2 emty posts with the signature in it si it does not take up less space.
And now we have 2 more posts about how much space the other posts take. ^_^
AegisGrimm wrote: Honestly, after multiple threadstorms on the subject, by now there's a pretty snarky part of me that thinks the majority of people who want female space marines just like the arguments it produces, rather than a burning need for it to be an inclusion in the fiction.
As one who would like to see marines being able to be based on women, how am I to respond to this? Baisicly your argument is 'This standpoint is so far removed from my own world view or opinion that it can not be true.'. There is no defence against this where you can not simply say 'That just confirm's what I said.' Not to take into account how dishonest it is to say 'You are lying, so I am not gonne consider your argument'. That means you are projecting intent onto the othern person arguing, that is very arogant.
I realise this is the internett, but I stil expect better.
I am one of them that would like space marines being able to be based on females. In fact I would like to see more female models (inclduing space marines in particurlar.) I have TK and Nids, they are for the most part gender neutral (Tomb Kings even have the tomb queen model.) I have dark eldar and they are quite gender diverse with male heads in the wytches kits, and female heads in the cabal kits. I also have SW that I had in 5th edition. I have yet to find any good heads that look SW to me so I can do some head swaps on them. If I pick them up later again in 8th edition I might look into it, there are more 3rd party companies after the chapterhouse lawsuit.
That being said, I am converting up some female models. My green stuff skills are very bad, but in making some allies for my tyranids I wanted to have 2 primuses. That was a very good opertunaty to get some females. I am not greenstuffing 5 point models, but a kick ass character? Hell yeah.
Your out of proportion, conjecture riven reply has proven his point quite well, all he was saying was that he didnt trust that some of the people wanting this, are being honest, and are just doing it to troll, then you come along and have this non sensical post.
You are the one projecting, injecting meaning and intent based on your emotional responses and you have displayed massive amounts of arrogance throughout this thread acting as "gatekeeper" of what is allowed in lore or not, what is "allowed" as a response to debunk your weak attempts to get others to conform to your beliefs and aims, at this point you really should just walk away.
I think we have had a quite good discussion. The theme has stil been relewant to the topic, as the topic was the aluding that SW might get female SM based on the Ashes of Prospero. We are 9 pages in. The tone of the post is very civil. Usualy these threads explode within 24 hours of creation and a moderator must shut it down. This has not happened and I think that is a great testament to all the people that have comented in this thread.
I who have no problems with space marines based upon females actually feel I have learned a lot from all the objections. There is a scientific/philesophical disepline (I have no idea what category it belongs to) called apologetics. This usually a collection of common explenations for or against something. My list of female space marine apolagetics has grown significantly. Hopefully the others in the thread are learning something as well.
Some apolagetics are better then others. For instance 'It is not currently in the setting' is the best argument against space marines based upon females. In my opponion it is not a good argument as we have seen several revisions of the setting form GW to the setting so far, but it is by far the strongest argument.
The argument space marines shall represent the male angels in paradise lost is a much weaker argument. First we do not know if it is based upon paradise lost. Secondly as someone pointed out, the angels in paradise lost are both female and male, sometimes even at the same time.
We have also learned that somebody has problems to seperate the idea that space marines can be based upon females, and the fact that space marines can not make babies. I am learning so much in this thread, and it tells me so much of the sosioculture background of my fellow players. Some studies in psycology point to peoole asume fellow players share the same opinion that they hold. Clearly this is not the case here.
I do not claim to be the gate keeper. But when I see an argument that i do not think hold water like to engage with it to see if I am just wrong about it. When they claim their argument is good they are doing the same.
I will admitt to being very vocal in the thread. But there are others chiming in as well, on both sides of the argument. I do not think I will persuade anybody to my side, as others know they will not sway someone to their side. We are all our own gatekepers for our own opinions, are we not?
If I have turned into Grahams Starks alter ego I must deeply apolegise. But you can keep your male SM while I have my female SM.
And speaking of gatekeepering, it sure looks a lot like one side is saying 'We want space marines that can be based upon females.' and the other side says 'That is impossible!'.
Niiai wrote: I think we have had a quite good discussion. The theme has stil been relewant to the topic, as the topic was the aluding that SW might get female SM based on the Ashes of Prospero. We are 9 pages in. The tone of the post is very civil. Usualy these threads explode within 24 hours of creation and a moderator must shut it down. This has not happened and I think that is a great testament to all the people that have comented in this thread.
I who have no problems with space marines based upon females actually feel I have learned a lot from all the objections. There is a scientific/philesophical disepline (I have no idea what category it belongs to) called apologetics. This usually a collection of common explenations for or against something. My list of female space marine apolagetics has grown significantly. Hopefully the others in the thread are learning something as well.
1: Some apolagetics are better then others. For instance 'It is not currently in the setting' is the best argument against space marines based upon females. In my opponion it is not a good argument as we have seen several revisions of the setting form GW to the setting so far, but it is by far the strongest argument.
2: The argument space marines shall represent the male angels in paradise lost is a much weaker argument. First we do not know if it is based upon paradise lost. Secondly as someone pointed out, the angels in paradise lost are both female and male, sometimes even at the same time.
3: We have also learned that somebody has problems to seperate the idea that space marines can be based upon females, and the fact that space marines can not make babies. I am learning so much in this thread, and it tells me so much of the sosioculture background of my fellow players. Some studies in psycology point to peoole asume fellow players share the same opinion that they hold. Clearly this is not the case here.
4: I do not claim to be the gate keeper. But when I see an argument that i do not think hold water like to engage with it to see if I am just wrong about it. When they claim their argument is good they are doing the same.
5: I will admitt to being very vocal in the thread. But there are others chiming in as well, on both sides of the argument. I do not think I will persuade anybody to my side, as others know they will not sway someone to their side. We are all our own gatekepers for our own opinions, are we not?
If I have turned into Grahams Starks alter ego I must deeply apolegise. But you can keep your male SM while I have my female SM.
1: this was debunked almost instantly and you still havent given a reasonable response to if you can change X, then why cant you change Y, space marines cannot be woman, why should that be changed?
2: I have no opinion on this.
3: Wrong, you have in this such a massive hole in your argument that you refuse to accept it, if you change the lore to allow female marines, then you must take into account that the in universe forces would try to take advantage of this, I have given you several in universe examples of how this would occur, and an example of it occuring before, the rest of your comment is pure distraction and more weak attempts to detract your opponents in the discussion, this is nothing to do with psychology or any of that other crap you have posted, answer the question or admit you are wrong and concede that this is a valid factor (in universe) of why the Big E wouldnt want female marines.
4: you are still acting at the gatekeeper and have in this very post, shocker that you clearly dont see your own bias
5: no issues with you being very vocal, as usual with these discussions I have a problem with you and your kind being so dimissive of others, condecending and hypocritical and not even having the where with all to see your doing it
and lastly, if you want your female marines, crack on, make them, but stop trying to force it on us.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
The answer to "why?" and "what's the point?" is because people would like it. What other reason do you need?
Would it actually impair anybody's enjoyment of the game or fluff if Space Marines weren't all originally men before undergoing operations and gene therapy which makes them so far removed from a human that the biological differences between male and female humans are minuscule in comparison?
Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
The answer to "why?" and "what's the point?" is because people would like it. What other reason do you need?
Would it actually impair anybody's enjoyment of the game or fluff if Space Marines weren't all originally men before undergoing operations and gene therapy which makes them so far removed from a human that the biological differences between male and female humans are minuscule in comparison?
I'm sure people would like it if necrons had T10 and shot mini black holes. That doesn't mean everyone will.
Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
The answer to "why?" and "what's the point?" is because people would like it. What other reason do you need?
Would it actually impair anybody's enjoyment of the game or fluff if Space Marines weren't all originally men before undergoing operations and gene therapy which makes them so far removed from a human that the biological differences between male and female humans are minuscule in comparison?
I'm sure people would like it if necrons had T10 and shot mini black holes. That doesn't mean everyone will.
I would like to point out that game balance is a very strong argument against this.
While not black holes per say, eldar have the D\distoriio weapons that causes an area of the material universe to momentarily collapse in on itself, essentially creating a miniature warp hole. I do not know how a black hole gun would function, but you would need to create such a big pull of gravety that it puls everything within the event horizon into itself. I do not know if a regular planet has enough mass to consentrate into colapsing into a black hole, so this proposed would need to insert a great amount of mass into a small enough space that it could happen. Anyway, some point during 6th or 7th edition eldard did have instant death weapons on their distortion cannoin wraight knights and it was very unbalanved. In apocalypse this would not be a problem.
One could argue that the celestial oreey that the necrons have is a black whole weapon as it can cause starts to colapse in on itself. Many people have a problem with this in the setting. But a model on the table with this? Yes, I hereby declare and gatekeep that game balance would be a good argument against this. Unless it is a special senario where you try to keep it from fiering, then it could be a cool senario.
Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
The answer to "why?" and "what's the point?" is because people would like it. What other reason do you need?
Would it actually impair anybody's enjoyment of the game or fluff if Space Marines weren't all originally men before undergoing operations and gene therapy which makes them so far removed from a human that the biological differences between male and female humans are minuscule in comparison?
I'm sure people would like it if necrons had T10 and shot mini black holes. That doesn't mean everyone will.
That is game mechanics, which is a completely different argument. Any army being overpowered impacts peoples enjoyment of the game. The possibility of Space Marines being made from women does not as people who dislike the idea can just make their army be all men from a planet where women are not allowed to be soldiers.
The idea that women could be space marines but weren't until now wouldn't even be that ridiculous. How much of the Imperium functions under the idea of "We did it this way in the past so we're going to keep doing it this way forever"? The Emperor could have been an idiot (judging from his actions, he was) and thought women wouldn't make as effective fighters due to his own arrogance (if his soldiers weren't made male in his image it would hurt his ego). So he doesn't use them. Then the people after him don't use them as they are copying him and assume that there must be a reason to not do so and so on and so forth. The Imperium cutting its own potential supply of bodies for Space Marines in half due to unquestioningly following the procedures of the past would be incredibly fitting in the universe.
Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
The answer to "why?" and "what's the point?" is because people would like it. What other reason do you need?
Would it actually impair anybody's enjoyment of the game or fluff if Space Marines weren't all originally men before undergoing operations and gene therapy which makes them so far removed from a human that the biological differences between male and female humans are minuscule in comparison?
But that last part, where you mention that the distinction between the two would render typical male/female traits irrevelant, basically explains why people don't want female space marines. It adds nothing if they effectively become androgynous males and you have to go through the trouble of retconning a large swathe of the lore back in 30k and even up to 40k. It's fine if you personally want to head-canon it, that's no problem. But it becomes an issue when you want to project that need to the entire setting just because you feel like its necessary, when it really isn't.
People should really be asking, why do we need female space marines? If Sisters of Battle and Sisters of Silence aren't enough representation, then why not through multi-sex armies as previously mentioned? This isn't a comic book world where we need to genderbend every major hero/faction in some way. Also, at the end of the day, 40K really shouldn't have to pander to any specific group anyways, there's always other universes/games that you can go for that scratches that itch you're looking for.
Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
The answer to "why?" and "what's the point?" is because people would like it. What other reason do you need?
Would it actually impair anybody's enjoyment of the game or fluff if Space Marines weren't all originally men before undergoing operations and gene therapy which makes them so far removed from a human that the biological differences between male and female humans are minuscule in comparison?
Sooo what you are saying is "because I want it".... no, post up any supporting evidence that a meaningful amount of people would justify the major change, either way Still not seeing any valid reason to change the fluff to suit their demands rather than them playing one of the many other alternatives that are available like sisters of battle or sisters of silence, both of which are MEQ armies.
Would it impair our enjoyment of the fluff, well that really does depend on how they are implemented, because this is how I see the female marine crowds expectations.
As previusly stated though I have not seen a sisters of battle since I played soulstorm back in 2008. I do not think I have seen an actuial sister of battle model IRL. They are not very prevelant on the tabletopp even if they are in the setting.
Speaking on how they would look. I think this example by chuckachu in 2012 is a great example. He excuses his painting skills, but you get the general idea.
Niiai wrote: As previusly stated though I have not seen a sisters of battle since I played soulstorm back in 2008. I do not think I have seen an actuial sister of battle model IRL. They are not very prevelant on the tabletopp even if they are in the setting.
Which means GW should focus more on existing factions like SoB that aren't seen as often due to the high entry rate compared to other armies and limited accessibility. Don't take that as lack of interest though, as Canoness Veridyan sold like hot cakes from what I heard. And as you can tell from this forum, there are plenty of people who would take the plunge if they were properly revamped and supported.
It still doesn't justify changing a significant part of the setting and a faction simply to get more representation.
Niiai wrote: As previusly stated though I have not seen a sisters of battle since I played soulstorm back in 2008. I do not think I have seen an actuial sister of battle model IRL. They are not very prevelant on the tabletopp even if they are in the setting.
Which means GW should focus more on existing factions like SoB that aren't seen as often due to the high entry rate compared to other armies and limited accessibility. Don't take that as lack of interest though, as Canoness Veridyan sold like hot cakes from what I heard. And as you can tell from this forum, there are plenty of people who would take the plunge if they were properly revamped and supported.
It still doesn't justify changing a significant part of the setting and a faction simply to get more representation.
Exactly, why change an existing faction in a major way to suit a tiny tiny minority, when you can just revamp and existing one that fills a similar role.... it makes no sense
Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
The answer to "why?" and "what's the point?" is because people would like it. What other reason do you need?
Would it actually impair anybody's enjoyment of the game or fluff if Space Marines weren't all originally men before undergoing operations and gene therapy which makes them so far removed from a human that the biological differences between male and female humans are minuscule in comparison?
I'm sure people would like it if necrons had T10 and shot mini black holes. That doesn't mean everyone will.
That is game mechanics, which is a completely different argument. Any army being overpowered impacts peoples enjoyment of the game. The possibility of Space Marines being made from women does not as people who dislike the idea can just make their army be all men from a planet where women are not allowed to be soldiers.
Alright, here's a fluff example - the 5th ed necron codex. Which gave necrons personalities and changed how C'tan worked, something that some people wanted. That change in the fluff also impacted people's enjoyment of the game, as many necron players were unhappy with the changes to the C'tan, the changes to necron lord's personality and the changes from the overall atmosphere, going more from horror and more towards grumpy old men in space with access to pokemon. Whilst it didn't effect the army mechanically, it still had an effect that many necron players felt unsatisfied with, and you still see today necron players talking about how aspects of the old fluff were better.
Niiai wrote: As previusly stated though I have not seen a sisters of battle since I played soulstorm back in 2008. I do not think I have seen an actuial sister of battle model IRL. They are not very prevelant on the tabletopp even if they are in the setting.
Which means GW should focus more on existing factions like SoB that aren't seen as often due to the high entry rate compared to other armies and limited accessibility. Don't take that as lack of interest though, as Canoness Veridyan sold like hot cakes from what I heard. And as you can tell from this forum, there are plenty of people who would take the plunge if they were properly revamped and supported.
It still doesn't justify changing a significant part of the setting and a faction simply to get more representation.
Exactly, why change an existing faction in a major way to suit a tiny tiny minority, when you can just revamp and existing one that fills a similar role.... it makes no sense
A tiny minoraty? If you buy the representation argument (and I do not say that you should, or that it is a good argument, I am not touching that even with a 11 feet pole (because sometimes 10 feet is not long enough)) but if you buy the representation argument sales would increase, not decrease, even if you account for the people who would stop buying because some of their SM could happen to have been based upon a female underneath that power armour.
But I can not flaw GW for not pushing sisters more if they do not bring in the money. If they do not sell that makes not sence for the company. I am not saying that is the case, they might sell like hot cakes, but I am not flaunting GW for giving people something that does not sell.
Chutulus Spy I agree with you on the necron, the change was very badly implemented. I do think necrons needed a change though, because they where very difficult to write fluff on, they where mostly blank slates, and had many of the problems that tyranids had when it cames to writing. So while I liked that they did a chaange, I was not very happy with the change they made. That does not mean it was not a good idea to atemt the change.
Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
The answer to "why?" and "what's the point?" is because people would like it. What other reason do you need?
Would it actually impair anybody's enjoyment of the game or fluff if Space Marines weren't all originally men before undergoing operations and gene therapy which makes them so far removed from a human that the biological differences between male and female humans are minuscule in comparison?
I'm sure people would like it if necrons had T10 and shot mini black holes. That doesn't mean everyone will.
That is game mechanics, which is a completely different argument. Any army being overpowered impacts peoples enjoyment of the game. The possibility of Space Marines being made from women does not as people who dislike the idea can just make their army be all men from a planet where women are not allowed to be soldiers.
Alright, here's a fluff example - the 5th ed necron codex. Which gave necrons personalities and changed how C'tan worked, something that some people wanted. That change in the fluff also impacted people's enjoyment of the game, as many necron players were unhappy with the changes to the C'tan, the changes to necron lord's personality and the changes from the overall atmosphere, going more from horror and more towards grumpy old men in space with access to pokemon.
Whilst it didn't effect the army mechanically, it still had an effect that many necron players felt unsatisfied with, and you still see today necron players talking about how aspects of the old fluff were better.
But this wouldn't be such a drastic change. Finding out the Imperium is stupid and ignorant isn't news, it's the status quo. Necrons gaining personalities and doing a complete 180 degree turn in their relationship with the C'tan was not.
Oh and the other side is asking "why" and "whats the point" more than "thats impossible" while your side is saying "cos I want it and you should too" without giving a valid reason.
The answer to "why?" and "what's the point?" is because people would like it. What other reason do you need?
Would it actually impair anybody's enjoyment of the game or fluff if Space Marines weren't all originally men before undergoing operations and gene therapy which makes them so far removed from a human that the biological differences between male and female humans are minuscule in comparison?
I'm sure people would like it if necrons had T10 and shot mini black holes. That doesn't mean everyone will.
That is game mechanics, which is a completely different argument. Any army being overpowered impacts peoples enjoyment of the game. The possibility of Space Marines being made from women does not as people who dislike the idea can just make their army be all men from a planet where women are not allowed to be soldiers.
Alright, here's a fluff example - the 5th ed necron codex. Which gave necrons personalities and changed how C'tan worked, something that some people wanted. That change in the fluff also impacted people's enjoyment of the game, as many necron players were unhappy with the changes to the C'tan, the changes to necron lord's personality and the changes from the overall atmosphere, going more from horror and more towards grumpy old men in space with access to pokemon.
Whilst it didn't effect the army mechanically, it still had an effect that many necron players felt unsatisfied with, and you still see today necron players talking about how aspects of the old fluff were better.
But this wouldn't be such a drastic change. Finding out the Imperium is stupid and ignorant isn't news, it's the status quo. Necrons gaining personalities and doing a complete 180 degree turn in their relationship with the C'tan was not.
It kind of is though, because the army's designer explicitly stated that women cannot be marines, as the geneseed is designed to work with male hormones and tissue.
If the creator of the army himself said it, and it has been that way since the marines as we know were designed, then wouldn't that constitute a drastic change?
It is a very drastic change if it would mean SM end up females and start making small space marine babies. Somebody have a a problem keeping that and space marines based on females seperate.
Niiai wrote: A tiny majoraty? If you buy the representation argument (and I do not say that you should, or that it is a good argument, I am not touching that even with a 11 feet pole (because sometimes 10 feet is not long enough)) but if you buy the representation argument sales would increase, not decrease, even if you account for the people who would stop buying because some of their SM could happen to have been based upon a female underneath that power armour.
But I can not flaw GW for not pushing sisters more if they do not bring in the money. If they do not sell that makes not sence for the company. I am not saying that is the case, they might sell like hot cakes, but I am not flaunting GW for giving people something that does not sell.
Why would you assume that representation would increase sales? There are already female players that buy Space Marines, presumably because they like them as is. Why does representing who you are as a person in 40k matter? Are you a Catholic Space Nazi hell bent on purging the Universe of people that don't share your beliefs? Are you a crazed worshiper of Ancient and very real deities who rapes, murders, plots and spreads disease. Are you an 8 foot tall genetically enhanced killing maching? How about an evolved Genderless Fungus that lives only for war? Or part of a hive mind hell bent on eating everything? Ancient Machine, the vast majority of them not identifying as male or female, hell bent on killing everything or enslaving it?
I dont identify as any of them, I simply chose the armies I have because I like how they look, or are portrayed in the lore. I cant speak for everyone, nor will I, but the vast majority of people I have met seem to pick the armies they do because they look cool, not because they identify with them.
It kind of is though, because the army's designer explicitly stated that women cannot be marines, as the geneseed is designed to work with male hormones and tissue. If the creator of the army himself said it, and it has been that way since the marines as we know were designed, then wouldn't that constitute a drastic change?
But such reasons don't actually hold up to even our medical knowledge. Tissue type is not different between men and women, it is different between literally everybody. Even your own mother and father don't have the same tissue type as you. If tissue type was an actual issue, there would be no Space Marines as you would never find a close match to the Primarchs whose genetics the chapters are based on due to them being entirely made in a lab with input from chaos gods.
As for hormones, apparently the Imperium hasn't heard of hormone therapy.
And, changing it from "These are specific reasons which are obviously wrong based on biology" to "these are what the Imperium assumed the reasons were and never actually questioned because blindly following the incomplete instructions from 10 thousand years ago is what the Imperium does" isn't that drastic. It just serves to highlight the idiocy, ignorance and wastefulness of the Imperium, which are core themes of the setting.
It kind of is though, because the army's designer explicitly stated that women cannot be marines, as the geneseed is designed to work with male hormones and tissue.
If the creator of the army himself said it, and it has been that way since the marines as we know were designed, then wouldn't that constitute a drastic change?
But such reasons don't actually hold up to even our medical knowledge. Tissue type is not different between men and women, it is different between literally everybody. Even your own mother and father don't have the same tissue type as you. If tissue type was an actual issue, there would be no Space Marines as you would never find a close match to the Primarchs whose genetics the chapters are based on due to them being entirely made in a lab with input from chaos gods.
As for hormones, apparently the Imperium hasn't heard of hormone therapy.
And, changing it from "These are specific reasons which are obviously wrong based on biology" to "these are what the Imperium assumed the reasons were and never actually questioned because blindly following the incomplete instructions from 10 thousand years ago is what the Imperium does" isn't that drastic. It just serves to highlight the idiocy, ignorance and wastefulness of the Imperium, which are core themes of the setting.
Fair enough. You do realize though that as per your argument, women still would not be made into space marines, as that would contradict such themes?
Niiai wrote: ISome apolagetics are better then others. For instance 'It is not currently in the setting' is the best argument against space marines based upon females. In my opponion it is not a good argument as we have seen several revisions of the setting form GW to the setting so far, but it is by far the strongest argument.
It was also YOUR argument when other issues were brought up!
Niiai wrote: ISome apolagetics are better then others. For instance 'It is not currently in the setting' is the best argument against space marines based upon females. In my opponion it is not a good argument as we have seen several revisions of the setting form GW to the setting so far, but it is by far the strongest argument.
It was also YOUR argument when other issues were brought up!
What do you mean? Can you explain what you are refering to a bit more?
Niiai wrote: ISome apolagetics are better then others. For instance 'It is not currently in the setting' is the best argument against space marines based upon females. In my opponion it is not a good argument as we have seen several revisions of the setting form GW to the setting so far, but it is by far the strongest argument.
It was also YOUR argument when other issues were brought up!
What do you mean? Can you explain what you are refering to a bit more?
I already did a couple of pages back (you erroneously dismissed it as a strawman, remember?)
When people started talking about Space Marines reproducing, you literally said that that couldn't happen because the setting has established it as impossible - which presumably you regard as a good argument, otherwise why make it(?).
Meanwhile, the setting has also established that female Marines are impossible - which you claim is not a good argument. Hmm...
Niiai wrote: ISome apolagetics are better then others. For instance 'It is not currently in the setting' is the best argument against space marines based upon females. In my opponion it is not a good argument as we have seen several revisions of the setting form GW to the setting so far, but it is by far the strongest argument.
It was also YOUR argument when other issues were brought up!
What do you mean? Can you explain what you are refering to a bit more?
I already did a couple of pages back (you erroneously dismissed it as a strawman, remember?)
When people started talking about Space Marines reproducing, you literally said that that couldn't happen because the setting has established it as impossible - which presumably you regard as a good argument, otherwise why make it(?).
Meanwhile, the setting has also established that female Marines are impossible - which you claim is not a good argument. Hmm...
He has been dodging that question for a few pages now lol, sad thing is I am not actually against female marines per say, if they must come, then it needs to come with the whole package, the fluff has shown that some really really horrible things happen when you involve chaos in the mix and has also shown that they are more than willing to monkey with genetics to get what they want aaaaand has also shown that fully grown marines with all the organs needed can be produced from females, all be it in a totally horrific way, but he ignores that, because it does not fit his personal narrative of how things should work in spite of wanting to break one part of the fluff to make it work, he wants his cake and to eat it too.
Could we clarify if those people who are so utterly insistant of GW changing the lore of my Grimdark setting to be more representative, will be happy with just "Female Space Marines" In the lore, or if their insistance also translates into plastic?
Niiai wrote: ISome apolagetics are better then others. For instance 'It is not currently in the setting' is the best argument against space marines based upon females. In my opponion it is not a good argument as we have seen several revisions of the setting form GW to the setting so far, but it is by far the strongest argument.
It was also YOUR argument when other issues were brought up!
What do you mean? Can you explain what you are refering to a bit more?
I already did a couple of pages back (you erroneously dismissed it as a strawman, remember?)
When people started talking about Space Marines reproducing, you literally said that that couldn't happen because the setting has established it as impossible - which presumably you regard as a good argument, otherwise why make it(?).
Meanwhile, the setting has also established that female Marines are impossible - which you claim is not a good argument. Hmm...
Aha. You are refering to my argument that I do not think it is a strong argument. I was confused to what you where refring to.
Yeah, I am not convinced by that argument as good. It can be changed. It would be a minor changen (in my opinion.) You could retcon the entier thing outside of the setting, retcon it in the setting like A Town Caled Malus have given a good example of, or you could just change the setting from this point on that Sgt_Smudge sugests on page 1. All of these could work. (Se how GW has inserted new tyranid monsters into the codex each edition without anybody batting an eyelid. And they do it retroactivly, so it is not explained in setting, it just happens. Or they make a big change, like with Necrons.)
The straw man I was refering to was that I say
'I do not see how it would be a problem with space marines being female. We all know marines can not make children anyway, they are made into space marines with a genseed.'
And then somebody refutes that argument by saying
'No I do not like this, there would be pregnent marines all over the place, you could just birth new marines'.
The counter argument in that case missrepresent what I am saying, and then defend against something I did no not say. That is what a straw man argument is, because you build a false version of my argument (the straw man) and then you attack an argument that is not actualy being presented. I hope that clear things up for you.
He has been dodging that question for a few pages now lol,
What is it I am dodging? Please ask and I will awnser. (The only thing I am dodging is the question of representation because that is a sure way to get this thread locked and I refuse to go down that road. I think this thread is quite constructive so far.)
'I do not see how it would be a problem with space marines being female. We all know marines can not make children anyway, they are made into space marines with a genseed.'
That can also be refuted with the same argument that you've been using for why there should be female marines. Just saying "X is already established in the lore." is something you've been saying isn't a good enough answer.
Yeah. But why would you need to make that change? As I said earlier why would you change the emperor into a dinosaur elephant (page 4 I think.)
If you find a good reason to change the setting, it follows that you change as little as possible, enough to furfill the justefication of changing the setting.
For instance you will notice that all the times they have made small changes (tyranids small changes each edition) or big changes (necrons 5th editoin) they have only changed what actually needed changing. At no point did they cram in things that did not have anything to do with the justification for the change. They did not, say, incert flying pegasuses in rainbow colours into the setting.
This is much the same way when you allow space marines to be based on females, you can stop the change there, You do not need to include the sentence "[..., and now they can get pregnent." Even if you include that sentence you would need to include the sentence. "And not only can they get pregnent, they birth new space marines when they do."
If I understand Fomosa correctly, he acused me of not adressing this. If that is the case, I have adressed this before. Why include that part? Space Marines being based upon females would need to only change that. Nothing else.
To get the changes Formosa suggests you would also need to change this:
- Space Marines can now make babies.
- Even though Space Marines have human DNA, when you insert the 13 external organs, you rewrite the DNA so that babies made from female space marines are also space marines.
- Chaos did in some way consieve of a way to mass produce babie space marines. Because of this, we now have many chaos space marines.
I would say that you can implement my sugested change, withouth including the 3 above changes.
But just to be clear, you do understand the argument that you can change something in the setting, withouth having to change something else right? Or does that not come over as a clear consept?
Niiai wrote: Yeah. But why would you need to make that change?
And hence we've come full circle with the over all topic.
But my innitial question was why can you not have space marines based on females. And if the awnser is 'Because it is in the setting' and that is the only reason, GW can just change it if they want to. I find the given reson quite bad.
Niiai wrote: Yeah. But why would you need to make that change?
And hence we've come full circle with the over all topic.
But my innitial question was why can you not have space marines based on females. And if the awnser is 'Because it is in the setting' and that is the only reason, GW can just change it if they want to.
And your argument for why couldn't male and female marines breed boils down to that very same defense.
Niiai wrote: Yeah. But why would you need to make that change?
And hence we've come full circle with the over all topic.
But my innitial question was why can you not have space marines based on females. And if the awnser is 'Because it is in the setting' and that is the only reason, GW can just change it if they want to.
And your argument for why couldn't male and female marines breed boils down to that very same defense.
No it does not. You would have to change three things.
- Can females be made into space marines?
- Can space marines make babies now?
- Are space marines altered in such a way that babies they make themselves turn into space marines withouth the use or organs?
As far as I can tell through this 11 page thread nobody would like change number 2 and 3. I, and some others in this thread, would like to see number 1 change. Number 2 and 3 are uncalled for.
Niiai wrote: Yeah. But why would you need to make that change?
And hence we've come full circle with the over all topic.
But my innitial question was why can you not have space marines based on females. And if the awnser is 'Because it is in the setting' and that is the only reason, GW can just change it if they want to.
And your argument for why couldn't male and female marines breed boils down to that very same defense.
No it does not. You would have to change three things.
- Can females be made into space marines?
- Can space marines make babies now?
- Are space marines altered in such a way that babies they make themselves turn into space marines withouth the use or organs?
As far as I can tell through this 11 page thread nobody would like change number 2 and 3. I, and some others in this thread, would like to see number 1 change. Number 2 and 3 are uncalled for.
It still boils down to the same argument you are giving. Why not? Because the lore says so! Too bad, not good enough.
Alpharius wrote: Is this a thread on "female Space Marines", and is it in the 40K Background section?
It is the thread do Ashes of Prospero alude to space marines buing build from females, and if so, will it become a thing in the future? There are rather few SW left out there after the 1000 Sons incurison into the sector,
Niiai wrote: Yeah. But why would you need to make that change? As I said earlier why would you change the emperor into a dinosaur elephant (page 4 I think.)
If you find a good reason to change the setting, it follows that you change as little as possible, enough to furfill the justefication of changing the setting.
For instance you will notice that all the times they have made small changes (tyranids small changes each edition) or big changes (necrons 5th editoin) they have only changed what actually needed changing. At no point did they cram in things that did not have anything to do with the justification for the change. They did not, say, incert flying pegasuses in rainbow colours into the setting.
This is much the same way when you allow space marines to be based on females, you can stop the change there, You do not need to include the sentence "[..., and now they can get pregnent." Even if you include that sentence you would need to include the sentence. "And not only can they get pregnent, they birth new space marines when they do."
If I understand Fomosa correctly, he acused me of not adressing this. If that is the case, I have adressed this before. Why include that part? Space Marines being based upon females would need to only change that. Nothing else.
To get the changes Formosa suggests you would also need to change this:
- Space Marines can now make babies.
- Even though Space Marines have human DNA, when you insert the 13 external organs, you rewrite the DNA so that babies made from female space marines are also space marines.
- Chaos did in some way consieve of a way to mass produce babie space marines. Because of this, we now have many chaos space marines.
I would say that you can implement my sugested change, withouth including the 3 above changes.
If you want an in game excuse for mass producing chaos SM it would not be difficuly. You can in fact do this withouth retconning the setting. Just make a deal with some demons to have an calm part of the warp where time moves slow (or in reverse, we know the warp acidentaly causes time travel.) Now get a space ship with a gellar field and make a lot of babies on that ship. Now implant those babies with geneseeds, and harvest them. Now you have twice the amount of geneseeds. Just repeat it again. All until you feel you have a good amount of geneseeds and now implant them in actual SM candidates. And vòla, you have a conveluded way to mass produse chaos space marines in game. Just like you are justefying some massive conveluted plot to produce space marines, even if you implement the sugested change I was making.
But just to be clear, you do understand the argument that you can change something in the setting, withouth having to change something else right? Or does that not come over as a clear consept?
Wrong again, to implement your changes you need to consider the implications of said change, and one of those implications is the self replicating marines, something the fluff supports as not only a possibility, but has actually happened before, you see chaos marines have a hell of a time finding humans that can take the gene seed, so a way around this was forcing gene seed into woman, adding a dash of warp nastiness to grow them to a montrous size, then implanting a child into the woman (so so nasty), the result was a fully grown astartes with all the organs but lacking skin, thankfully the Demonculaba were destroyed.
Next you have Fabulous bill who would muck with the genetics to make the female marines fertile, the result is up for debate sure, but its still a possibility.
Then you have Cawl who mucked with astartes genetics to make primaris.
So the lore supports that an attempt would be made to produce marines that can reproduce, males doing it would still require woman that could carry the baby to term, given the nature of marines it can be assumed that this would kill a normal human woman, a female marine though, thats a different story all together, all it would take is time to have the fetus grow with marine organs as part of its genetic makeup, which we also know is possible, since the primarchs have the full suit of marine organs (minus gene seed) and grew naturally (albeit at a faster rate), and the aformentioned demonculaba.
We understand that you can change one thing without changing anything else, you seem to lack the ability to see the bigger picture though, the ramifications of such a change to the setting.
Niiai wrote: Yeah. But why would you need to make that change?
And hence we've come full circle with the over all topic.
But my innitial question was why can you not have space marines based on females. And if the awnser is 'Because it is in the setting' and that is the only reason, GW can just change it if they want to.
And your argument for why couldn't male and female marines breed boils down to that very same defense.
No it does not. You would have to change three things.
- Can females be made into space marines?
- Can space marines make babies now?
- Are space marines altered in such a way that babies they make themselves turn into space marines withouth the use or organs?
As far as I can tell through this 11 page thread nobody would like change number 2 and 3. I, and some others in this thread, would like to see number 1 change. Number 2 and 3 are uncalled for.
It still boils down to the same argument you are giving. Why not? Because the lore says so! Too bad, not good enough.
But you do understand that those 3 changes are all 3 seperate changes though? Not every one in this thread understand that distiction.
Niiai wrote: Yeah. But why would you need to make that change? As I said earlier why would you change the emperor into a dinosaur elephant (page 4 I think.)
If you find a good reason to change the setting, it follows that you change as little as possible, enough to furfill the justefication of changing the setting.
For instance you will notice that all the times they have made small changes (tyranids small changes each edition) or big changes (necrons 5th editoin) they have only changed what actually needed changing. At no point did they cram in things that did not have anything to do with the justification for the change. They did not, say, incert flying pegasuses in rainbow colours into the setting.
This is much the same way when you allow space marines to be based on females, you can stop the change there, You do not need to include the sentence "[..., and now they can get pregnent." Even if you include that sentence you would need to include the sentence. "And not only can they get pregnent, they birth new space marines when they do."
If I understand Fomosa correctly, he acused me of not adressing this. If that is the case, I have adressed this before. Why include that part? Space Marines being based upon females would need to only change that. Nothing else.
To get the changes Formosa suggests you would also need to change this:
- Space Marines can now make babies.
- Even though Space Marines have human DNA, when you insert the 13 external organs, you rewrite the DNA so that babies made from female space marines are also space marines.
- Chaos did in some way consieve of a way to mass produce babie space marines. Because of this, we now have many chaos space marines.
I would say that you can implement my sugested change, withouth including the 3 above changes.
If you want an in game excuse for mass producing chaos SM it would not be difficuly. You can in fact do this withouth retconning the setting. Just make a deal with some demons to have an calm part of the warp where time moves slow (or in reverse, we know the warp acidentaly causes time travel.) Now get a space ship with a gellar field and make a lot of babies on that ship. Now implant those babies with geneseeds, and harvest them. Now you have twice the amount of geneseeds. Just repeat it again. All until you feel you have a good amount of geneseeds and now implant them in actual SM candidates. And vòla, you have a conveluded way to mass produse chaos space marines in game. Just like you are justefying some massive conveluted plot to produce space marines, even if you implement the sugested change I was making.
But just to be clear, you do understand the argument that you can change something in the setting, withouth having to change something else right? Or does that not come over as a clear consept?
Wrong again, to implement your changes you need to consider the implications of said change, and one of those implications is the self replicating marines, something the fluff supports as not only a possibility, but has actually happened before, you see chaos marines have a hell of a time finding humans that can take the gene seed, so a way around this was forcing gene seed into woman, adding a dash of warp nastiness to grow them to a montrous size, then implanting a child into the woman (so so nasty), the result was a fully grown astartes with all the organs but lacking skin, thankfully the Demonculaba were destroyed.
Next you have Fabulous bill who would muck with the genetics to make the female marines fertile, the result is up for debate sure, but its still a possibility.
Then you have Cawl who mucked with astartes genetics to make primaris.
So the lore supports that an attempt would be made to produce marines that can reproduce, males doing it would still require woman that could carry the baby to term, given the nature of marines it can be assumed that this would kill a normal human woman, a female marine though, thats a different story all together, all it would take is time to have the fetus grow with marine organs as part of its genetic makeup, which we also know is possible, since the primarchs have the full suit of marine organs (minus gene seed) and grew naturally (albeit at a faster rate), and the aformentioned demonculaba.
We understand that you can change one thing without changing anything else, you seem to lack the ability to see the bigger picture though, the ramifications of such a change to the setting.
If you are retconning the setting for Fabulous Bill to invent the equilant to biological birthing machines you can just space magic it up in the current setting. That has nothing to do with the argument. It is your straw man again.
Niiai wrote: Yeah. But why would you need to make that change?
And hence we've come full circle with the over all topic.
But my innitial question was why can you not have space marines based on females. And if the awnser is 'Because it is in the setting' and that is the only reason, GW can just change it if they want to.
And your argument for why couldn't male and female marines breed boils down to that very same defense.
No it does not. You would have to change three things.
- Can females be made into space marines?
- Can space marines make babies now?
- Are space marines altered in such a way that babies they make themselves turn into space marines withouth the use or organs?
As far as I can tell through this 11 page thread nobody would like change number 2 and 3. I, and some others in this thread, would like to see number 1 change. Number 2 and 3 are uncalled for.
I'm not sure if you're being wilfully ignorant at this point, but the point VictorVonTzzentch is making is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you say that you can make space marines into females, which breaks established fluff, then anything is fair game and you can easily make it so marines can procreate as well. You've been hypocritically taking the same position that us naysayers have been using to shoot down this possibility while saying it doesn't apply to your idea of just changing the lore to include female marines.
pm713 wrote: I don't really see how female Marines = Marines can have babies. It seems like a fair leap of logic.
It would be a leap if woman couldn't have babies, the main reason it's not though is because we know that in setting that people would try if female astartes were a thing, and those same people have been shown to have the ability to make it happen.
'Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting' a good argument
but
'Space Marines cannot be female it is clearly established in the setting' a bad argument (again according to you)
SM not having children is a good argument because as almost every one in this thread has pointed out it would break the setting.
I am never saying space marines cannot be female. I am always saying Space Marines based upon females. It is quite clear that a Space Marines is hardly a human at this point. (2,5 meters tall, 13 new organgs etc.) That distinction aside the argument that is established in the setting is bad if you find a good reason to change. That reason would be because some people, me among them, would like to see astartes based upon females.
Formosa, just so we are clear: You do understand how DNA works? If you chop of the tail of a male and fermale rat, their rat child would stil be born with a rat tail. That is because you do not change the rat DNA. When you turn a human into a space marine you do not change the DNA of the human. If that SM where to make a baby it would stil be a human. To make a SM you need to graft in the genseed and those 13 organs, in adition to everything else.
We can also mostly asert that space marines can not reproduce. The change happens before they hit puperty, and even if they make it through puberty it is never stated that they can have children. While I understand that GW do not have a huge focus on this, do you not think some noble woman out there would have SM sperm when she is looking for sperm donors? SM are clearly eluded to as not capable of having babies in the setting. Why would this change if fenmales could be space marines? You can just say that this it not possible. 'Because GW decides it' seems like a good reason by me.
'Space Marines can not have children it is clearly established in the setting' a good argument
but
'Space Marines cannot be female it is clearly established in the setting' a bad argument (again according to you)
SM not having children is a good argument because as almost every one in this thread has pointed out it would break the setting.
I am never saying space marines cannot be female. I am always saying Space Marines based upon females. It is quite clear that a Space Marines is hardly a human at this point. (2,5 meters tall, 13 new organgs etc.) That distinction aside the argument that is established in the setting is bad if you find a good reason to change. That reason would be because some people, me among them, would like to see astartes based upon females.
Formosa, just so we are clear: You do understand how DNA works? If you chop of the tail of a male and fermale rat, their rat child would stil be born with a rat tail. That is because you do not change the rat DNA. When you turn a human into a space marine you do not change the DNA of the human. If that SM where to make a baby it would stil be a human. To make a SM you need to graft in the genseed and those 13 organs, in adition to everything else.
We can also mostly asert that space marines can not reproduce. The change happens before they hit puperty, and even if they make it through puberty it is never stated that they can have children. While I understand that GW do not have a huge focus on this, do you not think some noble woman out there would have SM sperm when she is looking for sperm donors? SM are clearly eluded to as not capable of having babies in the setting. Why would this change if fenmales could be space marines? You can just say that this it not possible. 'Because GW decides it' seems like a good reason by me.
Aaaaaand proven wrong by the demonculaba example yet again, I will say it again just for you.
We already have examples of fully grown space marines with all organs being produced, they were naturally grown in the womb of a female and the result was either a mutant, or a skinless space marine, so you DNA example is meaningless, it can be done in setting, because it has been done, demonculaba are females with gene seed implanted and warp dickery applied.
All it would take is one dark mech adept or fabulous bill to work out how this is done, then bam, marine babies, naturally grown astartes organs like PRIMARCHS.
Niiai wrote: That distinction aside the argument that is established in the setting is bad if you find a good reason to change. That reason would be because some people, me among them, would like to see astartes based upon females.
So if I was to say, 'some people, me among them, would like to see astartes having babies' it's now somehow a good/better argument..?
Niiai wrote: Yeah. But why would you need to make that change?
And hence we've come full circle with the over all topic.
But my innitial question was why can you not have space marines based on females. And if the awnser is 'Because it is in the setting' and that is the only reason, GW can just change it if they want to.
And your argument for why couldn't male and female marines breed boils down to that very same defense.
No it does not. You would have to change three things.
- Can females be made into space marines?
- Can space marines make babies now?
- Are space marines altered in such a way that babies they make themselves turn into space marines withouth the use or organs?
As far as I can tell through this 11 page thread nobody would like change number 2 and 3. I, and some others in this thread, would like to see number 1 change. Number 2 and 3 are uncalled for.
I'm not sure if you're being wilfully ignorant at this point, but the point VictorVonTzzentch is making is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. If you say that you can make space marines into females, which breaks established fluff, then anything is fair game and you can easily make it so marines can procreate as well. You've been hypocritically taking the same position that us naysayers have been using to shoot down this possibility while saying it doesn't apply to your idea of just changing the lore to include female marines.
But you do understand that those 3 changes are all 3 seperate changes though? Not every one in this thread understand that distiction.
The number of changes is beyond the point Im trying to make, Im not arguing for or against allowing Astartes to breed. Indeed the whole point of them seemingly not being able to breed is to prevent the Astartes from replacing mankind whole sale. They are its defenders not its replacements. On the note of Astartes breeding, even if the geneseed wont be formed in the womb, the genetics of the parents being both Astartes capable would ensure larger success rates of implantation.
I am arguing that the defense you are using against them breeding is in fact the same defense you denounce when its being used to deny FemMarines.
.
Sorry, could not resist.
?
.
