Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:08:10


Post by: Vatsetis


Is there any reason why Sorotitas cant be diverse likes astartes or astra militarum... Sure they all follow the same faith and have the same armor... But cant they be diverse (in lore and aesthetics) as the other main IOM factions... Afterall Catholics (main inspiration for SOB) in Africa, America, Ireland, Italy or Poland dont look or behave in similar manner outside some common features?



SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:23:00


Post by: Gert


The Decree Passive requires the Sisters to be so obviously female because the wording specifically states the Ecclesiarchy cannot have men under arms. If there was any ambiguity to the Sisters then the Ecclesiarchy would be breaking the law.
I mean you can paint them however you want and add whatever Bitz to make them custom but they aren't the army for mass customisation.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:29:55


Post by: Vatsetis


Well I didnt ment diverse regarding gender (yes they are ment to be women) but rather regarding cultural background, etnicity, etc

Is there any lore reason why the cant be costumizable like AM regiments??


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:30:45


Post by: Arcanis161


GW has shown Sisters with different skin complexions if that's what you're referring to.

At Gert's point, the models themselves already have piles of iconography, making conversion work difficult.

Lore-wise I don't see anything preventing a Sisters Ordo Minoris from taking some traits from a culture where they're stationed. They are all trained through the Schola Progenium, so that probably limits what influence any given culture has on them. But afterwards? Just as long as they follow the rest of the rules, I don't see any reason why they couldn't adapt.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:31:44


Post by: Lammia


They all go through the same training and indoctrination so there's going to be a lot of monoculture, but they could have physical adaptations within accepted limits, like marines. They come from every planet, after all.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:39:56


Post by: Pyroalchi


In theory I could see something like the Dora Milaje from Marvels Black Panther or an order of sisters armored like samurai work really well aestetically.
Most probably there will be some that disagree or say it hurts their immersion in the game, but "armored female religious zealots" doesn't have to be identical with fleur de lys medieval european armor.

[Thumb - Dora Milaje.png]
[Thumb - female samurai.jpg]


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:44:56


Post by: Vatsetis


Cool photos indeed, those any 3rd party do adecuate models??


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:45:50


Post by: the_scotsman


IDK but if I end up making SOB there is going to definitely be at least some of the recent Ghamak models that turn them into a super over the top soviet red army because that just fits them to a T.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:48:30


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


In as much diversity as the Ecclesiarchy allow them to have. The issue is that Sisters are much more centrally organised than Space Marines, who are diverse by virtue of being able to rule their own independent fiefdoms, and less numerous than Guardsmen, who are diverse because trying to create some unified single type of Guardsman is both logistically and culturally nightmarish.

Sisters are much more closely tied to the Ecclesiarchy and to their major convents and holy sites - they exist because of the Ecclesiarchy, not the other way around, and therefore are very closely tied to the decrees and edicts that it presents. As a result, they are less likely to have that same free reign that many other Imperial organisations have (such as the Space Marines, Guardsmen, Knights, AdMech, and Inquisition).

From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well. Their designs are much more ornate, their details less conducive to the easy modification and variety that Space Marines have been afforded. Sisters are very strongly (and consistently) drawn from specifically European Catholicism and Medieval/Renaissance trappings - unlike the variety of "holy warrior" traditions that Space Marines find themselves drawn from - therefore, drawing from other branches of Catholicism isn't what we see GW doing with their specific design cues for the Sororitas. Even *if* the Sisters' lore was more conducive to them being decentralised and being able to create radically different religious and cultural identities, their model range and GW's aesthetic design for them has not supported this, in the same way that Necrons are strongly linked specifically to Egyptian designs and cultural coding. Maybe you *could* create a Necron dynasty which more closely reflects the culture of, say, feudal Europe, but aesthetically, their design does not reflect this, and therefore are not inherently as diverse a faction as Space Marines or Guardsmen. This isn't to say that creativity is impossible, but that it is simply not as promoted in certain factions as it is in others, and you would be actively fighting against the factional aesthetic design established if you were to deviate too far from that core design.


TL;DR - due to how they are described as a faction, and how GW treats them on a design standpoint, Sisters are not as conducive to player creativity as certain other factions.


EDIT: Oh, and in regard to ethnicity? There is no reason in the first place that any Imperial faction would be mono-ethnic. GW definitely don't present Sisters as mono-ethnic.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:48:53


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


There is no law saying you can't paint your armies however you choose, and if you are talking in the fluff, there are multiple examples in the books of sisters with dark skin, or extremely pale skin. Given that the majority of humanity exists on planets outside our solar system, it's not hard to see why there wouldn't be say, Asian SoB, as there is no "Asia" on planet Zeebes 17, which doesn't even have a sun, if it wasn't a hive world in the first place.

So yeah, don't look at the SoB as if they ALL come from Terran stock. They don't. Most come from different worlds that have radically different evolutionary paths.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:54:34


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Pyroalchi wrote:In theory I could see something like the Dora Milaje from Marvels Black Panther or an order of sisters armored like samurai work really well aestetically.
Most probably there will be some that disagree or say it hurts their immersion in the game, but "armored female religious zealots" doesn't have to be identical with fleur de lys medieval european armor.
Again, these are great examples, but in what GW offer in their models and their own artwork, Sisters are predominantly presented with European/Catholic trappings. That's not to say that such things *must* be adhered to, and I would encourage people to do whatever they like that looks coolest - but it cannot be understated that you would be taking a large diversion away from the aesthetics offered by GW, and as a result, I cannot say that it is just as open to diversity as Space Marines are, which have historically been (and still remain) open to customisation and different designs, both within and without GW's spheres of influence.

Is it *possible*? Yes! Is it as encouraged as certain other factions? Certainly not - hence my pointing out that Sisters should not be compared to other factions as a beacon of creativity, as it is not encouraged.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 18:56:02


Post by: the_scotsman


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
There is no law saying you can't paint your armies however you choose, and if you are talking in the fluff, there are multiple examples in the books of sisters with dark skin, or extremely pale skin. Given that the majority of humanity exists on planets outside our solar system, it's not hard to see why there wouldn't be say, Asian SoB, as there is no "Asia" on planet Zeebes 17, which doesn't even have a sun, if it wasn't a hive world in the first place.

So yeah, don't look at the SoB as if they ALL come from Terran stock. They don't. Most come from different worlds that have radically different evolutionary paths.


True, but, your asian-inspired sisters of battle DO all have to be covered in fleurs-de-lys and eagles and the various mishmash of random cultures that people vaguely throw together and point at and scream "WEST, THIS IS THE WEST OVER HERE ITS WHAT WESTERN CIVILIZATION LOOKS LIKE"


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 19:06:35


Post by: Overread


Pretty much every single army can be more diverse visually and culturally. This is present in the lore and at times Gw have done this in models - Eg they've had several different visual styles for Imperial Guard over the years.

However in general GW has finite resources and making the exact same army with slightly different visual styles over and over and over again doesn't tend to work well (marines are an extreme exception and even there most share the same core models). Because in the end its the same army; same mechanics being spread over more and more releases.


So they pick 1 design and go with it.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 19:24:00


Post by: Pyroalchi


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Pyroalchi wrote:In theory I could see something like the Dora Milaje from Marvels Black Panther or an order of sisters armored like samurai work really well aestetically.
Most probably there will be some that disagree or say it hurts their immersion in the game, but "armored female religious zealots" doesn't have to be identical with fleur de lys medieval european armor.
Again, these are great examples, but in what GW offer in their models and their own artwork, Sisters are predominantly presented with European/Catholic trappings. That's not to say that such things *must* be adhered to, and I would encourage people to do whatever they like that looks coolest - but it cannot be understated that you would be taking a large diversion away from the aesthetics offered by GW, and as a result, I cannot say that it is just as open to diversity as Space Marines are, which have historically been (and still remain) open to customisation and different designs, both within and without GW's spheres of influence.

Is it *possible*? Yes! Is it as encouraged as certain other factions? Certainly not - hence my pointing out that Sisters should not be compared to other factions as a beacon of creativity, as it is not encouraged.



I fully agree with what Sgt_Smudge said here and in the quote before. I should have added in my comment that I look at it from a "collectors perspective", thinking that while GW follows a clear design philosophy with SoB (and is very unlikely to divert from it), I think that if one wants to explore the concept of "power armored baseline human female" with a non-western-medieval aestetic there are several cool ways to do so.

Funny enough I have considered adding a squad or two of sisters to my african themed Guard army but refrained because their european design would fit poorly (I only collect and haven't played yet). I never thought about the Dora Milaje, but that might be an idea I pick up for myself, if I find fitting parts. So for that already thank you to the OP.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 19:24:06


Post by: Vatsetis


 the_scotsman wrote:
IDK but if I end up making SOB there is going to definitely be at least some of the recent Ghamak models that turn them into a super over the top soviet red army because that just fits them to a T.


Do you have link to those space soviet girls??


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 the_scotsman wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
There is no law saying you can't paint your armies however you choose, and if you are talking in the fluff, there are multiple examples in the books of sisters with dark skin, or extremely pale skin. Given that the majority of humanity exists on planets outside our solar system, it's not hard to see why there wouldn't be say, Asian SoB, as there is no "Asia" on planet Zeebes 17, which doesn't even have a sun, if it wasn't a hive world in the first place.

So yeah, don't look at the SoB as if they ALL come from Terran stock. They don't. Most come from different worlds that have radically different evolutionary paths.


True, but, your asian-inspired sisters of battle DO all have to be covered in fleurs-de-lys and eagles and the various mishmash of random cultures that people vaguely throw together and point at and scream "WEST, THIS IS THE WEST OVER HERE ITS WHAT WESTERN CIVILIZATION LOOKS LIKE"


Do they really have to be that way?? Is there any strong lore reason for it to be done that way??


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Pyroalchi wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Pyroalchi wrote:In theory I could see something like the Dora Milaje from Marvels Black Panther or an order of sisters armored like samurai work really well aestetically.
Most probably there will be some that disagree or say it hurts their immersion in the game, but "armored female religious zealots" doesn't have to be identical with fleur de lys medieval european armor.
Again, these are great examples, but in what GW offer in their models and their own artwork, Sisters are predominantly presented with European/Catholic trappings. That's not to say that such things *must* be adhered to, and I would encourage people to do whatever they like that looks coolest - but it cannot be understated that you would be taking a large diversion away from the aesthetics offered by GW, and as a result, I cannot say that it is just as open to diversity as Space Marines are, which have historically been (and still remain) open to customisation and different designs, both within and without GW's spheres of influence.

Is it *possible*? Yes! Is it as encouraged as certain other factions? Certainly not - hence my pointing out that Sisters should not be compared to other factions as a beacon of creativity, as it is not encouraged.



I fully agree with what Sgt_Smudge said here and in the quote before. I should have added in my comment that I look at it from a "collectors perspective", thinking that while GW follows a clear design philosophy with SoB (and is very unlikely to divert from it), I think that if one wants to explore the concept of "power armored baseline human female" with a non-western-medieval aestetic there are several cool ways to do so.

Funny enough I have considered adding a squad or two of sisters to my african themed Guard army but refrained because their european design would fit poorly (I only collect and haven't played yet). I never thought about the Dora Milaje, but that might be an idea I pick up for myself, if I find fitting parts. So for that already thank you to the OP.


You are welcome


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 19:30:38


Post by: Overread


Vatsetis wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:


True, but, your asian-inspired sisters of battle DO all have to be covered in fleurs-de-lys and eagles and the various mishmash of random cultures that people vaguely throw together and point at and scream "WEST, THIS IS THE WEST OVER HERE ITS WHAT WESTERN CIVILIZATION LOOKS LIKE"


Do they really have to be that way?? Is there any strong lore reason for it to be done that way??



The Imperial Church of the setting does have standard iconography and asthetics that are well established in the lore and art. However the Imperium is VAST its mindbogglingly fast. It's fully possible for different worlds to have different cultural influences rise up and replace that - say they were far from the central worlds and such or even cut off. It's just not often visually depicted because GW tends ot keep media focused on the model lines.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 19:41:12


Post by: A.T.


Vatsetis wrote:
But cant they be diverse (in lore and aesthetics) as the other main IOM factions... Afterall Catholics (main inspiration for SOB) in Africa, America, Ireland, Italy or Poland dont look or behave in similar manner outside some common features?
Your models can.

From a lore perspective though the sisters don't have a homeworld or heritage to call on beyond their order. They are orphans from across the whole galaxy raised by the Ecclesiarchy and inducted into one of six orders or a subset of them. There isn't a 'sisterhood of Polandis Three', there is the sisterhood of the Argent Shroud commandery on Polandis Three.

At the core of the faction is fanatical adherence to the dogma of the Imperial Creed - and divergence from the creed is quite literally heresy.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 19:54:00


Post by: Vatsetis


But that dogma implies aesthethic? Have never the SOB gone "native"?

Again the actual church In which the SoB are inspired shows you can have great diversity in appareance under one strict dogma.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 20:03:07


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:
But that dogma implies aesthethic? Have never the SOB gone "native"?
Yes, aesthetic is absolutely part of that dogma - uniform, and all that jazz.

And what does a Sister "go native" to? They spend most of their time around other members of their order, and are raised as orphans to the Imperial Creed, often specific to their order. Their whole lives are built on that kind of unwavering subservience to their creed.

Again the actual church In which the SoB are inspired shows you can have great diversity in appareance under one strict dogma.
Except the Sisters aren't inspired by "the church", they're inspired by a very specific subsection and point of aesthetic design of a specific type of church, which has a very well defined aesthetic and appearance. They don't have variety because what inspires most of their design is not a varied theme, but a specific aesthetic.

Egypt has had, and has even now, many cultures and aesthetics represented in their history, but the Necrons do not reflect all of them - they reflect a specific aesthetic design, like the Sisters do.

If you want to forgo that design and aesthetic yourself, you are free to, but the point stands that GW have not facilitated an easy method of eschewing the very specific aesthetic design that the faction currently has. This is in stark contrast to other factions, who are afforded a lot more leniency of design, both in background and in model formats.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 20:03:34


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


Yeah, don't underestimate the effect local beliefs can have on a centralized religion.
Hell, some very important Catholic religions are the product of local influences.

Doesn't the Eccleisarchy pretty much do the same thing anyway, where they take a local planet's religion and say its an aspect of the Emperor?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 20:04:35


Post by: Overread


Vatsetis wrote:
But that dogma implies aesthethic? Have never the SOB gone "native"?

Again the actual church In which the SoB are inspired shows you can have great diversity in appareance under one strict dogma.


Sure they've gone native. The Imperium plays out over the whole Galaxy - millions of worlds - trillions upon trillions of people. The scale actually defies our capacity to really fully comprehend easily. It's a vast setting. Within that there is limitless opportunity for individual creativity.

It's just that GW keeps things focused on a core design for each faction because that's practical and possible with their production.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 20:08:05


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, don't underestimate the effect local beliefs can have on a centralized religion.
Hell, some very important Catholic religions are the product of local influences.

Doesn't the Eccleisarchy pretty much do the same anything, where they take a local planet's religion and say its an aspect of the Emperor?
They absolutely do, but that isn't the same as their commanderies or preceptories - that's more what they do to ensure compliance, and is a tactic most used by their preachers and missionaries. Sisters of Battle, because they are drawn from the Schola, and therefore from a fairly standardised recruitment base, don't need to try and combine that with existing regional beliefs - their recruits only know the core tenets of the Imperial Creed, and nothing else.

Basically, because of how Sisters are recruited, you don't *need* to create these hybrid religious systems, whereas Space Marines, because they recruit from the direct populace, often tie into the cultures and practices of the people they came from.

Again - if *your* Sisters recruit from the local populace, or do something otherwise unseen, you do that! However, because such customisability is not presented by GW, Sisters are not a faction that is so defined by their diversity as other factions are.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 20:29:40


Post by: Vatsetis


 Overread wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
But that dogma implies aesthethic? Have never the SOB gone "native"?

Again the actual church In which the SoB are inspired shows you can have great diversity in appareance under one strict dogma.


Sure they've gone native. The Imperium plays out over the whole Galaxy - millions of worlds - trillions upon trillions of people. The scale actually defies our capacity to really fully comprehend easily. It's a vast setting. Within that there is limitless opportunity for individual creativity.

It's just that GW keeps things focused on a core design for each faction because that's practical and possible with their production.


Thanks, this sounds reasonable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, don't underestimate the effect local beliefs can have on a centralized religion.
Hell, some very important Catholic religions are the product of local influences.

Doesn't the Eccleisarchy pretty much do the same anything, where they take a local planet's religion and say its an aspect of the Emperor?
They absolutely do, but that isn't the same as their commanderies or preceptories - that's more what they do to ensure compliance, and is a tactic most used by their preachers and missionaries. Sisters of Battle, because they are drawn from the Schola, and therefore from a fairly standardised recruitment base, don't need to try and combine that with existing regional beliefs - their recruits only know the core tenets of the Imperial Creed, and nothing else.

Basically, because of how Sisters are recruited, you don't *need* to create these hybrid religious systems, whereas Space Marines, because they recruit from the direct populace, often tie into the cultures and practices of the people they came from.

Again - if *your* Sisters recruit from the local populace, or do something otherwise unseen, you do that! However, because such customisability is not presented by GW, Sisters are not a faction that is so defined by their diversity as other factions are.


For someone so hellbent on introducing FSM you seem very rigid towards how other factions can be depicted.

Anyway this thread is not about comparing SOB to Adeptus Astartes "Kustum boyz"... Its about the Sorotitas and how they could be depicted outside their main aesthetic.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 20:43:53


Post by: ArcaneHorror


I believe that there is at least one minor order where the Sisters seems to have the appearance of people from Central Asia, while at least two lean towards a more African ethnic aesthetic.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 20:49:42


Post by: Lord Damocles


I don't know if it's ever been specifically stated, but I could see Sisters deliberately being stationed on worlds away from their homeworlds - like the Arbites and Commissariat - specifically so that they don't have much of a connection to the local culture(s), so that they're less likely to hesitate if some purging needs doing.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 21:01:12


Post by: A.T.


Vatsetis wrote:
But that dogma implies aesthethic? Have never the SOB gone "native"?
The militant sisters exist to enforce the dogma.

Priests do 'go native' to appeal to the masses and move them towards the imperial creed, the sisters are more about setting the masses on fire if they rise up against it. Their whole lives are spent in strict adherence to their creed and more often than not as a symbolic representation of the Ecclesiarchys power - they aren't about making themselves more relatable or individual.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 21:04:51


Post by: epronovost


Vatsetis wrote:
But that dogma implies aesthethic? Have never the SOB gone "native"?

Again the actual church In which the SoB are inspired shows you can have great diversity in appareance under one strict dogma.


Well the point of having SoB being the defender of orthodoxy would prevent them from ''going native''. Their very purpose is to weed out unorthodox and heretical doctrines. Plus, their equipment is centrally produced and distributed which means since its build at the same place they are pretty uniform in terms of design. In the same fashion, all their recruits are centrally trained and indoctrinated. Their non-combat clothing might be more diverse, but we don't see those on the tabletop. Technically, SoB do have some diversity when it comes to aesthetic if only due to their armor colors, battle doctrines, favored patron Saints, etc. You could even attempt an easy conversion for more iconoclast or ''icono-sober'' SoB by stripping most the artwork from their tanks (you can try to find older, far less decorated SoB tanks) and avoiding to add all the seals markers on their units. SoB are a bit odd in the Imperium, with maybe the Mechanicus and its armies, for being very centralized and homogenous unlike Guards which are the pure product of their homeworld or Space Marines who have of course a ridiculous amount of diversity if only due to their abundant support in terms of models that allows to show cultural diversity in greater depth than words in Codex and books and a different color scheme.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 21:19:14


Post by: endlesswaltz123


Look at the schola progenium, the more direct military aspects of it all have a uniform that is fairly rigidly kept.

Scions, Commisars and Sisters... They all have a specific look that is maintained other than colour and specific livery found on banners.

The only candidates in the solar that don't have a rigid appearance upon leaving are those where their role requires them not to so they can blend in, Inquisitors for example.

Marines have more autonomy and patterns of power armour, they can be a bit more flexible in their appearance, but at the end of the day, they all share a core aspect in terms of uniform... They wear power armour.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 21:23:06


Post by: Lord Zarkov


The BL novel Requiem Infernal features a Adepta Soriatas minor order who have gone pretty majority native in following an (approved) local variation of the Imperial creed.

In this particular case, while their beliefs were pretty non-standard, their aesthetics were fairly normal (aside from the colour schemes of some sub-orders) as can be seen by the cover.

It’s just as possible that you could have a minor order with some major aesthetic differences as well. It’d be a pain to convert though given the level of standard iconography on all the models.



SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 21:44:24


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


EDIT:
Vatsetis wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, don't underestimate the effect local beliefs can have on a centralized religion.
Hell, some very important Catholic religions are the product of local influences.

Doesn't the Eccleisarchy pretty much do the same anything, where they take a local planet's religion and say its an aspect of the Emperor?
They absolutely do, but that isn't the same as their commanderies or preceptories - that's more what they do to ensure compliance, and is a tactic most used by their preachers and missionaries. Sisters of Battle, because they are drawn from the Schola, and therefore from a fairly standardised recruitment base, don't need to try and combine that with existing regional beliefs - their recruits only know the core tenets of the Imperial Creed, and nothing else.

Basically, because of how Sisters are recruited, you don't *need* to create these hybrid religious systems, whereas Space Marines, because they recruit from the direct populace, often tie into the cultures and practices of the people they came from.

Again - if *your* Sisters recruit from the local populace, or do something otherwise unseen, you do that! However, because such customisability is not presented by GW, Sisters are not a faction that is so defined by their diversity as other factions are.


For someone so hellbent on introducing FSM you seem very rigid towards how other factions can be depicted.
I'm sorry? You must have missed where I've repeatedly said that you can and should make your Sisters as varied as you like - I've even bolded it now on the quote above. You asked for what the lore and aesthetic design stated, not for how much value I placed on it.

Other examples of the above are:
"This isn't to say that creativity is impossible..."
"Is it *possible*? Yes!"
"If you want to forgo that design and aesthetic yourself, you are free to..."
That doesn't sound very rigid, does it?

Did you actually want an answer to your question, or are you hinting at something else?
Anyway this thread is not about comparing SOB to Adeptus Astartes "Kustum boyz"...
Sure it's not. It just so happens that this thread popped up when I commented in your previously closed thread about how Sisters shouldn't be compared to Astartes because Sisters (by GW's own design philosophy) aren't as customisable.

Definitely not related though, are they?
Its about the Sorotitas and how they could be depicted outside their main aesthetic.
They can be. But is it encouraged as a hallmark of their factional design? No.

Are you asking if that design aspect should be changed?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 21:47:41


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 the_scotsman wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
There is no law saying you can't paint your armies however you choose, and if you are talking in the fluff, there are multiple examples in the books of sisters with dark skin, or extremely pale skin. Given that the majority of humanity exists on planets outside our solar system, it's not hard to see why there wouldn't be say, Asian SoB, as there is no "Asia" on planet Zeebes 17, which doesn't even have a sun, if it wasn't a hive world in the first place.

So yeah, don't look at the SoB as if they ALL come from Terran stock. They don't. Most come from different worlds that have radically different evolutionary paths.


True, but, your asian-inspired sisters of battle DO all have to be covered in fleurs-de-lys and eagles and the various mishmash of random cultures that people vaguely throw together and point at and scream "WEST, THIS IS THE WEST OVER HERE ITS WHAT WESTERN CIVILIZATION LOOKS LIKE"


I view this the same exact way I view FSM intercessors. With the helmets on, who can tell the difference? Leave the helmets on and say they are the magical pixie sisters from Kalamazoo, Michigan, and they all have black skin and Asiatic features, because no one can tell with the helmets off. And you don't have to put any iconography on them you don't want to. Paint over the raised markings, or better yet, shave them down. Make them YOUR DUDES, or PEOPLE, whatever you want to call them, or habve them be. The Helmet protects the head cannon and the rules already state you can choose which you like, or make your own (Or is that just Astartest chapters?)

People need to feel more at ease with doing whatever the F they want with their toy soldiers. GW won't tell you to sod off if you show up with FSM or black Bulfen or Silver Custodes, or Green IF. They are YOUR MODELS.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 21:50:24


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, don't underestimate the effect local beliefs can have on a centralized religion.
Hell, some very important Catholic religions are the product of local influences.

Doesn't the Eccleisarchy pretty much do the same anything, where they take a local planet's religion and say its an aspect of the Emperor?
They absolutely do, but that isn't the same as their commanderies or preceptories - that's more what they do to ensure compliance, and is a tactic most used by their preachers and missionaries. Sisters of Battle, because they are drawn from the Schola, and therefore from a fairly standardised recruitment base, don't need to try and combine that with existing regional beliefs - their recruits only know the core tenets of the Imperial Creed, and nothing else.

Basically, because of how Sisters are recruited, you don't *need* to create these hybrid religious systems, whereas Space Marines, because they recruit from the direct populace, often tie into the cultures and practices of the people they came from.

Again - if *your* Sisters recruit from the local populace, or do something otherwise unseen, you do that! However, because such customisability is not presented by GW, Sisters are not a faction that is so defined by their diversity as other factions are.


Hm, fair enough. I do find it odd how a religious order somehow does not adopt local customs in some form, if only to facilitate the spread of the faith and ensure loyalty among the populace, but if it's not supported by the fluff then it's not supported by the fluff.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 21:57:08


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I do find it odd how a religious order somehow does not adopt local customs in some form, if only to facilitate the spread of the faith and ensure loyalty among the populace, but if it's not supported by the fluff then it's not supported by the fluff.
Again, it's not that the Ecclesiarchy don't adopt local customs and suchlike, one of my favourite Deathwatch RPG pregen missions is all about the Ecclesiarchy asking for some Deathwatch to be loaned for a mission because the locals would respect the strength of Space Marines, and the Space Marines would be more useful in creating that cultural crossover - but the Deathwatch were only a temporary measure, and the point stands that the Sisters aren't there primarily to act as missionaries: they're there to act as the strong arm of the Ecclesiarchy.

Think of them as the strange foreign bodyguards that the "nice" "friendly" preacher brought with them, than them being the preachers themselves, I suppose?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 21:57:47


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I do find it odd how a religious order somehow does not adopt local customs in some form, if only to facilitate the spread of the faith and ensure loyalty among the populace, but if it's not supported by the fluff then it's not supported by the fluff.
Again, it's not that the Ecclesiarchy don't adopt local customs and suchlike, one of my favourite Deathwatch RPG pregen missions is all about the Ecclesiarchy asking for some Deathwatch to be loaned for a mission because the locals would respect the strength of Space Marines, and the Space Marines would be more useful in creating that cultural crossover - but the Deathwatch were only a temporary measure, and the point stands that the Sisters aren't there primarily to act as missionaries: they're there to act as the strong arm of the Ecclesiarchy.

Think of them as the strange foreign bodyguards that the "nice" "friendly" preacher brought with them, than them being the preachers themselves, I suppose?


A.T. wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
But that dogma implies aesthethic? Have never the SOB gone "native"?
The militant sisters exist to enforce the dogma.

Priests do 'go native' to appeal to the masses and move them towards the imperial creed, the sisters are more about setting the masses on fire if they rise up against it. Their whole lives are spent in strict adherence to their creed and more often than not as a symbolic representation of the Ecclesiarchys power - they aren't about making themselves more relatable or individual.

Oh. Ok yeah that distinction makes sense.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 22:07:49


Post by: Deadnight


Withput getting in too deep as I'm not up to speed on huge amounts of the lore, but iirc, isn't most of the sisters orders based on a small number of locations? Convent sanctorum on Ophelia vii and convent priories on terra?

Most of what I've read suggests differences between the orders that would be more akin to something like the differences between 2 individual great companies (and/or their lords) of the Space wolves- ultimately they sing off the same hymn sheets. Equipment is centrally produced, training is centrally produced, culture seems more stifling etc. As they say though, the galaxy is large and I'm sure plenty girls hold onto some aspects of their homeworld when they go through training, or else they're trained locally.

For all that though, Gw seems to want to present a far more 'uniform' image of all the sisters orders and a far more cohesive and narrow theme rather than the vast tapestry of source material for the likes of the Space Marines, or even the guard.

Should that stop you? My all means, if you want none of the ornate catholic nun, tabards, fleur de lises, flamers etc, and all of the Space bear themed, pelt wearing axe wielding barbarian warrior-women based on nordic legends go for it - while its a departure from what is commonly conceived as a 'sisters of battle' to the point where you could argue 'she's no sister!" at all, I'm personally all for it, but I've not seen many minis or bits that could be used to facilitate this project.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 22:34:27


Post by: Vatsetis


I mean would SOB with a bit less blight, a pony tail or a slightly different armor "break the lore" in any degree?

Are they really meant to be the complete polar opposite of Adeptus Astartes in that just like every astartes apparently is an individual hero with an individual story and unique equipment but all the millions upon millions of SOB in the IOM are exactly identical to each other?

Cant there be some grey ground, some nuance?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 22:38:02


Post by: BrianDavion


Vatsetis wrote:


For someone so hellbent on introducing FSM you seem very rigid towards how other factions can be depicted.

Anyway this thread is not about comparing SOB to Adeptus Astartes "Kustum boyz"... Its about the Sorotitas and how they could be depicted outside their main aesthetic.


I don't see any contridiction here, he's simply saying "this is how the fluff presents them, and thus this is the facts we have, if you wanna do something else, go for it"

when someone asks a lore question they need to expect to get an answer, even if it's not the answer they're not looking for.

Here's some relevant points to sisters of battle. (and contrast these points with how space marines operate to understand why sisters of battle likely will never have "space wolf style divergant orders"

1: All sisters of battle are trained in the same 2 locations
2: All sisters of Battle receive their weapon and equipment from said 2 locations.
3: All minor orders are also, in theory answerable to one of the 6 major orders.

the sisters of battle are simply, per the fluff the most centralized orginization in the Imperium of Man


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 22:38:42


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:I mean would SOB with a bit less blight, a pony tail or a slightly different armor "break the lore" in any degree?
Less blight? What?
Why would a ponytail break any lore? That's a hairstyle, evidently the Sororitas have a variety of hairstyles - nothing implies that a ponytail would be improper.
Define "different armour"?

Are they really meant to be the complete polar opposite of Adeptus Astartes in that just like every astartes apparently is an individual hero with an individual story and unique equipment but all the millions upon millions of SOB in the IOM are exactly identical to each other?
Literally no-one claimed either of those two things?

Cant there be some grey ground, some nuance?
No-one said there wasn't any.

You asked a question. People gave a response, a response that was overwhelmingly "Sisters aren't known for being diverse, but if you want it, it's yours", and you took that to mean "THERE'S NO DIVERSITY AT ALL, SISTERS ARE EXACTLY IDENTICAL, THERE'S NO GREY AREA"??

Did you actually read your own thread?



Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:


For someone so hellbent on introducing FSM you seem very rigid towards how other factions can be depicted.

Anyway this thread is not about comparing SOB to Adeptus Astartes "Kustum boyz"... Its about the Sorotitas and how they could be depicted outside their main aesthetic.


I don't see any contridiction here, he's simply saying "this is how the fluff presents them, and thus this is the facts we have, if you wanna do something else, go for it"

when someone asks a lore question they need to expect to get an answer, even if it's not the answer they're not looking for.

Here's some relevant points to sisters of battle. (and contrast these points with how space marines operate to understand why sisters of battle likely will never have "space wolf style divergant orders"

1: All sisters of battle are trained in the same 2 locations
2: All sisters of Battle receive their weapon and equipment from said 2 locations.
3: All minor orders are also, in theory answerable to one of the 6 major orders.

the sisters of battle are simply, per the fluff the most centralized orginization in the Imperium of Man
Just a few corrections, in the interest of keeping the argument straight:
- Sisters are trained on more than just Terra and Ophelia VII, it's just that those are the two main strongholds of the Sororitas. They are still spread out, but are trained by the Schola Progenium, and so are playing all from the same cultural background regardless.

- Similarly, equipment likely comes from multiple sources, but is likely to be standardised, because, as mentioned, the Sororitas are a symbol of Ecclesiarchical unity and force.

- I believe that some minor orders don't form entirely as offshoots of the main 6 major orders, and so might not be beholden to direct authority - however, they would almost certainly defer out of respect/political authority.

- It's they, please, thank you.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 23:17:10


Post by: Vatsetis


BrianDavion wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:



the sisters of battle are simply, per the fluff the most centralized orginization in the Imperium of Man


Ok, even if this was true at face value and could be taken 100% as literally true... what happends to a group of SOB that for instances have been for decades without any contact with the rest of the SOB orders and are not even in contact with the broader imperium because their system is blocked by a warp storm?

Wouldnt they develop their own disctinct culture? wouldnt they be forced to adopt local equipment as their standard one deteriorates? even local recruits to continue enforcing their duty? wouldnt their faith be tested and they will need to adapt to the circunstances of prolonged isolation?

That sort of think is ment to be happenning constantly in the setting. No?

If we have millions upon millions of SOB in the IOM its probable that the numbers of "Rogue" or "Native" SOB is bigger than the 1 million loyalist Astartes in service.

That we dont have a GW model (yet) or a BL novel (yet) to reflect so, it dosent mean that it dosent happen or exist in the setting... if the IOM is almost infinite in extension and population, SOB cannot be treated as clones or drones no matter how centralised their structure is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:I mean would SOB with a bit less blight, a pony tail or a slightly different armor "break the lore" in any degree?
Less blight? What?


I meant bling, sorry for the mispelling.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:
Why would a ponytail break any lore? That's a hairstyle, evidently the Sororitas have a variety of hairstyles - nothing implies that a ponytail would be improper.
Define "different armour"?

.


Well since SOB art and minatures dont have pony tails perhaps there is some dogma that prevent them from doing so, you know because they have to adhere to a very strict aesthetic per the "lore", apparently.

"Slightly different armour" is self explanatory... is power armor but is aesthethically different, or has some non standard parts.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 23:28:47


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:
Wouldnt they develop their own disctinct culture? wouldnt they be forced to adopt local equipment as their standard one deteriorates? even local recruits to continue enforcing their duty? wouldnt their faith be tested and they will need to adapt to the circunstances of prolonged isolation?
They might develop their own culture. They also might just double down on whatever doctrines they already had. It's your Sisters, you decide how they adapt. No-one's saying you can't.

That we dont have a GW model (yet) or a BL novel (yet) to reflect so, it dosent mean that it dosent happen or exist in the setting...
Absolutely true. But you didn't ask that, did you? You asked how diverse Sisters were, which means that, if you wanted an answer, that would imply you wanted to know what the lore said.

Now, if you want to question that lore, or how relevant it is, you totally can - but that's not what your main topic was.
if the IOM is almost infinite in extension and population, SOB cannot be treated as clones or drones no matter how centralised their structure is.
It's a good job that no-one claimed that.


If you don't mind making up strawmen, I think you'll find that we're all in agreement then?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 23:28:54


Post by: Overread


Have you ever played "Chinese Whispers"?

Ergo the game where you whisper a little phrase into a persons ear, then they repeat it and whisper into another persons and so on and so on. Typically even within a small group of 10 or 20 people by the time you reach the end some of the message has changed.

Even without anyone in the group making a deliberate choice to change it, the message will alter just a bit. Throw someone making an intentional change and it can change a lot.



The Imperium is a LOT like that. Travel across it takes considerable time and its possible to take people from one region to another and basically isolate them. Even following strict rules and doctrine there will be changes. Changes caused by local conditions; by access to resources; by shifts in attitude and more. So yes a group of Sisters might well have less bling to their armour. Perhaps they were isolated a long long way from home and their weapons and equipment could be serviced and if need be replaced, but they lacked resources to make them flashy because of pressure for instant results for combat and such. So steadily a few icons and insignias are lost. Give it a few generations and suddenly if they met more "Core" world SoB, there would be a marked difference in the armour and designs.




SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 23:30:14


Post by: Vatsetis


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:

Did you actually read your own thread?



Reading is for lossers.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 23:34:14


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:I mean would SOB with a bit less blight, a pony tail or a slightly different armor "break the lore" in any degree?
Less blight? What?


I meant bling, sorry for the mispelling.
Sure. You'll have to cut it physically off the models GW makes, but you can do that if you want to. However, the fact you would physically have to cut it off implies that GW didn't really intend for that to be done. It doesn't mean you *can't*, only that, in response to your original question, GW did not perhaps intend to Sisters to be bereft of that.


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Why would a ponytail break any lore? That's a hairstyle, evidently the Sororitas have a variety of hairstyles - nothing implies that a ponytail would be improper.
Define "different armour"?.


Well since SOB art and minatures dont have pony tails perhaps there is some dogma that prevent them from doing so, you know because they have to adhere to a very strict aesthetic per the "lore", apparently.
... first, I've never seen a Sister of Battle with the colour scheme that I've painted mine in, does that mean that there's dogma that prevents it? No, not at all - only that GW haven't made it. Don't be dense.

And no-one claimed that you need to adhere to a strict aesthetic - only that GW have *presented* a narrow aesthetic range, implying that Sisters aren't designed to be a particularly diverse faction in the way Astartes are - but that doesn't mean you can't do whatever you want with your own models. Again, if you could avoid suggesting that people are saying that, when they aren't, that would be welcome.

"Slightly different armour" is self explanatory... is power armor but is aesthethically different, or has some non standard parts.
Could you describe these differences? There's a wealth of difference between aesthetics. What might you have in mind?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vatsetis wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Did you actually read your own thread?

Reading is for lossers.
So, at best, you're admitting to not engaging honestly, or at worst, you're trolling.

Why did you make this thread?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/30 23:36:03


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


 Overread wrote:
Have you ever played "Chinese Whispers"?

Ergo the game where you whisper a little phrase into a persons ear, then they repeat it and whisper into another persons and so on and so on. Typically even within a small group of 10 or 20 people by the time you reach the end some of the message has changed.

Even without anyone in the group making a deliberate choice to change it, the message will alter just a bit. Throw someone making an intentional change and it can change a lot.

The Imperium is a LOT like that. Travel across it takes considerable time and its possible to take people from one region to another and basically isolate them. Even following strict rules and doctrine there will be changes. Changes caused by local conditions; by access to resources; by shifts in attitude and more. So yes a group of Sisters might well have less bling to their armour. Perhaps they were isolated a long long way from home and their weapons and equipment could be serviced and if need be replaced, but they lacked resources to make them flashy because of pressure for instant results for combat and such. So steadily a few icons and insignias are lost. Give it a few generations and suddenly if they met more "Core" world SoB, there would be a marked difference in the armour and designs.



That's a thought. The Imperium's bureaucracy and logistics network is pretty rubbish. It could be that instead of getting proper supplies for their gear, an order of sisters got something completely different and they had to improvise.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 03:51:30


Post by: Argive


surely they could just change the bit of lore to get some diversity in SOB...


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 04:34:22


Post by: BrianDavion


 Argive wrote:
surely they could just change the bit of lore to get some diversity in SOB...


they could and honestly I'd not object to them doing it.. but there's a few things I'd like to see retconned from a better "your guys" POV.

the grey Knights for example I'd like to see moved from a chapter to a "quasi legion" with each 8 brotherhoods being 1000 men strong. (this would make the grandmasters of a bortherhood and a brother-captain make a lot more sense IMHO) with each brotherhood actually haveing their own unique colour scheme


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 04:38:36


Post by: Wyldhunt


Pretty much agree with everything Smudge has been saying.

Basically, there are reasons that sisters are less *likely* to have major aesthetic differences from each other, but there's nothing canonical that says such differences can't exist here and there.

If your guard army is dressed up in samurai armor, that's not terribly unusual; they probably just come from a homeworld that favors that style of armor for some reason. If your sisters have samurai armor, there's probably a story there. There's probably a reason their batch of armor is so different from the vast majority of sororitas armor.

Basically, there's no canonical rule that says sisters can't be dressed like samurai (or whatever), but there are canonical reasons that they *usually* aren't. Namely their shared culture (most sisters went to school in the same handful of locations) and their seemingly somewhat standardized sources of equipment. A sister is less likely to be dressed as a samurai than a guardsman, but there's no reason your army can't be a minor order that just so happens to wear samurai power armor.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 06:23:16


Post by: Vatsetis


So if you manage to get bits to put some fur cloaks over your sister, heads with "nordic" hairstyles and proxy the power mazes with power axes and power lances... You have your "not viking", "not shield maiden" Sorotitas (with an adecuate background story about being isolated for a long time in a fenrisian like planet) that are totally compliant with the church dogma and dont break the lore in the slightest manner, right??

So certainly the lore frames AS as more decentralized and SOB as more centralized, but in practical terms there is a huge grey area to costumize your army and lore as you like, right?



SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 07:43:51


Post by: Deadnight


In theory, sure, but in 'practical terms', you dont really see the alternatives either presented or suggested overtly or covertly though.

You'd probably need a lore change of a handful of words here and there to open up more 'unorthodox' approaches to sisters as an absolute (I mean, can you remove all thr visual queues and change everything that is currently understood to be a Sister and still claim shes a sister and compliant with the dogma?), along with alternative models/sculpts/bits and that's not a bad thing. but in the meantime if you want to go less church and more barbarian, go for it - but I think the kits to allow this, either third party or gw are thin on the ground.

Anvil industry's 'daughters of the burning rose' comes to mind as an obvious third party alternative but they're still strongly gothic, medieval knight/'not-sisters' heavy armour themed.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 08:17:42


Post by: Vatsetis


Well there is no need to "remove" that much... You can maintain the flor de lys and by adding a wolf/bear cloak you certainly change the aesthetic of the SOB. Same with changing the hairstyle to a more pseudo barbarian one.

I mean going native dosent mean you are unrecognosible... Just look to Col Kurtz men at the end of apocalipse now... They are obviously us army men but certainly have a different look from the fresh recruits on the boot camp.

It seems challenging but viable as a modeling project, dont you think?

Those "Daughters of the burning rose" from Anvil seem to be as costumizable as other 3rd party "Not SM" miniatures... Green stuff can do miracles.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 09:17:49


Post by: Deadnight


Vatsetis wrote:
Well there is no need to "remove" that much... You can maintain the flor de lys and by adding a wolf/bear cloak you certainly change the aesthetic of the SOB. Same with changing the hairstyle to a more pseudo barbarian one.

I mean going native dosent mean you are unrecognosible... Just look to Col Kurtz men at the end of apocalipse now... They are obviously us army men but certainly have a different look from the fresh recruits on the boot camp.

It seems challenging but viable as a modeling project, dont you think?

Those "Daughters of the burning rose" from Anvil seem to be as costumizable as other 3rd party "Not SM" miniatures... Green stuff can do miracles.


Sure.

You might want to look at spellcrow as well for 'not space wolf' bits - they've got fur tabards, cloaks etc- I'd considered them for my barbarian-themed Minotaurs bladeguard but maybe they'd be worth looking at for your project as well.

Plenty third party or even gw ranges would work for alternative heads too.

Anvil range is great, my only point is it's very thematically centred around medieval plate.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 09:36:51


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Argive wrote:surely they could just change the bit of lore to get some diversity in SOB...
Totally! As I've said, if the lore is being used to *prevent* player creativity, then that lore should be amended. In this situation, I'd like to see more emphasis on alternative forms of Sisters of Battle, because as they are presented by GW, they are not as diverse as they could be (and by diversity, I do not refer to ethnicity, as this *is* actually addressed).

Wyldhunt wrote:Basically, there are reasons that sisters are less *likely* to have major aesthetic differences from each other, but there's nothing canonical that says such differences can't exist here and there.
... A sister is less likely to be dressed as a samurai than a guardsman, but there's no reason your army can't be a minor order that just so happens to wear samurai power armor.
Deadnight wrote:In theory, sure, but in 'practical terms', you dont really see the alternatives either presented or suggested overtly or covertly though.

...if you want to go less church and more barbarian, go for it - but I think the kits to allow this, either third party or gw are thin on the ground.

Deadnight and Wyldhunt nail it perfectly. It's not that there's some great rule that you *can't* make your Sisters how you want to, but that it is not incentivised as part of their core design. From a core design standpoint, Sisters are portrayed by GW nearly universally as drawing heavily from Catholic symbols and aesthetic influences. This isn't to say that it's impossible or wrong that you could have Sororitas who are more influenced by other aesthetic styles, but that this is not incentivised in the same way that it is for other factions.

Spoiler:
And I bring up other factions so much because I don't believe for a second that this argument OP has presented is entirely in good faith or purely asking about Sisters of Battle.
I would like if that were the case, and this *were* just an innocuous questioning of the lore, but factoring that this thread was created after OP's previous near-immediate locking after attempting to open another women Astartes thread, in which several arguments presented very vocally rebuked the idea of "Sisters = Space Marines" on the basis that Sisters were not marketed as being as diverse as Astartes, and that the OP themselves has admitted to not bothering to read the comments presented here, I'm not convinced that this thread isn't intended to be some kind of continuation of that other thread.

Irrespective of that, understanding that Sisters, while having room (like any 40k faction) for player creativity, are not designed for it in the same way that other factions are is still an important nuance to recognise in this discussion.


Vatsetis wrote:So if you manage to get bits to put some fur cloaks over your sister, heads with "nordic" hairstyles and proxy the power mazes with power axes and power lances... You have your "not viking", "not shield maiden" Sorotitas (with an adecuate background story about being isolated for a long time in a fenrisian like planet) that are totally compliant with the church dogma and dont break the lore in the slightest manner, right??
Totally compliant with Ecclesiarchy dogma? No. Does that mean they break the lore? Also no.

The lore is big enough that there's enough exceptions to any rule presented in 40k. This includes Sisters who adopt a non-standard appearance, or whatever other "lore-breaking" scenarios you can imagine. Rules in 40k lore shouldn't be "rules" to the actual people playing the games.

So certainly the lore frames AS as more decentralized and SOB as more centralized, but in practical terms there is a huge grey area to costumize your army and lore as you like, right?
It's presented as a smaller grey area than in other factions where the grey area is explicitly huge (like Guardsmen and Astartes), but a grey area exists, as it does with any faction, yes.



Vatsetis wrote:Well there is no need to "remove" that much...
...It seems challenging but viable as a modeling project, dont you think?
...Green stuff can do miracles.
These responses indicate exactly *why* we emphasis that Sisters are not incentivised as a "diverse" faction. Unlike many other 40k factions, who are often presented with plenty of bits and resources from GW themselves to convert and tailor their models, Sisters don't have this kind of ready access. As you say yourself, it would be challenging, and require lots of greenstuff to pull off notable aesthetic changes - this is coupled with how GW don't really present alternative aesthetics for the Sororitas.

Again, all this to say that it's not that you can't, or shouldn't, create alternative designs for your Sisters of Battle if you so want to; only that Sisters are not marketed or incentivised in that way.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 09:44:11


Post by: Vatsetis


Marketing is detrimental to any healthy hobby experience... Marketing only exist to drain money of your pockets and creativity from your brains.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 12:03:46


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:
Marketing is detrimental to any healthy hobby experience... Marketing only exist to drain money of your pockets and creativity from your brains.
Yeah, that's not entirely true at all - in fact, that's an incredibly hyperbolic claim.

However, it's not really on topic for your own thread, is it?

As said - Sisters are perfectly customisable if you so want to, but it would be a lie to claim that they've been afforded the same opportunities to be customised that other factions have been given.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 13:18:05


Post by: Tiennos


Is it a fact that all sisters are trained by the Schola Progenium? I know that they'll usually pick the most promising recruits, but that doesn't mean that this is the only source of new sisters.

I could see devout parents pushing their daughters to serve the Emperor by joining the adepta sororitas, for example. If this is a thing, then the sisters would have a much less uniform culture/education.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 13:47:27


Post by: Gert


It won't be the only source and I'm not 100% sure it ever was. For the Schola background, it would say that the Sororitas get the second pick of girls after the Inquisition but I don't think SoB background said they only recruited from the Schola.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 14:45:28


Post by: Vatsetis


 Tiennos wrote:
Is it a fact that all sisters are trained by the Schola Progenium? I know that they'll usually pick the most promising recruits, but that doesn't mean that this is the only source of new sisters.

I could see devout parents pushing their daughters to serve the Emperor by joining the adepta sororitas, for example. If this is a thing, then the sisters would have a much less uniform culture/education.


Im proper Grimdark fashion, devout parents will inmolate themselves against a local heretic club so that their now orphan daugther could avenge them as a SOB.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 14:46:44


Post by: TwilightSparkles


From a lore perspective the Sisters have a faith that is very very strict without interpretation. Their armour and weapons are seen as blessed / holy artefacts in themselves hence why there is such uniformity. Whilst there are different orders , they are all part of the same faith and the worship of that faith is not allowed to be varied for the sisters.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 15:04:58


Post by: Vatsetis


So if a Squads of SOB that have been isolated 40 years from the broader IOM happend to wear a bear cape to remember a particularly strong fight against the heresy and to honour their fallen... they will be killed on sight without question when they reunite with their order because they are themselve heretics?

What happends when some part of the Sorotitas armor breaks and she dont have available spare parts? those she commit suicide to preserve the "holy symmetry"?

If SOB dont have more white dye... do they inmolate to prevent such a great dishonor to the IOM and the Church?

Is there any sort of reason that between the theory and the practices of the SOB their is not some level of contradiction? After all they are just regular humans, with regular fellings, not servitors.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 15:08:07


Post by: Gert


You've been told so many times now that you can do what you want with your stuff but that the background/models for SoB make it difficult to do so. That's the answer to your question.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 16:24:24


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


At this point the OP feels like they created the thread to stir the pot.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 16:26:56


Post by: Vatsetis


Why are SOB models particularly difficult to convert? Dont they allow for a head swap for instance?

I swear that I remember a few people saying SOB heads could be used for depicting FSM... So why cant the proccess be reversed?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At this point the OP feels like they created the thread to stir the pot.


Not at all, I simply like to make questions and led the conversation flow while striking an issue from different angles... Its called the socratic method... Ive heard that his inventor was banned for life from the forum where he was trolling arround.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 16:35:24


Post by: Deadnight


Vatsetis wrote:
Why are SOB models particularly difficult to convert? Dont they allow for a head swap for instance?

I swear that I remember a few people saying SOB heads could be used for depicting FSM... So why cant the proccess be reversed?


Head swaps are only a small part of it. If that's thr extent of your 'conversion' work this thread is done; they're pretty low-effort projects.

Head swaps are about the easiest thing to be fair. But you were suggesting far more extensive remodelling. going with the fenris/barbarian theme you brought up, for examlke Now if your swapping out bolters for axes and filing off all the fleur de lises tabards and church iconography, and replacing with pelts and runestones, and reposing the arms, you're investing in serious greenstuff and conversion work. Difficult? Maybe. Time consuming? Ye gods yes. Expensive? Won't be cheap.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 16:41:31


Post by: phandaal


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
There is no law saying you can't paint your armies however you choose, and if you are talking in the fluff, there are multiple examples in the books of sisters with dark skin, or extremely pale skin. Given that the majority of humanity exists on planets outside our solar system, it's not hard to see why there wouldn't be say, Asian SoB, as there is no "Asia" on planet Zeebes 17, which doesn't even have a sun, if it wasn't a hive world in the first place.

So yeah, don't look at the SoB as if they ALL come from Terran stock. They don't. Most come from different worlds that have radically different evolutionary paths.


This. There are at least one million worlds in the Imperium. That's a lotta different kinds of people.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 16:47:38


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:So if a Squads of SOB that have been isolated 40 years from the broader IOM happend to wear a bear cape to remember a particularly strong fight against the heresy and to honour their fallen... they will be killed on sight without question when they reunite with their order because they are themselve heretics?
For what it's worth, 40 years is ridiculously short to have abandoned previous practices. 400 years might be a better bet.

Killed on sight? No. Possibly all inducted as Repentia if the judge deems their infractions too drastic? Possibly. Again, they're your models. Do what you want to them.

What happends when some part of the Sorotitas armor breaks and she dont have available spare parts? those she commit suicide to preserve the "holy symmetry"?
If their armour breaks, then they requisition more. If they can't requisition more, how come they can requisition a whole different type of power armour? Would your Sisters even *have* a uniform aesthetic? If so, how and why, if their whole thing is because they can't repair their armour?

Again - these can all be answered, if you *want* to.

If SOB dont have more white dye... do they inmolate to prevent such a great dishonor to the IOM and the Church?
Even though it's common knowledge that not all Sisters have white hair?

Is there any sort of reason that between the theory and the practices of the SOB their is not some level of contradiction? After all they are just regular humans, with regular fellings, not servitors.
But that's the thing - they're not expected to have human reactions and feelings, because they're also indoctrinated and mentally conditioned to serve the Emperor's Will, and to abandon many of those human feelings. They're servants of the Ecclesiarchy and Emperor first and foremost, not basic humans. That's 40k for you.

Gert wrote:You've been told so many times now that you can do what you want with your stuff but that the background/models for SoB make it difficult to do so. That's the answer to your question.
Exactly. OP, you go do what you like - you got an answer to your question. End of story.

Vatsetis wrote:Why are SOB models particularly difficult to convert? Dont they allow for a head swap for instance?
Headswap? Sure. But a headswap alone doesn't change the very specific aesthetic design that they have.

Unlike Space Marines, whose design lends nicely to modification and embellishment (given how most Astartes models are quite plain and unadorned), Sisters have far more trappings and other designs on their armour. Their shoulder pads are less flat and blank than Space Marines, eliminating the easy opportunities for Chapter badges. Their robes prevent any kind of "tacticool" or minimalist design, which is only an issue on *some* Astartes models. They don't have the same customisablity afforded by highly modular sculpts that Astartes have historically had - while the Sisters sculpts are lovely and definitely not "monopose", they simply don't have the range of bits that Astartes do.

They're difficult to convert because their design influences are so strongly baked into their faction design. It'd be like trying to remove much of the Egyptian/death/skeleton theming from current Necrons, which is very difficult to do. Could you do it differently? Sure - using death mask iconography and cutting off all the ankh symbols might be a start, but there's a lot of work there.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
At this point the OP feels like they created the thread to stir the pot.
Not at all, I simply like to make questions and led the conversation flow while striking an issue from different angles...
You make questions, but never listen to the answer. That's called stirring the pot, and being intellectually dishonest.

Your question was answered, and the topic resolved, yes?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Deadnight wrote:
Head swaps are about the easiest thing to be fair. But you were suggesting far more extensive remodelling. going with the fenris/barbarian theme you brought up, for examlke Now if your swapping out bolters for axes and filing off all the fleur de lises tabards and church iconography, and replacing with pelts and runestones, and reposing the arms, you're investing in serious greenstuff and conversion work. Difficult? Maybe. Time consuming? Ye gods yes. Expensive? Won't be cheap.
Exactly - there's a lot of effort to be put in redesigning Sisters, because of how strongly their aesthetic is established. Can you change that? Yes, of course you can. Is it incentivised, or made any easier for you? No, of course not.


That's what we all mean by "Sisters aren't as customisable as other factions" - it's not that you can't do it. It's that doing so would be very difficult in comparison to other factions, because the Sisters have a very strong, very distinctive aesthetic that doesn't lend well to customisation.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 16:51:38


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


In terms of their armour, heraldry etc compared to Astartes? They simply start off less individualistic.

When they first came to the fore with Vandire, they were a single order. Post that period, they became formalised as a (the?) military wing of the Ecclesiarchy, and split into their Convents.

As each of those Convents is still ultimately beholden to the Ecclesiarchy, they’re more uniform than Astartes, who can get away with more because “we’re The Emperor’s grandsons, and our progenitor Chapter’s history goes further back than your faith”.

The church, the church is the thing.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 16:52:56


Post by: Pyroalchi


Regarding recruitment: I'm just reading "Cain's last stand" again. There it is mentioned that the local Schola Progenium on Perlia (near the Damocles Gulf so far from the usual centers) has a single Veteran Sister of Battle who kind of picks out suitable candidates, starts to train them before selecting those that will finally join the Adepta Sororitas.

Of course that's just a novel, but it kind of makes sense that a lot of the Scholas have the odd SoB collecting novices


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 17:20:12


Post by: Gert


That sounds pretty logical. From the Ghost's series, we know Gaunt's Schola "headmaster" was a retired Commissar (retired in that he had no legs), so it would stand to reason that there would be a Sororitas and Inquisitorial representatives as well in at least some of the Schola.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 17:28:14


Post by: Vatsetis


Well certainly if SOB are ment to have such a high degree of uniformity that cant be achieve through conventional means in a space so huge and disjointed as the IOM and with the technological and bureocratic constrains of the IOM... So probably its achieve in a supernatural manner and the faith of the SOB creates a common gestalt similar to the one created by the orks that also seem to behave all in a similar manner and follow the group behaviour.

Funny how the best troops of the IOM (SM, SOB, etc) are all but imperfect copies of the Orks.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 17:41:34


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I don't know how to stress this anymore. There is zero prohabition, Lore or otherwise, IN ANY SENSE of the word, from making your army dolls, YOUR personal vision. It's called Open play. You can make them literal FEMALE SPACE WOLVES of the EBON CHALICE faction on ULTRAMAR, trained by the GREY KNIGHTS of TITAN. No one cares. They are YOUR toy soldiers. If you want to play by the official rule set, then that's where you get into difficulties.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 17:44:21


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:Well certainly if SOB are ment to have such a high degree of uniformity that cant be achieve through conventional means in a space so huge and disjointed as the IOM and with the technological and bureocratic constrains of the IOM...
No-one said that.


Are you done trolling? Can we call this thread concluded?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 17:45:36


Post by: Vatsetis


How those exactly a fur cape for a SOB unit defies the "official rule set"?



SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 18:03:10


Post by: Lord Zarkov


Vatsetis wrote:
How those exactly a fur cape for a SOB unit defies the "official rule set"?



Fur cape is legit - the 3rd Ed Canoness had a fur cape.

But how many sisters compatible fur capes exist if you wanted them all to have them?

And does adding fur capes really change the aesthetics all that much if you’ve left all the iconography on?

And if you’re removing all the Catholicism inspired iconography, that’s a significant amount of work.

Also, by nature of the faction’s archetype and place in the background (nuns with guns), most of the variations are going to be along the lines of ‘here’s the local variant of emperor worship we follow’ which, while there are many in the Imperium, is fairly narrow in scope


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 18:09:08


Post by: Vatsetis


Well I never actually said I wanted... "non catholic" SOB... Quite the opposite, if you read my original post.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 18:14:23


Post by: Deadnight


Vatsetis wrote:Well I never actually said I wanted... "non catholic" SOB... Quite the opposite, if you read my original post.


You also said later on page 1 'outside of their main aesthetic'.... which is very much the church trappings.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 18:17:09


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:
Well I never actually said I wanted... "non catholic" SOB... Quite the opposite, if you read my original post.
"Catholic", in the way you used it, isn't an aesthetic ideal.

When the rest of us refer to Catholicism, we are referring to the aesthetic brand of Catholicism that the Sisters of Battle specifically emulate. Sisters of Battle aren't "Catholic" by religion or by doctrine, like the examples you give in the OP, but are Catholic by specific aesthetic, which not all of the religious Catholics you mention follow.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 18:31:29


Post by: Lord Zarkov


Vatsetis wrote:
Well I never actually said I wanted... "non catholic" SOB... Quite the opposite, if you read my original post.


Catholic here is shorthand for “aesthetics inspired by the modern (British) perception of medieval and Renaissance European Catholicism”, but the latter is a mouthful.

Just like modern catholics can have many different aesthetics, so can Emperor worship. But the models only portray a particular one which aligns with what most (anglosphere) people think of when an aesthetic is described as ‘Catholic’.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 19:35:13


Post by: Vatsetis


Fine... My initial post had some level of ambiguity since its was sort of an open question... But latter my reasoning has evolve more into adding rather than changing... Think more of a group of SOB on a long holiday and collecting souvenirs rather than departing from the church.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/08/31 19:41:44


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:Fine... My initial post had some level of ambiguity since its was sort of an open question... But latter my reasoning has evolve more into adding rather than changing... Think more of a group of SOB on a long holiday and collecting souvenirs rather than departing from the church.
Yeah... the Sisters don't really do that *as presented*.

Now, you are free to go ahead and do that yourself, but as you *asked a question*, you should know that the answer to that question is "no, the Sisters don't really do that, because they are religious zealots who are indoctrinated since childhood to view their lives only in service to the Emperor and Ecclesiarchy", and "collecting souvenirs" isn't really part of that memo. But, as always you are free to create your own Sisterhood if you so wish to - however, as you asked, this is not an aspect of their design that GW readily facilitates for.

Do you understand that? Or will you misrepresent that again?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 17:04:19


Post by: Mad Doc Grotsnik


Sisters have a regimented look because they are not independent armed forces. Indeed, they’re a military wing of a notoriously conservative organisation of religious nutters.

They’re religious fanatics, indoctrinated as previously mentioned from early childhood. Their armour, robes and equipment are holy to them. They do not deviate from it.

Astartes? They’re under their own steam. Nobody can order a Chapter to respond to anything. They can only petition for aid. Even the High Lords of Terra could receive a “no, bog off” answer from any given Chapter.

They’re warrior lodges or warrior cults. Their traditions are their own - especially the Progenitor Chapters, given they kinda predate The Imperium (they were part of the final pacification and unification of Terra).

They have a level of freedom which is stupendously rare within The Imperium. Sure, an Inquisitor might harbour concerns about some of the more outrageously garbed Chapters (such as Space Wolves). But there’s not a damned thing they can do about it, provided the Chapter is proven loyal.

There is no power governing the Chapters in the way Sisters are.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 17:19:22


Post by: Vatsetis


Why do all the post have to be "astartes centric"??

I know they are the marketing hook of the setting, but perhaps not everything has to revolce arround the "WASP"s of the 41st Millenium.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Vatsetis wrote:Fine... My initial post had some level of ambiguity since its was sort of an open question... But latter my reasoning has evolve more into adding rather than changing... Think more of a group of SOB on a long holiday and collecting souvenirs rather than departing from the church.
Yeah... the Sisters don't really do that *as presented*.

Now, you are free to go ahead and do that yourself, but as you *asked a question*, you should know that the answer to that question is "no, the Sisters don't really do that, because they are religious zealots who are indoctrinated since childhood to view their lives only in service to the Emperor and Ecclesiarchy", and "collecting souvenirs" isn't really part of that memo. But, as always you are free to create your own Sisterhood if you so wish to - however, as you asked, this is not an aspect of their design that GW readily facilitates for.

Do you understand that? Or will you misrepresent that again?


I understand that you dont understand whats my point... Im undecided if its because of you reading thinks literally and without nuance or for some other more esoteric reason.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 17:32:41


Post by: Gert


No other faction has the diversity of Marines so when you ask about why faction X doesn't have similar options, people explain why using comparisons. They're the blank slate and the faction that people compare others to when talking about ease of conversion or custom background.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 17:55:14


Post by: Vatsetis


Ahhh ok Now I Understand...

... ASTARTES = Kustum Boyz... NICE!!!

Rest of the factions are more defined... And Sororitas are defined by their strict adherence to Dogma... Which is express in their Speudo Gorthic faux Catholic design... If they dont follow that they are no longer official SOB (their are a fan proyect like Grot Guard).

Its all cristal clear now. Thank you for your enlightment



SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 18:05:17


Post by: Insectum7


 Gert wrote:
No other faction has the diversity of Marines so when you ask about why faction X doesn't have similar options, people explain why using comparisons. They're the blank slate and the faction that people compare others to when talking about ease of conversion or custom background.
There's no real reason for that to be the case from a background perspective and is just a function of Marines being popular. It's easy to imagine the same amount of "cultural" variance among Orks, Eldar, IG, Chaos etc. Marines themselves just get so much attention that any differences wind up being highly publicized, codified and scrutinized.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 18:16:09


Post by: Pyroalchi


@ Vatsetis: I think the answer here were a lot more moderated than that. Lots of posters including Sgt Smudge highlighted that you can do whatever you want with your sisters. The point of dissent just seems to be that the official pictures painted of the SoB are rather fixed in the current aestetic.

And I fully agree. I myself might add some Dora Milaje styled sisters to my collection if I find the parts, as Fezzik said: they are MY toy soldiers and I can do what I want, but I understand why they as an Imperial faction can be really fixed to their aestetic.

As you criticized the Marine centric argumentation I would like to give two other examples: Imperial Guard and Skitarii. The Guard is first and foremost a military body focussed on performance and their lore and artwork depicts them with a lot of diversity in looks and equipment. While they have priests attached, they are not really bound to a strict, religious fundamentalistic body. Skitarii on the other hand are and they are shown with a remarkably consistent aestetic throughout the galaxy. And with them it's not only the equipment, it seems to me that the vast majority of official artwork is limited to the colors red, black and white for their robes.

So maybe there is some truth to the argument about religious narrow mindedness and uniformous appearance


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 19:04:53


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


What's odd though about the Ad Mech is that the priests themselves aren't actually uniform; tech-priests had all sorts of different enhancements and cybernetic components.

I don't think even the skitarii were that uniform, that's a by-product of being turned into a model line and GW's insistence on making the art look exactly like the models.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 19:15:58


Post by: Gert


 Insectum7 wrote:
There's no real reason for that to be the case from a background perspective and is just a function of Marines being popular. It's easy to imagine the same amount of "cultural" variance among Orks, Eldar, IG, Chaos etc. Marines themselves just get so much attention that any differences wind up being highly publicized, codified and scrutinized.

I disagree with this quite a bit.
From a miniature design perspective, Marines are blank slates with lots of flat open panels and easily interchangeable parts. Even if you aren't using larger parts like shoulder pads or helmets, smaller parts like pelts or pendants fit better on the larger canvas Marine models offer.
You could argue that Marines are popular so they get more kits which means they have more presence which means they're more popular, which to a degree I agree with. But then how would you explain the Marines being consistently popular from 1st all the way through to 9th? Yes, there would have come a point of no return regarding releases but I don't think that would have occurred until at least 5th Ed.

From a background perspective, most Imperial organisations are heavily centralised or are too small to effectively convey mass customisation.
Marines fill the gap by being beholden to no particular group, free from outside interference, there are quite a lot of them, and ultimately able to pursue whatever culture they want. A Chapter descended from the Ultramarines could be as compliant and similar to their parent Chapter, like the Aurora Chapter or Sons of Guilliman, or they could be more deviant, like the Emperor's Spears or Angels of Fire. There are no holy texts or sacred rules that Chapters must follow, even the Codex Astartes is a controversial document that is often followed by many Chapters as guidelines rather than hard and fast rules. They don't need to be presented as male or need to be cyborgs/half-machines.

I'm not saying you can't have Orks that love guns more than combat or a Guard Regiment that looks like Muskateers than Cadians but Marines just do homebrew so much easier.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 19:16:21


Post by: Lord Damocles


The Skitarii described in Titanicus are nothing like the current model line.

The artwork always skews towards the current models; which is why there isn't a whole lot of new artwork featuring Mordian ​or Tallarn styles Guardsmen, for example.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 19:19:38


Post by: Veldrain


Skitarii are completely different from one forgeworld to another. As above, the two forces in Titanicus look down on each other thinking the other looks barbaric.

And Skitarii mentioned in the Lords of Mars series are nothing like the current model line.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 19:37:25


Post by: Vatsetis


 Pyroalchi wrote:
@ Vatsetis: I think the answer here were a lot more moderated than that. Lots of posters including Sgt Smudge highlighted that you can do whatever you want with your sisters. The point of dissent just seems to be that the official pictures painted of the SoB are rather fixed in the current aestetic.

And I fully agree. I myself might add some Dora Milaje styled sisters to my collection if I find the parts, as Fezzik said: they are MY toy soldiers and I can do what I want, but I understand why they as an Imperial faction can be really fixed to their aestetic.

As you criticized the Marine centric argumentation I would like to give two other examples: Imperial Guard and Skitarii. The Guard is first and foremost a military body focussed on performance and their lore and artwork depicts them with a lot of diversity in looks and equipment. While they have priests attached, they are not really bound to a strict, religious fundamentalistic body. Skitarii on the other hand are and they are shown with a remarkably consistent aestetic throughout the galaxy. And with them it's not only the equipment, it seems to me that the vast majority of official artwork is limited to the colors red, black and white for their robes.

So maybe there is some truth to the argument about religious narrow mindedness and uniformous appearance


Good point. On the other hand even amongst the most hellbent religious zealots communities (if they are big or exist for a long time, both of which apply a fortiori to SOB) you can see a level of diversity both in appearance and in practice . But I certainly understand that "the idea" of what a SOB is ment to be is fixed... I was talking about something different, but unfortunatly the point has been lost along the thread... There is no use in trying to rescue it.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 20:09:44


Post by: Pyroalchi


@ Skitarii: in that case I concede my point. I didn't know enough about Admech to be aware of this diversity.

@ Gert: I don't know... I personally think Guard and Orks do homebrew at least as good if not better than Marines. The official Regiments alone are visualy (at least in my opinion) significantly more diverse than what I saw so far of different Marine Chapters. And the background of Guard regiments ranging from Penal Legionairs over conscripted hive gangers, tribal warriors, professional soldiery, highborn aristocrats playing war etc. to me also gives a lot more variance than SM who by definition are an indoctrinated elite force.

But than again: I haven't read that much literature and nothing really focussing on Marines, so my opinion might be very biased


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 21:12:36


Post by: Tiennos


When it comes to practices and "culture," there's definitely some room for variation. If some minor order says different prayers, has unique customs or "weird" relics, it's fine as long as it's not outright heretical.
For the aesthetic part, the problem is that the sisters don't make any of their equipment. They don't have tech-sisters available to build or customize anything, so every weapon and armor is made following sacred templates. A paint-job and some decorations is probably as far as they can go, otherwise a forge world would have to make stuff according to their specifications.

That's for the in-universe version, anyway. The real-world version is: GW makes everything look like its line of models for marketing purposes. For example, tyranids are supposed to change their organisms all the time, adapting to the conditions they're currently in. In official depictions and models, a gaunt is a gaunt is a gaunt.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 21:16:33


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 Tiennos wrote:
When it comes to practices and "culture," there's definitely some room for variation. If some minor order says different prayers, has unique customs or "weird" relics, it's fine as long as it's not outright heretical.
For the aesthetic part, the problem is that the sisters don't make any of their equipment. They don't have tech-sisters available to build or customize anything, so every weapon and armor is made following sacred templates. A paint-job and some decorations is probably as far as they can go, otherwise a forge world would have to make stuff according to their specifications.

That's for the in-universe version, anyway. The real-world version is: GW makes everything look like its line of models for marketing purposes. For example, tyranids are supposed to change their organisms all the time, adapting to the conditions they're currently in. In official depictions and models, a gaunt is a gaunt is a gaunt.


That's a very easy objection to overcome. The sisters belong to possibly the wealthiest organization in the entire imperium. How to you think the inquisition is so well funded? It would not be hard for a minor church wing to splinter off and take a planet's worth of money and resources, and begin manufacturing their own weapons and armor. It's happened before.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 22:24:02


Post by: Gert


 Pyroalchi wrote:
@ Gert: I don't know... I personally think Guard and Orks do homebrew at least as good if not better than Marines. The official Regiments alone are visualy (at least in my opinion) significantly more diverse than what I saw so far of different Marine Chapters. And the background of Guard regiments ranging from Penal Legionairs over conscripted hive gangers, tribal warriors, professional soldiery, highborn aristocrats playing war etc. to me also gives a lot more variance than SM who by definition are an indoctrinated elite force.

But than again: I haven't read that much literature and nothing really focussing on Marines, so my opinion might be very biased

It's a difficult one because scale-wise there are more Guard Regiments than Marine Chapters so from that perspective, there should be greater options for converting and diversity. However, Guard are limited in a couple of ways.
Astartes fit the jack-of-all-trades field whereas Guard are very much trapped in the realm of overwhelming firepower.
An Astartes Chapter that favours CQC and makes sparse use of Tactical or Devastator Squads is easily done but you can't really do a CQC Guard army in the same way.
Astartes also have the benefit of not being mortal, so homebrew characters can have a story built around them easier than a Guard character. Sergeant Tarvin of the Golden Blades could survive numerous battles and eventually become a Captain, but Sergeant Craig of the Hoskan 112th can barely survive a Lasgun bolt let alone some of the things an Astartes could survive. Its harder to forge a story that is good and believable when the characters you're writing about tend to go *squish*.
A similar concept applies to Relic stories. Chapter Master Ordus of the Golden Blades might wield the ancient Paragon Blade Shadowfang, carried by the Chapters founder during the War of the Beast. Colonel Greg of the Hoskan 112th is unlikely to get his hands on anything above standard-issue, after all, he's only mortal and generally expendable. There'll be 20 new Hoskan Regiments by next week all with a Colonel of their own.
For me, Guard works best as the generalised mass, which works fine but is much harder to craft a narrative for. The Regiment as a whole can tell a story but individuals are much more difficult, something Marines don't really suffer from.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/01 23:49:30


Post by: alextroy


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
 Tiennos wrote:
When it comes to practices and "culture," there's definitely some room for variation. If some minor order says different prayers, has unique customs or "weird" relics, it's fine as long as it's not outright heretical.
For the aesthetic part, the problem is that the sisters don't make any of their equipment. They don't have tech-sisters available to build or customize anything, so every weapon and armor is made following sacred templates. A paint-job and some decorations is probably as far as they can go, otherwise a forge world would have to make stuff according to their specifications.

That's for the in-universe version, anyway. The real-world version is: GW makes everything look like its line of models for marketing purposes. For example, tyranids are supposed to change their organisms all the time, adapting to the conditions they're currently in. In official depictions and models, a gaunt is a gaunt is a gaunt.


That's a very easy objection to overcome. The sisters belong to possibly the wealthiest organization in the entire imperium. How to you think the inquisition is so well funded? It would not be hard for a minor church wing to splinter off and take a planet's worth of money and resources, and begin manufacturing their own weapons and armor. It's happened before.
That, sir, is Hersey and Treason of the highest order!

And as others have said, feel free to make your models and your army your own. That is the beauty of galaxy spanning war in the 41st Millennium. Still, going by the background as presented, the Adepta Sororitas are all selected from the Schola Progenium and armed with weapons and armor crafted by the Tech-Priest of Mars under the terms of the Writ Illuminat, a contract dating back to the days of High Lord Vandire and the founding of the Sister of Battle.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/02 05:22:42


Post by: Wyldhunt


A quick note regarding cultural diversity within the sororitas: it exists. Those differences are most obviously seen in the symbolism behind the colors and decorations of different orders' armor, but you can also see it in how the Argent Shroud's funeral rites vary from others or in how the Bloody Rose attaches more religious significance to melee. I think it's fair to assume that that last point (along with other fluff about the Bloody Rose) implies that they probably practice slightly different forms of melee combat than other orders.

Basically, certain forms of deviation from the "norm" seem to be tolerated or even encouraged. It's just that there are some very judgemental eyes keeping track of your orders deviations. So if your order decides to encourage shaving your head and ritually scarring holy images into your scalp, that might be seen as a quirky-but-admirable display of faith. If your order starts featuring a bunch of Escher-esque punk rock hair colors/styles, that might be viewed by your superiors as a dangerously individualistic form of self-expression that could lead to other selfish acts in the future. Unless your boss does a good job of convincing their boss to greenlight your green hair.

So if you want to put bear pelts and viking braids on your sisters, just ask yourself how they'll explain it to their superiors. If they've been deployed to a cold, icy planet for the last decade and the pelts are just a practical piece of gear they obtained from the locals, that's probably fine. If they refuse to give up their bear pelts because personally killing the biggest beast they could find was a "matter of honor" and "part of their saga," that's maybe going to attract some harsh scrutiny.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/02 11:44:42


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 alextroy wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
 Tiennos wrote:
When it comes to practices and "culture," there's definitely some room for variation. If some minor order says different prayers, has unique customs or "weird" relics, it's fine as long as it's not outright heretical.
For the aesthetic part, the problem is that the sisters don't make any of their equipment. They don't have tech-sisters available to build or customize anything, so every weapon and armor is made following sacred templates. A paint-job and some decorations is probably as far as they can go, otherwise a forge world would have to make stuff according to their specifications.

That's for the in-universe version, anyway. The real-world version is: GW makes everything look like its line of models for marketing purposes. For example, tyranids are supposed to change their organisms all the time, adapting to the conditions they're currently in. In official depictions and models, a gaunt is a gaunt is a gaunt.


That's a very easy objection to overcome. The sisters belong to possibly the wealthiest organization in the entire imperium. How to you think the inquisition is so well funded? It would not be hard for a minor church wing to splinter off and take a planet's worth of money and resources, and begin manufacturing their own weapons and armor. It's happened before.
That, sir, is Hersey and Treason of the highest order!

And as others have said, feel free to make your models and your army your own. That is the beauty of galaxy spanning war in the 41st Millennium. Still, going by the background as presented, the Adepta Sororitas are all selected from the Schola Progenium and armed with weapons and armor crafted by the Tech-Priest of Mars under the terms of the Writ Illuminat, a contract dating back to the days of High Lord Vandire and the founding of the Sister of Battle.


Then where do the Sisters on the other side of the Great rift get their weapons and armor? Just to name a few planets that have Sisters but no access to Mars currently: Valhalla, Vigilus, Mordian, Baal. Honestly not trying to be snarky here, but where do you get arms and armor on the other side of the rift?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/02 11:54:05


Post by: Gert


You have it before the Rift began and keep stuff in stockpile. Literally no Imperial force works on last minute supply for its arms and equipment. Or you get it from another Forge World that isn't Mars itself.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/02 13:25:59


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:Why do all the post have to be "astartes centric"??

I know they are the marketing hook of the setting, but perhaps not everything has to revolce arround the "WASP"s of the 41st Millenium.
Because understanding why Sisters and Astartes are not the same thing, and how their design philosophies differ is useful in understanding WHY Sisters are the way they are - you'll notice as well that I've done the same with Guardsmen and Necrons, outlining why customisation comes easier to one than the other.

Also, for what it's worth, in the OP itself, you compared them to Space Marines. If you're complaining about Space Marines being brought up, I should remind you that you mentioned them first.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But, as always you are free to create your own Sisterhood if you so wish to - however, as you asked, this is not an aspect of their design that GW readily facilitates for.

Do you understand that? Or will you misrepresent that again?


I understand that you dont understand whats my point...
You asked why Sisters aren't as diverse as Space Marines and Guardsmen. People outlined that, aesthetically, this is not as supported by GW's own design of the faction, but that you could absolutely customise them yourself, if you wanted to. That is the answer to your question.

If you are trying to ask a different question, perhaps just asking that question plainly would yield better answers.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:What's odd though about the Ad Mech is that the priests themselves aren't actually uniform; tech-priests had all sorts of different enhancements and cybernetic components.

I don't think even the skitarii were that uniform, that's a by-product of being turned into a model line and GW's insistence on making the art look exactly like the models.
This is very true - Skitarii are meant to be much more diverse than what GW's models present them as, and there's plenty of literature to back that up.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Wyldhunt wrote:
A quick note regarding cultural diversity within the sororitas: it exists. Those differences are most obviously seen in the symbolism behind the colors and decorations of different orders' armor, but you can also see it in how the Argent Shroud's funeral rites vary from others or in how the Bloody Rose attaches more religious significance to melee. I think it's fair to assume that that last point (along with other fluff about the Bloody Rose) implies that they probably practice slightly different forms of melee combat than other orders.
Also absolutely true - there *is* diversity within the Sororitas, but it rarely manifests on an aesthetic level beyond colour and the occasional symbol - most differences seem to be in doctrine. But yes, Sisters *do* have a variety of customs and subcultures even within the main culture itself.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/02 22:18:07


Post by: Insectum7


 Gert wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
There's no real reason for that to be the case from a background perspective and is just a function of Marines being popular. It's easy to imagine the same amount of "cultural" variance among Orks, Eldar, IG, Chaos etc. Marines themselves just get so much attention that any differences wind up being highly publicized, codified and scrutinized.

I disagree with this quite a bit.
From a miniature design perspective, Marines are blank slates with lots of flat open panels and easily interchangeable parts. Even if you aren't using larger parts like shoulder pads or helmets, smaller parts like pelts or pendants fit better on the larger canvas Marine models offer.
You could argue that Marines are popular so they get more kits which means they have more presence which means they're more popular, which to a degree I agree with. But then how would you explain the Marines being consistently popular from 1st all the way through to 9th? Yes, there would have come a point of no return regarding releases but I don't think that would have occurred until at least 5th Ed.

I wasn't speaking about miniature design, but if you want to go there we can. Imperial Guard have had a greater variety of regimental sculpts than Marines have had for their chapters.

 Gert wrote:

From a background perspective, most Imperial organisations are heavily centralised or are too small to effectively convey mass customisation.
Marines fill the gap by being beholden to no particular group, free from outside interference, there are quite a lot of them, and ultimately able to pursue whatever culture they want. A Chapter descended from the Ultramarines could be as compliant and similar to their parent Chapter, like the Aurora Chapter or Sons of Guilliman, or they could be more deviant, like the Emperor's Spears or Angels of Fire. There are no holy texts or sacred rules that Chapters must follow, even the Codex Astartes is a controversial document that is often followed by many Chapters as guidelines rather than hard and fast rules. They don't need to be presented as male or need to be cyborgs/half-machines.
From a background perspective, there's a hefty numbers game that doesn't go in the Mariens favor. There are only 1000 chapters, while there are a million worlds in the Imperium, each of which is required to have a local PDF and raise IG regiments. So right there you have 1000 times more potential cultures to draw upon.

The Codex Astartes, which all chapters are still compliant towards in some way or another, serves the same function as any holy scripture. The occasional 'loose' degree of adherence to the Codex isn't necessarily something that sets Marines apart. There's little reason for Guard Regiments or Sisterhood sub-Orders to behave differently in regards to their own doctrinal adherence. And remember that, in truth, the vast majority of SM Chapters are in fact quite Codex compliant, following company structures and squad organization very closely.

Here's a look at Space Marine "Variety":


Vs Imperial Guard (actual) variety:


Heh. Note that the IG regiments don't require color images to be notably distinct from one another.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/02 22:34:04


Post by: Argive


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Argive wrote:surely they could just change the bit of lore to get some diversity in SOB...
Totally! As I've said, if the lore is being used to *prevent* player creativity, then that lore should be amended. In this situation, I'd like to see more emphasis on alternative forms of Sisters of Battle, because as they are presented by GW, they are not as diverse as they could be (and by diversity, I do not refer to ethnicity, as this *is* actually addressed).



What do you refer to if not that ??


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/02 23:57:17


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Argive wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Argive wrote:surely they could just change the bit of lore to get some diversity in SOB...
Totally! As I've said, if the lore is being used to *prevent* player creativity, then that lore should be amended. In this situation, I'd like to see more emphasis on alternative forms of Sisters of Battle, because as they are presented by GW, they are not as diverse as they could be (and by diversity, I do not refer to ethnicity, as this *is* actually addressed).



What do you refer to if not that ??
The elements of the lore which don't prohibit player creativity, of course? Not all aspects of the lore exist solely to prevent certain things, or are absolutely statements.

For example, the Codex Astartes - a fun piece of lore, but not every Chapter follows it. It provides a framework to build off of, but doesn't prohibit player freedoms or choices. That's what the lore for 40k should be - an inspiration and framework, but not a cage or prison for that creativity.

The framework for Sisters should be "the Adepta Sororitas engage in multiple different forms of worship of the Emperor, ranging from different methods of waging war, private rituals and ceremonies, or other more esoteric means of showing their devotion" - right there, you have a framework for what they might do, without constraining and saying "no, they definitely don't do this".


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 05:16:55


Post by: BrianDavion


Spoiler:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Gert wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
There's no real reason for that to be the case from a background perspective and is just a function of Marines being popular. It's easy to imagine the same amount of "cultural" variance among Orks, Eldar, IG, Chaos etc. Marines themselves just get so much attention that any differences wind up being highly publicized, codified and scrutinized.

I disagree with this quite a bit.
From a miniature design perspective, Marines are blank slates with lots of flat open panels and easily interchangeable parts. Even if you aren't using larger parts like shoulder pads or helmets, smaller parts like pelts or pendants fit better on the larger canvas Marine models offer.
You could argue that Marines are popular so they get more kits which means they have more presence which means they're more popular, which to a degree I agree with. But then how would you explain the Marines being consistently popular from 1st all the way through to 9th? Yes, there would have come a point of no return regarding releases but I don't think that would have occurred until at least 5th Ed.

I wasn't speaking about miniature design, but if you want to go there we can. Imperial Guard have had a greater variety of regimental sculpts than Marines have had for their chapters.

 Gert wrote:

From a background perspective, most Imperial organisations are heavily centralised or are too small to effectively convey mass customisation.
Marines fill the gap by being beholden to no particular group, free from outside interference, there are quite a lot of them, and ultimately able to pursue whatever culture they want. A Chapter descended from the Ultramarines could be as compliant and similar to their parent Chapter, like the Aurora Chapter or Sons of Guilliman, or they could be more deviant, like the Emperor's Spears or Angels of Fire. There are no holy texts or sacred rules that Chapters must follow, even the Codex Astartes is a controversial document that is often followed by many Chapters as guidelines rather than hard and fast rules. They don't need to be presented as male or need to be cyborgs/half-machines.
From a background perspective, there's a hefty numbers game that doesn't go in the Mariens favor. There are only 1000 chapters, while there are a million worlds in the Imperium, each of which is required to have a local PDF and raise IG regiments. So right there you have 1000 times more potential cultures to draw upon.

The Codex Astartes, which all chapters are still compliant towards in some way or another, serves the same function as any holy scripture. The occasional 'loose' degree of adherence to the Codex isn't necessarily something that sets Marines apart. There's little reason for Guard Regiments or Sisterhood sub-Orders to behave differently in regards to their own doctrinal adherence. And remember that, in truth, the vast majority of SM Chapters are in fact quite Codex compliant, following company structures and squad organization very closely.

Here's a look at Space Marine "Variety":


Vs Imperial Guard (actual) variety:


Heh. Note that the IG regiments don't require color images to be notably distinct from one another.




yeah except that to make your guard differant you need to have entirely differant mini's to represent that differance. meanwhile the large surfaces for space marines allows for you to easily use it as a wide canvas, to paint things and drape stuff off, which was the point gert was getting at. Marines are easily customized to represent differnt things, whereas guard, sisters etc aren't. sure I'm sure people can green stuff up furs and scales etc for cadians, but iMarines make it a lot easier to do, thanks to the broad surfaces etc. likewise, due to the shoulderpads etc being things it's easy to hammer out bits to customize Marines.

You can't produce shoudler pads for guard, sisters etc


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 05:53:35


Post by: Pyroalchi


But as the IG Codex shows you can build a ridiculous amount of custom regiments by combining legs, body, arms and heads of:
Cadians troopers (with Flak armor)
Cadian officers (without armor)
Catachans
Scions
Genestealer Neophytes
Skitarii (especially the heads and weapons)
baseline humans from the AoS range, especially empire

The are some examples like
indigan prefects: Neophyte legs, Scion Torso, Neophyte(?) arms, Skitarii Vanguard heads, Scion Backpacks
Or Miasman Redcoats: officer (longcoat) legs, Cadian armored torso, and arms, either AoS elfen ranger heads with Cadian Command squad respirators or Skitarii Ranger heads...
Or Savlar Chem dogs who combine Cadian legs with Neophyte bodies and heads etc.

Other than Marines (who might possibly interchange a bit with Stormcast, I'm not sure), IG can heavily be customized with GW parts. And often enough quite efficiently if you buy a box of Cadians, Scions, Neophytes each and build 2-3 different custom regiments out of all the bits/swap with other hobbyists doing the same.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 06:11:26


Post by: Insectum7


BrianDavion wrote:

. . .
yeah except that to make your guard differant you need to have entirely differant mini's to represent that differance.

A: Requiring a different model makes my point about variety.

B: Paint and a head swap will do if you're feeling low effort.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 13:55:55


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Both sides to this are true.

Guardsmen, like Space Marines, lend well to customisation and conversion, albeit in different ways.

The core Space Marine design of flat panels, broad empty spaces, and the encouragement of aping off of different cultures lends strongly to this player freedom. Similarly, the range of compatible human/humanoid kits for Guardsmen and the examples GW provides also gives Guardsmen a nice niche as an army of player freedom and creativity.

This is because both factions have been designed and encouraged to be treated in such a manner, whereas Sisters are not.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 17:34:16


Post by: Gert


Just to make a point about the whole "Look at all the Regiments shown in the Guard Codex" thing, we've seen them broken down into their constituent parts but there's no cost analysis behind that. So for the converted Regiments from the 8th Edition Astra Militarum Codex we have:
Spoiler:
Mordian Veteran - Cadian Command Squad (legs, torso, head) the torso and head are 1 each per box. Tank Crewman (arms) you might have some spare but nowhere near enough to make a Regiment of plastic Mordians and none are holding Lasguns in a firing position. Heavy Weapon Team (weapon) comes with loads of spare Lasguns. For this specific conversion (I say "specific" because any deviation would make this much harder) we're looking at around £70-ish if we cheat and get the Start Collecting Box. There is no cost-effective way of replicating this miniature en-masse without lots of sculpting.
Tanith Guardsman - Cadian Command Squad (legs, cape, head) the cape is 1 per box. Catachan Heavy Weapon Team (body, arms, weapon) lots of all of these parts. Tanith are easily one of the simplest Regiments to convert mostly down to the fact that the Camo-Cloak can cover problems you encounter.
Miasman Redcowl - Cadian Command Squad (legs, rebreather) you get 1 long coat per box but 5 rebreathers. Cadian Squad (body, arms, gubbins sort of) not really an issue. Wyldwood Rangers (head) not a serious purchase for just the cloaked heads and would only make sense if you also played Cities of Sigmar in AoS. This one is one of the very difficult ones and you'd have to do lots of sculpting or rely massively on 3rd parties to supply certain parts.
Chem Dogs - Cadian Command Squad (legs, arms) again only one long coat per box. GSC Cultists (body, head) not difficult to source. Overall one of the cheaper options.
Indigan Prefects - GSC Cultists (legs, arms). Scions (body, backpack). Skitarii (head). Tank Crewman (shoulder pads). This one is the worse offender. The amount of money you'd need to spend on even just a squad of these would be painful.
Ventrillian Nobles - 90% of this model is the Cadian Squad with a head swap from the Freeguild Pistoliers. Not particularly difficult.
Ork Hunter - 90% Catchan with some Ork bitz. Very easy.


The point I'm trying to make here is that making a custom Regiment may be easy in the sense that there are many human-scaled kits to convert with but when it comes to cost, at least 50% it's just not worth it compared to buying one box of Space Wolves and having enough bitz to last your lifetime.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 17:38:38


Post by: Insectum7


Space Marines are still more bound to the forms of their armor, whereas canonically (and even rules-wise) Guardsmen have varied far more even on that dimension. At the height of their customization Guardsmen (even just the basic infantry) could be wearing armor ranging from 4+ to 6+.


Arguably Sisters suffer in the variation department only because they've been such an overlooked faction for so long. Ease of modeling aside, there's little in-universe reason for them not to be just as varied as Space Marines.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 17:42:10


Post by: Gert


Apart from the whole organisation being under the thumb of generally conservative religious nuts that don't like different things and the legal requirement for them to be overtly female you mean?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 17:48:31


Post by: Insectum7


 Gert wrote:
Just to make a point about the whole "Look at all the Regiments shown in the Guard Codex" thing, we've seen them broken down into their constituent parts but there's no cost analysis behind that. So for the converted Regiments from the 8th Edition Astra Militarum Codex we have:
Spoiler:
Mordian Veteran - Cadian Command Squad (legs, torso, head) the torso and head are 1 each per box. Tank Crewman (arms) you might have some spare but nowhere near enough to make a Regiment of plastic Mordians and none are holding Lasguns in a firing position. Heavy Weapon Team (weapon) comes with loads of spare Lasguns. For this specific conversion (I say "specific" because any deviation would make this much harder) we're looking at around £70-ish if we cheat and get the Start Collecting Box. There is no cost-effective way of replicating this miniature en-masse without lots of sculpting.
Tanith Guardsman - Cadian Command Squad (legs, cape, head) the cape is 1 per box. Catachan Heavy Weapon Team (body, arms, weapon) lots of all of these parts. Tanith are easily one of the simplest Regiments to convert mostly down to the fact that the Camo-Cloak can cover problems you encounter.
Miasman Redcowl - Cadian Command Squad (legs, rebreather) you get 1 long coat per box but 5 rebreathers. Cadian Squad (body, arms, gubbins sort of) not really an issue. Wyldwood Rangers (head) not a serious purchase for just the cloaked heads and would only make sense if you also played Cities of Sigmar in AoS. This one is one of the very difficult ones and you'd have to do lots of sculpting or rely massively on 3rd parties to supply certain parts.
Chem Dogs - Cadian Command Squad (legs, arms) again only one long coat per box. GSC Cultists (body, head) not difficult to source. Overall one of the cheaper options.
Indigan Prefects - GSC Cultists (legs, arms). Scions (body, backpack). Skitarii (head). Tank Crewman (shoulder pads). This one is the worse offender. The amount of money you'd need to spend on even just a squad of these would be painful.
Ventrillian Nobles - 90% of this model is the Cadian Squad with a head swap from the Freeguild Pistoliers. Not particularly difficult.
Ork Hunter - 90% Catchan with some Ork bitz. Very easy.


The point I'm trying to make here is that making a custom Regiment may be easy in the sense that there are many human-scaled kits to convert with but when it comes to cost, at least 50% it's just not worth it compared to buying one box of Space Wolves and having enough bitz to last your lifetime.
Of course GW is going to prescribe building custom models with more GW kits. But there are also 3rd party outlets which offer more options than GW and at a (nuch) lower cost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Gert wrote:
Apart from the whole organisation being under the thumb of generally conservative religious nuts that don't like different things and the legal requirement for them to be overtly female you mean?
The Codex Astartes is arguably no less overbearing in terms of defining conventions. The Codex Astartes is also pretty effin specific, but some chapters are more deviant than others.

How spelled out in the lore is it that Sisters follow their doctrine so rigidly (and how well enforced the doctrine is?). My argument is that the only reason we see the (still pretty limited) variation in Space Marines is because Space Marines are under a microscope brought about by continued popularity (and therefore continued pressure to make more variants for $$$).

(Also, it's not like Space Marines aren't also highly conservative religious nuts)


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 18:13:19


Post by: Gert


 Insectum7 wrote:
Of course GW is going to prescribe building custom models with more GW kits. But there are also 3rd party outlets which offer more options than GW and at a (nuch) lower cost.

We're talking about diversity in a GW model range, 3rd party companies don't come into consideration. For that specific post even moreso.

The Codex Astartes is arguably no less overbearing in terms of defining conventions. The Codex Astartes is also pretty effin specific, but some chapters are more deviant than others.

The Codex is a set of guidelines. Not a single Chapter has to follow it to the letter, as we see within the background. There is nothing stopping the Ultramarines from deciding to go on crusading for eternity and increasing their numbers beyond the Codex limits. Many of the ex-Legions still had contingencies to basically operate as a Legion anyway such as the Last Wall Protocol or the way all Unforgiven Chapters are subservient to the Dark Angels. Chapters don't need to use the Codex preferred ranks, doctrines, rites, or insignia. The Ordo Astartes is a thing but it is a minor Ordo and it takes some heft deviation (usually the fact a Chapter has turned traitor) for sanctions to be brought down on a Chapter.

How spelled out in the lore is it that Sisters follow their doctrine so rigidly (and how well enforced the doctrine is?).

Honestly? I'm not sure as I don't have the SoB Codex but from what I've read both here and elsewhere, the organisation isn't fond of individualism if it breaks Church rules.

My argument is that the only reason we see the (still pretty limited) variation in Space Marines is because Space Marines are under a microscope brought about by continued popularity (and therefore continued pressure to make more variants for $$$).

Yeah, a limited variation on the eight or so big aesthetic/cultural groups plus numerous other smaller sub-groups and compatibility with its range that surpasses most others. Very limited.

(Also, it's not like Space Marines aren't also highly conservative religious nuts)

Depends on the Chapter, which would be a point to their background being much more fluid.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 18:45:33


Post by: Vatsetis


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Just to make a point about the whole "Look at all the Regiments shown in the Guard Codex" thing, we've seen them broken down into their constituent parts but there's no cost analysis behind that. So for the converted Regiments from the 8th Edition Astra Militarum Codex we have:
Spoiler:
Mordian Veteran - Cadian Command Squad (legs, torso, head) the torso and head are 1 each per box. Tank Crewman (arms) you might have some spare but nowhere near enough to make a Regiment of plastic Mordians and none are holding Lasguns in a firing position. Heavy Weapon Team (weapon) comes with loads of spare Lasguns. For this specific conversion (I say "specific" because any deviation would make this much harder) we're looking at around £70-ish if we cheat and get the Start Collecting Box. There is no cost-effective way of replicating this miniature en-masse without lots of sculpting.
Tanith Guardsman - Cadian Command Squad (legs, cape, head) the cape is 1 per box. Catachan Heavy Weapon Team (body, arms, weapon) lots of all of these parts. Tanith are easily one of the simplest Regiments to convert mostly down to the fact that the Camo-Cloak can cover problems you encounter.
Miasman Redcowl - Cadian Command Squad (legs, rebreather) you get 1 long coat per box but 5 rebreathers. Cadian Squad (body, arms, gubbins sort of) not really an issue. Wyldwood Rangers (head) not a serious purchase for just the cloaked heads and would only make sense if you also played Cities of Sigmar in AoS. This one is one of the very difficult ones and you'd have to do lots of sculpting or rely massively on 3rd parties to supply certain parts.
Chem Dogs - Cadian Command Squad (legs, arms) again only one long coat per box. GSC Cultists (body, head) not difficult to source. Overall one of the cheaper options.
Indigan Prefects - GSC Cultists (legs, arms). Scions (body, backpack). Skitarii (head). Tank Crewman (shoulder pads). This one is the worse offender. The amount of money you'd need to spend on even just a squad of these would be painful.
Ventrillian Nobles - 90% of this model is the Cadian Squad with a head swap from the Freeguild Pistoliers. Not particularly difficult.
Ork Hunter - 90% Catchan with some Ork bitz. Very easy.


The point I'm trying to make here is that making a custom Regiment may be easy in the sense that there are many human-scaled kits to convert with but when it comes to cost, at least 50% it's just not worth it compared to buying one box of Space Wolves and having enough bitz to last your lifetime.
Of course GW is going to prescribe building custom models with more GW kits. But there are also 3rd party outlets which offer more options than GW and at a (nuch) lower cost.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Gert wrote:
Apart from the whole organisation being under the thumb of generally conservative religious nuts that don't like different things and the legal requirement for them to be overtly female you mean?
The Codex Astartes is arguably no less overbearing in terms of defining conventions. The Codex Astartes is also pretty effin specific, but some chapters are more deviant than others.

How spelled out in the lore is it that Sisters follow their doctrine so rigidly (and how well enforced the doctrine is?). My argument is that the only reason we see the (still pretty limited) variation in Space Marines is because Space Marines are under a microscope brought about by continued popularity (and therefore continued pressure to make more variants for $$$).

(Also, it's not like Space Marines aren't also highly conservative religious nuts)


Men... ASTARTES ARE... DA KUSTUM BOYZ!!!!!!... No one else can be adapted like them... And definetly not the SOB that share absolutely no design space with Kustum Boyz... The fact that both armies are mono gender, elite forces, with a religious underpinning, part of The IOM, use bolters and power armour is just a coincidence!!!!


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 19:03:54


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Insectum7 wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Apart from the whole organisation being under the thumb of generally conservative religious nuts that don't like different things and the legal requirement for them to be overtly female you mean?
The Codex Astartes is arguably no less overbearing in terms of defining conventions. The Codex Astartes is also pretty effin specific, but some chapters are more deviant than others.
Specific in how Chapters are allowed to look? Not really. Even their iconography is varied among "Codex" Chapters. The only specificities of the Codex come to organisation and in combat doctrines, but even those aspects nearly always come second to the individual flavour and theme of the Chapter in question.

Sorry, but this one doesn't stick.

How spelled out in the lore is it that Sisters follow their doctrine so rigidly (and how well enforced the doctrine is?).
It's not spelled out, but it's absence is important to note.

Again - I've outright said in this thread how I'd actually like to see nearly all aspects of lore that constrain customisation to be abolished, be that in GW promoting different aesthetics and ideas in other factions (Sisters, for example), or in removing various bits of needlessly exclusive lore. But, as per the question in the OP, it's hardly controversial to admit that Sisters don't get the same chances to be customised that GW affords to Guardsmen and Space Marines.
My argument is that the only reason we see the (still pretty limited) variation in Space Marines is because Space Marines are under a microscope brought about by continued popularity (and therefore continued pressure to make more variants for $$$).
Sure, this is certainly possible - but you're still buying into my general point that Space Marines *are* given more variation than Sisters, like it or not.

(Also, it's not like Space Marines aren't also highly conservative religious nuts)
I mean, they kind of aren't? Highly conservative to existing Chapter doctrines, yes, religious to existing Chapter cults, yes, but that's very different to the centralised conservatism of the Sororitas.

Chapters are loyal to the Chapter. The Sororitas are loyal to the Church. There's a difference here.

Vatsetis wrote:ASTARTES ARE... DA KUSTUM BOYZ!!!!!!... No one else can be adapted like them...
I mean, yes. Perhaps with the exception of Guardsmen, yes, Space Marines are absolutely the dominant example of player customisation.

If this is sarcasm, you might want to posit an actual rebuttal, otherwise you're kinda just conceding the argument here, which I certainly wouldn't complain about.
And definetly not the SOB that share absolutely no design space with Kustum Boyz...
They don't share any more than the Custodes do. Is this a weak attempt at sarcasm? Again - your technique needs work.
The fact that both armies are mono gender, elite forces, with a religious underpinning, part of The IOM, use bolters and power armour is just a coincidence!!!!
So, like Custodes?

Hell, Custodes are another example of what I mean by limited customisation. All we get are various palette swaps and different missions - but these are small differences, barely noticeable. I'd like to see more variety in the Custodes, more aesthetic options available - different animal motifs, different forms of armour, and suchlike. But I'd be lying if I said that GW provided the ammunition for these changes, like how they don't provide such options for the Sororitas either.

If anything, you're making a stronger case for the Custodes and Sisters to be related.
But that would be getting off topic, wouldn't it?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 19:05:03


Post by: Insectum7


 Gert wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Of course GW is going to prescribe building custom models with more GW kits. But there are also 3rd party outlets which offer more options than GW and at a (nuch) lower cost.

We're talking about diversity in a GW model range . . .

Which is off topic really. Being easy to customize or not isn't really relevant, all this does is bring to focus that Space Marines are spoiled for choice in terms of kits because their product line is ginormous. But even so, the IG line still has had more variety of regimental uniform through the ages. Also, pretending that 3rd party models aren't an options is pretty disingenuous.

 Gert wrote:

The Codex Astartes is arguably no less overbearing in terms of defining conventions. The Codex Astartes is also pretty effin specific, but some chapters are more deviant than others.

The Codex is a set of guidelines. Not a single Chapter has to follow it to the letter, as we see within the background. There is nothing stopping the Ultramarines from deciding to go on crusading for eternity and increasing their numbers beyond the Codex limits. Many of the ex-Legions still had contingencies to basically operate as a Legion anyway such as the Last Wall Protocol or the way all Unforgiven Chapters are subservient to the Dark Angels. Chapters don't need to use the Codex preferred ranks, doctrines, rites, or insignia. The Ordo Astartes is a thing but it is a minor Ordo and it takes some heft deviation (usually the fact a Chapter has turned traitor) for sanctions to be brought down on a Chapter.

Uhhh, that's definitely not true.That would certainly bring suspicion down on the chapter and the Inquisition/high-lords would be very keen on scrutinizing such behavior.

But whose to say that sisterhood Doctrine has to be followed to the letter? And what IS that doctrine?


 Gert wrote:
How spelled out in the lore is it that Sisters follow their doctrine so rigidly (and how well enforced the doctrine is?).

Honestly? I'm not sure as I don't have the SoB Codex but from what I've read both here and elsewhere, the organisation isn't fond of individualism if it breaks Church rules.
Which means you're just making assertions that you aren't able to back up. How strict is the governing body of the Sisterhood, and how rigidly do they hold their sub-Orders to any doctrine?

 Gert wrote:
My argument is that the only reason we see the (still pretty limited) variation in Space Marines is because Space Marines are under a microscope brought about by continued popularity (and therefore continued pressure to make more variants for $$$).

Yeah, a limited variation on the eight or so big aesthetic/cultural groups plus numerous other smaller sub-groups and compatibility with its range that surpasses most others. Very limited.
Limited compared to Guard. Limited enough to require color to depict it (hint: because they look virtually identical otherwise).

 Gert wrote:
(Also, it's not like Space Marines aren't also highly conservative religious nuts)

Depends on the Chapter, which would be a point to their background being much more fluid.
Find me the chapter you feel is least bound by tradition. The vast majority of them have been largely codex adherent for the lifetime of the chapter up to 10,000 years. Only the simultaneous return of Guilliman and the sudden appearance of Primaris has bucked the trend. Even the notably deviant chapters like Space Wolves have their own traditions and beliefs that are followed intensely and govern the way they operate.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 19:14:39


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 Insectum7 wrote:
Also, pretending that 3rd party models aren't an options is pretty disingenuous.
Not exactly - not when the discussion has made it clear that it's GW not providing the same freedom of customisation that's the main factor here.

Sure, anyone can use any kind of third party thing to change whatever you like - but that's not even close to the same as GW explicitly encouraging such customisation.

And, for what it's worth, if we were to start including third-party additions as part of the repertoire of "customisable factions", Space Marines would *still* be far and away the most customisable.

How strict is the governing body of the Sisterhood, and how rigidly do they hold their sub-Orders to any doctrine?
Evidently strict enough that we don't see any major variety among the Sisterhood.

Yes, that's an argument from absence, which is, as I'm sure we'll all agree, stupid, but that's my point - there is an absence of creativity in GW's portrayal of the Sisters of Battle, and that's simply a fact.

Do I want that changed? Also yes, but that's not the topic.

Limited compared to Guard. Limited enough to require color to depict it (hint: because they look virtually identical otherwise).
Eh, not really. You can blame GW's specific digital copypaste design on that, because even with colour removed, an Ultramarine doesn't look like a Space Wolf, or a Storm Warden doesn't look like a White Scar.

Even the notably deviant chapters like Space Wolves have their own traditions and beliefs that are followed intensely and govern the way they operate.
Yes, absolutely agreed - but that's the thing: it's their own traditions that they are hidebound to, not the decrees and whims of a centralised Ecclesiarchy.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 19:16:06


Post by: Insectum7


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
 Gert wrote:
Apart from the whole organisation being under the thumb of generally conservative religious nuts that don't like different things and the legal requirement for them to be overtly female you mean?
The Codex Astartes is arguably no less overbearing in terms of defining conventions. The Codex Astartes is also pretty effin specific, but some chapters are more deviant than others.
Specific in how Chapters are allowed to look? Not really. Even their iconography is varied among "Codex" Chapters. The only specificities of the Codex come to organisation and in combat doctrines, but even those aspects nearly always come second to the individual flavour and theme of the Chapter in question.

Sorry, but this one doesn't stick.


I believe this is the only rebuttal required:

Even in how they look, Space Marine variety largely comes down to color.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
How spelled out in the lore is it that Sisters follow their doctrine so rigidly (and how well enforced the doctrine is?). It's not spelled out, but it's absence is important to note.
Pure assumption. Provide evidence that individual convents or minor Orders cannot deviate from prescribed doctrine. (A prescribed doctrine which isn't even well defined in the first place.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
Also, pretending that 3rd party models aren't an options is pretty disingenuous.
Not exactly - not when the discussion has made it clear that it's GW not providing the same freedom of customisation that's the main factor here.
You appear to be making the argument that the model products are defining a lore in a way that strictly contradicts the actual lore. Which is definitely not a good argument.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 19:24:59


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Insectum7 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Specific in how Chapters are allowed to look? Not really. Even their iconography is varied among "Codex" Chapters. The only specificities of the Codex come to organisation and in combat doctrines, but even those aspects nearly always come second to the individual flavour and theme of the Chapter in question.

Sorry, but this one doesn't stick.


I believe this is the only rebuttal required:
Spoiler:

Even in how they look, Space Marine variety largely comes down to color.
Oh wow! You chose the bland, dumbed down template designed versions! That's definitely not cherry picking data, is it?

Tell me again how this is the same as this?

Again, I'm happy to admit that the image you've picked is definitely indicating that the only difference in in colour palette, but we're also all aware that this is a case of GW cutting corners with lazy Codex design, as the wealth of other art depicting unique and distinct Chapters would indicate.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
How spelled out in the lore is it that Sisters follow their doctrine so rigidly (and how well enforced the doctrine is?). It's not spelled out, but it's absence is important to note.
Pure assumption.
As would be any assumption that there was diversity.

All I'm saying is that GW don't showcase it. That's a fact.
Provide evidence that individual convents or minor Orders cannot deviate from prescribed doctrine. (A prescribed doctrine which isn't even well defined in the first place.)
Provide evidence they can.

For what it's worth, I personally agree that Sisters should be more diverse. The fact of the matter is that right now, they're not displayed as such. Can you dispute that? Can you show me culturally diverse Sisters in GW's material?



Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Not exactly - not when the discussion has made it clear that it's GW not providing the same freedom of customisation that's the main factor here.
You appear to be making the argument that the model products are defining a lore in a way that strictly contradicts the actual lore.
Like your reductive picture of Space Marines defining lore in a way that strictly contradicts actual lore too?

What I'm saying is that the models are absolutely a form of GW's intent when it comes to what factions they deem "customisable" or not. Guardsmen are customisable still - evidenced by the cases of the Ventrillians and Salvar. I'm not disputing that.
However, if you need to use third party cases to argue how "GW market this faction as customisable", you're missing the point. It doesn't matter how many third party things exist if GW aren't putting in the legwork to encourage that material.

Third party stuff exists for guardsmen *because* GW encouraged it in the past. They haven't with Sisters.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 19:50:17


Post by: Insectum7


I don't require 3rd party models to make my point. GW makes the point for me by showing a wider variety of lowly Guardsmen from different regiments than yes, even your (cherry picked) veteran UM vs. veteran SW example.

If you paint Intercessors Gray and put a wolf on them, they're Space Wolves. If you paint them blue and put an inverted omega on them, they're Ultramarines.

If you paint Catachans blue they don't become Mordian Iron Guard.

If you have the current Sisters codex, find a statement that minor Orders Millitant don't deviate from the major ones, and that local convents don't have their own heraldries/traditions etc.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 20:00:53


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Insectum7 wrote:I don't require 3rd party models to make my point.
Sure, that's why you didn't say "But there are also 3rd party outlets which offer more options", did you?
GW makes the point for me by showing a wider variety of lowly Guardsmen from different regiments than yes, even your (cherry picked) veteran UM vs. veteran SW example.
And how many of those regiments are still marketed?

*Showed, is perhaps a better way to describe your comment.

Also, I don't hear you saying how those two pictures I showed (which are completely standard images for those factions) are the same thing. Strange.

If you paint Intercessors Gray and put a wolf on them, they're Space Wolves. If you paint them blue and put an inverted omega on them, they're Ultramarines.

If you paint Catachans blue they don't become Mordian Iron Guard.
But if you paint Cadians in white and black, they become the "Truskan Snowhounds", or the "Faeburn Vanquishers". Sorry, but again, Guardsmen are just as guilty of being reduced down to colour schemes.

However, in your example, if I take a Space Wolves model, with all the trappings that Space Wolves *are entirely supported as having*, and paint it blue, it ain't an Ultramarine. If I take an Ultramarine, bedazzled in all the finery of Macragge, as they have also been outlined to be able to look like, they would never look like a Space Wolf. You see, that's because GW have made it clear that Space Wolves and Ultramarines can have drastically different appearances, if you so wanted them to - the same cannot be said of the Sororitas.

You see - we can both play this little game.

If you have the current Sisters codex, find a statement that minor Orders Millitant don't deviate from the major ones, and that local convents don't have their own heraldries/traditions etc.
If you have it, can you show me an example of a minor Order Militant that does, because that was the main point I've been making this whole time.

You seem to be under the impression that I'm trying to justify that Sisters aren't diverse. I'm not. I'm stating that they have never been portrayed as diverse in the same way that Space Marines or Guardsmen are. Can you disprove that?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 20:17:05


Post by: Karak Norn Clansman


It is crucial to remember that any official range we see in Warhammer 40'000 these days will be streamlined and monolithic in looks. This is not how things actually look in-setting, but a necessity enforced upon Games Workshop by the Codex threadmill, army book straitjacket and need to supply ever-growing army ranges with expensive plastic moulds.

Outside of the ever-popular Space Marines in all their various flavours, only once did GW truly dabble in releasing a swathe of different Imperial forces of the same army but from different worlds: The 1990s Imperial Guard range.

1980s Imperial Army was all Necromundan.

1990s Imperial Guard did a swathe of different regiments.

2000s and 2010s Imperial Guard was all Cadian, with Catachan command kit and Vostroyans as the last spurt of brilliant creativity for niche Guard regiments. They did have some variant regiments in a White Dwarf article, including highlanders and Savlar Chem Dogs.

Forgeworld did pick up the slack with Elysians and Death Korps of Krieg, but both required extensive model ranges and could not just be done with max three kits and call it a day. Unlike 1980s Warhammer releases, mind you.

Adepta Sororitas have been neglected for so long, that only now may we see them grow into a whole flora of peculiar local orders and strange insular microcultures. This process is well under way among fan artists, some of whose concepts' look very good. Eventually we may see Sisters of Battle receive a treatment of variant flavours, if their popularity prove high enough and if GW designers have ideas they want to add to the setting.

The easiest way to implement it is to add conversion kits as add-ons to existing kits. But there must exist a striking enough aesthetic with popular enough demand for this to make commercial sense. This is where background and art comes into play, in order to create demand.

The bottom line is this:

Do not confuse the streamlined official artwork and model lines with the incredibly varied Imperium of Man. The need for plastic kits for vast army ranges has enforced creative limits on Games Workshop, ones the studio has fought back against every decade. Specialist Games, Dreadfleet, Space Hulk and so on are all attempts to break free from the straitjacket and recapture the freewheeling 1980s creativity that characterized the studio.

If GW don't do weird orders and peculiar local cultural variants, then we, the community, will have to do so. True to the spirit of the setting.

I for one hope to doodle an Ethiopian nun in space Sororitas down the line.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 20:18:03


Post by: Vatsetis


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:I don't require 3rd party models to make my point.
Sure, that's why you didn't say "But there are also 3rd party outlets which offer more options", did you?
GW makes the point for me by showing a wider variety of lowly Guardsmen from different regiments than yes, even your (cherry picked) veteran UM vs. veteran SW example.
And how many of those regiments are still marketed?

*Showed, is perhaps a better way to describe your comment.

Also, I don't hear you saying how those two pictures I showed (which are completely standard images for those factions) are the same thing. Strange.

If you paint Intercessors Gray and put a wolf on them, they're Space Wolves. If you paint them blue and put an inverted omega on them, they're Ultramarines.

If you paint Catachans blue they don't become Mordian Iron Guard.
But if you paint Cadians in white and black, they become the "Truskan Snowhounds", or the "Faeburn Vanquishers". Sorry, but again, Guardsmen are just as guilty of being reduced down to colour schemes.

However, in your example, if I take a Space Wolves model, with all the trappings that Space Wolves *are entirely supported as having*, and paint it blue, it ain't an Ultramarine. If I take an Ultramarine, bedazzled in all the finery of Macragge, as they have also been outlined to be able to look like, they would never look like a Space Wolf. You see, that's because GW have made it clear that Space Wolves and Ultramarines can have drastically different appearances, if you so wanted them to - the same cannot be said of the Sororitas.

You see - we can both play this little game.

If you have the current Sisters codex, find a statement that minor Orders Millitant don't deviate from the major ones, and that local convents don't have their own heraldries/traditions etc.
If you have it, can you show me an example of a minor Order Militant that does, because that was the main point I've been making this whole time.

You seem to be under the impression that I'm trying to justify that Sisters aren't diverse. I'm not. I'm stating that they have never been portrayed as diverse in the same way that Space Marines or Guardsmen are. Can you disprove that?


Are you a Lawyer Smudge??

Because you certainly argue as if you were in court trying to get your client - who you know its guilty- declared not guilty.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 21:54:03


Post by: Gert


Thats just how regular people have discussions. Insectum and Smudge are the doing the exact same things as each other because that's how discussions work.
They both look at the other person's points and discuss them. However, Insectum is arguing "Sisters are X" and then asking to be proved wrong instead of proving themselves right by providing evidence that supports their claim.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 21:55:34


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Karak Norn Clansman wrote:It is crucial to remember that any official range we see in Warhammer 40'000 these days will be streamlined and monolithic in looks. This is not how things actually look in-setting, but a necessity enforced upon Games Workshop by the Codex threadmill, army book straitjacket and need to supply ever-growing army ranges with expensive plastic moulds.

Outside of the ever-popular Space Marines in all their various flavours, only once did GW truly dabble in releasing a swathe of different Imperial forces of the same army but from different worlds: The 1990s Imperial Guard range.

1980s Imperial Army was all Necromundan.

1990s Imperial Guard did a swathe of different regiments.

2000s and 2010s Imperial Guard was all Cadian, with Catachan command kit and Vostroyans as the last spurt of brilliant creativity for niche Guard regiments. They did have some variant regiments in a White Dwarf article, including highlanders and Savlar Chem Dogs.

Forgeworld did pick up the slack with Elysians and Death Korps of Krieg, but both required extensive model ranges and could not just be done with max three kits and call it a day. Unlike 1980s Warhammer releases, mind you.

Adepta Sororitas have been neglected for so long, that only now may we see them grow into a whole flora of peculiar local orders and strange insular microcultures. This process is well under way among fan artists, some of whose concepts' look very good. Eventually we may see Sisters of Battle receive a treatment of variant flavours, if their popularity prove high enough and if GW designers have ideas they want to add to the setting.

The easiest way to implement it is to add conversion kits as add-ons to existing kits. But there must exist a striking enough aesthetic with popular enough demand for this to make commercial sense. This is where background and art comes into play, in order to create demand.

The bottom line is this:

Do not confuse the streamlined official artwork and model lines with the incredibly varied Imperium of Man. The need for plastic kits for vast army ranges has enforced creative limits on Games Workshop, ones the studio has fought back against every decade. Specialist Games, Dreadfleet, Space Hulk and so on are all attempts to break free from the straitjacket and recapture the freewheeling 1980s creativity that characterized the studio.

If GW don't do weird orders and peculiar local cultural variants, then we, the community, will have to do so. True to the spirit of the setting.

I for one hope to doodle an Ethiopian nun in space Sororitas down the line.
I am in agreement with this, absolutely. I've bolded the sections of this (very well put) point to reinforce what I'm *actually* saying: that GW chooses to let Space Marines (and Guardsman, in earlier years) have more opportunities and creative space for customisation, and chooses not to give those same flexibilities to Sororitas. GW might have a universe which *should* accommodate for all kinds of player flexibilities, but they certainly don't give every faction the same creative freedoms and flexibilities right now.

Sisters are not afforded the same diversity that is given to other factions. This is simply a fact. It doesn't have to be true for the future, and it doesn't have to stop anyone from making their own unique Sororitas. I'm not saying that Sisters shouldn't be customisable right now, or that I don't want GW to make them more customisable, but simply answering the question in the OP that they are currently not regarded with the same kind eye that GW has afforded Astartes and Guardsmen.

Is this an incorrect statement to make?

Vatsetis wrote:Are you a Lawyer Smudge??

Because you certainly argue as if you were in court trying to get your client - who you know its guilty- declared not guilty.
No, I am neither of these things, and you appear to be making inferences that do not exist in my post. I have no idea what on earth you're going on about, only that you've chosen not to comment on the actual discussions raised on your own thread.

If you can prove the "guilt" of this hypothetical client, please, raise your point. I'll debunk it like all your other ones.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 22:09:23


Post by: Insectum7


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Spoiler:
Insectum7 wrote:I don't require 3rd party models to make my point.
Sure, that's why you didn't say "But there are also 3rd party outlets which offer more options", did you?
GW makes the point for me by showing a wider variety of lowly Guardsmen from different regiments than yes, even your (cherry picked) veteran UM vs. veteran SW example.
And how many of those regiments are still marketed?

*Showed, is perhaps a better way to describe your comment.

Also, I don't hear you saying how those two pictures I showed (which are completely standard images for those factions) are the same thing. Strange.

If you paint Intercessors Gray and put a wolf on them, they're Space Wolves. If you paint them blue and put an inverted omega on them, they're Ultramarines.

If you paint Catachans blue they don't become Mordian Iron Guard.
But if you paint Cadians in white and black, they become the "Truskan Snowhounds", or the "Faeburn Vanquishers". Sorry, but again, Guardsmen are just as guilty of being reduced down to colour schemes.

However, in your example, if I take a Space Wolves model, with all the trappings that Space Wolves *are entirely supported as having*, and paint it blue, it ain't an Ultramarine. If I take an Ultramarine, bedazzled in all the finery of Macragge, as they have also been outlined to be able to look like, they would never look like a Space Wolf. You see, that's because GW have made it clear that Space Wolves and Ultramarines can have drastically different appearances, if you so wanted them to - the same cannot be said of the Sororitas.

You see - we can both play this little game.
None of your above responses hold up to any respectable scrutiny, and I'll leave you with that.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If you have the current Sisters codex, find a statement that minor Orders Millitant don't deviate from the major ones, and that local convents don't have their own heraldries/traditions etc.
If you have it, can you show me an example of a minor Order Militant that does, because that was the main point I've been making this whole time.


The Rise of the Lesser Orders Militant
. . . These small, scattered bases . . .over time became independent of the Orders that founded them, establishing their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.


-Witch Hunters Codex pg. 6


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Gert wrote:
However, Insectum is arguing "Sisters are X" and then asking to be proved wrong instead of proving themselves right by providing evidence that supports their claim.
I'm asking for you to provide evidence of your assertions, of which none has been provided.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 22:22:20


Post by: Lord Zarkov


-deleted, quoting was a mess and I accidentally deleted my actual post trying to fix it


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 23:17:00


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Insectum7 wrote:
Spoiler:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:I don't require 3rd party models to make my point.
Sure, that's why you didn't say "But there are also 3rd party outlets which offer more options", did you?
GW makes the point for me by showing a wider variety of lowly Guardsmen from different regiments than yes, even your (cherry picked) veteran UM vs. veteran SW example.
And how many of those regiments are still marketed?

*Showed, is perhaps a better way to describe your comment.

Also, I don't hear you saying how those two pictures I showed (which are completely standard images for those factions) are the same thing. Strange.

If you paint Intercessors Gray and put a wolf on them, they're Space Wolves. If you paint them blue and put an inverted omega on them, they're Ultramarines.

If you paint Catachans blue they don't become Mordian Iron Guard.
But if you paint Cadians in white and black, they become the "Truskan Snowhounds", or the "Faeburn Vanquishers". Sorry, but again, Guardsmen are just as guilty of being reduced down to colour schemes.

However, in your example, if I take a Space Wolves model, with all the trappings that Space Wolves *are entirely supported as having*, and paint it blue, it ain't an Ultramarine. If I take an Ultramarine, bedazzled in all the finery of Macragge, as they have also been outlined to be able to look like, they would never look like a Space Wolf. You see, that's because GW have made it clear that Space Wolves and Ultramarines can have drastically different appearances, if you so wanted them to - the same cannot be said of the Sororitas.

You see - we can both play this little game.
None of your above responses hold up to any respectable scrutiny, and I'll leave you with that.
And likewise, your lack of response (especially about the reskinned "Cadians") says all the same. Happy to leave it there though.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If you have the current Sisters codex, find a statement that minor Orders Millitant don't deviate from the major ones, and that local convents don't have their own heraldries/traditions etc.
If you have it, can you show me an example of a minor Order Militant that does, because that was the main point I've been making this whole time.


The Rise of the Lesser Orders Militant
. . . These small, scattered bases . . .over time became independent of the Orders that founded them, establishing their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.


-Witch Hunters Codex pg. 6
I believe the question we both posed was "current Sisters Codex", not the Witch Hunters Codex? I'll say again - if you have the current Sisters codex, can you show me an example of minor Order Militant that does deviate significantly?

Even ignoring that you weren't able to find what we both asked for, does the Witch Hunters Codex present any examples of these lesser orders? Any detailed accounts of their diversity, in the same way that GW were more than happy to do for Guardsmen and Space Marines at the same time, and in the decades since?

 Gert wrote:
However, Insectum is arguing "Sisters are X" and then asking to be proved wrong instead of proving themselves right by providing evidence that supports their claim.
I'm asking for you to provide evidence of your assertions, of which none has been provided.
The evidence of my assertions comes in what I'm asserting - that there's been no effort on GW's part to treat Sisters as being as diverse as Space Marines or Guardsmen, for which the absence of evidence proves the assertion. The assertion comes from that there *is* no evidence contrary, seeing as it took you having to go into the Witch Hunters Codex to even find a mention of this, a mention which is bereft of seemingly any support that would even hold a candle to the glow that Space Marines and Guardsmen bask in.

Do you actually know what I'm asserting, because this response seems to make me think you don't?

I'm not asserting that Sisters *can't* have diversity. I'm asserting that GW has not given Sisters the same nourishment and opportunities for that diversity that they've given to other factions. The evidence exists in that there *are* no diverse depictions of Sisters from GW - which I must assume is the case, given how your only example was a single line in the Witch Hunters Codex.

Does that make my stance clearer to you? Do you have an objection to it? If so, would you care to explain where?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 23:32:23


Post by: Insectum7


I've given written evidence that Sisters can (and are) varied beyond their primary Orders.

I've given evidence that IG are more varied than Space Marines.

I've seen nothing that states the contrary of either, other than some bizarre notion that because GW hasn't continued to make Valhallan models, they must no longer exist.

This appears to be over.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 23:38:11


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 Insectum7 wrote:
I've given written evidence that Sisters can (and are) varied beyond their primary Orders.
That's not what we both asked for, was it - you explicitly asked it to be from the current Sisters Codex. I asked you the same, and you failed to provide anything.

Don't blame me for your own inability to hold yourself to the standard you set. I yet again ask for *examples* of these diverse Orders, and while I normally wouldn't ask this, as you brought it up, I want to see it from the *current Sisters Codex* - as that was the standard you set.
I've given evidence that IG are more varied than Space Marines.
That's hardly what I'm really bothered about discussing right now. As far as I'm concerned, Astartes and Guardsmen are both head and shoulders over Sisters of Battle when it comes to the customisation afforded to them, and I've evidenced this repeatedly.

I've seen nothing that states the contrary of either, other than some bizarre notion that because GW hasn't continued to make Valhallan models, they must no longer exist.
That's not what I've been claiming at all, so you've done an excellent job of making my last post all the more necessary. I suggest you re-read it, but, as we both seem to agree:
This appears to be over.
You're right - if you can't understand what I'm actually saying, and would rather make up what I'm claiming instead, then this is a waste of both our time.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/03 23:56:02


Post by: Karak Norn Clansman


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I am in agreement with this, absolutely. I've bolded the sections of this (very well put) point to reinforce what I'm *actually* saying: that GW chooses to let Space Marines (and Guardsman, in earlier years) have more opportunities and creative space for customisation, and chooses not to give those same flexibilities to Sororitas. GW might have a universe which *should* accommodate for all kinds of player flexibilities, but they certainly don't give every faction the same creative freedoms and flexibilities right now.

Sisters are not afforded the same diversity that is given to other factions. This is simply a fact. It doesn't have to be true for the future, and it doesn't have to stop anyone from making their own unique Sororitas. I'm not saying that Sisters shouldn't be customisable right now, or that I don't want GW to make them more customisable, but simply answering the question in the OP that they are currently not regarded with the same kind eye that GW has afforded Astartes and Guardsmen.

Is this an incorrect statement to make?


Thank you kindly. I'm not yet read up on the latest publications, but I've followed miniature and artwork with great interest, and from what I can glimpse here in this thread and from the visuals, then it is a correct statement to make.

It's not much different from other new factions, such as the Adeptus Mechanicus (even more neglected until recently than Adepta Sororitas). I know there are older references to varied Skitarii aesthetics, including feathers and pelts on some forgeworlds. But I highly doubt there are any officially published conversion guides for converting exotic Skitarii, especially since that could throw a bone for third party producers. This streak of IP mania is destructive for creativity, no doubt about it. Though it does not mean we may not eventually see an injection of visual diversity beyond colour schemes for the Adeptus Mechanicus or Adepta Sororitas.

The Sisters of Battle is a no-brainer. Give them the Space Marine Chapter treatment. Come up with all manner of wacko insular orders, some based upon crazed themes, others upon historical nun orders. Any writings about all Orders following the same tenets strictly should be thrown out the window as shoddy worldbuilding unworthy of 40k. Akin to that 1990s lone corrupted Sister of Battle background, said to be the only Sororitas to have fallen to Chaos. Yawn, did that really show up in an official GW publication? The Battle Sisters' background is wonderful and plays to the spirit of the setting so well on so many levels (female Space Marines can go to hell), but there seem to be a few odd ugly warts which GW never would have given the Space Marines or Imperial Guard even in the very beginning. Amateurish. But I guess they just lack ideas for injecting bizarre variety into the Sororitas like they've done the Astartes and Militarum?

At any rate 5'000 years is plenty of time for sprawling institutions to mutate and pop off all manner of parochial microcultures. They can not all be standardized. And they should not.

GW has always been good at building grimdark sandboxes, opening for people to build their own corners of the universe. GW has always been good by leading with example, coming up with all manner of strange subfactions. The same should obviously be done to the Mechanicus and the Sororitas. Insular microcultures is at the core of Warhammer 40'000.

That said, the monolithic streamlined look itself is being handled very well. The new Sororitas artwork with a religious procession is stunning. And having new models released in this day and age means that they are both exquisitely made, and lovingly given fun details like pigeons and a hilarious scorched heretic carcass. I would start a Sororitas army over an Astartes one any day of the week. 40k as a whole is being handled with a lot more care and respect for its bonkers, dark and ironic roots than most people give Games Workshop credit for. It's in a far better shape after 30 years than one could expect it to be.

Viva Imperator!


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 00:30:32


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


I wonder, is the Eccleisarchy truly uniform at the highest levels? I'm not talking about local variations on some backwater planet, I'm talking about the Church itself.

We know the Inquisition isn't a monolithic organization as you have puritan groups like Thorians and more radical groups who are fine with creating demon hosts, so wouldn't the Church also have several denominations? Much like how irl we have Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox? I would think that a parody of religion would mock the existence of there being different variations of the same core tenets of belief.

Wouldn't such denominations influence Sororitas as well?

Another thought, if the Imperium is so large and unwieldy that effective communication is impossible, would a complex, uniform belief system be even possible beyond a simple set of tenets?



SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 00:36:56


Post by: Karak Norn Clansman


 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
I wonder, is the Eccleisarchy truly uniform at the highest levels?

We know the Inquisition isn't a monolithic organization as you have puritan groups like Thorians and more radical groups who are fine with creating demon hosts, so wouldn't the Church also have several denominations? Much like how irl we have Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox? I would think that a parody of religion would mock the existence of there being different variations of the same core tenets of belief.

Wouldn't such denominations influence Sororitas as well?



Of course. All of the Imperium is built upon a parody of schismatic religioys splits and theological mutations resulting in aggressively myopic violence. It's all a grand parody of Byzantine religious strife, medieval religious strife and of early modern religious strife in particular.

And there is a lot of historical religious strife outside of European contexts to milk for inspiration in the future: Take medieval Buddhist warlords presenting severed heads to their Buddha statues in Central Asia, for instance. GW has only scratched the surface. Look to their Redemptionists and House Cawdor on Necromunda for clues.

Insular microcultures is key to the retrograde, depraved and parochial nature of the Imperium of Man. They must exist everywhere, at every level. Only the Custodes may be small and focused enough to escape it (unless you subscribe to TTS' joke version of a... sensual schism within the Adeptus Custodes).

The Ecclesiarchy in particular should be highly fractured and highly schismatic, with lots and lots of religious infighting. Check out Kid_Kyoto's writing on civilian life on an Imperial world for a brilliant example. Schismatic violence is part of everyday life.

This is pivotal to 40k worldbuilding: Nothing human in can be uniform in the Age of Imperium. That kind of thing only existed during the Dark Age of Technology.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 01:19:37


Post by: Jack Flask


 Insectum7 wrote:
I've given written evidence that Sisters can (and are) varied beyond their primary Orders.

I've given evidence that IG are more varied than Space Marines.

I've seen nothing that states the contrary of either, other than some bizarre notion that because GW hasn't continued to make Valhallan models, they must no longer exist.

This appears to be over.


+1 to you.
And that's before even addressing how in lore there are variants of everything from lasguns up through titans based purely on the Forge World and sometimes year that something was produced on.

Not to mention all the instances of rules/models not reflecting practical deviations that make sense in a living universe. Things like Skitarii being outfitted with lasguns and using Rhinos, ad-hoc situational troop formations, or Orks looting all manner of enemy weapons.

Plus (I think it was either you or Fezzrik) made a good point that with the Cicatrix Maledictum there's an entire half of the Imperium cut off from Mars. So even if we assume that up until Gathering Storm all SoB power armor was made on Mars, well going forward you'll probably start seeing a lot of Nihilus Sisters using jury-rigged or locally sourced replacement parts leading to increased variance.

The reality though is that Smudge is trying to double down on SoB being "overly restrictive" because it supports one of his constantly repeated strawmen from the female Space Marines thread about how Space Marines are the only army in the game that allow creativity, ergo not having female Space Marines is discrimination against female players.

That's why he keeps trying to ignore/downplay the wide amount of canonical variance in IG, Orks, Chaos, etc and why he's suddenly so concerned about the sanctity of the lore. Otherwise it would weaken his arguments elsewhere on the forum...


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 01:24:49


Post by: JNAProductions


Smudge isn't saying "There should be no variance in SoB!"

They're saying that, as presented, there isn't much variance from GW. Is that incorrect?

Also, Smudge is not he. They use gender-neutral pronouns. (Check their sig.)


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 01:58:16


Post by: Jack Flask


 JNAProductions wrote:
Smudge isn't saying "There should be no variance in SoB!"

They're saying that, as presented, there isn't much variance from GW. Is that incorrect?


No, it's irrelevant.

The question in the OP is as follows:
Vatsetis wrote:
Is there any reason why Sorotitas cant be diverse likes astartes or astra militarum... Sure they all follow the same faith and have the same armor... But cant they be diverse (in lore and aesthetics) as the other main IOM factions... Afterall Catholics (main inspiration for SOB) in Africa, America, Ireland, Italy or Poland dont look or behave in similar manner outside some common features?


The answer that Smudge keeps repeating is: "well the pictures and models all look the same, but the Space Marines look different, so if A=B then B=C!"

Which doesn't actually answer the question outside of some reason Smudge made up by Smudgeself about how it's heretical or something for SoB to look different (?). Citation needed.

Also arguing using the art and models is completely disingenuous because they are not reflective of the entire lore, mostly just the sliver of it that GW is able to put into production and sell.

So no, you and Smudge fail on both counts.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 02:05:16


Post by: Insectum7


 JNAProductions wrote:
Smudge isn't saying "There should be no variance in SoB!"

They're saying that, as presented, there isn't much variance from GW. Is that incorrect?
Not really, no. Here is an excerpt from their first post in the thread:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
In as much diversity as the Ecclesiarchy allow them to have. The issue is that Sisters are much more centrally organised than Space Marines, who are diverse by virtue of being able to rule their own independent fiefdoms, and less numerous than Guardsmen, who are diverse because trying to create some unified single type of Guardsman is both logistically and culturally nightmarish.

Sisters are much more closely tied to the Ecclesiarchy and to their major convents and holy sites - they exist because of the Ecclesiarchy, not the other way around, and therefore are very closely tied to the decrees and edicts that it presents. As a result, they are less likely to have that same free reign that many other Imperial organisations have (such as the Space Marines, Guardsmen, Knights, AdMech, and Inquisition).

From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well.


Not to mention seemingly to argue that Space Marines are somehow more varied than Guard, which is canonically obviously false.

There isn't a good reason to believe that Sisters are somehow more restricted than Space Marines in terms of appearance or doctrine, and the only reason we see more variation in Space Marines is because GW sells lots and lots of Space Marines, and therefore lavishes attention on them.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 06:19:02


Post by: Vatsetis


Well I suppose that if the FSM are to have a design space of their own... then there is a need for SOB to be framed as a niche faction akin to the Custodes (which implies a fixed aesthetics)... rather than the female counterpart of adeptus astartes (which would allow more freedom model wise).

Its an interesting ideological debate... with profound implications about the relationship between container and content.

Talking about ideological schism in the ecclesiarchy.





SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 10:48:13


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Karak Norn Clansman wrote:The Sisters of Battle is a no-brainer. Give them the Space Marine Chapter treatment. Come up with all manner of wacko insular orders, some based upon crazed themes, others upon historical nun orders. Any writings about all Orders following the same tenets strictly should be thrown out the window as shoddy worldbuilding unworthy of 40k.
...
At any rate 5'000 years is plenty of time for sprawling institutions to mutate and pop off all manner of parochial microcultures. They can not all be standardized. And they should not.

GW has always been good at building grimdark sandboxes, opening for people to build their own corners of the universe. GW has always been good by leading with example, coming up with all manner of strange subfactions. The same should obviously be done to the Mechanicus and the Sororitas. Insular microcultures is at the core of Warhammer 40'000.
Yes to the idea that Sisters should get Chapter treatment. 40k *should* be a sandbox, for all things regarding player creativity - including the single part of your post that I think falls into the same "shoddy worldbuilding unworthy of 40k" category.

That's what my comments have been in support of this whole thread - that Sisters *aren't* given that same treatment (answering OP's question), but that they *should*.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:I wonder, is the Eccleisarchy truly uniform at the highest levels? I'm not talking about local variations on some backwater planet, I'm talking about the Church itself.
Again, while in practice, and if we were to understand that nothing in the lore is truly set in stone, I'd absolutely bet that the Ecclesiarchy is varied. However, we rarely see this variation in practice, unlike with things like the Guard and Space Marines.

Don't take that to mean the Ecclesiarchy *isn't* varied, but that it is not shown as such.

Another thought, if the Imperium is so large and unwieldy that effective communication is impossible, would a complex, uniform belief system be even possible beyond a simple set of tenets?
A lot of the strength of the Ecclesiarchy and the belief system it spreads comes from it's simplicity. The actual doctrine used to hold power over the people is incredibly versatile and flexible to local beliefs. The issue comes from how Sisters and higher ranking Ecclesiarchial personnel are highborn, and come from centralised power structures and institutions. Because of that centralisation, the higher ranks probably would be more uniform - very much being a case of the lower class citizens believing a very different set of rules to the upper classes.

Jack Flask wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
I've given written evidence that Sisters can (and are) varied beyond their primary Orders.

I've given evidence that IG are more varied than Space Marines.

I've seen nothing that states the contrary of either, other than some bizarre notion that because GW hasn't continued to make Valhallan models, they must no longer exist.

This appears to be over.


+1 to you.
And that's before even addressing how in lore there are variants of everything from lasguns up through titans based purely on the Forge World and sometimes year that something was produced on.
No-one's disputing that, because we can *see* those variants to lasguns.

Can you show me these variants of Sisters? No, because that's the point I'm making - GW haven't showcased the variety in the Sororitas. Prove me wrong, show me some noticeably varied Sisters from GW. That's literally all you need to do.

Not to mention all the instances of rules/models not reflecting practical deviations that make sense in a living universe. Things like Skitarii being outfitted with lasguns and using Rhinos, ad-hoc situational troop formations, or Orks looting all manner of enemy weapons.
Skitarii didn't exist in rules until recently - their background being a varied, eclectic mix has more weight than their model line - and you can see the remnants of other weapons *in* various Ork weapons, especially Lootas and Flash Gitz.

But throughout the history of the Sisters existing, I don't think I've ever seen a Sister that didn't fit GW's set aesthetic design for them. With Skitarii, we've seen multiple written examples of their difference before they got models. We see ad-hoc troop formations in nearly every book. We see Orks looting weapons literally in their model designs. But where do we see varied Sisters?

Again - GW are happy to make other things varied, but not with Sisters. That's not me claiming that Sisters *can't* be varied, but simply that GW don't do it.

Plus (I think it was either you or Fezzrik) made a good point that with the Cicatrix Maledictum there's an entire half of the Imperium cut off from Mars. So even if we assume that up until Gathering Storm all SoB power armor was made on Mars, well going forward you'll probably start seeing a lot of Nihilus Sisters using jury-rigged or locally sourced replacement parts leading to increased variance.
Would we also perhaps be seeing Space Marines with replacement parts and non-standard forms of recruitment, given how they're cut off as well?

Again, you're absolutely missing my comments. It's not that non-standard Sisters can't be a thing. Read my comments, I explicitly say that people should do what they want with their models, with whatever justification they want for it. All I am mentioning is that GW don't do this, and haven't shown off the wonderful variety that Sisters could have. You can prove me wrong by *showing* me some of these varied Sisters, but it seems you are unable to as well.

The reality though is that Smudge is trying to double down on SoB being "overly restrictive" because it supports one of his constantly repeated strawmen from the female Space Marines thread about how Space Marines are the only army in the game that allow creativity, ergo not having female Space Marines is discrimination against female players.
Actually, that's not my point at all.

I'm not saying that Sisters *can't* have creativity - only that they are not presented as it. You could debunk this claim if you could find me presentations of Sisters which are customised. However, evidently, you can't.

However, I find it absolutely hilarious the hoops that people are jumping through to say "BUT THERE'S NO WAY THE IMPERIUM COULD BE STANDARDISED AND HOW THERE COULD NEVER BE ANY DIFFERENCES, HOW DARE YOU SAY MY SISTERS CAN ONLY LOOK ONE WAY!!!", and in the same breath will fight to standardise how Space Marines can be recruited.
Read my posts - I'm not fighting for standardisation. I'm arguing for player freedoms and choices - but that can only be done if we acknowledge that GW aren't exactly being 100% fair in their presentation of various factions.
I'm 100% pro-creativity in the Adepta Sororitas - but that comes with understanding that the Sororitas are currently not incentivised to be a creatively free as other factions. If you wish to disprove this, show me some customised Sisters that GW have promoted.

That's why he keeps trying to ignore/downplay the wide amount of canonical variance in IG, Orks, Chaos, etc and why he's suddenly so concerned about the sanctity of the lore. Otherwise it would weaken his arguments elsewhere on the forum...
Again, this is blatantly untrue for two reasons.
First, "he" didn't say anything.
Second, did you miss where I outright called for all lore that prevented player customisation to be thrown out? I'm the furthest thing away from "sanctity of the lore" you can get - all I'm saying is that GW aren't giving the Sisters of Battle fair treatment.

Seriously, actually read what the argument is.

JNAProductions wrote:Smudge isn't saying "There should be no variance in SoB!"

They're saying that, as presented, there isn't much variance from GW. Is that incorrect?

Also, Smudge is not he. They use gender-neutral pronouns. (Check their sig.)
Spot on. It's not that Sisters shouldn't be varied, but that right now, they're not.

It'd be like saying "there's no food in my fridge". That's not to say that there *shouldn't* be food in my fridge, or that I'm not allowed it, but simply that at the current moment, there is no food in there.

And I appreciate the latter.

Jack Flask wrote:No, it's irrelevant.

The question in the OP is as follows:
Vatsetis wrote:
Is there any reason why Sorotitas cant be diverse likes astartes or astra militarum... Sure they all follow the same faith and have the same armor... But cant they be diverse (in lore and aesthetics) as the other main IOM factions... Afterall Catholics (main inspiration for SOB) in Africa, America, Ireland, Italy or Poland dont look or behave in similar manner outside some common features?


The answer that Smudge keeps repeating is: "well the pictures and models all look the same, but the Space Marines look different, so if A=B then B=C!"
The OP asks "is there any reason why Sororitas can't be as diverse" - the answer to that is "no, there is no reason Sisters can't be diverse, but GW don't recognise or promote this diversity".

This isn't difficult to understand, unless you're being wilfully obtuse. Space Marines were only brought up because OP decided to compare them.

Which doesn't actually answer the question outside of some reason Smudge made up by Smudgeself about how it's heretical or something for SoB to look different (?). Citation needed.
When did I say that Sororitas looking different was heresy?
What I *said* was that GW don't show Sororitas looking any different, you can do what you like. Gee, it's almost the exact stance I've repeated said about 40k lore - that the lore should encourage people to do what they want, instead of try and fit into pr-eset categories.

Also arguing using the art and models is completely disingenuous because they are not reflective of the entire lore, mostly just the sliver of it that GW is able to put into production and sell.
What lore is there that paints the Sisters as varied? One line from an outdated publication? I can also find you other slivers of lore from outdated publications - are they also reflective of the lore?

And before you paint this as "Smudge says that old lore is irrelevant!" or "Smudge says the Sisters shouldn't be varied because it's not mentioned in modern books", that's precisely the opposite of what I'm saying - I'm saying that GW should make their lore more reflective of customisable Sisters, and actually include some alternative designs, instead of their only mention being in a nearly two-decades old Codex.

Again - GW clearly care about diversity and customisation in Space Marines and Astra Militarum lines to feature conversions and custom Chapters regularly. They don't with Sisters. Why do they treat them so differently?

Insectum7 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Smudge isn't saying "There should be no variance in SoB!"

They're saying that, as presented, there isn't much variance from GW. Is that incorrect?
Not really, no. Here is an excerpt from their first post in the thread:
Spoiler:


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
In as much diversity as the Ecclesiarchy allow them to have. The issue is that Sisters are much more centrally organised than Space Marines, who are diverse by virtue of being able to rule their own independent fiefdoms, and less numerous than Guardsmen, who are diverse because trying to create some unified single type of Guardsman is both logistically and culturally nightmarish.

Sisters are much more closely tied to the Ecclesiarchy and to their major convents and holy sites - they exist because of the Ecclesiarchy, not the other way around, and therefore are very closely tied to the decrees and edicts that it presents. As a result, they are less likely to have that same free reign that many other Imperial organisations have (such as the Space Marines, Guardsmen, Knights, AdMech, and Inquisition).

From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well.


Not to mention seemingly to argue that Space Marines are somehow more varied than Guard, which is canonically obviously false.
Where in my first post do I say that Sisters absolutely shouldn't be customised? I said that they have as much freedom as the Ecclesiarchy allows for - the same can be said of Guardsmen and Space Marines.

Oh yeah, and what happened to the *rest* of my post, which you blatantly refused to quote? Here, let me repost it here, in case it slipped your mind:
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Their designs are much more ornate, their details less conducive to the easy modification and variety that Space Marines have been afforded. Sisters are very strongly (and consistently) drawn from specifically European Catholicism and Medieval/Renaissance trappings - unlike the variety of "holy warrior" traditions that Space Marines find themselves drawn from - therefore, drawing from other branches of Catholicism isn't what we see GW doing with their specific design cues for the Sororitas. Even *if* the Sisters' lore was more conducive to them being decentralised and being able to create radically different religious and cultural identities, their model range and GW's aesthetic design for them has not supported this, in the same way that Necrons are strongly linked specifically to Egyptian designs and cultural coding. Maybe you *could* create a Necron dynasty which more closely reflects the culture of, say, feudal Europe, but aesthetically, their design does not reflect this, and therefore are not inherently as diverse a faction as Space Marines or Guardsmen. This isn't to say that creativity is impossible, but that it is simply not as promoted in certain factions as it is in others, and you would be actively fighting against the factional aesthetic design established if you were to deviate too far from that core design.


TL;DR - due to how they are described as a faction, and how GW treats them on a design standpoint, Sisters are not as conducive to player creativity as certain other factions.


EDIT: Oh, and in regard to ethnicity? There is no reason in the first place that any Imperial faction would be mono-ethnic. GW definitely don't present Sisters as mono-ethnic.
In case you're put off by all that text, I've emphasised the points that I make where I make clear that Sisters should be more creativly free, but that GW don't present it as such.

Seriously, if you're going to claim to reference my first post in this topic, actually reference the whole first post.
There isn't a good reason to believe that Sisters are somehow more restricted than Space Marines in terms of appearance or doctrine
Great - so show it to me.
and the only reason we see more variation in Space Marines is because GW sells lots and lots of Space Marines, and therefore lavishes attention on them.
Bolded for emphasis.

That's literally my whole point - we see more variation in Space Marines.

Thank you for making my point for me. That's literally all there was. Glad you could finally get there.

Vatsetis wrote:Well I suppose that if the FSM are to have a design space of their own... then there is a need for SOB to be framed as a niche faction akin to the Custodes (which implies a fixed aesthetics)... rather than the female counterpart of adeptus astartes (which would allow more freedom model wise).
I have no idea what you're suggesting here, but I'm entirely on board for both women Astartes and more customisable Sisters. I see no reason why one should come at the expense of the other.

But this isn't about women Astartes, is it?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 11:00:44


Post by: Haighus


Do we actually have a good idea of what number of Soriritas exist? Both combatant and overall numbers?

Given the vast majority of the Soritas are directly affiliated with the Orders Majoris and relatively centralised, it seems likely that Sisters on the whole will conform to their defined aesthetic. However, that in no way precludes a huge amount of aesthetic (and cultural) variety in the more isolated Orders Minoris, even if the actual numbers of Sisters in such Orders are relatively small.

I think that allows for an organisation that, on the whole, is more homogenous than Marines and certainly than Guard and PDFs, but still accommodates a great deal of variety in the fringe sufficient to allow whatever player theme they fancy. In other words, both aspects are not contradictory together because they are not absolutes. You see this in Guard and Space Marine fluff too (mostly to justify the limited model lines...): many Guard regiments copy the illustrious Cadians, and many Space Marine Chapters are descended from and/or choose to copy the Ultramarines as the originators of the Codex Astartes.

It is not at all difficult to come up with lore-consistency backstories for the aesthetic of a given Order. You could have an especially puritanical order that eschews the gaudy bling of others (trim off the gubbins on the model). You could have an order that sees artistry as an expression of religion and has a strong theme of covering themselves in illuminated manuscripts- this would perhaps blend well with a more medieval Celtic/Irish style of catholicism. You could have a far-flung order that has chronic supply issues and has negotiated a supply contract with the local forge world, and therefore all their power armour has a completely different style (perhaps a more Byzantine cataphractii style, if keeping to Christian cultures with easily switchable iconography. Armour based on styles elsewhere is entirely doable, just more work to blend with the model range and iconography). An order could be on a permanent pilgrim crusade and therefore have no fixed supply lines, so their armour is a mishmash of repaired and salvaged pieces, supplemented with whatever local patterns of power armour can be purchased through donations and gifts to their mission.

The more they deviate, the more backstory you can use to fill the gap.

Will other Soriritas declare yours heretics? Maybe. Sounds like a great background story to a Sister-vs-Sister mirror match on the tabletop! Some of the Imperium's biggest civil wars were about religious schisms, including the very war that brought the Sisters into prominence under Goge Vandire. Internecine Ecclesiarchical conflicts will happen all the time, so this is absolutely no barrier to creating a unique aesthetic and can add some tension to stories and campaigns involving more "vanilla" Sisters conforming closely to core doctrines.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 11:06:58


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


 Haighus wrote:
Do we actually have a good idea of what number of Soriritas exist? Both combatant and overall numbers?
More than Space Marines, for sure - my guess would be in the several billions, across the galaxy?

Given the vast majority of the Soritas are directly affiliated with the Orders Majoris and relatively centralised, it seems likely that Sisters on the whole will conform to their defined aesthetic. However, that in no way precludes a huge amount of aesthetic (and cultural) variety in the more isolated Orders Minoris, even if the actual numbers of Sisters in such Orders are relatively small.

I think that allows for an organisation that, on the whole, is more homegenous than Marines and certainly than Guard and PDFs, but still accommodates a great deal of variety in the fringe sufficient to allow whatever player theme they fancy.
That's the general vibe I have too. Sisters definitely should have freedom to be customised, and there's enough Sisters out there in the galaxy that it wouldn't be particularly egregious to have lots of non-standard Sororitas out there, but also that, more often, they are more aesthetically homogenous, in the same way that *most* Space Marines follow the Codex Astartes. However, that doesn't prevent players from picking and choosing what works for their own little toy soldiers.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 11:18:11


Post by: Haighus


Also, in terms of ease of creating a new aesthetic for a given person's Sisters, I do think it will generally be easier to take themes from other real-world Christian aesthetics- like the aforementioned Ethiopian branch of Christianity, or Coptics, Orthodox, various Protestant groups, local flavours of Catholicism etc- and adapt the GW models accordingly.

Mainly because real life has already gone to the trouble of blending the iconography and trappings with pre-existing local cultures

As Christian missionaries tried their hand just about everywhere, there is a pretty broad range of aesthetics to start with.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 11:22:05


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


I'm still disappointed they haven't taken advantage of the Great Rift yet. Seeing an alternate Imperium that arose after being split from Terra and the Eccleisarchy there diverging from Terra's version would be neat.
It would be like the schism between the Orthodox and Catholic Church.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 11:25:42


Post by: Gert


I'm excited for the Dawn of Fire series where we definitely get onto the other side of the Rift eventually. Spear of the Emperor gives a cursory glance at how an Astartes Chapter might operate, i.e. using Navy vessels in the fleet even though its technically illegal.
The kind of conflict I want to see is between a group of Imperials who flat out refuse to expand their domain and Guilliman/Custodes who are ordering them to disperse their forces.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 12:03:55


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I was excited for it too, until I read it. It's better left unread and unpurchased. Until GW gets some idea of where it's lore is going, I'm sick of reading new lore that trips over if not completely breaks established lore. DoF series might as well be a return to GoTo's Backflipping Terminators with Lasguns.

Also, +1 to Smudge is a force for good in these forums, and is generally a font of wisdom in these discussions. They are arguing for GW to promote MORE customization, which they have had an extremely difficult time of in the last 3 editions. Look on all the how to paint videos. They are how to paint the models on the cover. GW doesn't promote kitbashing, customization of their core models, or diversity in their models. Because that doesn't generate the profit machine to go chug chug.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 12:12:48


Post by: Gert


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I was excited for it too, until I read it. It's better left unread and unpurchased. Until GW gets some idea of where it's lore is going, I'm sick of reading new lore that trips over if not completely breaks established lore. DoF series might as well be a return to GoTo's Backflipping Terminators with Lasguns.

How so?
There's been 2 books and neither have trampled any sort of previous background I have seen.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 12:13:30


Post by: CthuluIsSpy


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I was excited for it too, until I read it. It's better left unread and unpurchased. Until GW gets some idea of where it's lore is going, I'm sick of reading new lore that trips over if not completely breaks established lore. DoF series might as well be a return to GoTo's Backflipping Terminators with Lasguns.

Also, +1 to Smudge is a force for good in these forums, and is generally a font of wisdom in these discussions. He's arguing for GW to promote MORE customization, which they have had an extremely difficult time of in the last 3 editions. Look on all the how to paint videos. They are how to paint the models on the cover. GW doesn't promote kitbashing, customization of their core models, or diversity in their models. Because that doesn't generate the profit machine to go chug chug.


Aye, I noticed that too. I remember how on the website and rule books there used to be hobbying articles. How to convert, how to make terrain, how to paint, alternate army lists to represent more esoteric forces.
They don't have those nowdays, nowadays it's "buy this" and "paint your dudes to look like this company approved denomination"
Oh sure, they don't outright forbid you from converting or painting how you want, but they don't encourage it as much as they used to anymore outside the odd token showcase of someone's army.
I think that's a pity.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 12:31:17


Post by: Gert


I mean there's a consistent feature in WD (Galactic Warzones) that showcases conversions. Index Astartes features conversions all the time. Whenever guest armies are shown on WarCom they usually feature heavy conversions. Tale of 4 Warlords often has lots of converted stuff. Chris Peach is basically the GW Converted Model presenter on Warhammer TV and most other presenters do it as well, Nick Bayton's Primaris Terminators or Ben Bailey's Jade Paladins for example.
Just because it isn't in primary marketing (which it hasn't been for a very very very long time) doesn't mean it isn't there.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 12:37:42


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


The most notable examples of any kind of GW "promoted" customisation (emphasis on promoted, as in, GW actively showcasing and revealing custom schemes, and how to fully customise your own models, not just showcasing creations from other hobbyists) I'd have to say come from the Astra Militarum Codex and White Dwarf multi-part series for the Tome Keepers Chapter.

In the case of the Militarum, GW readily show kitbashes and how these could be widely applied across an army for a unique custom look. In the case of the Tome Keepers, GW showcase model customisation, homebrew lore, bespoke rules, and conversion of not just the army, but of individual characters within the Tome Keepers roster.

As I said - it's not that Sisters can't be customised, or that they shouldn't be, but that they aren't afforded the same treatment that Guardsmen and Space Marines have both historically had. That's the main point that I'm making here.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/04 13:23:03


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I'm so wrong, I just realized I mis-labeled you smudge and I wanted to publicly call it out. I will edit it now, and I apologize.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/05 21:12:16


Post by: Insectum7


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
?
Insectum7 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Smudge isn't saying "There should be no variance in SoB!"

They're saying that, as presented, there isn't much variance from GW. Is that incorrect?
Not really, no. Here is an excerpt from their first post in the thread:
Spoiler:


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
In as much diversity as the Ecclesiarchy allow them to have. The issue is that Sisters are much more centrally organised than Space Marines, who are diverse by virtue of being able to rule their own independent fiefdoms, and less numerous than Guardsmen, who are diverse because trying to create some unified single type of Guardsman is both logistically and culturally nightmarish.

Sisters are much more closely tied to the Ecclesiarchy and to their major convents and holy sites - they exist because of the Ecclesiarchy, not the other way around, and therefore are very closely tied to the decrees and edicts that it presents. As a result, they are less likely to have that same free reign that many other Imperial organisations have (such as the Space Marines, Guardsmen, Knights, AdMech, and Inquisition).

From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well.


Not to mention seemingly to argue that Space Marines are somehow more varied than Guard, which is canonically obviously false.
Where in my first post do I say that Sisters absolutely shouldn't be customised? I said that they have as much freedom as the Ecclesiarchy allows for - the same can be said of Guardsmen and Space Marines.

Oh yeah, and what happened to the *rest* of my post, which you blatantly refused to quote? Here, let me repost it here, in case it slipped your mind:
Sgt_Smudge wrote:Their designs are much more ornate, their details less conducive to the easy modification and variety that Space Marines have been afforded. Sisters are very strongly (and consistently) drawn from specifically European Catholicism and Medieval/Renaissance trappings - unlike the variety of "holy warrior" traditions that Space Marines find themselves drawn from - therefore, drawing from other branches of Catholicism isn't what we see GW doing with their specific design cues for the Sororitas. Even *if* the Sisters' lore was more conducive to them being decentralised and being able to create radically different religious and cultural identities, their model range and GW's aesthetic design for them has not supported this, in the same way that Necrons are strongly linked specifically to Egyptian designs and cultural coding. Maybe you *could* create a Necron dynasty which more closely reflects the culture of, say, feudal Europe, but aesthetically, their design does not reflect this, and therefore are not inherently as diverse a faction as Space Marines or Guardsmen. This isn't to say that creativity is impossible, but that it is simply not as promoted in certain factions as it is in others, and you would be actively fighting against the factional aesthetic design established if you were to deviate too far from that core design.


TL;DR - due to how they are described as a faction, and how GW treats them on a design standpoint, Sisters are not as conducive to player creativity as certain other factions.


EDIT: Oh, and in regard to ethnicity? There is no reason in the first place that any Imperial faction would be mono-ethnic. GW definitely don't present Sisters as mono-ethnic.
In case you're put off by all that text, I've emphasised the points that I make where I make clear that Sisters should be more creativly free, but that GW don't present it as such.

Seriously, if you're going to claim to reference my first post in this topic, actually reference the whole first post.
There isn't a good reason to believe that Sisters are somehow more restricted than Space Marines in terms of appearance or doctrine
Great - so show it to me.
and the only reason we see more variation in Space Marines is because GW sells lots and lots of Space Marines, and therefore lavishes attention on them.
Bolded for emphasis.

That's literally my whole point - we see more variation in Space Marines.

Thank you for making my point for me. That's literally all there was. Glad you could finally get there.

Saying they sky is blue doesn't absolve any culpability for claiming trees are purple. You've tried to make a lore centric argument (the actual topic of the thread) that SOBs will have less variety than Space Marines. I've just pointed out that's not necessarily true, and provided an actual quote to back it up.

You could make a completely equivalent quote about Space Marine variety in regards to codex adherence, roughly that "The vast majority of chapters are heavily codex adherent, but there are some that are less so."

If you can bring some actual research to the table, like a quote from a recent publication that overwrites my 3rd ed book, please provide it. So far you haven't provided much beyond the absurd claim that because specific models dont exist they must not exist in the lore.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/05 21:19:23


Post by: JNAProductions


If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.

You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.

I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/05 21:28:22


Post by: Lord Zarkov


 JNAProductions wrote:
If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.

You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.

I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?


Fwiw the novel Requiem Infernal shows a minor order who are fairly divergent in religious sect and hierarchy. But from the descriptions given their equipment and uniforms are all standard pattern and they have all the normal different types of Sororitas (militant and non-militant) other than those introduced in the most recent codices.

Edit: came out last year, so most up to date background.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/05 21:30:05


Post by: Insectum7


 JNAProductions wrote:
If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.

You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.

I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
There's not a statute of limitations on lore that I'm aware of.

If anybody with a more current book comes up with something to countermand my reference, that's great. Seriously does the opposing side just refuse to do any research?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/05 21:35:33


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Insectum7 wrote:Saying they sky is blue doesn't absolve any culpability for claiming trees are purple.
Except that's not what I said.

To put this in context properly would be me saying that most trees we've seen presented in botanist journals aren't purple, but there's nothing stopping you from making them so.

You're the one acting like I've made some great sweeping claim that dictates how all Sisters are supposed to look. I've stuck with my main point that GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions. That doesn't mean people *can't* customise their Sisters, but it definitely *does* mean something in the context of the OP which seeks to compare Astartes and Guardsmen.

Had the OP not done so, I would not have made that connection, but OP *did* ask for that comparison between them. I explained that Sisters are not demonstrated (in GW's various materials, aside from a single line in a nearly-two decades old book) to be as varied, but that they could do whatever they wanted with their models.
You've tried to make a lore centric argument (the actual topic of the thread) that SOBs will have less variety than Space Marines. I've just pointed out that's not necessarily true, and provided an actual quote to back it up.
And I've presented that in terms of *actual material put out*, there very much *is* less variety than Astartes.

The actual topic asked why/if Sisters were considered less diverse than Astartes. I posited a potential lore explanation, but ultimately said that you could ignore that if one so wanted, but that the main sticking point was that GW did not present much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but did do so with the aforementioned factions. Ergo, there *was* a difference in how diverse they were treated.

You provided a quote, yes (interestingly, not one that adhered to your own conditions and standards you levied at me), and I don't disagree with that quote. However, a single quote from a nearly two-decades old book is not the same thing as multiple varied depictions of both Guardsmen and Space Marines, and you well know that, especially considering you seem more than aware that Guardsmen and Space Marines also have different "levels" of depiction as "varied".

I'm not arguing that Sisters aren't, or can't, be varied - only that GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions.

You could make a completely equivalent quote about Space Marine variety in regards to codex adherence, roughly that "The vast majority of chapters are heavily codex adherent, but there are some that are less so."
Yes, you absolutely can - the difference is that we *see* these non-adherent Chapters, and that they are given extensive information and lore surrounding their deviancy, and their cultures, and why they're distinctly different from other Chapters.

The same cannot be said of these once-mentioned varied Sisters, because (deep breath) - GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions.

Is my argument sinking in yet?

If you can bring some actual research to the table, like a quote from a recent publication that overwrites my 3rd ed book, please provide it.

I have.
It's called the simple fact that GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions. This fact is self-evident, because there is little variation in how GW present their Sisters of Battle, which I've invited people to disprove repeatedly.

You still haven't.
So far you haven't provided much beyond the absurd claim that because specific models dont exist they must not exist in the lore.
That's not what I'm claiming at all.

In case you've gotten this far, and decided to skip to the end, don't worry, I'll repeat what my claim is, the claim I've re-iterated in this thread repeatedly:
GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions.

Is this statement wrong? If so, show me some variation in GW's Sisters - not just allusions to it.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lord Zarkov wrote:Fwiw the novel Requiem Infernal shows a minor order who are fairly divergent in religious sect and hierarchy. But from the descriptions given their equipment and uniforms are all standard pattern and they have all the normal different types of Sororitas (militant and non-militant) other than those introduced in the most recent codices.

Edit: came out last year, so most up to date background.
Thank you for providing an example! As I'm not familiar with the text, do you mind if I ask in what way they're divergent, even if not on an aesthetic level? My own Sisters are somewhat divergent from other Orders, but are also aesthetically similar to the "default" look.

Insectum7 wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.

You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.

I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
There's not a statute of limitations on lore that I'm aware of.
Of course not, but again, you'd think that something so relevant and important would crop up in a more recent publication - again, were you not also the one to cherrypick from modern (rather flat) artwork to claim that Space Marines all looked the same, whereas older artwork would have shown how incorrect this was?

I'm not denying your quote, only attaching it with the little footnote that this is the only real reference to variety within the Sororitas (with the culture-only exception of Requiem Infernal, as helpfully presented above), as compared to the reams of variety we see in both the Guard and Astartes.
If anybody with a more current book comes up with something to countermand my reference, that's great.
If anybody can find any *actual* examples of variety, instead of allusions to it, that would be even better
Seriously does the opposing side just refuse to do any research?
What research is there to be done - there is a self-evident *lack* of evidence, which is what my argument comes from - that GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions.

What you're asking is like saying "prove to me that there's no food in your fridge" - I can open the door, and show you there's nothing in there - that *is* my proof. Now, if you could root around in my fridge and find me some food, that'd be great, and it would prove me wrong, but you seem unable to find any, possibly because *there is no food in my fridge*, just like how there's little variation of design in how GW have presented their Sisters of Battle, in comparison to other factions.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/05 22:13:08


Post by: Vatsetis


I really think this thread has entered a rat wheel... We can go on circle arround the same arguments, but its hard for nothing new to emerge right now... And certainly it dosent look as anyone is going to change their minds.

Better to leave the debate to rest for a while and to mature meanwhile.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 01:08:33


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


So the best I can possibly provide is the recent revision of the entire Sisters Repentia line. Whereas before, it was boobs and bikinis with large swords, now it's more body suits and giant swords, but with some leathery bits. Much more tactical, less "male gaze" stupidity. I hate the new Penitent Engines though. I think given the entire lineup was JUST taken out of it's pewter state only two years ago, I think we agree to give GW some time on creating new and interesting "customizable" designs? As it is right now, from a lore stand point, they have pretty much railroaded themselves into a Female only Catholic Cult with Battle plate and Bolters. They are extremely intolerant of change or any modification of the past. It's going to take a Primaris level re-write of their existing doctrines/lore before GW is even capable of saying things like "Anyone can be a SoB" or "SoB can be non-standard". Speaking entirely from a LORE standpoint here.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 05:26:28


Post by: Insectum7


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

. . . Except that's not what I said. . .
Insectum7 wrote:If you can bring some actual research to the table, like a quote from a recent publication that overwrites my 3rd ed book, please provide it.
I have. . .

There has to be some particular hallmark of insanity when someone is vehemently claiming to not be doing a thing, and then going right ahead and doing that very thing.

You are claiming to not be making a claim about lore, but instead about models, and then you're turning right around and using models to claim lore.

Models are not the single defining variable when it comes to lore, that should be obvious.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
again, were you not also the one to cherrypick from modern (rather flat) artwork to claim that Space Marines all looked the same, whereas older artwork would have shown how incorrect this was?
It's not cherry picked. A similar chart is in every Space Marine codex going all the way back to before codexes even exist, back through the Compilation (1991) and the OG Rogue Trader (1987) book itself.


Vatsetis wrote:
I really think this thread has entered a rat wheel... We can go on circle arround the same arguments, but its hard for nothing new to emerge right now... And certainly it dosent look as anyone is going to change their minds.

Better to leave the debate to rest for a while and to mature meanwhile.

All you need is someone who has access to one of the more recent publications to either find a similar piece of text about minor Orders, or to prove the omission of such a line. It should be easy for anyone with a current codex.

I'll note that the quote provided about traditions, doctrines, livery, and titles" covers all aspects of Space Marine appearance (and more) variation off the top of my head.

Space Wolves have Rune Priests instead of Librarians = title
Space Wolves organize into "Great Companies" rather than the strictly-codex 10 = doctrine
Space Wolves have their own unique traditions = traditions
Space Wolves wear pelts and wolf teeth = livery


Bonus: Double insanity!!:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

The framework for Sisters should be "the Adepta Sororitas engage in multiple different forms of worship of the Emperor, ranging from different methods of waging war, private rituals and ceremonies, or other more esoteric means of showing their devotion" - right there, you have a framework for what they might do, without constraining and saying "no, they definitely don't do this".


The piece of lore I found, again:

The Rise of the Lesser Orders Militant
. . . These small, scattered bases . . .over time became independent of the Orders that founded them, establishing their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.


-Witch Hunters Codex pg. 6

I've literally provided a statement you've claimed to want, and you're bending over backwards to be upset about it and deny it's relevance.

There's a reason you are the sole dakkanaut I have on ignore.



SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 06:45:12


Post by: Lord Damocles


'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.'
Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13


'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.'
Codex: Adepta Sororitas (6th ed. ebook), pg.12


'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.'
[Codex] 'Sisters of Battle' (5th ed.) in White Dwarf 380 (US), pg.92




SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 09:09:14


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Insectum7 wrote:There has to be some particular hallmark of insanity when someone is vehemently claiming to not be doing a thing, and then going right ahead and doing that very thing.

You are claiming to not be making a claim about lore, but instead about models, and then you're turning right around and using models to claim lore.

Models are not the single defining variable when it comes to lore, that should be obvious.
Did I say they were? No. Did I limit the evidence I asked of you only to models?* Also no. I asked you to find me any material that showed us aesthetical diverse Sisters - be that artwork, models, or literature. And here I am, still waiting on you to show me this.

Face it - it doesn't exist. And that's fine, you don't *need* pre-existing material to inspire whatever the hell you want to do - but when my argument is "GW haven't shown the variety within the Sororitas faction", that's a pretty damning piece of evidence supporting it.

Did you even read my comment, or are you just competing in a strawman contest here?

*Also, I still haven't forgotten how you asked me to find evidence only from the most current Codex, which I then asked you to do the same, and you had to go diving into a two-decades old book instead. I don't disagree with the quote, especially in the light of Damocles' helpful excerpts above, but come on, hold yourself to the same standards, please.
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
again, were you not also the one to cherrypick from modern (rather flat) artwork to claim that Space Marines all looked the same, whereas older artwork would have shown how incorrect this was?
It's not cherry picked. A similar chart is in every Space Marine codex going all the way back to before codexes even exist, back through the Compilation (1991) and the OG Rogue Trader (1987) book itself.
"It's not cherry picked!!" they say, knowing full well that other art exists which fully distinguishes between Chapter aesthetics.

I'm not denying that Astartes share the same base armour pattern, but to act like that's the only depiction we have is wilfully ignorant.
All you need is someone who has access to one of the more recent publications to either find a similar piece of text about minor Orders, or to prove the omission of such a line. It should be easy for anyone with a current codex.
Thankfully, we've had that posted for us - and it's actually rather interesting!

I'll also mention that you don't even need that to "prove" it - you only need to show us an actual depiction of these varied Sisters. After all, if GW treated Sisters like they treated Astartes and Guardsmen, we'd surely see or read about descriptions of these visually distinct Sororitas, yes?

I'll note that the quote provided about traditions, doctrines, livery, and titles" covers all aspects of Space Marine appearance (and more) variation off the top of my head.

Space Wolves have Rune Priests instead of Librarians = title
Space Wolves organize into "Great Companies" rather than the strictly-codex 10 = doctrine
Space Wolves have their own unique traditions = traditions
Space Wolves wear pelts and wolf teeth = livery
You're absolutely right! But guess what - I can read about these differences in books. I can see these differences in the artwork. I can represent these differences on my models with readily available bits. I can actually see and visualise these differences, both in the Space Wolves, but in multiple other Chapters too, because GW go out of their way to do so.

Show me Sisters who you can say the same for, because that's been my point all along - that GW do not represent them.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
The framework for Sisters should be "the Adepta Sororitas engage in multiple different forms of worship of the Emperor, ranging from different methods of waging war, private rituals and ceremonies, or other more esoteric means of showing their devotion" - right there, you have a framework for what they might do, without constraining and saying "no, they definitely don't do this".


The piece of lore I found, again:

The Rise of the Lesser Orders Militant
. . . These small, scattered bases . . .over time became independent of the Orders that founded them, establishing their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.


-Witch Hunters Codex pg. 6

I've literally provided a statement you've claimed to want, and you're bending over backwards to be upset about it and deny it's relevance.
Actually, I've never denied that quote - read my argument.

Firstly, I found your comment amusing because you weren't able to fulfil the criteria that you yourself had set (you asked me to quote from the current Codex, I asked the same of you, and you couldn't even do that).
Secondly, a single line is not the same as multiple artistic depictions of diversity, and you well know this, considering the tantrum you threw over the idea of Guardsmen and Space Marines being considered "equally diverse". You're evidently aware that not all forms of diversity are made equal, so why are you arguing that this one is? It honestly just sounds like you're being contrarian, and ignoring my actual comments and arguments to do it.

I'm not denying your quote exists. What I *am* saying is that a single line saying "guys, we PROMISE that Sisters can be diverse!!!" isn't the same as "hey folks, look at all these cool examples of diverse Chapters and regiments, see how you can make your own!!"
Does that make sense?

There's a reason you are the sole dakkanaut I have on ignore.
I really don't care if you do or don't, but I'd suggest *actually* ignoring me and not responding if you're going to make that comment - otherwise, it just looks like an empty statement. But you do you, it's none of my business.

Lord Damocles wrote:'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.'
Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13
Thank you for the examples! I've only quoted the first one (from the 8th ed Codex), both as it being the most recent source, but also as I'm actually genuinely surprised to see that it plays into both sides of the discussion - that the Sororitas *are* aesthetically near identical, and seem to only be separated by their rites and rituals, which we already long knew, and which I was agreeing with.

I didn't actually expect them to say outright that they "[cast] aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into", and actually are so aesthetically similar.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 15:12:45


Post by: JNAProductions


 Lord Damocles wrote:
'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.'
Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13


'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.'
Codex: Adepta Sororitas (6th ed. ebook), pg.12


'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.'
[Codex] 'Sisters of Battle' (5th ed.) in White Dwarf 380 (US), pg.92


Thanks for providing that. So it looks like, lore-wise, GW has "given permission" (not that it's needed) to mess with the base aesthetics.

Still not shown in any models-unless, from that White Dwarf, are there examples of converted Sisters? I don't buy White Dwarf, so I cannot access the magazine to check myself.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 15:58:09


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


The closest I have is the issue on the SoS that I have, where it had submissions by random people for their own stylized SoS. It was really just palette swaps. Are we counting palette swaps as "diversity"? I don't think we are. There has never been any releases that I am aware of to offer "extra bits" sprus. There are a ton for things like Chaos.

That gives me an idea, Fallen Sisters. They now worship Khorne, and are all spikes and Skulls.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 16:38:15


Post by: Pyroalchi


They have it a bit difficult as I'm not aware of a lot of model lines selling (power)armored females or bits for those.

There are loads of un/flak/carapace armored baseline humans and also quite some (power) armored Superhumans and bits to customize your dudes. But almost all bits and models of female power armor has a pretty clear medieval european vibe.

On the topic of customization though: the User Max Moray here on Dakka has some pretty awesome SoBs that he personalized with greenstuff and the like.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/769412.page


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 16:54:15


Post by: Deadnight


 Pyroalchi wrote:
They have it a bit difficult as I'm not aware of a lot of model lines selling (power)armored females or bits for those.

There are loads of un/flak/carapace armored baseline humans and also quite some (power) armored Superhumans and bits to customize your dudes. But almost all bits and models of female power armor has a pretty clear medieval european vibe.

On the topic of customization though: the User Max Moray here on Dakka has some pretty awesome SoBs that he personalized with greenstuff and the like.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/769412.page


Anvil industry have a 'Daughters of the burning rose' line of medieval female power armour, with or without robes. They'd be among your best bets I think.

I'd like to see a robeless 'tacticool' option and a cuirass that isn't so aesthetically 'female' in its shape.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 17:02:45


Post by: Pyroalchi


I was aware of Anvil, but in my opinion they would fall under "european medieval vibe". But if anyone knows of producers of fitting parts/models that have a clearly other vibe to swap parts feel free to prove my comment wrong. I would love to find sources for conversion I'm unaware of.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 18:25:57


Post by: Jack Flask


 JNAProductions wrote:
If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.

You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.

I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?


Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?

 Pyroalchi wrote:
They have it a bit difficult as I'm not aware of a lot of model lines selling (power)armored females or bits for those.

This is not meant to be a pointed comment at you specifically, so apologies in advance for it coming off this way, but has anyone saying this actually tried looking?

Spoiler:

https://reptilianoverlords.com/product/coven-squad-stl-set/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/chaos/female-corrupted-sororita-battle-cultist-sister/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/chaos/chaos-female-cultist-scythe-gun/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/chaos/running-chaos-female-cultist-scythe/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/chaos/chaos-female-cultist-scythe-gun-2/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/battle-sisters/emperor-sisters-goggles-heads-set-5u/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/battle-sisters/emperor-sisters-hoods-heads-set-5u/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/battle-sisters/emperor-sisters-helmets-v2-10u/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/battle-sisters/emperor-sisters-common-helmets-set-5u/


https://artelw.com/Sisterhood-of-Abyss-Squad-p368244848


https://artelw.com/Sisterhood-of-Abyss-Sister-Superior-p368208050


https://artelw.com/Sisterhood-of-Abyss-Bearer-of-Unholy-Relic-p368208913


https://artelw.com/Sisterhood-of-Abyss-Sister-Damnatrix-p368243069





https://artelw.com/Sisters-of-Corruption-Bundle-p262522887


And I'm also going to be honest and say that "no, I don't think the WarGames Exclusive corrupt sisters are 'good'" they were some of their earliest sculpts, have dubious quality and are very representative "40k but boobs" aesthetic. I'm still including them because they fit the criteria that was asked.

EDIT: Oh! And I should note, I specifically only included things that I could think of which were explicitly meant to be used as bits for SoB but we're also not overtly Gothic-Europe-Churchy-Nun. If you start looking for general female heads you could probably make an even longer list.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 18:58:34


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Jack Flask wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.

You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.

I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?


Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?
You *do* understand this is a fictional setting, right? Like, in that it's not real?

 Pyroalchi wrote:
They have it a bit difficult as I'm not aware of a lot of model lines selling (power)armored females or bits for those.

This is not meant to be a pointed comment at you specifically, so apologies in advance for it coming off this way, but has anyone saying this actually tried looking?

Spoiler:

https://reptilianoverlords.com/product/coven-squad-stl-set/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/chaos/female-corrupted-sororita-battle-cultist-sister/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/chaos/chaos-female-cultist-scythe-gun/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/chaos/running-chaos-female-cultist-scythe/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/chaos/chaos-female-cultist-scythe-gun-2/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/battle-sisters/emperor-sisters-goggles-heads-set-5u/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/battle-sisters/emperor-sisters-hoods-heads-set-5u/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/battle-sisters/emperor-sisters-helmets-v2-10u/


https://wargameexclusive.com/shop/battle-sisters/emperor-sisters-common-helmets-set-5u/


https://artelw.com/Sisterhood-of-Abyss-Squad-p368244848


https://artelw.com/Sisterhood-of-Abyss-Sister-Superior-p368208050


https://artelw.com/Sisterhood-of-Abyss-Bearer-of-Unholy-Relic-p368208913


https://artelw.com/Sisterhood-of-Abyss-Sister-Damnatrix-p368243069





https://artelw.com/Sisters-of-Corruption-Bundle-p262522887


And I'm also going to be honest and say that "no, I don't think the WarGames Exclusive corrupt sisters are 'good'" they were some of their earliest sculpts, have dubious quality and are very representative "40k but boobs" aesthetic. I'm still including them because they fit the criteria that was asked.
Great finds, but I don't see a GW sculpt among them, which, while not what Pyroalchi specified, *is* what I specified in my stance - seeing as you specified that this wasn't aimed at Pyroalchi.


EDIT: Oh! And I should note, I specifically only included things that I could think of which were explicitly meant to be used as bits for SoB but we're also not overtly Gothic-Europe-Churchy-Nun. If you start looking for general female heads you could probably make an even longer list.
That's great! Let me know if you find any GW stuff in there, while you're at it.

Look, if we're going to start counting third party stuff* in the whole "Sisters are JUST as diverse in representation as Space Marines!!" argument, then should we not also take into account the even *larger* third party market for Space Marines, which would further distance the "customisation" between Astartes and Sororitas?

*not that we should be, because ultimately this is about GW's portrayal of them, and GW not encouraging the same level of customisation.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 19:20:21


Post by: Pyroalchi


@ Jack Flack: no offence taken.

It's been a while that I looked at Artel W and I wasn't aware of their "chaotic sisters". Nice catch. And of course there are lots of female heads (Anvil Industry, Statuesque miniatures and Victoria Miniatures come to my mind). What I mean though: that's still not really something suited to give your powerarmored females a - culturally - new vibe.

You are right that I haven't specifically searched the depths of the internet for it, but is someone aware of lets say: baseline human female powerarmor (or something that could slip through as one) with a samurai/african/norse/ancient greek (and I don't mean half naked amazons) vibe?
For Guards(wo)men it's easy to come by parts and minis for conversions, for Space Marines too, as there are so many 3rd parties and also quite a range from GW itself.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 20:31:18


Post by: Insectum7


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jack Flask wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.

You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.

I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?


Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?
You *do* understand this is a fictional setting, right? Like, in that it's not real?
Right, right . . . My copy of the Lord of the Rings is from the 60's. It's probably not canon anymore amirite?



SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 21:03:56


Post by: Lord Zarkov


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jack Flask wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.

You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.

I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?


Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?
You *do* understand this is a fictional setting, right? Like, in that it's not real?
Right, right . . . My copy of the Lord of the Rings is from the 60's. It's probably not canon anymore amirite?



Because the work of a single long dead author is exactly the same as a setting that is still being written and rewritten….

Or can we still have half Eldar Ultramarine Chief Librarians?

Also Tolkein is not even that good an example for your point given that older versions of the Hobbit famously contain a non-canon sequence…

Sgt_Smudge wrote: Thank you for providing an example! As I'm not familiar with the text, do you mind if I ask in what way they're divergent, even if not on an aesthetic level? My own Sisters are somewhat divergent from other Orders, but are also aesthetically similar to the "default" look.


I’ve not got the book to hand and I read it a while ago so this is mangled somewhat:

It was the Order of the Last Candle who were based on a shrine world founded by a saint and his disciples. There were either 5 or 7 of them (can’t remember) each of which embodied a different virtue and founded a different sub-order (militant, famulous, hospitaller, diologus, etc). Each had their own keep in a ring with the main temple in the centre.

The disciples had very stylised appearances (think blind justice etc (though this is the Imperium so the justice one was pointedly not blind etc)) and the whole set up did the standard Ecclisiarchy thing of technically worshiping the Emperor and his saints but in practice essentially worshiping a pantheon of gods with the Emperor as overgod. Even to the point of swearing by and primarily praying to the main saint.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/06 21:14:39


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Insectum7 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
You *do* understand this is a fictional setting, right? Like, in that it's not real?
Right, right . . . My copy of the Lord of the Rings is from the 60's. It's probably not canon anymore amirite?

Is the Lord of the Rings is being constantly updated and rewritten by a living set of authors? I thought not.

Also, what was that about being "the only user you have on ignore"?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/07 17:37:55


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Accoding to the gak that Peter Jackson is putting out, yeah, it's being ammended and toyed with.

The new HBO series based on the Simarillion will have sex and nudity as well. I'm sure thats what Mr. T wanted.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/07 20:11:57


Post by: Andykp


 Insectum7 wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Jack Flask wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.

You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.

I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?


Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?
You *do* understand this is a fictional setting, right? Like, in that it's not real?
Right, right . . . My copy of the Lord of the Rings is from the 60's. It's probably not canon anymore amirite?



I have been following this thread for a while, I have nothing to add to the OP but this “row” you are having with smudge is silly. They are clearly not saying what you say they are, they have repeatedly said they agree that they could be diverse are presented in that way by GW. One quote that you have found supports that stance fully. A few bits of text from what ever time shows that they can be diverse but there is not a picture or image or description of them appearing different anywhere in the “lore”.

Ergo, smudge’s point stands. They can be diverse but you don’t see it often from GW. I think all of us would like to see more diverse stuff from GW on this but we don’t. So stop getting all upset and fake exasperated because yiu actually agree with smudge.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/08 14:01:37


Post by: Irbis


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well. Their designs are much more ornate, their details less conducive to the easy modification and variety that Space Marines have been afforded. Sisters are very strongly (and consistently) drawn from specifically European Catholicism and Medieval/Renaissance trappings - unlike the variety of "holy warrior" traditions that Space Marines find themselves drawn from - therefore, drawing from other branches of Catholicism isn't what we see GW doing with their specific design cues for the Sororitas.

You don't see you completely demolished your own point here?

Let's see, in Medieval European Catholicism, knights of France looked different to Germans, these to Italians, these to Spaniards. French used fleur de lys, Germans eagle, Italians, due to high artistic skills and development of Italian cities (and lack of centralization leading to a single symbol) used richly decorated plate. There is no reason sisters can't have similar split, one part using Aquila, other lily, third part defaulting to ecclesiarchy symbols much like some European nations heavily used cross. And that's just 4 nations bordering each other, separated only by a small mountain range.

Add say Polish and Russian knights into the mix (never mind Byzantium and Armenian ones), and you get far more diversity. Then you have Cathars, Huguenots, Hussites, Waldensians, Bogomilism, Lollards, etc, etc, all on small peninsula within stone throw of Rome. The idea religion would somehow centralize instead of constantly splintering over smallest ideological differences is just wrong. Especially seeing Imperial church was never shown as huge, centralized organization in fluff, more like umbrella of millions of cults that just have to agree on worshiping the Emperor to be accepted.

Hell, friend recently reminded me of 'Horse Heresy', namely local Imperial cult insisting Emperor was a famous horse tamer who smote 9 rebellious stallions led by Horse the heretic, and the Battle Sister listening to it just smirked at misunderstanding instead of shooting them for heresy. That's how 'unified' and 'monolithic' the faith in Imperium is. That is, not at all.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
The new HBO series based on the Simarillion will have sex and nudity as well. I'm sure thats what Mr. T wanted.

Yeah, I am sure Humans and Elves procreated 10.000 years using only storks, not body contact, eh?

I like how brainwashing of a single religion can be so strong it bends something that 95% of all human cultures see as completely normal thing to be unnatural and yucky, especially in a setting that never saw the horrors and mental warping of said cult, eh?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/08 14:21:45


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 Irbis wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well. Their designs are much more ornate, their details less conducive to the easy modification and variety that Space Marines have been afforded. Sisters are very strongly (and consistently) drawn from specifically European Catholicism and Medieval/Renaissance trappings - unlike the variety of "holy warrior" traditions that Space Marines find themselves drawn from - therefore, drawing from other branches of Catholicism isn't what we see GW doing with their specific design cues for the Sororitas.

You don't see you completely demolished your own point here?

Let's see, in Medieval European Catholicism, knights of France looked different to Germans, these to Italians, these to Spaniards. French used fleur de lys, Germans eagle, Italians, due to high artistic skills and development of Italian cities (and lack of centralization leading to a single symbol) used richly decorated plate. There is no reason sisters can't have similar split, one part using Aquila, other lily, third part defaulting to ecclesiarchy symbols much like some European nations heavily used cross. And that's just 4 nations bordering each other, separated only by a small mountain range.

Add say Polish and Russian knights into the mix (never mind Byzantium and Armenian ones), and you get far more diversity. Then you have Cathars, Huguenots, Hussites, Waldensians, Bogomilism, Lollards, etc, etc, all on small peninsula within stone throw of Rome. The idea religion would somehow centralize instead of constantly splintering over smallest ideological differences is just wrong. Especially seeing Imperial church was never shown as huge, centralized organization in fluff, more like umbrella of millions of cults that just have to agree on worshiping the Emperor to be accepted.

Hell, friend recently reminded me of 'Horse Heresy', namely local Imperial cult insisting Emperor was a famous horse tamer who smote 9 rebellious stallions led by Horse the heretic, and the Battle Sister listening to it just smirked at misunderstanding instead of shooting them for heresy. That's how 'unified' and 'monolithic' the faith in Imperium is. That is, not at all.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
The new HBO series based on the Simarillion will have sex and nudity as well. I'm sure thats what Mr. T wanted.

Yeah, I am sure Humans and Elves procreated 10.000 years using only storks, not body contact, eh?

I like how brainwashing of a single religion can be so strong it bends something that 95% of all human cultures see as completely normal thing to be unnatural and yucky, especially in a setting that never saw the horrors and mental warping of said cult, eh?


Wow, you've completely missed both points in an effort to be snarky, rude, and presumptive. In the same vein, maybe you like getting your jimmies off watching HBO-porn in your free time, but those of us who aren't shouldn't be forced to see our classic works of fiction reduced to GoT spank bait for troglodytes incapable of having actual relationships.

As for your posts toward smudge, how can you continually, almost willfully, miss the point of what they are saying? GW doesn't rep variety with them! It's not about how Victorian era themes lend themselves to diversity, it's about how we have 5 different sculpts of GW sanctioned Imperial Guard, god knows how many different flavor of SM, at least 3 flavors of orks, but only 1 type of SoB model, ever displayed. Why is that, do you think?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/08 15:08:36


Post by: Vatsetis


I started a thread to speak about how SOB could be depicted in a more diverse manner and we ended speaking about "porn"...

Internet is certainly a weird place.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/08 22:21:45


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Irbis wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well. Their designs are much more ornate, their details less conducive to the easy modification and variety that Space Marines have been afforded. Sisters are very strongly (and consistently) drawn from specifically European Catholicism and Medieval/Renaissance trappings - unlike the variety of "holy warrior" traditions that Space Marines find themselves drawn from - therefore, drawing from other branches of Catholicism isn't what we see GW doing with their specific design cues for the Sororitas.

You don't see you completely demolished your own point here?

Let's see, in Medieval European Catholicism, knights of France looked different to Germans, these to Italians, these to Spaniards. French used fleur de lys, Germans eagle, Italians, due to high artistic skills and development of Italian cities (and lack of centralization leading to a single symbol) used richly decorated plate. There is no reason sisters can't have similar split, one part using Aquila, other lily, third part defaulting to ecclesiarchy symbols much like some European nations heavily used cross. And that's just 4 nations bordering each other, separated only by a small mountain range.

Add say Polish and Russian knights into the mix (never mind Byzantium and Armenian ones), and you get far more diversity. Then you have Cathars, Huguenots, Hussites, Waldensians, Bogomilism, Lollards, etc, etc, all on small peninsula within stone throw of Rome. The idea religion would somehow centralize instead of constantly splintering over smallest ideological differences is just wrong. Especially seeing Imperial church was never shown as huge, centralized organization in fluff, more like umbrella of millions of cults that just have to agree on worshiping the Emperor to be accepted.
Amazing! You showcased a bunch of varied aesthetics in the real world!

Now show me these varied SoB aesthetics in 40k which GW have showcased. I'll be waiting.

What seems to have happened is that you thought that I was implying that there was only a single Real World Catholic aesthetic - I did not claim that. What I *did* claim is that the Sisters of Battle only use a single facet of Catholic aesthetics, but that is all we get of them. It doesn't matter what the real world is, and how many options there are there, because I'm talking about the fictional one.

Now, with that cleared up, could you show some of these varied Sister of Battle designs?

That's how 'unified' and 'monolithic' the faith in Imperium is. That is, not at all.
Great - so show me these canon varied Sisters.

Spoiler:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
The new HBO series based on the Simarillion will have sex and nudity as well. I'm sure thats what Mr. T wanted.

Yeah, I am sure Humans and Elves procreated 10.000 years using only storks, not body contact, eh?
Just because something exists doesn't make it relevant to the story being told. If I was telling a story about the myriad perils of home decoration, and every second scene was a cutaway to sex and nudity, I'd question the artistic necessity of showing that content in the context of a story about the myriad perils of home decoration, and if that actually helped the story I wanted to tell.

As someone who has yet to see the new HBO series, I can't make that claim, but if it only exists to pander to the "wow, sex = edgy! and adult!" crowd, then I don't think it helps the story much.

I like how brainwashing of a single religion can be so strong it bends something that 95% of all human cultures see as completely normal thing to be unnatural and yucky, especially in a setting that never saw the horrors and mental warping of said cult, eh?
Eh, not religious, but rather I question it on the basis of "is this necessary in the story being told", in the same way that I wouldn't expect an epic quest to destroy some cursed jewellery to show up in risque content.

But this is rather off-topic.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/09 01:10:25


Post by: BrianDavion


 Lord Damocles wrote:
'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.'
Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13


'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.'
Codex: Adepta Sororitas (6th ed. ebook), pg.12


'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.'
[Codex] 'Sisters of Battle' (5th ed.) in White Dwarf 380 (US), pg.92





ok but what does Livery MEAN?
yes it CAN mean a completely differant uniform (for example one could say that the differance between cadians and catachans apperance is their livery and be, largely accurate) but it could simply mean the colours of their uniform.

we've seen multiple examples of minor orders, such as the Order of the golden light, the order of the Blue robe, etc. so far all the art of them has suggested a largely uniform look of symbolism on the armor etc with the major differance thus far being that of the colours used. There's simply no evidance given by GW of sisters who say........... use fur robes instead of cloth. It's a great idea and I'd LOVE to see someone who models their stuff that way (seriously if anyone's done something like that please post a pic!) but so far the evidance seems to suggest that by and large the livery change is mostly "WE USE ORANGE ROBES AND RED ARMOR!"


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/09 02:35:54


Post by: epronovost


BrianDavion wrote:
 Lord Damocles wrote:
'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.'
Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13


'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.'
Codex: Adepta Sororitas (6th ed. ebook), pg.12


'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.'
[Codex] 'Sisters of Battle' (5th ed.) in White Dwarf 380 (US), pg.92





ok but what does Livery MEAN?
yes it CAN mean a completely differant uniform (for example one could say that the differance between cadians and catachans apperance is their livery and be, largely accurate) but it could simply mean the colours of their uniform.

we've seen multiple examples of minor orders, such as the Order of the golden light, the order of the Blue robe, etc. so far all the art of them has suggested a largely uniform look of symbolism on the armor etc with the major differance thus far being that of the colours used. There's simply no evidance given by GW of sisters who say........... use fur robes instead of cloth. It's a great idea and I'd LOVE to see someone who models their stuff that way (seriously if anyone's done something like that please post a pic!) but so far the evidance seems to suggest that by and large the livery change is mostly "WE USE ORANGE ROBES AND RED ARMOR!"


To add to what you mention, the only other areas in terms of "livery" we have beside colors is symbols with the all the Major Orders (and presumably all minor ones too) have their own heraldic symbol like the chalice of the Ebon Chalice or the red rose of the Bloodied Rose for example though all of them share the symbols of the Sisterhood in general and of the Ecclesiarchy. Furthermore, the difference in doctrines seem to be limited to patron saints, military strategy and military organization. While there is diversity in the SoB, that diversity isn't wide ranging. It's mostly in the detail section. In my opinion, this isn't a weakness per say. Some people like their faction well fleshed out and consistent while others prefer sandbox in which they can easily make their completely unique subfaction. It's smart and healthy for an IP like 40K to have some for every taste.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/09 04:31:42


Post by: BrianDavion


and the bit about tradtions and doctrines is represented buy minor orders having their own minor order traits.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 04:18:35


Post by: Hecaton


 Gert wrote:

An Astartes Chapter that favours CQC and makes sparse use of Tactical or Devastator Squads is easily done but you can't really do a CQC Guard army in the same way.


That's only because the rules fail to represent the diversity implied in the fluff. Astartes are the most "customizable" because GW pushes them. Guard are much more diverse in actuality; you have Guard regiments that focus entirely on artillery, for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:
yeah except that to make your guard differant you need to have entirely differant mini's to represent that differance.


And before GW went full corporate IP tyrant, we could use historical minis to represent IG with divergent looks.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 07:28:06


Post by: BrianDavion


Hecaton wrote:
 Gert wrote:

An Astartes Chapter that favours CQC and makes sparse use of Tactical or Devastator Squads is easily done but you can't really do a CQC Guard army in the same way.


That's only because the rules fail to represent the diversity implied in the fluff. Astartes are the most "customizable" because GW pushes them. Guard are much more diverse in actuality; you have Guard regiments that focus entirely on artillery, for example.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:
yeah except that to make your guard differant you need to have entirely differant mini's to represent that differance.


And before GW went full corporate IP tyrant, we could use historical minis to represent IG with divergent looks.


you still can, GW's not going to rush into your home, your local gaming shop etc and smash your knee caps.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 08:19:19


Post by: Vatsetis


Its not going to do so... Yet

Actually It dosent need to do so... The cult of officialdom does the dirty work for the corporation.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 12:22:26


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Hecaton wrote:
 Gert wrote:

An Astartes Chapter that favours CQC and makes sparse use of Tactical or Devastator Squads is easily done but you can't really do a CQC Guard army in the same way.


That's only because the rules fail to represent the diversity implied in the fluff. Astartes are the most "customizable" because GW pushes them. Guard are much more diverse in actuality; you have Guard regiments that focus entirely on artillery, for example.
Well, you *can* create an artillery regiment pretty well. Just take a bunch of artillery. If I'm not mistaken, there's also the Emperor's Wrath Artillery Company rules from the Vigilus books that also do this. However, CQC Guard is more limited by wargear than anything else, and simply the units not really existing, though a proxy Catachan force might get away with it.

But yes, ultimately, Astartes are most "customisable", because GW made them so, because GW deems "customisability" to be a major part of the Space Marine factional identity.


BrianDavion wrote:
yeah except that to make your guard differant you need to have entirely differant mini's to represent that differance.


And before GW went full corporate IP tyrant, we could use historical minis to represent IG with divergent looks.
You still can. They won't stop you, unless you go into their stores and do it, but that was your choice to go into that store.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 13:16:35


Post by: Pyroalchi


CQC guard is not that hard and might even be funny:
Outsider detachment:
2 Death rider Commanders with Plasma (100)
2 DR Command Squads (170)
3 x 10 Death riders (600)
Nork Dedogg (60)


Vanguard detachment
1 Death rider Commanders with Plasma (50)
3 x 9 Bullgryns (945)
3 x Ogryn Bodyguard with Bullgryn plate and maul (180)
= 2125 points of pure melee guard if I'm not mistaken. And I haven't even included Crusaders, Hades Breaching drill and Sentinel Powerlifters...


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 13:25:55


Post by: Gert


TBF that's not Guard, it's Regiment specific units from the DKoK and Auxiliary units. It would be like saying Iron Hands have loads of Characters then listing Guilliman, Calgar, and Tigirius.
There are no generic units that any Regiment can take that are designed for CQC, which is fine since Guard fills the "endless waves of tanks, artillery, and men" niche well.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 14:32:23


Post by: Pyroalchi


How is this not Guard? Bullgryns/Nork/Bodyguards are very very common as far as I know and DKOK is now a normal guard regiment. Just because the other regiments can not (yet?) take death riders does not magically make them "not guard". Or else a Blood Angels List with Sanguinary Guard would not be an SM List.

As much as some people negate it: Auxilia units are Guard. And have been for quite some time.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 14:41:19


Post by: JNAProductions


 Pyroalchi wrote:
How is this not Guard? Bullgryns/Nork/Bodyguards are very very common as far as I know and DKOK is now a normal guard regiment. Just because the other regiments can not (yet?) take death riders does not magically make them "not guard". Or else a Blood Angels List with Sanguinary Guard would not be an SM List.

As much as some people negate it: Auxilia units are Guard. And have been for quite some time.
The difference is that a BA list with Sanguinary Guard is still usually made of primarily ordinary SM units.

The presented melee list is made entirely of abhumans and unique units. To me, given the majority of models are DKoK specific, you can reasonably say "DKoK can run a melee list."
You can't as much say "Guard can run a melee list," at least not at 2k, since they lack the Death Riders. That's like saying Daemons can run a list where most of their models have guns and not specifying Tzeentch Daemons.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 14:53:49


Post by: Gert


 Pyroalchi wrote:
How is this not Guard? Bullgryns/Nork/Bodyguards are very very common as far as I know and DKOK is now a normal guard regiment. Just because the other regiments can not (yet?) take death riders does not magically make them "not guard".

One plastic kit doesn't make DKoK "normal Guard". We can assume that DKoK rules will be present in the next Astra Militarum Codex but that doesn't mean that any of the unique units will be in there nor does it mean that any subfaction other than DKoK can take them. Ultramarine armies cannot take Death Company or Wolf Guard.
As for the "Ogryns are Guard", yes and no. Abhumans are in the Codex but they are not Militarum Regiments, they are Auxiliaries. This thread is discussing diversity in factions as a Background/design concept, not a game concept. Ogryns Regiments can be attached to a regular Militarum Regiment but they are not the same thing. So when I say a Guard Regiment can't really be CQC focussed compared to SM, what I am saying is that Guardsmen can only have guns, unless they are some kind of Officer. There are no dedicated Guardsmen CQC units, which again is fine but it still limits the diversity of a Guard Regiment when it comes to culture/tactics.

Or else a Blood Angels List with Sanguinary Guard would not be an SM List.

It isn't a SM list. It's a Blood Angels list since it includes Blood Angels unique units. That's how subfactions work.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/10 15:13:05


Post by: Pyroalchi


Fair enough. I concede my point


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/11 13:25:29


Post by: Haighus


Guard used to have rules that let you equip guardsmen infantry squads with "warrior weapons"- replaced the lasgun with laspistol and close combat weapon.

Those regiments exist in the background, but no longer on the tabletop. An example is the Karanak Skull Takers.

Laspistol + CCW also used to be much more common in the codex- veterans and command squads could take it as a loadout.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/11 13:44:04


Post by: Gert


 Haighus wrote:
Guard used to have rules that let you equip guardsmen infantry squads with "warrior weapons"- replaced the lasgun with laspistol and close combat weapon.

And yet they haven't been able to do it since the 4th Ed Codex, so not really relevant to the current Codex options nor the discussion on aesthetic diversity.

Those regiments exist in the background, but no longer on the tabletop. An example is the Karanak Skull Takers.

They do exist but you can't accurately portray them with models or rules and the Skull Takers are like 1/1000 for Regiments that don't use normal equipment.

Laspistol + CCW also used to be much more common in the codex- veterans and command squads could take it as a loadout.

Which Codex are you talking about here because I've had each Codex from 5th to 8th and while Command Squads could take Pistols and CCW, I certainly don't remember Veterans having the option.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/11 13:49:51


Post by: Gadzilla666


Veterans had the option of las pistol + CCW in the 3.5 Guard codex.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/11 16:46:06


Post by: Haighus


 Gert wrote:
 Haighus wrote:
Guard used to have rules that let you equip guardsmen infantry squads with "warrior weapons"- replaced the lasgun with laspistol and close combat weapon.

And yet they haven't been able to do it since the 4th Ed Codex, so not really relevant to the current Codex options nor the discussion on aesthetic diversity.

Those regiments exist in the background, but no longer on the tabletop. An example is the Karanak Skull Takers.

They do exist but you can't accurately portray them with models or rules and the Skull Takers are like 1/1000 for Regiments that don't use normal equipment.

Laspistol + CCW also used to be much more common in the codex- veterans and command squads could take it as a loadout.

Which Codex are you talking about here because I've had each Codex from 5th to 8th and while Command Squads could take Pistols and CCW, I certainly don't remember Veterans having the option.


It isn't relevant for current codex options, but is definitely relevant for aesthetic diversity- there are still going to be Guard armies floating around from that era. Regardimg SoB, there isn't the historic diversity of designs as well as a lack of current designs.

I actually had a veteran squad with laspistols and ccw from the 3.5/4th ed codex. I do wish we could get some of those options back- the carapace armour has basically disappeared too.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/11 21:30:34


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Are we considering weapon loadouts "diversity" now? I think I see two different models when I look at a Catachan vs a Cadian, despite what they are armed with. Show me two stock SoB models that look like completely different models with the same loadout.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/11 21:37:16


Post by: JNAProductions


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Are we considering weapon loadouts "diversity" now? I think I see two different models when I look at a Catachan vs a Cadian, despite what they are armed with. Show me two stock SoB models that look like completely different models with the same loadout.
Would you consider Assault Intercessors distinct from regular Intercessors?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/11 22:39:28


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


No, they are both Space Marines. I was referring to specific Models. A good example is "Is a Blood Angels Intercessor with Bolt Rifle look the Same as a Blood Angels Intercessor with Assault Bolt Rifle?

See what I mean? Load out does not equal diversity. Diversity is a completely different model. So an Old Marine vs a Nu Marine. That is diversity. A Devastator vs a Assault Marine.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/11 23:06:07


Post by: JNAProductions


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
No, they are both Space Marines. I was referring to specific Models. A good example is "Is a Blood Angels Intercessor with Bolt Rifle look the Same as a Blood Angels Intercessor with Assault Bolt Rifle?

See what I mean? Load out does not equal diversity. Diversity is a completely different model. So an Old Marine vs a Nu Marine. That is diversity. A Devastator vs a Assault Marine.
A Devastator and Assault Marine have different loadouts. That's the only difference, unless you also give the Assault Marine a Jump Pack.

And while I certainly agree that Intercessors, Bolt Rifles, and Intercessors, AutoBolt Rifles are functionally the same, I would consider Assault Intercessors distinct. Minor kit changes does not a diverse range make, but major ones do.

So I would consider IG Vets armed for CC diverse when alongside IG Vets armed for shooting. Your mileage may vary, as this is subjective.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 00:38:23


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 JNAProductions wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
No, they are both Space Marines. I was referring to specific Models. A good example is "Is a Blood Angels Intercessor with Bolt Rifle look the Same as a Blood Angels Intercessor with Assault Bolt Rifle?

See what I mean? Load out does not equal diversity. Diversity is a completely different model. So an Old Marine vs a Nu Marine. That is diversity. A Devastator vs a Assault Marine.
A Devastator and Assault Marine have different loadouts. That's the only difference, unless you also give the Assault Marine a Jump Pack.

And while I certainly agree that Intercessors, Bolt Rifles, and Intercessors, AutoBolt Rifles are functionally the same, I would consider Assault Intercessors distinct. Minor kit changes does not a diverse range make, but major ones do.

So I would consider IG Vets armed for CC diverse when alongside IG Vets armed for shooting. Your mileage may vary, as this is subjective.


I see your point, and thank you for explaining it further. I think you have a valid point.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 02:01:27


Post by: Rhia_Stadtfeld


Can you? Yes, Is it common, no.

Realistically in the lore sisters have fanatical zealousness and devotion to the emperor & imperial creed, faith is everything, faith keeps you alive amidst the horrors of the galaxy.

As for your point about wolf cloaks as a mark of respect for the fallen etc - Our Martyred Lady used to be, black armor, black cloth, white trim and red cloth on the insides of the tabbards, that changed when Saint Katherine died to the red it is today.

They don't have much wiggle room, as the fact is they're so fanatically uniform with their indoctrination / display of faith and guidelines. Pinning it as heresy for deviating due to necessity is one thing, doing penance for your sins is entirely more likely. You've only to look as far as the repentia.



SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 06:47:08


Post by: Lord Damocles


The change from red to black robes for Our Martyred Lady was made following the Third War for Armageddon - so barely a couple of hundred years ago.

(And makes it a bit odd that Celestians retain the black for some reason).


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 13:43:59


Post by: Rhia_Stadtfeld


 Lord Damocles wrote:
The change from red to black robes for Our Martyred Lady was made following the Third War for Armageddon - so barely a couple of hundred years ago.

(And makes it a bit odd that Celestians retain the black for some reason).


Aye but my point is the differences, even in deaths brought about by prominent members of the order, change as a mark of respect for the fallen is minor.

TLDR: OP should do what they want with their minis, but, as someone else said, sisters are very much a uniform faction.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 13:44:58


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


So I think we are all agreed here, aside from armor color and hair color, there is zero diversity in the Sisters model line?

Not like say, Catachan vs Vostoyan.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 19:37:18


Post by: BrianDavion


that depends how you define diversity


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 19:45:03


Post by: JNAProductions


BrianDavion wrote:
that depends how you define diversity
That be the crux of the matter, don't it?

I think we can, speaking in broad terms, say that Sisters are one of the less-diverse lines GW produces. Perhaps not the worst in that regard, but certainly nowhere near IG or SM.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 21:39:23


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Aren't Tau the worst? Or Nids? There is no variant forms of dress or uniform in either of those factions. It's all just paint scheme and basing for diversity.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 23:33:24


Post by: Haighus


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Aren't Tau the worst? Or Nids? There is no variant forms of dress or uniform in either of those factions. It's all just paint scheme and basing for diversity.

Tau and SoB are pretty much in the same boat, excepting that there were at least a wide variety of cosmetic battlesuit variants for Tau (I think a lot of this is OOP nowadays?).

Nids have loads of variety, but they are ferociously practical and any variations come with specific advantages and usually game rules. Carnifexes have several carapace designs, for example. The basic Gaunts are a bit bland tbf, but even Genestealers have a couple of different designs kicking around.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/12 23:54:01


Post by: Rhia_Stadtfeld


 Haighus wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Aren't Tau the worst? Or Nids? There is no variant forms of dress or uniform in either of those factions. It's all just paint scheme and basing for diversity.

Tau and SoB are pretty much in the same boat, excepting that there were at least a wide variety of cosmetic battlesuit variants for Tau (I think a lot of this is OOP nowadays?).

Nids have loads of variety, but they are ferociously practical and any variations come with specific advantages and usually game rules. Carnifexes have several carapace designs, for example. The basic Gaunts are a bit bland tbf, but even Genestealers have a couple of different designs kicking around.


Id not say nid variation is yoo bad from a conversion / obscure model standing, it may be a necessary evolution for the consumption of a particular planet before they're re harvested along with the biomass. Nids are probably one of the least constrained I'd have said, along with greenskins. But I'm not educated on tyranid lore, so it's a very vague assumption on my part.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/13 11:18:54


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


Green skins have multiple variants that you can play, especially now with Beast Snaggas.

Nids don't have any variation between hive fleets aside from paint scheme. There is no iconography that makes Behemoth distinct from Leviathan. Same with the Tau. There is zero difference between a fire warrior of any sept except for color.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/13 11:22:06


Post by: Gert


I mean, the endless swarm of faceless beasts that recycles its dead back into the biomass pool where it gets spawned again doesn't get loads of diversity. Almost like it's intentionally designed that way.

As for the T'au. A small insular empire with a strict caste system that doesn't allow freedom between the castes or any significant variation from the T'au'va. The diversity in the T'au comes from its auxiliary allies but that's a dead fish in terms of models. So in background it's there but in model terms less so.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/13 19:46:31


Post by: BrianDavion


would really like to see more tau auxilleries, sadly Tau have been flanderized into "MOAR SUITS!" everytime a new tau model comes out. which is a shame. TBH if I was a mini designer I'd love the subject race aspect of the Tau, a chance to design some wild and batty new aliens in a single "one and done" box? sounds like a paradise for creativity


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/13 19:50:51


Post by: Mr Morden


BrianDavion wrote:
would really like to see more tau auxilleries, sadly Tau have been flanderized into "MOAR SUITS!" everytime a new tau model comes out. which is a shame. TBH if I was a mini designer I'd love the subject race aspect of the Tau, a chance to design some wild and batty new aliens in a single "one and done" box? sounds like a paradise for creativity


Yep I feel the same way - sad really that they jst keep making biger and more stupid looking suits - the Stromsurge being the depths - only matched by Grey Knights Baby carriers and Centurions.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/13 21:03:34


Post by: epronovost


 Mr Morden wrote:
BrianDavion wrote:
would really like to see more tau auxilleries, sadly Tau have been flanderized into "MOAR SUITS!" everytime a new tau model comes out. which is a shame. TBH if I was a mini designer I'd love the subject race aspect of the Tau, a chance to design some wild and batty new aliens in a single "one and done" box? sounds like a paradise for creativity


Yep I feel the same way - sad really that they jst keep making biger and more stupid looking suits - the Stromsurge being the depths - only matched by Grey Knights Baby carriers and Centurions.


I must be strange, but I love the new Tau suits, the Stormsurge being my second favorite (best one being the Ghostkeel) and generally enjoy the Tau aesthetic as being one of the best in 40K. I don't think that treating the Tau as a repository for all the half baked unit concept of xenos a design team could come up with would be any sort of success. Should Kroot be further developed, Probably. Should human auxiliaries be added, probably too. Could Vespid have some unit diversity, that could be good. Should three more "one unit of one race" be added, definitely not.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/14 00:55:04


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I think the most deserving of "diversity" is in order:

SoB - no real diversity to speak of, only one type of sister, paint is only difference
Nids - Paint is only difference, but there should be divergent traits just by evolution alone, make Behemoth have an extra arm, or Leviathan somehow bigger?
Tau - Lock away types of suits to specific septs, done. Sort of how Elesian Drop Troops are only allowed to a certain part of the IG.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/16 21:06:42


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I am not entirely sure this counts either. It's still obviously the same Fluer De Lis power armor ladies running around with ridiculously over compensating boob plate. Are we seriously supposed to believe that boob plate enhances battle efficiency?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/16 21:16:51


Post by: Gert


It's not about efficiency it's to make it abundantly clear that the Sororitas are women so as to not break the Decree Passive. It's weird and could be construed as sexist but it's not exaggerated to the point of x rated and there are quite a few models in the range that are covered by cloaks, hoods, and shawls so there is no breastplate. Considering some of the model's GW has put out in the past *cough*Dark Eldar Slaves*cough*, SoB are very low on the horny scale.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/16 21:27:26


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


I'm sorry if you don't think their boob armor is exaggerated, I don't know how to prove to you that it is. Maybe ask a woman you trust if she thinks the size of their boobs is realistic?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/16 21:43:03


Post by: BrianDavion


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm sorry if you don't think their boob armor is exaggerated, I don't know how to prove to you that it is. Maybe ask a woman you trust if she thinks the size of their boobs is realistic?


he didn't say it's exaggerated, he said it's "not exaggerated to the point of being x rated"

Maybe try and understand the nuance of whats being said rather then attack strawmen.






SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/16 21:51:16


Post by: Gert


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm sorry if you don't think their boob armor is exaggerated, I don't know how to prove to you that it is. Maybe ask a woman you trust if she thinks the size of their boobs is realistic?

I mean women have breasts, like what do you want me to say here? The models have noticeable breastplate protrusions but they aren't obscene or dominating the design space. But again the point of the styling of the armour is to make it abundantly clear that the Sororitas are women and therefore not "men" under-arms.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/16 22:14:40


Post by: Tiennos


Armor is not always made for efficiency, sometimes it's designed for style, no matter if it's dumb or not.

Here's some genuine male boobplate from ancient Greece, complete with nipples:


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/16 22:14:56


Post by: BrianDavion


 Gert wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I'm sorry if you don't think their boob armor is exaggerated, I don't know how to prove to you that it is. Maybe ask a woman you trust if she thinks the size of their boobs is realistic?

I mean women have breasts, like what do you want me to say here? The models have noticeable breastplate protrusions but they aren't obscene or dominating the design space. But again the point of the styling of the armour is to make it abundantly clear that the Sororitas are women and therefore not "men" under-arms.


he's shifting the goalposts and trying to argue that the breasts are oversized. He'smissing the fact that 40k isn't perfectly scale. that means extremities such as hands, feet, heads, and yes breasts, are over sized


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 00:25:30


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/09/16/gen-con-tau-pathfinders-rumble-with-all-new-novitiate-sisters-in-the-first-kill-team-expansion/

Yes? Visibly the same aesthetic design, leaning *even further* into the "stereotypically Catholic" aesthetic.

Are you trying to prove the point that the Sisters of Battle only seem to have one aesthetic design? Because that's just what you've done.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 04:02:27


Post by: H.B.M.C.


Is it bad that Sisters have a specific aesthetic to them? I mean, doesn't everything in 40k (other than differing Guard regiments) work that way?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 05:27:49


Post by: ph34r


I think the argument is supposed to be, Sisters of Battle as an all female counterpart to Space Marines as an all male force is not sufficient, because space marines have wolf marines and monk marines and Templar marines and sisters of battle are all Catholics.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 07:57:25


Post by: Lord Damocles


That would only be a problem if you insisted on viewing Sisters of Battle as the female equivalent to Space Marines.

They're not just gender swapped Marines; they're their own thing.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 09:22:30


Post by: Overread


 ph34r wrote:
I think the argument is supposed to be, Sisters of Battle as an all female counterpart to Space Marines as an all male force is not sufficient, because space marines have wolf marines and monk marines and Templar marines and sisters of battle are all Catholics.


Which kind of applies to every single model line except Space Marines - who are a total exception even within GW, let alone outside.
They even have an alternate 30K line of models with variety between different chapters too.


It's just abnormal and not something even GW can repeat or copy easily. Plus looking at how they handle AoS now, it doens't look like its something GW want to try again and personally I agree with that stance. I'd rather have 20 totally different armies and asthetics and lores than 15 armies that look mostly the same with minor variations and then 5 separate creative designs. Sure that means armies which "should" have near infinite variety end up just having 1 design aesthetic, but it at least means the firm can make loads of different creative ideas.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 18:11:44


Post by: Haighus


 Overread wrote:
 ph34r wrote:
I think the argument is supposed to be, Sisters of Battle as an all female counterpart to Space Marines as an all male force is not sufficient, because space marines have wolf marines and monk marines and Templar marines and sisters of battle are all Catholics.


Which kind of applies to every single model line except Space Marines - who are a total exception even within GW, let alone outside.
They even have an alternate 30K line of models with variety between different chapters too.


It's just abnormal and not something even GW can repeat or copy easily. Plus looking at how they handle AoS now, it doens't look like its something GW want to try again and personally I agree with that stance. I'd rather have 20 totally different armies and asthetics and lores than 15 armies that look mostly the same with minor variations and then 5 separate creative designs. Sure that means armies which "should" have near infinite variety end up just having 1 design aesthetic, but it at least means the firm can make loads of different creative ideas.


The reason it is relevant is not because people reasonably expect SoB to be given as diverse a range of models as Space Marines, it is because Sisters are held up as a sort of shield against female Space Marines, when they are not close in terms of what is portrayed for Sisters vs Astartes.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 20:02:45


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


And THERE we have it. We only needed 8 pages to weedle out the truth. SoB is GW's defense against having to create FSM.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 20:07:00


Post by: Goose LeChance


Oh nooooooooooo

Rally the troops!


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 20:27:25


Post by: ph34r


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
And THERE we have it. We only needed 8 pages to weedle out the truth. SoB is GW's defense against having to create FSM.
Or, maybe it is ok that not everything is symmetrical across whatever lines of identification you favor?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 21:13:53


Post by: FezzikDaBullgryn


 ph34r wrote:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
And THERE we have it. We only needed 8 pages to weedle out the truth. SoB is GW's defense against having to create FSM.
Or, maybe it is ok that not everything is symmetrical across whatever lines of identification you favor?


I don't even know what this means. Can you go into more detail about whatever this statement's intended meaning is?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 21:48:20


Post by: Vatsetis


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
And THERE we have it. We only needed 8 pages to weedle out the truth. SoB is GW's defense against having to create FSM.


Nope. BUT the existence of SOB make FSM rebundant (lore wise and model wise) unless you really, really want FSM for some exogeneus reason (IE not for the in universe lore and not for the minis... Since apparently the consensus is that FSM should look exactly or almost exactly as the current SM line).


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 21:49:26


Post by: steelhead177th


hey GW where are my white, english speaking Zulu warriors with boobplate? I need my diversity in all forms...wat? they don't have them in official models? I don't want to paint them in different colours, they MUST be official prints in order for them to count. They have to be female as well, even though Zulu warriors where never female, nor white, nor english speaking. No, I don't want to use stand ins, they HAVE to be GW or they don't count.

Sweet lord, this and the FSM arguement is nonsensical. According to lore SM are male, the Sisters are female. What you do is your business with the models you buy. Convert and paint them as you wish and stop trying to change the world to fit YOUR ideal. Change your own stuff to fit your narrative and leave my narrative alone.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 21:51:48


Post by: Gert


Wanna stop talking about a certain thing before the thread gets locked? Maybe tone down the hostility while we're at it?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 22:00:34


Post by: Goose LeChance


SoB have one of the best model lines in 40K, it makes me jealous. It seems like they're popular and sell well, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Same goes for Space Marines.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 22:03:19


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


Vatsetis wrote:BUT the existence of SOB make FSM rebundant (lore wise and model wise)
Except evidently not, as you attempted (and failed) to disprove in this thread. Sisters do not have the same range of options, both aesthetically and in flavour, that Astartes are *encouraged* to have. This, as I have asserted many times, is but one of the many reasons that the two factions are not the same, in the same way that Custodes should (by your logic) make mono-gender Astartes redundant. In design and in concept, Sisters are closer to Custodes in terms of their identity - generally centralised, aesthetically solidified, politically influential and well armoured/trained warriors, with a small but well defined aesthetic identity set out by GW.

Do I feel that there should be more encouragement of different aesthetic designs? Yes, I do - in the same way I encourage those same player freedoms to Astartes, in exactly the way you expect.


Besides, I thought you said this had nothing to do with women Astartes, after I suspected such a motivation from you in the creation of this thread. Or was that yet another case of wilful bad faith?
steelhead177th wrote:hey GW where are my white, english speaking Zulu warriors with boobplate? I need my diversity in all forms...wat? they don't have them in official models? I don't want to paint them in different colours, they MUST be official prints in order for them to count. They have to be female as well, even though Zulu warriors where never female, nor white, nor english speaking. No, I don't want to use stand ins, they HAVE to be GW or they don't count.
See, the issue here is that the Zulu are a real tangible thing that existed/exists. Space Marines and Sisters of Battle are neither - their entire existence is a fabrication.

Demanding reality to change/be representative is very different to wanting some different options for your fictional made up toy soldiers. Nice false equivalence though.

What you do is your business with the models you buy. Convert and paint them as you wish and stop trying to change the world to fit YOUR ideal. Change your own stuff to fit your narrative and leave my narrative alone.
That's exactly what I want - me having women Astartes, or more customisable Sisters doesn't affect your narrative at all, so why would adding that option be a problem for you?

In what way does a broader range of options hurt you? There's no quota for you, no requirement for you to repaint or rebuild or redesign your army. The existence of Space Wolves doesn't mean I need to add pelts to my homebrew Chapter. The existence of the Farsight Enclaves doesn't affect my own cadre of Tau. The existence of the Silent King doesn't mean squat for my own Necron dynasty. So why would this be an affront to you?


But, as said, this isn't the topic, is it? Is it, OP?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gert wrote:Wanna stop talking about a certain thing before the thread gets locked? Maybe tone down the hostility while we're at it?
Aye - that topic was supposed to be locked down - but, as I fear, I think the OP was trying to circumnavigate that from the start.

Goose LeChance wrote:SoB have one of the best model lines in 40K, it makes me jealous.
Oh, absolutely - their new plastic incarnation is very good, if aesthetically one-note and inflexible to customisation - but very good no less.
It seems like they're popular and sell well, if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Same goes for Space Marines.
However, in counterpoint to that sentiment, people said that before Primaris existed, and look how well they've sold. Maybe the market is ready for some slight divergences from the previous designs - after all, if Primaris are anything to go by, it seems like a great success!


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 22:11:43


Post by: Goose LeChance


I would bet my life that Primaris sold well because they're properly sized Marines, and upscaling the vanilla Marines would have sold even better. Everything that sucks about Primaris is the new stuff, including the lore.

Ok, not everything, the Outriders are an improvement.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/17 23:02:58


Post by: ph34r


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
steelhead177th wrote:hey GW where are my white, english speaking Zulu warriors with boobplate? I need my diversity in all forms...wat? they don't have them in official models? I don't want to paint them in different colours, they MUST be official prints in order for them to count. They have to be female as well, even though Zulu warriors where never female, nor white, nor english speaking. No, I don't want to use stand ins, they HAVE to be GW or they don't count.
See, the issue here is that the Zulu are a real tangible thing that existed/exists. Space Marines and Sisters of Battle are neither - their entire existence is a fabrication.

Demanding reality to change/be representative is very different to wanting some different options for your fictional made up toy soldiers. Nice false equivalence though.
Nuns are a real thing right? Monks are a real thing right? Are sisters of battle basically warrior nuns? Yes. Are space marines basically warrior monks? Yes. Seems like a pretty fair and not false equivalent to me. Like, there is no army of soccer hooligan elves, just soccer hooligan orcs. There is no army of mechanical locusts from another galaxy, just biological locusts from another galaxy. There is no army of biological ancient humanoids dwelling beneath the surface of tomb worlds, just mechanical ones. There are no boy warrior nuns, just girls. There are no girl warrior monks, just boys.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
That's exactly what I want - me having women Astartes, or more customisable Sisters doesn't affect your narrative at all, so why would adding that option be a problem for you?
That would be awesome if Sisters of Battle got more variety, I'm all for it. They have one of the best model lines there is, and it had been a long time coming too.

Can't you just have "Daughters of Erda" if sisters of battle aren't space marine-y enough? Why change something old when you can just add something new with no conflict? Everyone wins right? If someone showed up with an army of space marines with all the bare heads being women, and said "oh yeah they're not adeptus astartes, they're <something else>", that would be totally cool.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 00:16:24


Post by: epronovost


 ph34r wrote:
Nuns are a real thing right? Monks are a real thing right? Are sisters of battle basically warrior nuns? Yes. Are space marines basically warrior monks? Yes. Seems like a pretty fair and not false equivalent to me.


Well, Space Marines aren't warrior monks. They aren't monks at all. They don't live a monastic lifestyle and aren't a branch of the Ecclesiarchy nor subservient to its hierarchy. Sisters of Battle are warrior nuns (to some extend though they don't quite fit the bill either), but Space Marines aren't monks at all. Some of them aren't even religious in the proper sense of the term, holding on to the old "Imperial Truth" ideology (though they do have a cult of personality toward the Emperor and their Primarch). Plus, monastic or religious orders that contains members of both sex do exist. Not only is your comparison not apt, it's not even internally consistent.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 00:40:11


Post by: BrianDavion


I think it's obvious that this thread was just a trojan horse for the "female marines" crowd.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 00:45:54


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


ph34r wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
steelhead177th wrote:hey GW where are my white, english speaking Zulu warriors with boobplate? I need my diversity in all forms...wat? they don't have them in official models? I don't want to paint them in different colours, they MUST be official prints in order for them to count. They have to be female as well, even though Zulu warriors where never female, nor white, nor english speaking. No, I don't want to use stand ins, they HAVE to be GW or they don't count.
See, the issue here is that the Zulu are a real tangible thing that existed/exists. Space Marines and Sisters of Battle are neither - their entire existence is a fabrication.

Demanding reality to change/be representative is very different to wanting some different options for your fictional made up toy soldiers. Nice false equivalence though.
Nuns are a real thing right? Monks are a real thing right? Are sisters of battle basically warrior nuns? Yes. Are space marines basically warrior monks? Yes. Seems like a pretty fair and not false equivalent to me.
Tell me when the nuns at your local convent go around wearing power armour, fighting aliens, and carry bolters.

No, this is completely ridiculous. There is a whole *universe* of difference between "I want to change the demographics of an actual real world historical/cultural organisation" and "I want to change the fictional depiction of a fictional organisation inspired by stereotypical and oftentimes inaccurate facsimiles of real cultures", namely in that one of those *does not exist and exists only as a shared figment of our imagination*.

I'm sure you know that, and I needn't dismantle this ridiculous line of logic any further.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
That's exactly what I want - me having women Astartes, or more customisable Sisters doesn't affect your narrative at all, so why would adding that option be a problem for you?
That would be awesome if Sisters of Battle got more variety, I'm all for it. They have one of the best model lines there is, and it had been a long time coming too.

Can't you just have "Daughters of Erda" if sisters of battle aren't space marine-y enough?
But why invent something wholly new? What prevents us using existing assets that already fit the bill?
Why change something old when you can just add something new with no conflict?
Why create something new when something old already exists fit for purpose?
Everyone wins right?
Everyone wins anyway - unless people choose to get offended by something that has no need to affect them, that is.

If my local takeout store starts offering a new topping option for their pizzas, I don't have to buy that. No point them inventing a whole new type of flatbread and branding it something unique so that it doesn't infringe on the "pizza" section, when those who don't want that topping on their pizza can just... not have it.
If someone showed up with an army of space marines with all the bare heads being women, and said "oh yeah they're not adeptus astartes, they're <something else>", that would be totally cool.
But as you said - they're Space Marines with the bare heads being women. Why can't they just be... yanno, Space Marines, like you just described them as?

Let's put the same example to these aesthetically different Sisters you said you wanted and were all for - what if we could have these aesthetically diverse Sisters, but they had to be called the "Daughters of Erda". They use all the same resources, units, rules, and suchlike as the Sisters of Battle, but you absolutely definitively cannot call them Sisters of Battle, despite their only difference being an aesthetic one, and they *must* go by a different name, like the "Daughters of Erda". Is it not simpler to call them Sisters of Battle, and those who don't like these aesthetically different Sisters of Battle can just not use them?

You see my point?

epronovost wrote:
 ph34r wrote:
Nuns are a real thing right? Monks are a real thing right? Are sisters of battle basically warrior nuns? Yes. Are space marines basically warrior monks? Yes. Seems like a pretty fair and not false equivalent to me.


Well, Space Marines aren't warrior monks. They aren't monks at all. They don't live a monastic lifestyle and aren't a branch of the Ecclesiarchy nor subservient to its hierarchy. Sisters of Battle are warrior nuns (to some extend though they don't quite fit the bill either), but Space Marines aren't monks at all. Some of them aren't even religious in the proper sense of the term, holding on to the old "Imperial Truth" ideology (though they do have a cult of personality toward the Emperor and their Primarch). Plus, monastic or religious orders that contains members of both sex do exist. Not only is your comparison not apt, it's not even internally consistent.
I'd have said the same, but you managed it before me - but yes, I do take umbrage with "Space Marines are warrior monks", because it really doesn't fit many variants of Astartes, and that not all monastic orders are even mono-gendered. Do Chapters have their own cults and rituals, absolutely - but those could be inspired by *any* cultures, and could have any variety of traditions and expectations. After all, with Astartes, variety seems to be the spice of life - a counterpoint to Sisters, who (despite also having variety in their rituals and ceremonies) are oftentimes depicted and identified as a more homogenous grouping.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote:
I think it's obvious that this thread was just a trojan horse for the "female marines" crowd.
But OP insisted that it wasn't! It definitely had nothing to do with the fact that this thread was created immediately after their previous thread on That Topic was locked, after many users mentioned that Sisters and Astartes could not be considered equivalent due to their divergent levels of player freedoms and encouraged creativity...

Definitely not related at all.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 00:52:55


Post by: Arcanis161


FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
And THERE we have it. We only needed 8 pages to weedle out the truth. SoB is GW's defense against having to create FSM.


K.

Can we close this thread too? Before it explodes into a ball of hatred and name-calling?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 01:47:09


Post by: ph34r


 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
ph34r wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Demanding reality to change/be representative is very different to wanting some different options for your fictional made up toy soldiers. Nice false equivalence though.
Nuns are a real thing right? Monks are a real thing right? Are sisters of battle basically warrior nuns? Yes. Are space marines basically warrior monks? Yes. Seems like a pretty fair and not false equivalent to me.
Tell me when the nuns at your local convent go around wearing power armour, fighting aliens, and carry bolters.
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
No, this is completely ridiculous. There is a whole *universe* of difference between "I want to change the demographics of an actual real world historical/cultural organisation" and "I want to change the fictional depiction of a fictional organisation inspired by stereotypical and oftentimes inaccurate facsimiles of real cultures", namely in that one of those *does not exist and exists only as a shared figment of our imagination*.

I'm sure you know that, and I needn't dismantle this ridiculous line of logic any further.
He's not asking Reality to change Zulu warriors to being women, he's asking GW to produce girl Zulu warriors. Which they won't do because A. they don't produce any Zulu warriors and B. warhammer 40k does not contain Zulu warriors, just like it does not contain girl space marines. Why not? No reason, it's arbitrary. Why do it? No reason, they decided the setting doesn't have Zulu warriors. Just like there aren't soccer hooligan elves or the empire from star wars or Tau psykers.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
That's exactly what I want - me having women Astartes, or more customisable Sisters doesn't affect your narrative at all, so why would adding that option be a problem for you?
That would be awesome if Sisters of Battle got more variety, I'm all for it. They have one of the best model lines there is, and it had been a long time coming too.
Can't you just have "Daughters of Erda" if sisters of battle aren't space marine-y enough?
But why invent something wholly new? What prevents us using existing assets that already fit the bill?
Why change something old when you can just add something new with no conflict?
Why create something new when something old already exists fit for purpose?
Why *not* invent something wholly new? Why change preexisting assets? This argument works both ways, why change something established when you can just make something new to add what you want? Why weren't half the Primarchs women? Why don't titans have more than 2 legs when it's so impractical? Why does humanity treat its members like dirt instead of fixing society and being like the Federation from Star Trek?

Everyone wins right?
Everyone wins anyway - unless people choose to get offended by something that has no need to affect them, that is.
How about, everyone wins right now anyway, because why not? Why be offended by space marines being boys, as it doesn't effect you either?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But as you said - they're Space Marines with the bare heads being women. Why can't they just be... yanno, Space Marines, like you just described them as?
Because the fluff says so, like every other arbitrary decision that makes a background setting a background setting. Why aren't there eldar space marines? Why isn't there a 5th 6th and 7th chaos god?

Let's put the same example to these aesthetically different Sisters you said you wanted and were all for - what if we could have these aesthetically diverse Sisters, but they had to be called the "Daughters of Erda". They use all the same resources, units, rules, and suchlike as the Sisters of Battle, but you absolutely definitively cannot call them Sisters of Battle, despite their only difference being an aesthetic one, and they *must* go by a different name, like the "Daughters of Erda". Is it not simpler to call them Sisters of Battle, and those who don't like these aesthetically different Sisters of Battle can just not use them?
You've got me wrong here, If it's aesthetically diverse sisters, I would say 1. awesome, and 2. ok they are sisters of battle, but aesthetically diverse. If you made boy sisters of battle, you would put a different name to them. If for some reason power armor and bolters isn't good enough, and you want chunky MkI-MkX power armor women with grav guns and Land Raiders and Leviathan Dreadnoughts and everything else where what Sisters have right now isn't good enough.... well that's not sisters of battle any more, you just made a new thing, and new things get new names.

EDIT: And again, just to be clear, I *do want* there to be more diverse aethetically imperial girl warriors. That would be great. I'd buy it.
And if aesthetically diverse sisters of battle still isn't good enough, I'm down with them making post-human genetically enhanced women, again, I'd buy it. But why retcon when you could just..... not retcon?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 02:27:27


Post by: steelhead177th


there are Zulu warrior minis. they are modeled male, and black. the fact that they are modeled after a real culture isn't relevant. the models exist. asking them to be female and white because you need to have them different for your own personal needs is the problem. if i really needed to have white, green or chinese Zulus I could paint them, or kitbash them to have bookplate. that is a project I could take on. I wouldn't force my needs and perspective on the company that makes them, or the people who want black Zulus because I feel they should be happy as I with the "choice". that's what this thread is about. same for the FSM thread. you feel it should be, therefore you need to wax on about imagined issues such as sexisim and racisim to forced others in to your view point. my position doesn't change your ability to have your female SM, or black sisters. your position forces me to alter the world and universe that was created that I enjoy. your position destroys the narrative that is already in place. i do believe that is the point of these pleas. to disrupt and destroy what others love just to see if you can. There are 3rd party minis for FSM, head swaps and different pigments that can be used without asking everyone else to bow to your whims. that is the solution to FSM and non Catholic sisters. do it for yourself. don't force that on others no matter how "harmless" you say it is. that is for the others to decide, not you. you understand this concept, but refuse to acknowledge it as it undermines your whole argument. I kept from posting in the FSM thread and stayed out of this one for along time, but the circular arguments presented are not in good faith or with the idea that other's are allowed to enjoy the story built as is. several times it was brought up to just do it instead of trying to force change and it is always dismissed with some sort of "it doesn't hurt you directly if it is available" but it does destroy the universe already written and twists it beyond the frame in which other's like it.
Telling people that lemon flavoured candy is good but now should have aniseed added to it because you like the taste and think it goes well together- yet the combo destroys the taste of lemon that others like-and when some say they like just lemon and you can add aniseed to your own candy you say it's better that way and it doesn't hurt you to mix them. in doing this you have just walked all over their preferences in favour of your own. you don't get to make that choice for others. just yourself. stop poking your finger into other's pies. bake your own just for that purpose. i understand it's not as satisfying to wreak your own crust as wreaking someone else's crust, but them's the breaks.
so Zulus and candy and pies. SM and sisters.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 03:01:39


Post by: epronovost


 ph34r wrote:
But why retcon when you could just..... not retcon?


What's wrong with "retcon" or even more simple "change"? Primaris Marines aren't a retcon; they are a change as in a recent development in the history of the world and the faction they belong to. Centurions were a retcon, as in a unit that had always existed in the fluff but is a decade old on the tabletop at most. GW product are in a constant state of recton and change as faction model lines grow or change. A year ago there were no such thing as Paragon warsuits or Celestian armed for close combat, but these things have been retconned into the fluff of Sisters of Battle. Who knows what the next five years will bring to factions like Space Marines and others. If you don't like retcon, you are in the wrong IP. Since retcons are frequent, inevitable and will continue as are changes, why are they "bad" or should they be avoided?


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 04:56:36


Post by: ph34r


I guess I'm making a distinction between:

1. "retcon": these units which could plausibly have existed now do exist. we didn't talk about them before, but we didn't really explicitly say that we couldn't possibly have them.
ex: space marines found another rhino variant in the closet
ex: here's another of the eldar aspect warrior shrines we haven't talked about
ex: would you look at that, even more weird types of ork vehicle

2. "retcon": this specific thing we said in the past, is in fact a different specific thing
ex: turns out necrons aren't all robots without personality! (this happened)
ex: the dark eldar actually do have psykers
ex: technically space marine chapters have 12 companies, not 10
ex: space marine process no longer explicitly requires boy inductees to get the genetics from their boy superhuman fathers


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 05:12:41


Post by: epronovost


 ph34r wrote:
I guess I'm making a distinction between:

1. "retcon": these units which could plausibly have existed now do exist. we didn't talk about them before, but we didn't really explicitly say that we couldn't possibly have them.
ex: space marines found another rhino variant in the closet
ex: here's another of the eldar aspect warrior shrines we haven't talked about
ex: would you look at that, even more weird types of ork vehicle

2. "retcon": this specific thing we said in the past, is in fact a different specific thing
ex: turns out necrons aren't all robots without personality! (this happened)
ex: the dark eldar actually do have psykers
ex: technically space marine chapters have 12 companies, not 10
ex: space marine process no longer explicitly requires boy inductees to get the genetics from their boy superhuman fathers


Considering both those things happened in the past and will certainly happen again at some point why are retcons (both types) bad de facto.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 06:18:57


Post by: Deadnight


 ph34r wrote:
Because the fluff says so, like every other arbitrary decision that makes a background setting a background setting. Why aren't there eldar space marines? Why isn't there a 5th 6th and 7th chaos god?

[


Whatever else can be said, in fairness, 'the Fluff says so' is shaky ground.

Fluff isn't a constant. Fluff change. Or is tigurius still half-eldar, are space wolves still from lucan, necrons got a complete personality transplant, primaris etc.

And interestingly, There was a fifth god, back in the day. Ever hear of Malal? The 'lost' God. Sons of malice are still semi-canon.

Gw do not treat their lore as sacrosanct.

And that's as close to [that topic] that I'm gonna go to here.

steelhead177th wrote:
your position forces me to alter the world and universe that was created that I enjoy. your position destroys the narrative that is already in place. i do believe that is the point of these pleas. to disrupt and destroy what others love just to see if you can.


Firstly, Change isn't necessarily bad. Aa above, gw have changed plenty.

I think is a horribly cruel and deeply unjust insult to claim that people who want changes want to 'destroy what others love, just because they can'. People just want to be equally respected and validated, that's not wrong. It's not pie. More for others doesn't mean less for you.

I have no doubt you probably don't mean it as such, but please, with respect, take a second
take a step back and turn your words to someone kicking off against real life issues like the civil rights movement back in the day (or even today), women fighting for equal rights etc and those words take on an a tremendous dark hue. It's basically 'don't stand up to, challenge or request changes to THE ORTHODOXY'. It might be in the context of toy soldiers but those changes youre hostile to won't actuslly ruin the IP you say you love. And those people asking for those changes are not the barbarians at the gate, looking to sack rome. Three not demons or monsters either. They're people like you that want a place where their values can be seen and shown openly without hostility or blowback.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 07:12:11


Post by: Arcanis161


Deadnight wrote:

I think is a horribly cruel and deeply unjust insult to claim that people who want changes want to 'destroy what others love, just because they can'. People just want to be equally respected and validated, that's not wrong. It's not pie. More for others doesn't mean less for you.

I have no doubt you probably don't mean it as such, but please, with respect, take a second
take a step back and turn your words to someone kicking off against real life issues like the civil rights movement back in the day (or even today), women fighting for equal rights etc and those words take on an a tremendous dark hue. It's basically 'don't stand up to, challenge or request changes to THE ORTHODOXY'. It might be in the context of toy soldiers but those changes youre hostile to won't actuslly ruin the IP you say you love. And those people asking for those changes are not the barbarians at the gate, looking to sack rome. Three not demons or monsters either. They're people like you that want a place where their values can be seen and shown openly without hostility or blowback.


So now we've moved back to the "changing the lore to include what I want is a moral issue" part of the argument. Good grief.

Looks like we'll be reaching the "and anyone who disagrees is secretly a <something>ist and a terrible human being" part fairly soon.

I'd say to just stop while you're ahead, as no one here is going to change anyone else's mind, but having seen this crop up time and time again, I think the people on this forum just like this visceral and vicious cycle of anger, implicating, and name calling.

Can't say I'm surprised. Just disappointed. Bye.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 07:27:20


Post by: Deadnight


Arcanis161 wrote:

So now we've moved back to the "changing the lore to include what I want is a moral issue" part of the argument. Good grief.

Looks like we'll be reaching the "and anyone who disagrees is secretly a <something>ist and a terrible human being" part fairly soon.

I'd say to just stop while you're ahead, as no one here is going to change anyone else's mind, but having seen this crop up time and time again, I think the people on this forum just like this visceral and vicious cycle of anger, implicating, and name calling.

Can't say I'm surprised. Just disappointed. Bye.


K.

Bear in mind, stated as a response to:
'i do believe that is the point of these pleas. to disrupt and destroy what others love just to see if you can".
the poster absolutely may not have intended it (my default is to assume this) but other pov is just as easily constructed to be just as negative and hostile, devalue and delegitimise a perspective and claim that asking for the lore to be changed makes you bad/wrong because all your intentions are therefore airomatically hostile etc . With respect, 'Good grief' applies here too.

Both povs can be bastardised, manipulated and weaponised to lash out.

And I Think I made it pretty clear I don't regard folks on the other side of the debate as 'bad people'. I specifically stated that. For what its worth, I also hate that kind of projection you refer to- there's a person at the other end and most people are fundamentally decent. Changing the lore isn't moral or anything, it's just change. And change isn't necessarily bad.

I'm not looking to change people's minds - that won't happen - but I don't think it's wrong to suggest a different perspective or to reflect on our own words we take for granted in a different context. In real life, for what it's worth, it's something I strongly value.

We're talking on a topic which worked around widening the aesthetics of sisters of battle. I don't think it's a bad idea - seeing fur clad barbarian sororitas could be kind of cool.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 08:25:01


Post by: Sgt_Smudge


ph34r wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
ph34r wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Demanding reality to change/be representative is very different to wanting some different options for your fictional made up toy soldiers. Nice false equivalence though.
Nuns are a real thing right? Monks are a real thing right? Are sisters of battle basically warrior nuns? Yes. Are space marines basically warrior monks? Yes. Seems like a pretty fair and not false equivalent to me.
Tell me when the nuns at your local convent go around wearing power armour, fighting aliens, and carry bolters
[....]
No, this is completely ridiculous. There is a whole *universe* of difference between "I want to change the demographics of an actual real world historical/cultural organisation" and "I want to change the fictional depiction of a fictional organisation inspired by stereotypical and oftentimes inaccurate facsimiles of real cultures", namely in that one of those *does not exist and exists only as a shared figment of our imagination*.

I'm sure you know that, and I needn't dismantle this ridiculous line of logic any further.
He's not asking Reality to change Zulu warriors to being women, he's asking GW to produce girl Zulu warriors.
Begging your pardon, but that's not what they said at all. They asked that models representing Zulu warriors (a real, tangible thing) be changed to be something other than the real tangible thing they represent.

This is not the same as changing the depictions of a fictional toy soldier brand, because, well, they're *fictional*. They do not exist.

Their argument was a poor attempt to compare changing X as changing Y, but the fundamental issue with their logic was that one thing they suggested (changing the depiction of Zulus) was a real thing, and the other (changing Sororitas or Astartes) was made up. You can see this in their follow-up post.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
That's exactly what I want - me having women Astartes, or more customisable Sisters doesn't affect your narrative at all, so why would adding that option be a problem for you?
That would be awesome if Sisters of Battle got more variety, I'm all for it. They have one of the best model lines there is, and it had been a long time coming too.
Can't you just have "Daughters of Erda" if sisters of battle aren't space marine-y enough?
But why invent something wholly new? What prevents us using existing assets that already fit the bill?
Why change something old when you can just add something new with no conflict?
Why create something new when something old already exists fit for purpose?
Why *not* invent something wholly new? Why change preexisting assets? This argument works both ways, why change something established when you can just make something new to add what you want?
As you say, it goes both ways - so I'm asking why, as GW seems to be just fine with retconning and re-purposing existing assets.
Why weren't half the Primarchs women?
Why not indeed.
Why don't titans have more than 2 legs when it's so impractical?
Because 40k is not a practical setting, and because Titans look cool on two legs.
Why does humanity treat its members like dirt instead of fixing society and being like the Federation from Star Trek?
Because if the Imperium treated their members well, they wouldn't be the objectively awful regime that the setting was predicated on them being, and they would cease to be the "bloodiest regime imaginable" outlined in the setting's tagline.

Everyone wins right?
Everyone wins anyway - unless people choose to get offended by something that has no need to affect them, that is.
How about, everyone wins right now anyway, because why not? Why be offended by space marines being boys, as it doesn't effect you either?
Except not everyone wins right now, hence why people are asking for a change in options. There's no "offence" in Space Marines being boys, but there *is* offence in "Space Marines can ONLY be boys", as that affects my choice of creativity, in the same way that "no, Sisters can ONLY look like this" is "offensive" - it's a pointless restriction that exists for... what?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But as you said - they're Space Marines with the bare heads being women. Why can't they just be... yanno, Space Marines, like you just described them as?
Because the fluff says so, like every other arbitrary decision that makes a background setting a background setting.
Cool cool, so... arbirtrary. And why does this arbitrary restriction mean so much, but the other arbitrary decisions that GW overturns every time they release a new book don't?
Why aren't there eldar space marines?
There *were*. You should be asking "why aren't there any more", because that was another one of those arbitrary decisions overturned by GW.
Why isn't there a 5th 6th and 7th chaos god?
Again, there *was* - Malal.
You should be asking "why was this arbitrary decision also retconned".

Let's put the same example to these aesthetically different Sisters you said you wanted and were all for - what if we could have these aesthetically diverse Sisters, but they had to be called the "Daughters of Erda". They use all the same resources, units, rules, and suchlike as the Sisters of Battle, but you absolutely definitively cannot call them Sisters of Battle, despite their only difference being an aesthetic one, and they *must* go by a different name, like the "Daughters of Erda". Is it not simpler to call them Sisters of Battle, and those who don't like these aesthetically different Sisters of Battle can just not use them?
You've got me wrong here, If it's aesthetically diverse sisters, I would say 1. awesome, and 2. ok they are sisters of battle, but aesthetically diverse.
Great - so why do you delineate between "aesthetically diverse Sisters can be called Sisters, but aesthetically diverse Astartes can't be called Astartes"? Why the double standard?

Why is there a difference?
If you made boy sisters of battle, you would put a different name to them. If for some reason power armor and bolters isn't good enough, and you want chunky MkI-MkX power armor women with grav guns and Land Raiders and Leviathan Dreadnoughts and everything else where what Sisters have right now isn't good enough.... well that's not sisters of battle any more, you just made a new thing, and new things get new names.
But I haven't made "something else", I've made Space Marines, who happen to be women. And, as we both seem to recognise, those are just called "Space Marines". That's what you called them, at least.

But why retcon when you could just..... not retcon?
Ask GW that - I'm still waiting for my half-Eldar Ultramarines Librarians, and my Obi-Wan Sherlock Closseaus.

steelhead177th wrote:there are Zulu warrior minis. they are modeled male, and black. the fact that they are modeled after a real culture isn't relevant.
And that's where you're wrong, because that very much *is* relevant.

Models of *actual Zulu warriors* should be representative of *actual Zulu warriors*, because *actual Zulu warriors* existed.
Models of fictional toy soliders from the 41st millennium simply do not have these same standards and demands, because none of them do, have, or ever will exist in the real world.

We have tangible proof on what a Zulu is. Space Marines, Orks, and Sisters of Battle do not.
if i really needed to have white, green or chinese Zulus I could paint them, or kitbash them to have bookplate. that is a project I could take on.
But then they're not Zulus. They're models that you've kitbashed or painted who were once representative of the real world culture of Zulus, but are no longer that - *because Zulus exist, and we can tangibly point to what a Zulu is*.

You cannot do that with a fictional toy soldier.
your position forces me to alter the world and universe that was created that I enjoy.
No more so than GW forces you to collect Primaris, or have a Primarch in your army, or collect all the factions out there.

Get over yourself. As much as you seem to ridicule the idea that 'there's sexism and racism everywhere, hahaha look at those SJWs jumping at nothing!', you're the one taking this as a personal attack on you. Maybe calm it with the self-importance.
i do believe that is the point of these pleas. to disrupt and destroy what others love just to see if you can.
Would you like fries with that tinfoil?
don't force that on others no matter how "harmless" you say it is. that is for the others to decide, not you.
Why is that for others to decide? Does that imply aesthetically diverse Sisters would be harmful?
If others are allowed to decide what is and isn't harmless, why can't I decide that too? Or is this another case of "you're not actually part of this community if you believe in this"?
it does destroy the universe already written and twists it beyond the frame in which other's like it.
And? Someone better tell GW that they're not welcome any more, as they're the only ones who've been "destroying" their own written universe.

Maybe it's almost like written universes don't exist, and are entirely fictional!
Telling people that lemon flavoured candy is good but now should have aniseed added to it because you like the taste and think it goes well together- yet the combo destroys the taste of lemon that others like-and when some say they like just lemon and you can add aniseed to your own candy you say it's better that way and it doesn't hurt you to mix them.
But you can still buy lemon candy without aniseed? Why are you crying over more options for people?
There's no quota for you to uphold - you don't need women in *your* Astartes, you don't need aesthetically diverse Sisters in *your* Sororitas, you don't need Primarchs in *your* army, and you don't need aniseed in *your* lemon flavoured sweets.

in doing this you have just walked all over their preferences in favour of your own.
And that's not what you're doing?
you don't get to make that choice for others. just yourself.
Great - that's exactly what I'm advocating for - having the CHOICE to have all the variety I want in my Astartes and Sisters, a choice which you want to delegitimise from me. I don't care what the hell you do with your models, but don't seek to stigmatise against mine.

ph34r wrote:I guess I'm making a distinction between:

1. "retcon": these units which could plausibly have existed now do exist. we didn't talk about them before, but we didn't really explicitly say that we couldn't possibly have them.

2. "retcon": this specific thing we said in the past, is in fact a different specific thing
But... why? Why make the distinction?

Secondly, I'd also like to very briefly highlight how the whole "Space Marines can only be boys" is not very frequently mentioned - not in any Codexes, to my recollection. It's hardly an oft-enforced and repeated statement in the same way that there's 4(but is it actually 5?) Chaos Gods, or how Ultramarines are blue.

Arcanis161 wrote:So now we've moved back to the "changing the lore to include what I want is a moral issue" part of the argument. Good grief.
As opposed to the "if you want to change the lore, that's a personal attack on me"? If you're going to clutch at pearls over one "side", I have to ask why you're letting that corker of a comment go unchallenged too.

Looks like we'll be reaching the "and anyone who disagrees is secretly a <something>ist and a terrible human being" part fairly soon.
I think we've already hit the "anyone who disagrees with me is an Ess-Jay-Double U who wants to profit off my misery" part, not that you called it out.

I'd say to just stop while you're ahead, as no one here is going to change anyone else's mind, but having seen this crop up time and time again, I think the people on this forum just like this visceral and vicious cycle of anger, implicating, and name calling.

Can't say I'm surprised. Just disappointed. Bye.
I don't want to say I knew this would happen from the thread's inception... but I knew this would happen from the thread's inception, and made that clear to the mods. They chose not to act on it proactively. If I'm disappointed in anyone, it's on their end.

And yes, this probably *is* off topic.


SOB Diversity @ 2021/09/18 08:41:25


Post by: Manchu


Well, that’s probably enough about that for now.