Corporal_Reznov wrote:

Void__Dragon wrote:It's still roughly 9,001 times better than anything the codices have put out in recent times.

Agreed. FFG adds in the gak I hate from the codices like the Dreadknight , but FFG doing so doesn't annoy me cause they didn't create the Dreadknight. They have to add it cause GW says so seeing as GW created the Dreadknight.

Nonsense. Licensed material can and does divert from GW fluff by considerable margin, and if FFG did not want to add the Dreadknight they could have simply let it out of the book. Just like, lo and behold, the use of Warp Sorcery - a big theme in the GK retcon - is omitted completely in FFG fluff, thus retaining their "paladins of purity" aspect.

As a Sisters fan, I also disagree with Blood of Martyrs being "better than anything the codices have put out in recent times". I'll rather keep my Sisters being badasses instead of decorative cannonfodder mages wielding "civilian bolters", thanks.

 Lynata wrote:

Corporal_Reznov wrote:

Void__Dragon wrote:It's still roughly 9,001 times better than anything the codices have put out in recent times.

Agreed. FFG adds in the gak I hate from the codices like the Dreadknight , but FFG doing so doesn't annoy me cause they didn't create the Dreadknight. They have to add it cause GW says so seeing as GW created the Dreadknight.

Nonsense. Licensed material can and does divert from GW fluff by considerable margin, and if FFG did not want to add the Dreadknight they could have simply let it out of the book. Just like, lo and behold, the use of Warp Sorcery - a big theme in the GK retcon - is omitted completely in FFG fluff, thus retaining their "paladins of purity" aspect.

*shrug* Okay. Still doesn't change the fact that GW created it and thus its inclusion in FFG doesn't annoy me. I'd think that not going along with the retcon or atleast not showing it in that book will please you?

As a Sisters fan, I also disagree with Blood of Martyrs being "better than anything the codices have put out in recent times". I'll rather keep my Sisters being badasses instead of decorative cannonfodder mages wielding "civilian bolters", thanks.

If you mean due to game mechanics? I have already told you that I don't particularly care, right?

From what I've seen, the FFG fluff paints them off to be badass in both combat and in ways other than combat. The are wielding human bolters. Not the bolters marines use.

I'm sure you will bombard me with quotes now. I will tell you now, Lynata, please don't. i'm not in the mood you right now.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:I'd think that not going along with the retcon or atleast not showing it in that book will please you?

That's tricky. I like oldschool GKs more and think the change sucks (same about the Newcrons). On the other hand, I've kinda committed to always prefer a GW source for my own interpretation of the setting whenever a conflict arises.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:If you mean due to game mechanics? I have already told you that I don't particularly care, right? From what I've seen, the FFG fluff paints them off to be badass in both combat and in ways other than combat. The are wielding human bolters. Not the bolters marines use. I'm sure you will bombard me with quotes now. I will tell you now, Lynata, please don't. i'm not in the mood you right now.

Alright, no quotes - just pointing out that, no, it's not just the game mechanics. It's their entire representation from omitting their capability to deal with Space Marines (this fits to FFG's rules however, given that their weapons aren't even capable of wounding Astartes) to bumping up their numbers in the Calixis sector from 50 (Black Industries' Inquisitor's Handbook) to several thousand (FFG's Book of Martyrs) all the way to turning Acts of Faith into actual space magic rather than a matter of willpower and grit. GW also doesn't make a difference between "human" or "Marine" bolters when it comes to destructive capabilities - they all have the same barrel size and the WH Codex notes weapons and armour as being on the same level.

In short, FFG "guardified" the Sisters by making them more numerous whilst simultaneously stripping away their firepower. What's more, now it seems that everybody and his mum can pull off Acts of Faith, too.

If you prefer that, cool. I'll stick with the original.

If you're not in the mood to discuss, Reznov, don't post. Simple, see?

In all the other established fluff, there is no difference in calibre between Godwyn pattern bolters used by Marines and Godwyn De'az pattern bolters used by Sisters. They use the same rounds and are roughly the same size. The difference is that the De'az has a smaller pistol grip and a more streamlined foregrip designed to take a Sarissa or Exterminator attachment, while the straight-up Godwyn pattern has a larger pistol grip suited for Astartes power armour and a chunkier foregrip so that it's easier to handle with large hands, but lacks the attachment rail in favour of a gun cam.

I also hate the idea of Sisters as "space wizards" using mystical mumbo-jumbo to perform their acts of heroism. They are much more badass using straight-up fighting prowess with the occasional bit of divine inspiration or guidance. You want space wizards, go bug the Adeptus Astra Telepathica.

Edit: spelling

 Lynata wrote:

Corporal_Reznov wrote:I'd think that not going along with the retcon or atleast not showing it in that book will please you?

That's tricky. I like oldschool GKs more and think the change sucks (same about the Newcrons). On the other hand, I've kinda committed to always prefer a GW source for my own interpretation of the setting whenever a conflict arises.

So you pretty much admit what I've been saying all along that you are biased against everything not codexes. As I've said before, go and become the boss of GW and then declare everything not codex to be not canon. That way you will be happy.

Alright, no quotes - just pointing out that, no, it's not just the game mechanics. It's their entire representation from omitting their capability to deal with Space Marines (this fits to FFG's rules however, given that their weapons aren't even capable of wounding Astartes)

I really wouldn't know seeing as I don't play the game.

to bumping up their numbers in the Calixis sector from 50 (Black Industries' Inquisitor's Handbook) to several thousand (FFG's Book of Martyrs)

is this a problem? More numbers are good. It make more sense. Also there are other sisters like order famulous and such and they have to be in higher numbers than a mere 50.

all the way to turning Acts of Faith into actual space magic rather than a matter of willpower and grit.

I will have to read it again. But Acts of faith can be like the Orks belief affecting reality which shows that humans have their own version which is weaker cause not all humans believe the same thing and such, if you can get what I mean? Or it could be the Emp daining to help the SOB *shrug*.

GW also doesn't make a difference between "human" or "Marine" bolters when it comes to destructive capabilities - they all have the same barrel size and the WH Codex notes weapons and armour as being on the same level.

Differences between human and marine bolters make more sense to me. Don't care what you think.

In short, FFG "guardified" the Sisters by making them more numerous whilst simultaneously stripping away their firepower. What's more, now it seems that everybody and his mum can pull off Acts of Faith, too.

Their called acts of faith meaning if you have sufficient faith and such, they should work.

If you prefer that, cool. I'll stick with the original.

Am I trying to convince you to change your opinion? The answer is no. keep your pov. I don't care.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:So you pretty much admit what I've been saying all along that you are biased against everything not codexes.

How was there ever any question about this?

"Me, I'm staying as close to the GW studio fluff as possible, meaning the contents of codices, the rulebooks, magazines such as White Dwarf or Citadel Journal (RIP) and the stuff hosted on the various websites (free PDFs and short articles). Aside from me "growing up" with the tone and style of the studio's own writing, I also believe that this approach keeps me more compatible to the majority of future products from this origin than if I were to embrace one of the outsourced outlets of fluff instead, simply because all the GW stuff is written by the same circle of people (aside from the occasional change in personnel that occurs over the years), compared to the ideas and interpretations of the many, many different individual writers that work on novels etc. Many cooks, broth, etc. Even now, after over two decades, you still find references and even straight copied passages of text from the earliest days of the franchise in the newest rulebook. That is a consistency unparalleled by any other source of fluff, and I'm all for consistency."
- Lynata in the recent "40k canon" thread

Are you just not reading my posts in their entirety?

Corporal_Reznov wrote:is this a problem? More numbers are good. It make more sense. Also there are other sisters like order famulous and such and they have to be in higher numbers than a mere 50.

I'm talking Battle Sisters. And it doesn't make more sense, seeing that the Calixis sector, amongst other Sisterhood detachments, now hosts about a third of what one of the six Major Orders has available for the entire galaxy.

Of course, this would only apply if you take into account GW sources, which have presented us with actual numbers on their strength.

Also, it is a problem in that it contradicts the fluff that Dark Heresy had established for itself in the Inquisitor's Handbook. But I guess this is one of the risks involved in transferring a game from one studio to another. Other writers = other ideas.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:I will have to read it again. But Acts of faith can be like the Orks belief affecting reality which shows that humans have their own version which is weaker cause not all humans believe the same thing and such, if you can get what I mean? Or it could be the Emp daining to help the SOB *shrug*.

"Acts of Faith are not counted as psychic powers, and so may not be nullified."
- Games Workshop

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Differences between human and marine bolters make more sense to me. Don't care what you think.

Why call me out on it, then?

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Their called acts of faith meaning if you have sufficient faith and such, they should work.

Except that Codex fluff explained them not only as a result of the Sisters' faith and willpower but also many years of specialised training and indoctrination following the original teachings of the San Leor temple.
That's the big difference between GW and FFG - one tells you it's actually just trained badassness taken for miracles, whilst the other tells you it's SPACE MAGIC you can just happen to pick up at random.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:Am I trying to convince you to change your opinion? The answer is no. keep your pov. I don't care.

Why do you keep posting this stuff, then? For someone who "doesn't care" you are rather quick to jump into long debates about it.

 Lynata wrote:

Corporal_Reznov wrote:So you pretty much admit what I've been saying all along that you are biased against everything not codexes.

How was there ever any question about this?

"Me, I'm staying as close to the GW studio fluff as possible, meaning the contents of codices, the rulebooks, magazines such as White Dwarf or Citadel Journal (RIP) and the stuff hosted on the various websites (free PDFs and short articles). Aside from me "growing up" with the tone and style of the studio's own writing, I also believe that this approach keeps me more compatible to the majority of future products from this origin than if I were to embrace one of the outsourced outlets of fluff instead, simply because all the GW stuff is written by the same circle of people (aside from the occasional change in personnel that occurs over the years), compared to the ideas and interpretations of the many, many different individual writers that work on novels etc. Many cooks, broth, etc. Even now, after over two decades, you still find references and even straight copied passages of text from the earliest days of the franchise in the newest rulebook. That is a consistency unparalleled by any other source of fluff, and I'm all for consistency."
- Lynata in the recent "40k canon" thread

Nothing just making a full confirmation. Thats all.

Are you just not reading my posts in their entirety?

Sometimes. Your posts are dull and tiring to read and just consist of you trying to batter people over the head until they bow to you.

I'm talking Battle Sisters. And it doesn't make more sense, seeing that the Calixis sector, amongst other Sisterhood detachments, now hosts about a third of what one of the six Major Orders has available for the entire galaxy.

Of course, this would only apply if you take into account GW sources, which have presented us with actual numbers on their strength.

Does the book say exactly battle sisters or simply sisters? Will have to check it out. I personally don't find any problem with the numbers increase. Just increase it elsewhere as well.

You have me at a handicap in this discussion cause I'm still somewhat busy with school work and thus can't and open up my FFG books. Me being on the forum is just a way to loosen some stress before diving back in to school work. Though chatting and reading your posts is once again raising my stress level .

Also, it is a problem in that it contradicts the fluff that Dark Heresy had established for itself in the Inquisitor's Handbook. But I guess this is one of the risks involved in transferring a game from one studio to another. Other writers = other ideas.

I don't mind it at all.

]"Acts of Faith are not counted as psychic powers, and so may not be nullified."
- Games Workshop

see above about not reading the books.

Why call me out on it, then?

I didn't, You brought it up! I was just agreeing with Void_dragon and then you come along and started this discussion.

Except that Codex fluff explained them not only as a result of the Sisters' faith and willpower but also many years of specialised training and indoctrination following the original teachings of the San Leor temple.
That's the big difference between GW and FFG - one tells you it's actually just trained badassness taken for miracles, whilst the other tells you it's SPACE MAGIC you can just happen to pick up at random.

One of the faith abilities as used in FFG fluff IIRC is weakening a Nurgle daemon prince by surrounding it and chanting and praying. And this was done by Sister Hospitaler's! And you say weak and gak? Also how does a trained badass beat a nurgle prince by praying?

Why do you keep posting this stuff, then? For someone who "doesn't care" you are rather quick to jump into long debates about it.

I was talking about changing your opinion. Funny about how you say that there is no canon and thus we should pick and choose what we want and that its all fine and yet you attack me over posting fluff I like cause you disagree with it.

Well, since it's obvious that you only care about arguing with Lynata rather than discussing anything, I'll bow out of this one.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Well, since it's obvious that you only care about arguing with Lynata rather than discussing anything, I'll bow out of this one.

Just ignore him until he gets bored - I'd give it another hour tops.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Well, since it's obvious that you only care about arguing with Lynata rather than discussing anything, I'll bow out of this one.

I'm not interested in arguing with Lyanata. I came back into this thread again just to reply to void_dragon. Lyanata started this.

My response was to an issue brought up by Void Dragon. That you have replied to it doesn't change this. I guess I should have just removed your post from the quote if the avoidance of this confusion would have saved us both the fruitless debate above, so apologies for that.

You picking out individual points from my argument still conflicts with you "not caring", however. As do the posts you made in the last few days where you attacked my PoV without me having addressed you in any way, such as in the lasgun thread.

But if you're not interested in a proper discussion anyways due to my "tiresome" posts, let's just stop here before you result to actual insults rather than mere verbal stings. I'll do us both a favour and ignore your posts in this thread from here on out. Feel free to shoot me a PM should you start "caring" again.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Well, since it's obvious that you only care about arguing with Lynata rather than discussing anything, I'll bow out of this one.

Considering the fact Lynata enjoys typing essays in response to everything I don't think anyone has any interest in arguing with him/her.

Essays are useful, they tell us things. *Shrug*

Not when s/he ignores or manipulates your content to fit his/her preconceived notions and then proceeds to go off on an irrelevant tangent.

Amaya wrote:Not when s/he ignores or manipulates your content to fit his/her preconceived notions and then proceeds to go off on an irrelevant tangent.

I'd like you to expand on this point, please.

 Lynata wrote:
As a Sisters fan, I also disagree with Blood of Martyrs being "better than anything the codices have put out in recent times". I'll rather keep my Sisters being badasses instead of decorative cannonfodder mages wielding "civilian bolters", thanks.

What are you talking about?

Decorative cannon fodder is exactly how the Sisters of Battle are being portrayed these days in studio fluff.

 Lynata wrote:
My response was to an issue brought up by Void Dragon. That you have replied to it doesn't change this. I guess I should have just removed your post from the quote if the avoidance of this confusion would have saved us both the fruitless debate above, so apologies for that.

Cause you replied to me and discussed points I had posted about such as the Dreadknight. So I responded. Things escalated from there.

You picking out individual points from my argument still conflicts with you "not caring", however.

Because I had thought you were replying to me so I replied back. Get it?

. As do the posts you made in the last few days where you attacked my PoV without me having addressed you in any way, such as in the lasgun thread.

I was having a discussion with you then. That as time worn on turned into canon and inconsistencies debates.

But if you're not interested in a proper discussion anyways due to my "tiresome" posts, let's just stop here before you result to actual insults rather than mere verbal stings.

I can have a discussion with you later on in maybe over the weekend, not right now. But even when I am eager to discuss things. I do admit that dealing with your posts are tiresome.

I'll do us both a favour and ignore your posts in this thread from here on out. Feel free to shoot me a PM should you start "caring" again.

My not caring was about changing your opinion. In the other threads I was discussing about consistencies so as to see if we can rationalize them. I did them just for discussion sake, not out of a need to try and change you pov.

 Amaya wrote:

Considering the fact Lynata enjoys typing essays in response to everything I don't think anyone has any interest in arguing with him/her.

Its a debate tactic I have seen in action other sites, its called "debate through attrition" or something like that. Its basically where you overwhelm your opponent with large and tiresome posts usually in essay form. You continue to do this until the opponent simply gets sick of it and call quits or can't keep up and calls quits.

I personally have no stomach to deal with this tactic, thus all my comments about tiresome and so on.

Lynata isn't even a master from what I've seen. i've seen this tactic used where the essay ends up taking a large portion of the screen.

Take it to PMs, no one gives a gak. Seriously.

As far as the Sisterhood's current depiction in studio fluff is concerned... yeah, they're definitely being used as cannonfodder. This is not good (that's the IG's job) especially when it's used only to show how much better the SM are, when the SoB are meant to be their equals.

As far as the FFG bolters thing is concerned... there isn't, really, a fundamental difference between a "civilian" and an "Astartes" bolter. While the Astartes bolter will be of superior craftsmanship, and possibly contain more advanced targeting systems and such, they still fire the same rocket-propelled mass-reactive exploding bullet. Their game systems should establish this by having a standard bolt-weapon entry, and then providing the Astartes versions with a bonus to-hit or something... not the *massively* overpowered (base double damage, plus Tearing, plus Best Quality) bolters presented in DW.

Our local group has made them a hodge-podge of both. Removed the Tearing quality from the Astartes bolters and upgraded the DH bolt weapons to the 2d10+6 P4 damage of DW. A boltgun should be a fearsome weapon, but it should not be the best weapon for every situation (with the "exploding d10s" the Tearing quality gave all-but-guaranteed access to, it was possible for a DW Marine to shoot a Baneblade to death with his boltgun).

Corporal_Reznov wrote:
[
Its a debate tactic I have seen in action other sites, its called "debate through attrition" or something like that. Its basically where you overwhelm your opponent with large and tiresome posts usually in essay form. You continue to do this until the opponent simply gets sick of it and call quits or can't keep up and calls quits.

I personally have no stomach to deal with this tactic, thus all my comments about tiresome and so on.

Lynata isn't even a master from what I've seen. i've seen this tactic used where the essay ends up taking a large portion of the screen.

And you're egging him/her/it on... please chill its just a "friendly" discussion on one aspect of a boardgame - this is getting ridiculous.

And Lynata, Reznov is the only one who reads all of your posts - we got short attention spans.

Where is this belief that Battle Sisters are on par with Space Marines coming from?

^ Oooo NO, you didn't say that ...now this discussion will never end !!!
And here we go....

 Psienesis wrote:
Take it to PMs, no one gives a gak. Seriously.

Agreed on that. though I don't know if that if I have the stomach to do so. May just decided to ignore Lynata altogether.

As far as the Sisterhood's current depiction in studio fluff is concerned... yeah, they're definitely being used as cannonfodder. This is not good (that's the IG's job) especially when it's used only to show how much better the SM are,

I agree on the cannonfodder thing.

when the SoB are meant to be their equals.

I can't agree on this part. SM's have more bigger armor which should mean better protection, centuries of experience, all sorts of bio-enhancements, that carapace thing that lets them act as if their armor is a second skin and so on. SM's should be better in average situations to me. Everything else depends on skill, weapon and faith abilities, etc, of the users.

As far as the FFG bolters thing is concerned... there isn't, really, a fundamental difference between a "civilian" and an "Astartes" bolter.

While the Astartes bolter will be of superior craftsmanship, and possibly contain more advanced targeting systems and such, they still fire the same rocket-propelled mass-reactive exploding bullet. Their game systems should establish this by having a standard bolt-weapon entry, and then providing the Astartes versions with a bonus to-hit or something... not the *massively* overpowered (base double damage, plus Tearing, plus Best Quality) bolters presented in DW.

According to Lexicanum, they say the below and the cites come from dark Heresy rpg the Inquisitors handbook which was made by Black Industries IIRC. could be wrong.

Adeptus Astartes

Like other Space Marine weaponry, Astartes boltguns are designed around their superhuman physique. The weight of each weapon would require most humans to use a supporting brace, with hand-grips larger than any normal human could manage. However, even if a normal human were to fire the boltgun, the resulting recoil would rip their arm from its socket.[10d] Normal humans found to be in possession of even a single Astartes bolt round, much less a boltgun, can expect a swift execution for their crimes.[10a]

This makes perfect sense to me.

Our local group has made them a hodge-podge of both. Removed the Tearing quality from the Astartes bolters and upgraded the DH bolt weapons to the 2d10+6 P4 damage of DW. A boltgun should be a fearsome weapon, but it should not be the best weapon for every situation (with the "exploding d10s" the Tearing quality gave all-but-guaranteed access to, it was possible for a DW Marine to shoot a Baneblade to death with his boltgun).

The DW fluff I've read never implied that bolters could kill Baneblades on their own. So I just put it down to game mechanics. Unless, I'm mistaken?

 Amaya wrote:
Where is this belief that Battle Sisters are on par with Space Marines coming from?

Oh God, you've just opened Pandora's Box without even realizing it.

All those without the mettle to face the oncoming storm, abandon thread.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
Where is this belief that Battle Sisters are on par with Space Marines coming from?

Oh God, you've just opened Pandora's Box without even realizing it.

All those without the mettle to face the oncoming storm, abandon thread.

Looks like i've also added to it unfortunately .

The only thing Battle Sisters have that Space Marines don't is Faith.

Space Marines have

1) Genetically engineered superhumans
2) Interface completely with their power armor, making them even stronger and getting superior usage from it
3) Decades to centuries of combat experience
4) Beyond human training that is only capable because they are genetically engineered


Battle Sisters might be peak humans with Faith, but Space Marines are beyond any natural human limits.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
It would great if SoB were retconned to be on par with Space Marines, but I don't see anything in current fluff to suggest that they are equal right now.

Void__Dragon wrote:Decorative cannon fodder is exactly how the Sisters of Battle are being portrayed these days in studio fluff.

Eh, they definitively still have that "martyr" theme going on (tbh it never really changed) - but at least they're still portrayed as an elite force capable of taking on daemons and Marines, and do sport the occasional "win" in studio fluff (in spite of how often that tends to be forgotten even by the more cynical SoB fans).

mad_eddy_13 wrote:And Lynata, Reznov is the only one who reads all of your posts - we got short attention spans.

I doubt that - I've had long and civil discussions with quite a number of dakkanauts in the past. For some reason, Reznov and I have been clashing time and time again last week. I have no idea why; I don't think we ever interacted before.

Amaya wrote:Where is this belief that Battle Sisters are on par with Space Marines coming from?

Just a line dropped on the GW website, and the description of their equipment in the 3E 'dex. It's not really surprising that few people know of it, especially given how Astartes superiority is stressed in much more popular sources.

Frankly I disagree, individually, no soldier in the Imperium should be equal to a Space Marine on average (Disregarding exceptions like Straken or Yarrick). That is the entire point of the Space Marines, individually, they are the mightiest soldiers of the Imperium.

Also, how many battle sisters are there? I've never seen the numbers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:
Eh, they definitively still have that "martyr" theme going on (tbh it never really changed) - but at least they're still portrayed as an elite force capable of taking on daemons and Marines, and do sport the occasional "win" in studio fluff (in spite of how often that tends to be forgotten even by the more cynical SoB fans).

I can recall no recent codex fluff where the Sisters weren't massacred, to be honest. But then, I did just sort of glance through the WD update, so hey.

Strong evidence for Sisters being on par with Space Marines. Oh em gee guys, they both wear power armor, they must be equal!

Void__Dragon wrote:Also, how many battle sisters are there? I've never seen the numbers.

There are six Major Orders with about 2.000 to 3.000 Battle Sisters each, and an undisclosed amount of Minor Orders that tend to average at about a hundred. The former are the mobile crusading forces, whereas the latter tend to be local convents focusing on other duties such as guarding a holy site, escorting Ecclesiarchy officials, protecting a pilgrim route etc.

There just was a "short" discussion (about 2 pages, involving fluff quotes as well as speculation) about that very subject in this thread.

Wow that's it?

That's fething puny. Those numbers should be bulked up, IMHO.

 Amaya wrote:
Where is this belief that Battle Sisters are on par with Space Marines coming from?

If we compare them with Dark Angels Space marines, they are almost equals... If we compare them with Dark Angels Space marines, they are almost equals... in point cost!

For the arguments about the actual numbers of Sisters in the IoM... if each planet is able to produce only ONE sister per year (and I find that stat kinda low IMO), there should be millions of them, no?

Edit: I mean, I find it hard to believe that there is more psykers (counting the thousands dying each day for the golden throne) than there is potential people that can become SoB.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Frankly I disagree, individually, no soldier in the Imperium should be equal to a Space Marine on average (Disregarding exceptions like Straken or Yarrick). That is the entire point of the Space Marines, individually, they are the mightiest soldiers of the Imperium.

Also, how many battle sisters are there? I've never seen the numbers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:
Eh, they definitively still have that "martyr" theme going on (tbh it never really changed) - but at least they're still portrayed as an elite force capable of taking on daemons and Marines, and do sport the occasional "win" in studio fluff (in spite of how often that tends to be forgotten even by the more cynical SoB fans).

I can recall no recent codex fluff where the Sisters weren't massacred, to be honest. But then, I did just sort of glance through the WD update, so hey.

Wait? so the muscle lumps in armor don't die but the chicks in similar armor get slaughtered?

Void__Dragon wrote:Wow that's it?
That's fething puny. Those numbers should be bulked up, IMHO.

Nah, it's more than enough for the role they are intended to fill, and how uncommon their participation is. See the force disposition charts of Armageddon or the 13th Black Crusade.

I mean, we could argue that one million Space Marines is puny and that those numbers should be bulked up as well. Those forces are intended to be rare.

Amaya wrote:Strong evidence for Sisters being on par with Space Marines. Oh em gee guys, they both wear power armor, they must be equal!

You should know me better...

"As the Chamber Militant of the galaxy-spanning Ecclesiarchy, the Sisters of Battle are fierce warriors that are equals to their brother Space Marines. What the Sisters lack in genetic enhancement they make up for in faith and devotion."
- GW website

"The Sisters of Battle are exceptionally well equipped, with armour and weapons the equal of any Space Marine Chapter."
- 3E C:WH

I'm still waiting on you to expand on your claim that I would "manipulate people's content to fit my preconceived notions", by the way. Looks to me like you are the one doing that.

I like to think that largest of the minor orders are about thousand strong, and there are actually quite a lot of these orders. This makes number of Sisters to be more reasonable.

As for Marines vs. Sisters, whereas individual Marine might be more powerful, the Sisters can still challenge them. They're the best non-marine troops the Imperium has, and thus they're used purging rogue Marine Chapters.

Your entire claim hinges upon a throw away quote from GW...

The idea that anyone is more devoted to the Emperor than Space Marines is a bit laughable.

 Lynata wrote:


"As the Chamber Militant of the galaxy-spanning Ecclesiarchy, the Sisters of Battle are fierce warriors that are equals to their brother Space Marines. What the Sisters lack in genetic enhancement they make up for in faith and devotion."
- GW website

So average BT ( and every fanatical chapter) has all that + even more....so how are they equal?

 Crimson wrote:

As for Marines vs. Sisters, whereas individual Marine might be more powerful, the Sisters can still challenge them. They're the best non-marine troops the Imperium has, and thus they're used purging rogue Marine Chapters.

I simply don't see it that way seeing as Astartes have their own fleets and such. IIRC, FW had that Badab thing where when they wanted to crush an SM's chapter, they brought in other SM's. Not SOB's.

Amaya wrote:Your entire claim hinges upon a throw away quote from GW...

The way I see it, that's still better than anything my opposition had to say so far.

Amaya wrote:The idea that anyone is more devoted to the Emperor than Space Marines is a bit laughable.

Yeah, especially considering how few Space Marines switched sides so far.

On a sidenote, your failure to respond to my request regarding your offensive claim might make you look like you were lying. Just saying.

DarthMarko wrote:So average BT ( and every fanatical chapter) has all that + even more....so how are they equal?

Can your average BT pull off Acts of Faith?

 DarthMarko wrote:

 Lynata wrote:


"As the Chamber Militant of the galaxy-spanning Ecclesiarchy, the Sisters of Battle are fierce warriors that are equals to their brother Space Marines. What the Sisters lack in genetic enhancement they make up for in faith and devotion."
- GW website

So average BT ( and every fanatical chapter) has all that + even more....so how are they equal?

Cause GW and some holy codex says so, of course.

Because they have power armor (that they don't interface with) and bolters obviously.

The very existence of Sisters is misogynistic. They were obviously created as female Space Marines, but instead of being capable Space Marines on their own they rely on the Emperor's blessing to guide them through battle.

Amaya wrote:The very existence of Sisters is misogynistic. They were obviously created as female Space Marines, but instead of being capable Space Marines on their own they rely on the Emperor's blessing to guide them through battle.

Acts of Faith are not in any way powered by the Emperor but a result of the Sisters' training and dedication.

Perhaps you should read a bit more about the faction you're bashing.

[edit] At least as per GW. FFG actually does have them use Emperor Space Magic.

Does that make FFG misogynistic?
/philosoraptor

How am I bashing this faction? Again, there you go taking things out of context.

Amaya wrote:How am I bashing this faction? Again, there you go taking things out of context.

Do I, really? You sit there badmouthing the Sisters' combat capabilities, yet apparently you are not even aware of what level of wargear they use or that AoF are a result of their training. And when I throw in the relevant quotes from GW you dismiss them as "throwaway". What's your agenda, if not that?

Corporal_Reznov wrote:

I simply don't see it that way seeing as Astartes have their own fleets and such.

Imperial Navy will need to transport the Sisters, that is true. But that hardly matters.

IIRC, FW had that Badab thing where when they wanted to crush an SM's chapter, they brought in other SM's. Not SOB's.

Because FW wanted to make a Marine book, not a Sisters book.

Crimson wrote:Imperial Navy will need to transport the Sisters, that is true. But that hardly matters.

If it's a Minor Order. The Major Orders run their own fleets.

 Lynata wrote:

Amaya wrote:How am I bashing this faction? Again, there you go taking things out of context.

Do I, really? You sit there badmouthing the Sisters' combat capabilities, yet apparently you are not even aware of what level of wargear they use or that AoF are a result of their training. And when I throw in the relevant quotes from GW you dismiss them as "throwaway". What's your agenda, if not that?

I am entirely aware of their wargear and Acts of Faith. They were my first army after all.

But because I disagree with your assessment that they are equal to Space Marines, I am "bashing" them.

That's really cute.

 Lynata wrote:

Can your average BT pull off Acts of Faith?

Actually, I'd claim that they kinda can. They have their vows or whatever they're called. I see this to be basically the same thing what the Sisters have, psychological buff brought by insane dedication.

i don't see what the controversy over SOB's having faith powers are. All its shows is that their faith is very, very strong. So strong that it taps into the human psyker effect similar to Orks or its the God Emperor himself favoring them, who knows *shrug*


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

Imperial Navy will need to transport the Sisters, that is true. But that hardly matters.

now you're bringing othe branches into this. Purely speaking, SOB's against marines on their own can't win due to having no support. Also, the last time I heard the SOb's try something against SM's(the wolves) they lost IIRC.

Because FW wanted to make a Marine book, not a Sisters book.

So what? It still shows that the Inquisition or Imperium in general relies on SM's to crush SM's.

Space marines are. Nine feet tall, have fingers like turkey legs, feet like fething frankenstein, two hearts, can spit acid, and have solid fused rib cages.

Cato sicarius cracked on and decapitated some eldar bird, after she had cut his primary heart in half, and all he did was take a knee afterwards and pant a bit. :-D

I love the sisters, but trying to say they are as nails as marines is silly.

They are nails because they AINT as nails as space marines. An unaugmented human in a bit of armor stubbornly facing terrifying horror is particularly awesome.

In the same way that a fearless God of war that straddles the battlefield like a mighty colossus (Matty) can never be as brave as a coward that grits his teeth and commits an act of true valor, so are the sisters totally bad ass.

It takes their entire appeal away to say they are as strong as the inhuman freaks that are genetically more awesome in every way.

That's an assumption, Lynata. The only Ecclesiarchy ship we've ever seen is the Hammer of Thor.

Back when Sisters were first introduced, their "space magic" consisted of a fixed bonus set at the start of the game which ranged from being immune to Fear and Terror to Firing twice in the same shooting phase. Or the very low chance (if you're led by a Sister Superior and have an allied Psyker) of nothing at all.

Wow. Such magnificent space magic they were forced to rely on.

Also, they had basically the same stat line as Marines, except instead of assault marines, they got Seraphim, who were better.

Amaya wrote:I am entirely aware of their wargear and Acts of Faith. They were my first army after all.
But because I disagree with your assessment that they are equal to Space Marines, I am "bashing" them.
That's really cute.

This isn't "my assessment" - this is something taken directly from the GW website. Careful with that manipulation.

Pray tell, why are you dismissing these quotes if you really are "neutral" to the issue? I can understand and respect people simply having different personal preferences, and given how the fluff works in this franchise it is entirely okay to just disregard something from GW that you don't agree with. I just don't see why anyone would do that unless they do not want Sisters to be equal to Marines.

Crimson wrote:Actually, I'd claim that they kinda can. They have their vows or whatever they're called. I see this to be basically the same thing what the Sisters have, psychological buff brought by insane dedication.

Hmm, good point. I'd still say that this isn't some sort of standard amongst the Astartes, like it is for Battle Sisters. Also, what effect do these vows take, exactly? I'd wager it does not make Black Templars notably more powerful than other Marines - whereas on the other hand, the absence of Acts of Faith would severely impact the Sisters' combat prowess, both on the table as well as in fluff.

Furyou Miko wrote:That's an assumption, Lynata. The only Ecclesiarchy ship we've ever seen is the Hammer of Thor.

Nope, that's actual GW fluff from the Rogue Trader rulebook and the 2E Codex Imperialis.

mattyrm wrote:Space marines are. Nine feet tall, have fingers like turkey legs, feet like fething frankenstein, two hearts, can spit acid, and have solid fused rib cages. [...] In the same way that a fearless God of war that straddles the battlefield like a mighty colossus (Matty) can never be as brave as a coward that grits his teeth and commits an act of true valor, so are the sisters totally bad ass. It takes their entire appeal away to say they are as strong as the inhuman freaks that are genetically more awesome in every way.

I think we've got a bit of a misunderstanding here. I don't doubt that the Marines are physically much stronger than any Sister. However, most of what separates the Space Marines from normal people does not necessarily make them better fighters, simply because it's so extremely situational. Using the same guns still means that a Sister will kill a Marine just as easily as a Marine will shoot another Marine.

Also, in GW's world, Marines are still 7 feet.

^ Faith? Nah, give me another set of eyes, please

It always puzzeled me, how did the acts of faith worked before empy's rise to the heavens? Seriosly @Lyn indulge me...

Thanks, Marko, that was really helpful.

For reference, the original rules that later became Acts of Faith;

At the start of the battle, roll 1d6 for every character leading a squad, with the following modifiers:

Psyker in the army: -1
Squad led by Missionary Major Hero or Sister Superior +1
Squad led by a Veteran Sister Superior +2
Squad led by a Canoness +3

1: No Effect
2: Squad is immune to Fear and Terror for the duration of the battle.
3: Squad is subject to Frenzy.
4: Squad gains +1 Leadership for the duration of the battle (Max Ld10)
5: The squad Hates the enemy.
6: Each member of the squad has a psychic save of 4+ on a d6. Note that this is not a nullify - roll for each model: On a 4+ it is unaffected. Some of the squad may be affected while others aren't.
7: The squad automatically passes all psychology and Break tests it is required to make.
8: The squad is so determined to smite their enemies that it pays no heed to its own safety. The squad may ignore the Choosing a Target rules and fire at any enemy squad or vehicles you wish. The squad cannot pick out enemy characters unless they are more than 2" from a squad and the closest target, as detailed in the Heroic Characters section of the Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook.
9: Once in the battle, at the end of the shooting phase, the squad may fire again. Weapons that are jammed or recharging may not be fired and will stay jammed or recharging until the next shooting phase as normal.

Note that if the character leaves the squad during the battle, the effects of any rolls on the Sacred Rites tables are lost.

Yep, some super-awesome Emperor Given Space Magic there. Just a whole lot of positive psychology bonuses.

 mattyrm wrote:
Space marines are. Nine feet tall, have fingers like turkey legs, feet like fething frankenstein, two hearts, can spit acid, and have solid fused rib cages.

Cato sicarius cracked on and decapitated some eldar bird, after she had cut his primary heart in half, and all he did was take a knee afterwards and pant a bit. :-D

I love the sisters, but trying to say they are as nails as marines is silly.

They are nails because they AINT as nails as space marines. An unaugmented human in a bit of armor stubbornly facing terrifying horror is particularly awesome.

In the same way that a fearless God of war that straddles the battlefield like a mighty colossus (Matty) can never be as brave as a coward that grits his teeth and commits an act of true valor, so are the sisters totally bad ass.

It takes their entire appeal away to say they are as strong as the inhuman freaks that are genetically more awesome in every way.

That's true - being weaker than a space marine is not very uncommon. But having the balls to take on the same gak as the SM? Very common.

DarthMarko wrote:It always puzzeled me, how did the acts of faith worked before empy's rise to the heavens? Seriosly @Lyn indulge me...

I don't think I get it.
Or is that just poking fun at the whole faith thingy? I'd be quite happy to explain Acts of Faith should you actually be interested in that, but I have a feeling you wanted to make a joke.

I will simply post this:

Dark Heresy rpg Daemon Hunters pg 22 wrote:That path led to the very centre of Camp 109, where they found the first host waiting for them atop a mountain of bloated, fly-ridden corpses. The host, the very first of the wounded Imperial Guardsmen to have beseeched the Lord of Plague for aid, had become a Daemon Prince of Nurgle, granted apotheosis for the destruction wrought in his master’s name.

Lystug ordered his servants to attack, but his words went
unheeded as the Sisters Hospitaller stepped forward as one and formed a circle around the vile daemon. Chanting praises to the saints of their healing order, the Adepta Sororitas crippled the servant of Nurgle, purging its bloated, decaying body of contagion so that only a dried, shrivelled husk remained.

Yet still, the power of Nurgle animated the Daemon Prince’s
form. It slew the many of the sisters and attempted to flee.

Dark Heresy rpg Daemon Hunters pg 22 wrote:Only through the purity of the
Sisters Hospitaller and the valor of the Inquisition was 47
Kapella saved from a world-ravaging plague.

So yeah.

 Lynata wrote:
Hmm, good point. I'd still say that this isn't some sort of standard amongst the Astartes, like it is for Battle Sisters. Also, what effect do these vows take, exactly? I'd wager it does not make Black Templars notably more powerful than other Marines - whereas on the other hand, the absence of Acts of Faith would severely impact the Sisters' combat prowess, both on the table as well as in fluff.

Regardless the strength, the effect is similar. However, I agree that the Marines can never have exactly the kind of faith the Sisters have; the Marines know that Emperor was a mere man, Sisters know he is a god.

That's cute, Reznov, but where did it come from?

Didn't anyone ever teach you proper referencing? Page number, book, author, publication date please.

 mattyrm wrote:
Space marines are. Nine feet tall, have fingers like turkey legs, feet like fething frankenstein, two hearts, can spit acid, and have solid fused rib cages.

Cato sicarius cracked on and decapitated some eldar bird, after she had cut his primary heart in half, and all he did was take a knee afterwards and pant a bit. :-D

I love the sisters, but trying to say they are as nails as marines is silly.

They are nails because they AINT as nails as space marines. An unaugmented human in a bit of armor stubbornly facing terrifying horror is particularly awesome.

In the same way that a fearless God of war that straddles the battlefield like a mighty colossus (Matty) can never be as brave as a coward that grits his teeth and commits an act of true valor, so are the sisters totally bad ass.

It takes their entire appeal away to say they are as strong as the inhuman freaks that are genetically more awesome in every way.

Seven to seven and a half feet. Nine feet tall is a BL/FFG/Fan fabrication.

No one is saying that the SoB are as strong as the SM (in the physical sense). What the SOB is, though, is a battlefield equivalent of the Space Marines. If you took, say, a standard battle-deployment of both, dropped them on a planet somewhere and said "OK, kill each other", you have a 50/50 chance of choosing which of the two is going to still be standing by the end of the war. It's not a cut-and-dried "oh, this faction will always kill this faction" sort of situation.

Crimson wrote:Regardless the strength, the effect is similar. However, I agree that the Marines can never have exactly the kind of faith the Sisters have; the Marines know that Emperor was a mere man, Sisters know he is a god.

In the end, I'd presume that the Sisters' AoF push them closer to the Marines than a Templar's vows pushes him above, I guess.

Furyou Miko wrote:That's cute, Reznov, but where did it come from?
Didn't anyone ever teach you proper referencing? Page number, book, author, publication date please.

I'm betting it's Dark Heresy, or perhaps rather Only War as it sounds like a military thing. FFG has embraced the Sisters = Space Magic idea, contrary to the original GW fluff.

Also, +1 to Psienesis, expressed it better than I could.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
That's cute, Reznov, but where did it come from?

Didn't anyone ever teach you proper referencing? Page number, book, author, publication date please.

Ha ha ha, very funny. I posted that and then was going to edit it with the references but my internet keeps acting up by shutting down and ten starting up after a while. It affecting my performance on this site, right now.

Anyway, I will edit my post, but just for you it comes from Dark Heresy rpg Daemon Hunters pg 22 .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:

 mattyrm wrote:
Space marines are. Nine feet tall, have fingers like turkey legs, feet like fething frankenstein, two hearts, can spit acid, and have solid fused rib cages.

Cato sicarius cracked on and decapitated some eldar bird, after she had cut his primary heart in half, and all he did was take a knee afterwards and pant a bit. :-D

I love the sisters, but trying to say they are as nails as marines is silly.

They are nails because they AINT as nails as space marines. An unaugmented human in a bit of armor stubbornly facing terrifying horror is particularly awesome.

In the same way that a fearless God of war that straddles the battlefield like a mighty colossus (Matty) can never be as brave as a coward that grits his teeth and commits an act of true valor, so are the sisters totally bad ass.

It takes their entire appeal away to say they are as strong as the inhuman freaks that are genetically more awesome in every way.

Seven to seven and a half feet. Nine feet tall is a BL/FFG/Fan fabrication.

You guys are awfully obsessed with absolutes, I swear. No variations can exist in your eyes from what I've seen

This is not directed towards you in particular Psienesis.

 Lynata wrote:

DarthMarko wrote:It always puzzeled me, how did the acts of faith worked before empy's rise to the heavens? Seriosly @Lyn indulge me...

I don't think I get it.
Or is that just poking fun at the whole faith thingy? I'd be quite happy to explain Acts of Faith should you actually be interested in that, but I have a feeling you wanted to make a joke.

Well I'm not poking you, I'm just trying to be pragmatic....Do a real ( individual and general ) comparison between SoB and SM, and explain to me how the acts of faith can level them up.....
I'm dead serious on this....

DarthMarko wrote:Well I'm not poking you, I'm just trying to be pragmatic....Do a real ( individual and general ) comparison between SoB and SM, and explain to me how the acts of faith can level them up.....
I'm dead serious on this....

Well, the way I see it, Acts of Faith allow you to pull off stuff like this:
http://www.paramvirchakra.com/Recipients/Grenadier_Yogender_Singh_Yadav.html

Basically, it's a "mind over matter" thing. Kind of like you now have dentists and surgeons use hypnosis instead of anaesthesia. The body is capable of incredible things when subjected to the correct psychological triggers - it's why self-confidence is now recognised to be extremely important for sports. In essence, for the Sisters, their intense faith lets them feel so convinced in the Emperor protecting them that they start becoming capable of delaying their own death to mortal wounds, or summoning seemingly superhuman strength from deep within their body reserves. This, coupled with the Sisters' decade-long intense training, makes for remarkable combat prowess that has earned them the respect of the Space Marines themselves. And yes, said respect is GW fluff, too.

OK. Gonna do this using the current codices, since the 2e comparison is basically "look at the model, those are the differences but Sisters get Rites of Battle as well".

Here's an Act of Faith that makes a Sister equivalent to a space marine:

BS 4 and exactly the same wargear makes them identical on the attack, whilst Light of the Emperor makes them more accurate by granting rerolls of a 1 to hit.

Space Marines Shall Know No Fear, while Sororitas can activate Fearless at the start of their turn for the same effect. The only thing the Sisters lack is Sweep protection.

Seraphim are better than Assault Marines in every way. They have the same WS and number of attacks in CC, better shooting due to two pistols and Shred (Well, Act of Faith: Reroll to Wound, but it may as well be Shred), a 6+ rerollable invulnerable save and Hit and Run. For 15 points as opposed to the Assault Marine's 18(?).

 Lynata wrote:

DarthMarko wrote:Well I'm not poking you, I'm just trying to be pragmatic....Do a real ( individual and general ) comparison between SoB and SM, and explain to me how the acts of faith can level them up.....
I'm dead serious on this....

Well, the way I see it, Acts of Faith allow you to pull off stuff like this:
http://www.paramvirchakra.com/Recipients/Grenadier_Yogender_Singh_Yadav.html

Basically, it's a "mind over matter" thing. Kind of like you now have dentists and surgeons use hypnosis instead of anaesthesia. The body is capable of incredible things when subjected to the correct psychological triggers - it's why self-confidence is now recognised to be extremely important for sports. In essence, for the Sisters, their intense faith lets them feel so convinced in the Emperor protecting them that they start becoming capable of delaying their own death to mortal wounds, or summoning seemingly superhuman strength from deep within their body reserves. This, coupled with the Sisters' decade-long intense training, makes for remarkable combat prowess that has earned them the respect of the Space Marines themselves. And yes, said respect is GW fluff, too.

So homeopathy is your argument :-)...O, come on...human body is still a human body...SM do all that on 10x stronger bio basiss....

DarthMarko wrote:So homeopathy is your argument :-)...O, come on...human body is still a human body...SM do all that on 10x stronger bio basiss....

Homeopathy is something different, I think. This would be a more apt comparison, given that it has scientific basis.
And whilst a human body is still a human body, it can well be pushed beyond the limits of what it is capable to do on average. Who's to say where these limits lie? According to GW, it is apparently sufficient as far as their influence on combat capabilities is concerned.

The "10x stronger bio basis" is your assumption, and I'd get ripped apart by certain people if I would make such wild claims about the Sisters here. Given that the Space Marines operate with augmented bodies on a daily basis, it is well possible that they do not push themselves as far. Not to mention the possibility of simply underestimating the opposition because, hey, it's just normal humans, right? What could they possibly do.

 Lynata wrote:
I think we've got a bit of a misunderstanding here. I don't doubt that the Marines are physically much stronger than any Sister. However, most of what separates the Space Marines from normal people does not necessarily make them better fighters, simply because it's so extremely situational. Using the same guns still means that a Sister will kill a Marine just as easily as a Marine will shoot another Marine.

Also, in GW's world, Marines are still 7 feet.

I'll never comprehend how you convinced yourself of this.

Space Marines have the superior senses to know of the Marine's presence before a Sister, have the superior reaction-time (In both gameplay and fluff) to aim and pull the trigger first, and is more likely to survive the salvo if the Marine returns fire due to superhuman endurance and durability (And yes, power armour can reliably stop bolter salvos).

So no, the Sisters can't kill a Marine just as easily as a Marine can, because Marines aren't just enhanced with physical strength, everything about the is augmented. It is not "extremely situational".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Psienesis wrote:
Seven to seven and a half feet. Nine feet tall is a BL/FFG/Fan fabrication.

No one is saying that the SoB are as strong as the SM (in the physical sense). What the SOB is, though, is a battlefield equivalent of the Space Marines. If you took, say, a standard battle-deployment of both, dropped them on a planet somewhere and said "OK, kill each other", you have a 50/50 chance of choosing which of the two is going to still be standing by the end of the war. It's not a cut-and-dried "oh, this faction will always kill this faction" sort of situation.

FFG states Marines are slightly above 2.10 meters tall on average.

Aka seven feet.

Try to keep your hatred of the game to show so much.

Interesting, other than a single GW website quote meant to sell armies, what is your basis for this?

There are far more quotes referring to the Space Marines as the greatest soldiers in the Imperium, peerless in their ability, I assure you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:
I'm betting it's Dark Heresy, or perhaps rather Only War as it sounds like a military thing. FFG has embraced the Sisters = Space Magic idea, contrary to the original GW fluff.

So where is this fluff, out of curiosity? Can you cite the source?

Both BS4, the Sister rerolls ones to hit. Seems like she kills the Marine better than the Marine does to me.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
OK. Gonna do this using the current codices, since the 2e comparison is basically "look at the model, those are the differences but Sisters get Rites of Battle as well".

Here's an Act of Faith that makes a Sister equivalent to a space marine:

BS 4 and exactly the same wargear makes them identical on the attack, whilst Light of the Emperor makes them more accurate by granting rerolls of a 1 to hit.

Space Marines Shall Know No Fear, while Sororitas can activate Fearless at the start of their turn for the same effect. The only thing the Sisters lack is Sweep protection.

Seraphim are better than Assault Marines in every way. They have the same WS and number of attacks in CC, better shooting due to two pistols and Shred (Well, Act of Faith: Reroll to Wound, but it may as well be Shred), a 6+ rerollable invulnerable save and Hit and Run. For 15 points as opposed to the Assault Marine's 18(?).

Why are you citing gameplay as evidence?

Outdated gameplay at that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Both BS4, the Sister rerolls ones to hit. Seems like she kills the Marine better than the Marine does to me.

Read above.

The tabletop game is a very poor abstraction of the real thing, and is not to be taken seriously.

Void__Dragon wrote:I'll never comprehend how you convinced yourself of this.

Just like Marine fans convince themselves of the extreme gap between Astartes and other humans, of course. By pointing to those individually preferred sources of fluff that strengthen their argument.

Superior Space Marine senses aren't exactly a decisive factor when both groups use helmets with auto-senses overriding their natural senses, and you are ignoring that Initiative is only important for melee combat where I'd wager it does not represent trigger fingers but rather the Marine using his physical strength to gain the upper hand. Just like, lo and behold, the Sisters have an Act of Faith to improve their Initiative, coupled with additional benefits. And lastly, the Sister's faith may well cause her to simply ignore that somebody just shot her arm off.

You're way too fixated on an "auto win" scenario and simply choose to ignore the factors that would affect the result, chiefly the AoF - which happen to be precisely what supposedly makes the Sisters "equal" and counterbalances the Astartes' genetic superiority, in GW's own wording.

Void__Dragon wrote:So where is this fluff, out of curiosity? Can you cite the source?

Was that directed at me or Reznov? If the former, what exactly are you referring to?

You cling to much on that GW statment @Lynata...I'mean you are a rational person, and you always slap us (fanboys) when we go over the top on some GW publications....
But now, the roles are reversed IMO.....

Non-GW publications, chiefly. I've got my own internal guideline in terms of consistency which pushes me to stick to GW fluff, even where I would prefer not to.

Note that if any of you do not wish to adhere to the quotes I provided and prefer your Sisters to be weaker in order to preserve your interpretation of the Astartes, you are absolutely free to dismiss them. It'd certainly be more in line with their various representations in the licensed material.
Right now, I am merely argueing against the claim that my interpretation is somehow "wrong".

 Lynata wrote:

Void__Dragon wrote:I'll never comprehend how you convinced yourself of this.

Just like Marine fans convince themselves of the extreme gap between Astartes and other humans, of course.

I'm not particularly emotionally involved with either party, but the canon fluff strongly supports the idea that Marines are pretty much superior to other humans in every way.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're intentionally mistating these things for your own amusement, but I just had to chime in after that doozy.

Monster Rain wrote:I'm not particularly emotionally involved with either party, but the canon fluff strongly supports the idea that Marines are pretty much superior to other humans in every way.

There is no true canon (in the sense that there exists a singular uniform representation of the setting) in 40k, which may add to the confusion. If you have checked my previous posts, you will note that I have delivered quotes from GW material supporting my interpretation.

Given the aforementioned absence of any canonicity, they are in no way to be regarded as gospel - but it would be incorrect to assume that I am making this stuff up or "intentionally misstating" things. I am simply preferring GW's take on the subject over whatever the other folks have chosen (likely individual mixtures of a great many sources ranging from codices to novels and games).

This is the second time in the past couple posts that someone is attempting to badmouth the validity and integrity of my posts without backing up their claim. I guess that's just how it feels to swim against the current.

Ah, I see what's going here.

Carry on, then.

Corporal_Reznov wrote:
You guys are awfully obsessed with absolutes, I swear. No variations can exist in your eyes from what I've seen

This is not directed towards you in particular Psienesis.

Yeah see, this is my point. Normal unaugmented humans if they train, can bench 700lbs.

Normal unaugmented humans regularly hit 7 feet.

Have you seen strong men competitions? Normal people can lift cars and tow airplanes.

Ergo, considering normal people pretty commonly range from like.. 5 feet, to seven feet..and note im not talking about really really tall, or dwarves, its ridiculous to say theres only 6 inches difference berween marines.

Common sense says some will be crazy huge, plenty will be eight feet, some will be shorter than seven.

And their strength really could be totally insane. A human with his feeble skeleton, say a normal pro lifter can lift incredible weight, imagine a two hearted beast with a solid rib cage?!

Some of them will be like.. Ten feet tall and able to bench a school bus!

A marine with a penchant for steroid abuse could wrestle godzilla.

The fused rib-cage also means he wouldn't be able to bend over to tie his shoes... or ever do crunches...so there's some design flaws in the SM.

Remember that SM start out as regular humans, almost universally pre-teen boys. Right about the time they hit puberty, they're getting the first round of implants. Gods only know what side-effects this has on human development, other than the obvious.

There's also the fact that SM power armor is not always crafted for an individual Marine, but may be handed down from the fallen to the new replacements. If the previous Marine was 7'6", the ten-foot guy isn't getting his PA.

As for steroids? The Apothecary and the Librarian might have some issues. The former with possible problems with the various additional organs and bio-implants, the Librarian with "What? The Gene-Seed of the Emperor isn't good enough for you?".

 Lynata wrote:
Just like Marine fans convince themselves of the extreme gap between Astartes and other humans, of course. By pointing to those individually preferred sources of fluff that strengthen their argument.

So you ignore the greater amount of fluff that portrays the Marines as superior.

Superior Space Marine senses aren't exactly a decisive factor when both groups use helmets with auto-senses overriding their natural senses,

Those auto senses are still affixed to an inferior biological foundation. How fast the auto senses perceive the Marine means nothing if the perceptions and reaction-time of the Sister does not match them. The Marine's, on the other hand? They can. The auto senses do not replace their natural senses, only further enhance them.

and you are ignoring that Initiative is only important for melee combat where I'd wager it does not represent trigger fingers but rather the Marine using his physical strength to gain the upper hand.

"This represents the swiftness of a creature's reactions. Models
with a low Initiative characteristic (Orks, with Initiative 2) are
slow-witted, while models with a high Initiative characteristic
(Genestealers, with Initiative 6) react far more quickly."
- 6e rulebook, page 2

It's reaction-time. Does it apply on the tabletop to shooting? No not really. But it sure as gak would in an actual firefight. Space Marines have higher reaction-time on the tabletop and the fluff, their reactions being described as "superhuman" in both the Space Marine and Blood Angel sections for the Land Speeder (I assume their enhanced musculature, superhuman perceptions, and training give them these traits).

Just like, lo and behold, the Sisters have an Act of Faith to improve their Initiative, coupled with additional benefits. And lastly, the Sister's faith may well cause her to simply ignore that somebody just shot her arm off.

And exactly how often are these Acts of Faith put to use in the fluff by the way? I'm genuinely curious to know.

You're way too fixated on an "auto win" scenario and simply choose to ignore the factors that would affect the result, chiefly the AoF - which happen to be precisely what supposedly makes the Sisters "equal" and counterbalances the Astartes' genetic superiority, in GW's own wording.

Read above. And I don't think Space Marines auto win against Sisters of Battle. But equal numbers, they'd sure have the advantage IMO.

Was that directed at me or Reznov? If the former, what exactly are you referring to?

Well, I was quoting you, so it is safe to assume the former.

Acts of Faith being the result of essentially Charles Atlas Superpowers.

Woah, this is getting way too heated and involved for my likes.

Also off topic.

Anyway, I hope that eventually they write a book from a guardswoman's perspective at the very least.

 Melissia wrote:


Anyway, I hope that eventually they write a book from a guardswoman's perspective at the very least.

I think they will, I have read all the HH books and I've noticed a larger amount of good female characters as they have gone on. It's why I kinda disagree with the premise of the thread, sure books about space marines will be a little lady light, but there have been plenty of stoic, smart, admirable women in the series so far, usually working on the bridge and calmly getting gak done!

 Melissia wrote:
Woah, this is getting way too heated and involved for my likes.

Also off topic.

Anyway, I hope that eventually they write a book from a guardswoman's perspective at the very least.

But so hot was the blood that the sword-blade was melted
Likest to snow when the Father unbindeth
The fetters of frost that the winter has welded.

Do not hate me for my passion.

There have been some, but they're usually just a side character, oftentimes even just a love interest (and in the case of serial books like the Cain series, oftentimes just a lady-of-the-week variety love interest).

What I was hoping for was one as a protagonist, told from HER point of view, not just as a token female character.

DarthMarko wrote:You cling to much on that GW statment @Lynata...I'mean you are a rational person, and you always slap us (fanboys) when we go over the top on some GW publications....
But now, the roles are reversed IMO.....

Lyanata has proven multipe times in this thread that s/he is not rational.

Monster Rain wrote:

 Lynata wrote:

Void__Dragon wrote:I'll never comprehend how you convinced yourself of this.

Just like Marine fans convince themselves of the extreme gap between Astartes and other humans, of course.

I'm not particularly emotionally involved with either party, but the canon fluff strongly supports the idea that Marines are pretty much superior to other humans in every way.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you're intentionally mistating these things for your own amusement, but I just had to chime in after that doozy.

That's not the case at all.

Melissia wrote:Woah, this is getting way too heated and involved for my likes.

Also off topic.

Anyway, I hope that eventually they write a book from a guardswoman's perspective at the very least.

Everyone saw this coming. I regret nothing!

At least Lyanata has been exposed as having some very funny ideas and that s/he manipulates fluff to server xir own ends.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Both BS4, the Sister rerolls ones to hit. Seems like she kills the Marine better than the Marine does to me.

Yeah you got that right - its just because SOB are trained to aim down their sights

No fancy ass cameras mounted on their guns, just lots of training.

I'm not saying my views on Space MArines, because that will probably start a fight and besides, space marines are irrelevant, we're talking about human (or eldar/tau) women, not inhuman post-male musclebound mutants.

 mad_eddy_13 wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Both BS4, the Sister rerolls ones to hit. Seems like she kills the Marine better than the Marine does to me.

Yeah you got that right - its just because SOB are trained to aim down their sights

No fancy ass cameras mounted on their guns, just lots of training.

Are we seriously bringing tabletop rules into this?

I was trying to steer the topic back to female Space Marines. Sorry guys.

On a semi-related note, Commander Shadowsun is getting her own novel that is out soon.

Edit: I already said that Amaya. Stop copies me.

Manipulating the fluff to suit your arguments is the whole point of the 'no canon' statements all over official sources, so whatever.

Melissia - have you read Abnett's Titanicus? A good part of that book is from the point of view of a female PDF trooper.

That stance is the death of debate and rational discussion.

The "nothing is canon" stance renders any discussion meaningless, because even though there is no fluff that states the Grey Knights are child-molesters who prey on Eldar children for the glory of Slaanesh, by GW's stance my fluff is just as canon. Which is poop.

True. This is me saying "I reject your reality and substitute it with my own" because that subject is done to death. Everyone is just going round and round it in circles, and I want to know if my spiritual sister Melissia has read Titanicus.

Void__Dragon wrote:So you ignore the greater amount of fluff that portrays the Marines as superior.

Superior to the Sisters of Battle? Well, if you have GW fluff on that is this specific, I would be genuinely interested in seeing it, given that it would contradict the other description. I always saw the superiority to refer more to the bulk of humanity, though. Let's keep in mind that genetic enhancements are advantages, not the be-all and end-all when it comes to combat capabilities (unless we assume melee combat where physical properties would play a much larger role, I suppose).

Void__Dragon wrote:Those auto senses are still affixed to an inferior biological foundation. How fast the auto senses perceive the Marine means nothing if the perceptions and reaction-time of the Sister does not match them. The Marine's, on the other hand? They can. The auto senses do not replace their natural senses, only further enhance them.

We need to consider how auto-senses would work. If they outline targets that the Marine would have seen with his natural eyes anyways, this arguably grants them a smaller benefit than the Sisters, whose reaction-time would be boosted by it being a lot easier to notice a highlighted opponent it may have otherwise taken them another heartbeat more to spot.

Void__Dragon wrote:It's reaction-time. Does it apply on the tabletop to shooting? No not really. But it sure as gak would in an actual firefight.

In an actual firefight, you'd have people react with different speeds rather than all at once - influenced by situational modifiers. If this were some sort of duel with people drawing bolt revolvers, I'd agree, but not under battlefield conditions where such important yet miniscule advantages tend to be drowned under a combination of coincidence and both commanders' chosen tactics. In 40k, combat engagements would rarely be decided by who fires the first shot.

Thanks for posting the stat description, though - seems I remembered this incorrectly.

Void__Dragon wrote:And exactly how often are these Acts of Faith put to use in the fluff by the way? I'm genuinely curious to know.

They are referenced in just about every description of the Sisters of Battle, given that they form a major component of what makes them special. Or do you mean individual events? Those would be be a lot trickier to find, given that there aren't many short stories of the Sisters to be found when limited to GW resources. One instance that springs to mind might be Sister Anastasia Rosetta shaking off the Zombie Plague in her Inquisitor background.

Or, from the 5E Minidex:
"As Tyranids pour through, Praxedes confronts a Hive Tyrant. During the fighting, the Canoness is dealt a mortal wound, but even as her blood ebbs away, she summons the strength to land a final blow, caving in the beast's skull with a thunderous strike from her power mace. With the Tyrant's destruction, the swarm loses all direction."

It's easier once one delves away from studio fluff and into the realm of licensed fiction. James Swallow's SoB novels have their protagonist employ Acts of Faith on occasion, and whilst his books clash with GW fluff on some other details, his descriptions are pretty close to how I personally imagine them to work.

Void__Dragon wrote:Acts of Faith being the result of essentially Charles Atlas Superpowers.

"For millennia, the Sisters have practiced their unique method of war, combining combat doctrine and prayer which enables them to accomplish feats upon the battlefield that appear miraculous to the unschooled." "
- 3E C:WH

This, compared with the clarification that AoF are not psychic, leads me to believe that they are indeed "just" the product of sheer willpower (channeled via religious zeal) in combination with highly trained bodies. Which only makes it even more badass to me. They are regarded as "miracles" because the "unschooled" do not know how a normal human could pull it off.
It's a bit like the Indian Grenadier's story I referenced earlier, just that it occurs more often (both due to the high degree of training from childhood on as well as the religious indoctrination and the resulting confidence).

I have a feeling this isn't going anywhere, though, and by now some posters have expressed a desire to move on to other topics. Truce?

Amaya wrote:At least Lyanata has been exposed as having some very funny ideas and that s/he manipulates fluff to server xir own ends.

It would be more accurate to say that you were exposed as being a liar. And a coward, given that you did not dare to react to me calling you out on your claims. Twice.

"Man up."

Oh, no someone on the internets called me a coward, whatever will I do?

Personally, I'd only wish you would stop to claim things about me that are not true or you at least refuse to support with actual evidence. I'm pretty sure this forum has a code of conduct dealing with such things, but I won't stoop so low as to involve a mod in this. It's just a behaviour I find somewhat unfair and disrespectful.

Lets do a recap:
Women in 40k fanfiction? check
Female SM? check
female phykers? check
female guard? check
Chaos chicks? check
more women in fanfiction? check
Sisters of battle (style, rules, armor & ETC.)? check
repeat from top of list? very soon

Edit:
petty feuds? check

34 Pages In... not sure how much longer this can/should go on.

It seems to be getting a bit... cranky in here.

RULE #1 and all that, OK everyone?

This thread is "Officially On Notice" - it might not have much time left to live...

Ok, just to add one that occurs to me before the topic is locked forever - a (fairly) sane reason that all Marines are male.

Both Marines and their armour were originally intended for a degree of mass production. As a bit of the previous debate mentioned, if you have one marine who's 8'6" and another who's 7'2", you'll need a lot more sizes of armour.

So part of the point of the Marine genetic engineering is to "tailor the man to fit the clothes". And as previously mentioned, women need differently shaped armour for their skeletal structure, not to mention that you're going to need differently located catheter hookups etc.

Not that genetic engineering couldn't get around this, but why add a layer of complication to something you only intend to use for the duration of the Great Crusade and then retire?

It was mentioned earlier that no one really has a problem with the Space Marines being male-only, as GW fluff supports that the Sisters of Battle (female-only) are their equal. Of course, we'd *like* to see the Sisters given equal measure in the fluff as a viable faction, as well as receive the same level of care and updates (if not the volume... not really needed for SoB) that the SM do.

We'd also like to see the Sisters not used as cannon-fodder, especially if the only function of that is to make SM look better. How about some role reversal for a change, with troops of Chapter X getting a mudhole stomped in it until Canoness Beatcha rolls in with a Seraphim squad, some Repentia, a couple Immolators and an Order of Battle-Sisters and saves the day?

There was the defense of San Leon in the fifth edition "codex", where a large number of chaos marines attempted to invade the Sororitas "homeworld" (insofar as Sororitas can have such; their historical point of origin is more accurate) and were repulsed with contemptuous ease.

Yeah, such stories do exist, of course, and while I know it's a pipe-dream to see SoB-as-the-focus stories in the same volume (or even nearly so) as SM, I do think that they could do better by the SoB in the stories that *are* presented in the Codices and WD and such.

I don't think any of us would disagree with that, Psienesis.

Anyway, I'm working on that book. ¬¬ Too bad the Black Library's submissions policy changed though.

I don't have the patience to be honest..to go through all the pages..but if you're looking for SoB stories..there was a short story I recall..as having two main characters a Space Marine and a Celestian (the ones with the jump packs right? lol)

well the Space Marine succumbed to a Great Unclean one and became a champion of Nurgle while the Celestian escaped and it became her mission to redeem and cleanse the space marine which she succeeded in doing...at the end I BELIEVE he repented after realising what he became and she ended his existence!...=strong female character

=strong female character

I thought Melissia said she was looking for examples of "Strong Character, Female" rather than "Strong Female Character" But I may have that backwards.

 Zakiriel wrote:

=strong female character

I thought Melissia said she was looking for examples of "Strong Character, Female" rather than "Strong Female Character" But I may have that backwards.

Alright you have me at a loss...What's the difference between the two?

Strong character, female is a female character with depth, she is rounded and complex.

Strong female character is a strong character (In that she can beat gak up) and happens to be female.

That is what I assume Zakiriel meant, and those traits are not necessarily separate from one another, nor are they necessarily required to be combined.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
There was the defense of San Leon in the fifth edition "codex", where a large number of chaos marines attempted to invade the Sororitas "homeworld" (insofar as Sororitas can have such; their historical point of origin is more accurate) and were repulsed with contemptuous ease.

Show where the number of Chaos Marines was stated.

I want female cardians so much. I want a female senior officer to represent myself especially. Shame the only person doing those sprews wants £60 a pop. Plus the bums are way too exaggerated they look ridiculous.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Strong character, female is a female character with depth, she is rounded and complex.

Strong female character is a strong character (In that she can beat gak up) and happens to be female.

That is what I assume Zakiriel meant, and those traits are not necessarily separate from one another, nor are they necessarily required to be combined.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
There was the defense of San Leon in the fifth edition "codex", where a large number of chaos marines attempted to invade the Sororitas "homeworld" (insofar as Sororitas can have such; their historical point of origin is more accurate) and were repulsed with contemptuous ease.

Show where the number of Chaos Marines was stated.

It's the other way around.

Strong character, female, is a character who is pretty badass, and just happens to be female. That's what the comma is there for, it's to denote that the "female" part is practically an after-thought.

As opposed to "I'm going to make this a character a female, and she will be badass."

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Ratliker wrote:


One last thing: feminism doesn't exist in 40k, and would probably be considered heresy.

I'm going to ignore the rest of your sexist asterisks and address the only relevant point of your post;

At least two of the High Lords of Terra are female. A Canoness is of equal rank with a Cardinal. There are multiple examples of female planetary governors and Tech Archmagi in the lore. So yes, feminism does exist in 40k, because without feminism you do not get women in positions of power.

Yeah, ignoring logical arguments and going straight to juicy "sexism" is your thing i see.
Anyway, the very presence of female governors, ship captains, officers and inquisitors shows there is really no misogyny in 40k - case closed.

What logical arguments? I was ignoring the crap you wrote about how women were inferior.

You'll notice that the part I replied to wasn't actually you being sexist, just you stating that feminism didn't exist in 40k, which (I suppose) might be a reasonable assumption if you've just read the first few posts of this thread.

You seem to have done a complete 180. The post I quoted had you saying there was no such thing as feminism, while now you're saying there's no such thing as misogyny, which is the opposite of feminism.

How is this me going straight to the "juicy" sexism, when it was the sexism that I was ignoring?

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Strong character, female is a female character with depth, she is rounded and complex.

Strong female character is a strong character (In that she can beat gak up) and happens to be female.

Void dragon has the gist of it here. A strong character who happens to be female, is one who is an interesting, deep, and well rounded character-- someone you want to read about. A strong female character, however, is a character who is able to beat the gak out of everyone she runs in to-- a badass character.

The two are not mutually exclusive, but there are a number of the latter who do not qualify for the former because of the misunderstanding of what was being asked for.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Show where the number of Chaos Marines was stated.

No. GW is rarely that specific, and it certainly wasn't the case here. But it was not described as a minor raid.

THERE ARE TWO UNDERSCORES IN MY USERNAME.

WhatI believe Melissia is referring to the following event;

799.M41
The San Leor Massacre
A Red Corsairs strike force invades San Leor, the original homeworld of the Daughters of the Emperor. The Chaos Space Marines are unprepared for the fury of the Adepta Sororitas reprisal, as they come under assault from nine separate Orders Militant and are utterly annihilated by the combined counter-attack.

Strike Force implies at least company strength.

I've read the fluff.

How does strike force imply at least company strength now?

This thread has 1011 posts about ?

Because anything less and it would be a raid. Strike Force implies Strike Cruisers.

Why are you so adamant it has to be less than that?

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Because anything less and it would be a raid. Strike Force implies Strike Cruisers.

Why are you so adamant it has to be less than that?

Oh? You have read fluff dictating the difference in numbers between a "raid" and a "strike force" in 40k?

I don't have an opinion on how many Marines there were, because I actually realise there isn't any information to make an accurate assumption.

9 seperate orders is loads too right?

They might have outnumbered the corsairs a hundred to one!

Those would have been Orders Minoris, which themselves only number about 50 to 300 Sisters under most circumstances.

Void__Dragon, for someone with 'no opinion' you sure are pretty vocal about what is or isn't true...

Some of them are described as being as small as a dozen sisters.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Those would have been Orders Minoris, which themselves only number about 50 to 300 Sisters under most circumstances.

Void__Dragon, for someone with 'no opinion' you sure are pretty vocal about what is or isn't true...

Point out where I said that there definitely were not, say, a company of Marines there.

There could have been up to like 50,000, considering the size of the Red Corsairs warband. Or as little as maybe five Marines.

I make no claims, only point out the lack of basis for claims.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

Void__Dragon, for someone with 'no opinion' you sure are pretty vocal about what is or isn't true...

He's pointing out that your argument sucks.

strike force
noun
strike forces, plural

A military force equipped and organized for sudden attack

raid
/rād/
Noun
A rapid surprise attack on an enemy by troops, aircraft, or other armed forces in warfare.
Verb
Conduct a raid on: "officers raided thirty homes".
Synonyms
incursion - foray - inroad - attack - invasion

There is an explicit, concrete numerical value that you need to have a "company". There is no concrete numerical value of troops you need to have a "strike force" or a "raid". A "strike force" is not a military unit. It's a phrase.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Point out where I said that there definitely were not, say, a company of Marines there.

You are being pedantic to the point of nonsense.

No he's not. He's debating.

Go look up what "burden of proof" is.

BlaxicanX wrote:
No he's not. He's debating.

In order to debate he'd first have to actually take a stance himself.

Indeed that is true.

I am simply pointing out the flaws in the logic of others.

What he's doing is what we colloquially term "S*** stirring". Which, while it can be useful for stimulating discussion... at this point it just comes across as aggravating, because there is no other point of discussion.

The discussion shifted towards Space Marines vs. Sisters of Battle. I am not sure why, but it did.

Melissia made the claim that the Sisters of Battle easily repelled a large band of Chaos Marines.

All of that is factual except the "large" part, the amount of Marines is not even hinted at. It's applicability to the topic at hand is dubious at best due to the serious lack of any context that would allow us a good analysis.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
What he's doing is what we colloquially term "S*** stirring". Which, while it can be useful for stimulating discussion... at this point it just comes across as aggravating, because there is no other point of discussion.

Please provide evidence to support your claim that the Chaos strike force was the size of a company. =)

Anything smaller than a Company would have struggled to get at an Imperial shrine world without a renegade fleet.

I truly doubt they did not have cultists flying their craft.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Anything smaller than a Company would have struggled to get at an Imperial shrine world without a renegade fleet.

And when you make statements like this, the burden of proof is upon you to back it up somehow.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Anything smaller than a Company would have struggled to get at an Imperial shrine world without a renegade fleet.

This isn't evidence. Do you understand what burden of proof is?

I only listed that as it was the only example I could actually think of from new lore, when someone was asking for examples (in hindsight, they weren't actually asking for examples, but whatever). I don't actually CARE enough about the so-called "codex" of fifth edition to get in to this pedantic, nonsense argument about a vague fluff bit that GW vomited out in to a half-assed codex and then proceeded to promptly ignore the hell out of.

Let's try to not keep getting dragged off in to this little tangent. Frankly, Sisters of Battle aren't really "normal" any way. The only ones that could be described as normal in my view are Guardswomen and Eldar Guardians.

I accept your concession.

edit- Damn right you edited. lol. Don't bring that gak up in here.

It's not a concession, I just wanted to try to remove any antagonistic parts of it and get the topic back on topic.

Burden of proof means that the person challenging the established information is responsible for proving their claim.

However, since I'm simply putting forward the established information (That a strike force of Crimson whatevers was wiped out by Sisters of Battle in an engagement large enough to be called a 'massacre'), the burden of proof actually lies with you.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Burden of proof means that the person challenging the established information is responsible for proving their claim.

However, since I'm simply putting forward the established information (That a strike force of Crimson whatevers was wiped out by Sisters of Battle in an engagement large enough to be called a 'massacre'), the burden of proof actually lies with you.

Again you misuse words.

Events with less than twenty dead have been called massacres.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_events_named_massacres

Multiple events with less than one hundred dead and a few with under fifty. Quantity of dead is not a variable in calling something a massacre. It is the complete domination of one force over another, typically involving the near complete destruction of the defeated force.

Edit: Stupid thing doubled my post.

Edit 2: One moment my post is there twice, the next it's gone. The hell?

Original post;

Yet you choose to refute the part of my post you can, rather than actually answering the point I raised.

Melissia brings up a good point in that we can't really call Sisters "normal women" though.

Okay, so the SOB stories can now end and we can agree that Marines are all SoBs anyway.

So what are these stories starring the girls that people want to see?
I don't know about females per se, but I'd like to see more stories set amongst the civilian populations of the Imperium like we've seen with the various stories involving inquisitors and arbites.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Edit: Stupid thing doubled my post.

Edit 2: One moment my post is there twice, the next it's gone. The hell?

Original post;

Yet you choose to refute the part of my post you can, rather than actually answering the point I raised.

Melissia brings up a good point in that we can't really call Sisters "normal women" though.

Who are you responding to?

Back on topic, Ive changed from I somewhat agree to I disagree after reading the whole thread.

The fact is, they have done a decent job of properly representing women, in the real military women are outnumbered heavily, its got to be 10 to 1.

And yet, there are absolutely loads of women in the 40k setting, as has been pointed out.. plenty in the HH, pilots, planetary governors, inquisitors, leaders, fighters, many that inspire.

Sure some are jiggly and cliched, but plenty arent.

And hey, plenty of women actually are jiggly and cliched in real life as well right?

For every sensible intellectual woman like my missus, clearly a fething genius because she is with me, there is one that enjoys reality TV, gossip mags, wearing leather, batting her eyelashes and courting attention, a lifetime spent in bars and pubs shows you that.

As a result, surely the balance is about spot on?

In the setting, some men are good, some men are evil, some are dumb, some aren't.

Women, some are awesome and inspiring, and some are dumb and slutty and cliched, there are just less of the characters in the novels because generally war gak has less women in it as a whole.

Isn't that about right proportionately?

ZSO, SAHAAL wrote:
I think it’s a major flaw and is in fact killing the series and keeping it from being what it could be. This is because well rounded characters and varying personalities and perspectives gives stories depth, people complain about lack of love in 40k but how can you have love when every female character is a pious sexually repressed nun, a snobbish aristocrat, or a sex slave captured by the dark elder. Often those who make fun of the sisters of battle are accused of misogyny and often the accusation is correct but again what do you expect, they've been set up to be Sci-Fi snuff, with dd's and beads and a "device", that looks like a chastity belt around their crotches along with matt wards bizarre fantasies mixed in the sisters of battle are obviously not meant to be taken seriously and for the most part their not.

The Solution: Include normal female characters that aren't getting chopped up or sexually enslaved. I believe ADB has done a great job with this in his books particularly in Soul Hunter where he actually had a love story, and had female characters that played non sexual roles such as Octavia’s servants and female members of the bridge crew. I think Chaos would be the best place to start with this introduction, the Imperials have already been fleshed out pretty will and it’s easier to add new material than to change material already in existence. Where lacking fluff on the mortal servants of Chaos, this seems like a great place to add normal female characters, partisans and resistance leaders fighting the Imperium, or captains leading the warmasters ships(their not all commanded by Chaos Marines after all), maybe some that got tired of the old boys club in the Imperium and did'nt want to be either a nun or the wife/plaything of an Imperial officer/gangleader/noble. This is a blunt and honest post and I demand blunt and honest responses. No sugarcoating. I'm making a poll of whether you agree completely, somewhat, or disagree completely so I can gauge overall opinion.

The female commissar comes to mind. What idiot, man or woman, would wear a suit, to a battlefield (in the 40k universe mind you) that exposed their cleavage/chest? Seriously. This is the bloodiest universe I know where battles of unimaginable size can wage across entire systems and billions can be involved in just one fight. Cleavage, to any grunt with half a brain cell, is a weak spot meant to be exploited by your guns or melee weapons. 40k is meant to be dark, brooding, there is no "light at the end of the tunnel." In short there is no hope for a better future. So, in reference to a love story, I'm not in for that. Love stories, in my honest opinion, have no place in the canon and thus should be left out. Keep that in the fan-fiction section.

I believe, however, they can be strong, commanding characters in the canon. Why not? I'm pretty sure a commissar, no matter their sex, would command the respect (and fear) of the troops simply by being a commissar.

Yes and no - amazing how few character warriors wear helmets on the 40k battlefield ?

The 40K universe is not and never has been based on pure Vulcan logic - its about having fun with death and darkness - you know what most of us as teenagers saw as cool, mix in massive amounts of violence, hints of sex and some comedy and enjoy.

Bare / exposed chests - well catchan's are fine with it as are a number of other "primitive" warriors and a number of the Xenos - Kroot and Orks usually disdain armour never mind extensive clothing. Dark Eldar and Servants of Chaos flash the flesh to taunt and tantalise............they are happy for you to look as in that moment they have ensared your soul, or slit yout throat - or both.

re love stories- you miss the point - love stories don’t have to end well or happily - give someone hope and something to give their all for and then at the end find that which they strived for was already crushed or worse totally false - that’s grim dark.

People say that to make the good shine you need evil but the reverse is also true, to make the darkness mean something there needs to be an element of light to be either maintained or snuffed out as a contrast - at least IMO.

This is used in a number of BL novels from older ones like Last Chancers to more recent ones like Wrath of Iron or Imperial Glory - there are love stories here - but Emperor they often end so badly..................

Love, be it sexual or not, can be a important element of the story if it’s handled well.

A Grimdark love story;

In Titanicus, Cally Samstag gets called up to fight in the PDF. She spends the entire book barely surviving, the only thing keeping her going in places is the fact she knows that if she just survives, she can go home and see her husband again.

When she finally makes it, she finds a letter in the door from the Arbites about her husband...

Actually love stories can be some of the most grimdark stories you can come up with...

 Melissia wrote:
Actually love stories can be some of the most grimdark stories you can come up with...

Look a Romeo and Juliet that's depressing by 40k standards.

Ok, I posted this in the Tau and rumors before coming here, so im sorry if i look like im angry about it. It is about Shadowsun.
In a book about Shadowsun, Quite possibly one of the strongest females in 40k her conflict is very stereotypical and very narrowminded.

 Amaya wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Burden of proof means that the person challenging the established information is responsible for proving their claim.

However, since I'm simply putting forward the established information (That a strike force of Crimson whatevers was wiped out by Sisters of Battle in an engagement large enough to be called a 'massacre'), the burden of proof actually lies with you.

Again you misuse words.

Events with less than twenty dead have been called massacres.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_events_named_massacres

Multiple events with less than one hundred dead and a few with under fifty. Quantity of dead is not a variable in calling something a massacre. It is the complete domination of one force over another, typically involving the near complete destruction of the defeated force.

A Massacre is an incident where some group is killed by another, and the perpetrating party are perceived to be in total control of force while the victimized party is perceived to be helpless and/or innocent with regard to any legitimate offense. There is no clear-cut definition for when killings are referred to as massacres or not, rather, this choice is a result of an individual or collective assessment, depending e.g. on how the circumstances of the killing align with given ideas of acceptable use of force and on the desired status of an event in collective memory.

Massacre is thrown around a lot. Most of the time its used to the be sympathetic with the victims (exmp :Rosewood Massacre 8 killed ) or (Boston Massacre 5 killed) A real massacre (By definition) would be (Nanking Massacre/rape of Nanking 200,000 killed)

Sadly, the "family or career" fallacy is still strongly in play in our society.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Ok, I posted this in the Tau and rumors before coming here, so im sorry if i look like im angry about it. It is about Shadowsun.
In a book about Shadowsun, Quite possibly one of the strongest females in 40k her conflict is very stereotypical and very narrowminded.

Spoiler:

She is in conflict about whether to become a mother, or continue her career. This becoming a mother isnt out of smething she wants to do, but something she thinks she NEEDS to do. Out of duty. Its very odd the entire time TBH. While it could be interchangeable between sexes, He concern isnt about being a female, but making she her familial line continues. But tht fact that she is female just makes it odd

On the one hand, it could just be a story about how someone who faces death every day feels responsibility to carry on their family line knowing they could die on their next mission.

On the other hand, though, in my opinion it's a bit facepalm-worthy that the book about the best-known Tau female character can't come up with a better internal conflict for her than whether or not to have kids. I wonder if a female writer would have looked at it differently? It wouldn't be impossible to write a similar story where the question of kids didn't come up - for example, what about a plot where Shadowsun realises she is the last of her line, becomes pretty disillusioned with a life of constant warfare and carnage, and is conflicted over whether to take on a new duty out of harm's way (moving higher up the chain of command or becoming a mentor at an academy or something - if Fire Warriors are allowed to leave to have kids I'm sure they must have desk jobs as well) or stay on the front lines where she feels it's her responsibility to lead her troops?

Or, to be more realistic and less stupid, she could have the child AND serve, leaving the father to raise the child while she visits whenever she can.

That is implied to be the possible aswell. But it does seem from the book tau do have a sexual dichotomy when it comes to the raising of kids, it it the females job.

Are Tau even mammalian enough to need nursing mothers?

They probably lay eggs.

You just game me a disturbing image. Very very disturbing.
But they have hooves. hooves are mammilian right?

Hooves are not a mammalian trait, though coincidentally they are only seen on mammals in the current era to the best of my knowledge.

However, Tyranids have hooves. Tau have soft camel-feet, not hooves.

Oh I know! Forget about the discrepancies for the power requirements of lasguns and even how a band of CSM can kill the ENTIRE population of a planet (14B) in a short number of months, but take it at face value as insult to women in general!

Yeah, no. Why is this even a thing?

I'm not really certain what you're responding to.

Although I'm not likely to care, given how dismissive you are of the entire topic it makes me wonder why you're even posting? It's not like I go around saying "marines suck" in every single thread about space marines.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
That is implied to be the possible aswell. But it does seem from the book tau do have a sexual dichotomy when it comes to the raising of kids, it it the females job.

Aren't Tau supposed to be raised in a creche? That seemed to be the case in Firewarrior. They also did not choose with whom they could breed, and I thought it was as much a part of their job as "stand here", "shoot that" and "wait"..?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
That is implied to be the possible aswell. But it does seem from the book tau do have a sexual dichotomy when it comes to the raising of kids, it it the females job.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, that the Tau probably outright enforce the "family or career" thing.

Somehow I doubt it. They enforce the "Greater good". A general can serve the greater good better by being a general than by retiring in the middle of a campaign and leaving the army leaderless to be a parent.

 Melissia wrote:
I'm not really certain what you're responding to.

Although I'm not likely to care, given how dismissive you are of the entire topic it makes me wonder why you're even posting? It's not like I go around saying "marines suck" in every single thread about space marines.

Because it's entirely fair to say 40K, its creators and/or its fanbase hates women. The topic's already been debunked in previous posts (I bothered to read ten or so pages before giving up), so right now I'm stating how baseless the topic is to begin with. Hopefully that's okay with you, I wouldn't want to appear misogynistic myself.

Though marines do suck when you realize they're genetically-modified, hyper-genocidal and ultra-religious space monks/knights -- but that's another topic for another time.

I don't think that the ominously dark far-future is the perfect place for 'love' as such, but I do think that having more normal female characters would be nice. I think that Eldar, Dark Eldar and Imperial Guard are prime places to expand upon strong, non-crazy female characters because they already have a bit of it hard wired into their fluff.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
That is implied to be the possible aswell. But it does seem from the book tau do have a sexual dichotomy when it comes to the raising of kids, it it the females job.

Aren't Tau supposed to be raised in a creche? That seemed to be the case in Firewarrior. They also did not choose with whom they could breed, and I thought it was as much a part of their job as "stand here", "shoot that" and "wait"..?

I thought this also - their society being much like the BattleTech Clans?

I think that Eldar, Dark Eldar and Imperial Guard are prime places to expand upon strong, non-crazy female characters because they already have a bit of it hard wired into their fluff

Hmmm Dark Eldar women are usually by other races standards pretty crazy, sadistic etc - the corsair captain in Path of the Outcast was pretty close to being "Eldar normal" but she def changed when back mixing with her dark kin....

 guyperson5 wrote:
I don't think that the ominously dark far-future is the perfect place for 'love' as such, but I do think that having more normal female characters would be nice. I think that Eldar, Dark Eldar and Imperial Guard are prime places to expand upon strong, non-crazy female characters because they already have a bit of it hard wired into their fluff.

There is no Dark Eldar who would be "sane" by human standards.

 The Airman wrote:
Because it's entirely fair to say 40K, its creators and/or its fanbase hates women.

Oh, you were just attacking a strawman then.

Nevermind, I thought you had something of value to add, my mistake, false alarm.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
There is no Dark Eldar who would be "sane" by human standards.

To be fair, I don't think there's craftworld Eldar who are sane by human standards.

 Melissia wrote:

 The Airman wrote:
Because it's entirely fair to say 40K, its creators and/or its fanbase hates women.

Oh, you were just attacking a strawman then.

Nevermind, I thought you had something of value to add, my mistake, false alarm.

Then perhaps the meaning of 'misogyny' changed when I wasn't looking.

 The Airman wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 The Airman wrote:
Because it's entirely fair to say 40K, its creators and/or its fanbase hates women.

Oh, you were just attacking a strawman then.

Nevermind, I thought you had something of value to add, my mistake, false alarm.

Then perhaps the meaning of 'misogyny' changed when I wasn't looking.

I think the poll demonstrates a moderate level of desire for more female equality in the models and books.

I wasn't aware there was an inequality between the genders to begin with in a far-fetched, hobbyist tabletop board game within a grimdark setting where [almost] everything and everyone dies horrifically. There're plenty of characters both man and woman but nothing to suggest an inherent inequality for one side or another.

 The Airman wrote:
I wasn't aware there was an inequality between the genders to begin with in a far-fetched, hobbyist tabletop board game within a grimdark setting where [almost] everything and everyone dies horrifically. There're plenty of characters both man and woman but nothing to suggest an inherent inequality for one side or another.

I'm saying 58% of people disagree with you vs the 42% who don't. That is a pretty damn strong majority. Even if you don't buy into the legitimacy of the poll it still means there are a large number of people with an opposite opinion.

They aren't featured as much in the action because they are all in the kitchen, where they belong.

/joke

 The Airman wrote:
I wasn't aware there was an inequality between the genders to begin with in a far-fetched, hobbyist tabletop board game within a grimdark setting where [almost] everything and everyone dies horrifically. There're plenty of characters both man and woman but nothing to suggest an inherent inequality for one side or another.

Go find me some GW female Cadian models then.

 The Airman wrote:
I wasn't aware there was an inequality between the genders to begin

Yeah, I can tell that you don't pay any attention at all and haven't actually bothered to read the debate.

 The Airman wrote:
I wasn't aware there was an inequality between the genders to begin with in a far-fetched, hobbyist tabletop board game within a grimdark setting where [almost] everything and everyone dies horrifically. There're plenty of characters both man and woman but nothing to suggest an inherent inequality for one side or another.

You can find good female characters in novels, but they are poorly represented on the tabletop and gak, is what people are saying.

I haven't voted on the poll because I'm not entirely certain what the OP's stance was. ^^;

Psienesis wrote:

 The Airman wrote:
I wasn't aware there was an inequality between the genders to begin with in a far-fetched, hobbyist tabletop board game within a grimdark setting where [almost] everything and everyone dies horrifically. There're plenty of characters both man and woman but nothing to suggest an inherent inequality for one side or another.

Go find me some GW female Cadian models then.

Eldar/Dark Eldar beat you to it. Additionally, men and women look about the same in body armor so your squad can have goth genders if you like.

Melissia wrote:

 The Airman wrote:
I wasn't aware there was an inequality between the genders to begin

Yeah, I can tell that you don't pay any attention at all and haven't actually bothered to read the debate.

Or that I find the premise of the OP's argument to be rediculous. If you think the way 40k is presented fails to show women in a larger role, the you have a problem with Space Marines, in which is GW's primary focus and what the focus most of their marketing on. And it's more likely the castrated space monks are keeping potential customers away, so again, not only is the premise rediculous but also a strawman.

You about done?

 The Airman wrote:
Or that I find the premise of the OP's argument to be rediculous

There have been thirty-six pages of discussion since then.

 Melissia wrote:

 The Airman wrote:
Or that I find the premise of the OP's argument to be rediculous

There have been thirty-six pages of discussion since then.

Unfortunately it's still an open discussion. And the OP should feel bad about what they've accomplished here.

 The Airman wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 The Airman wrote:
Or that I find the premise of the OP's argument to be rediculous

There have been thirty-six pages of discussion since then.

Unfortunately it's still an open discussion. And the OP should feel bad about what they've accomplished here.

On the contrary, the OP should not feel bad for starting this discussion. It is an important discussion to have.

I have given up trying to follow the tennis match that is this thread. He said, she said. Jeez. However it is obviously very important to some so I will not belittle it.

A couple points, raised by a friend while discussing this subject (yes I have even got to the stage of talking about this outside in the real world).

Firstly if anyone has already raised this sorry, cant be bothered to trawl through 36 pages to see if anyone was actually thinking.

Secondly it will never change anything. GW will never conform to the wishes of the fans.

And lastly have you seen the cost of a setting up injection moulding. That is why they have cut the whole universe into tiny little bits now. Suddenly the whole universe is full of Cadian IG only. (don't troll me, I know there are others out there, but GW push cadians so hard.) Dont see many others these days. And in truth there are only about 5-6 models for the Cadians, Same for all armies really. The choices we had when it was all metal where vaste compared to the plastic range. Orks had what, six totally different clans, they are now just orks. So to give us a little variety, like including females across the universe, is simply too expensive and not worth it to GW. The argument, sorry discussion is good and it's nice to air our opinions, but do we not think it is mute, as GW are not going to do anything about it.!!!

PS I would rather they spent the money on updating all the codex. Including proper codex for SoB.

Yeah, actually, I have. For something the size of the 40K minis? $60 grand, brand new. Seems a lot, but that's also the price of a decent car. A company with a credit line could get one rather easily.

You can get larger injection molding machines that build much larger pieces of injection-molded plastic for like a quarter-mil... but why would you? They're not building life-sized Rhinos here.

Also, if they did make such an investment, and started producing a decent line of female characters for the various IoM armies that have female characters (IG, Inquisition, SOB, etc), you gotta take into account the sales volume and potential new customers (and thus new business) they would attract, off-setting the cost.

Not just new customers, but also return customers as well. It's not just women that want female imperial guard models, but a lot of guys would like them, too.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Yes and no - amazing how few character warriors wear helmets on the 40k battlefield ?

The 40K universe is not and never has been based on pure Vulcan logic - its about having fun with death and darkness - you know what most of us as teenagers saw as cool, mix in massive amounts of violence, hints of sex and some comedy and enjoy.

Bare / exposed chests - well catchan's are fine with it as are a number of other "primitive" warriors and a number of the Xenos - Kroot and Orks usually disdain armour never mind extensive clothing. Dark Eldar and Servants of Chaos flash the flesh to taunt and tantalise............they are happy for you to look as in that moment they have ensared your soul, or slit yout throat - or both.

re love stories- you miss the point - love stories don’t have to end well or happily - give someone hope and something to give their all for and then at the end find that which they strived for was already crushed or worse totally false - that’s grim dark.

People say that to make the good shine you need evil but the reverse is also true, to make the darkness mean something there needs to be an element of light to be either maintained or snuffed out as a contrast - at least IMO.

This is used in a number of BL novels from older ones like Last Chancers to more recent ones like Wrath of Iron or Imperial Glory - there are love stories here - but Emperor they often end so badly..................

Love, be it sexual or not, can be a important element of the story if it’s handled well.

I have to say wasn't thinking that way when I wrote that post, but you are correct. One only has to look to Romeo and Juliet to see that's true. Ah me.

Just out of curiosity, since I've not read every post in the previous 36 pages...

Has anyone touched on the fact that, aside from the title of the thread including "normal women," that there are very few "normal men" abounding in the grimdark of the future? They're either, from my experience, a low-brow caricature of some kind of trope (corrupt politician, fat cat businessman/priest/etc.) which, usually, either gets stamped into paste or eaten or mauled in some fashion by some demon/space marine/equally superhuman entity, or their some kind of male figure so far down on the spectrum of good and evil that their morality, like their superhuman facilities, is beyond what would be deemed "normal" by any sane individual. Even the Imperial Guard characters displayed have herculean levels of endurance/stamina/faith/determination/any other number of traits.

It's a universe above our own, not just in years, but in manifestations of reality and history, superhuman in everything it describes and displays, especially it's humanity. I don't think there's a normal *anything* in the 40k universe.

That said, in regards to models being crafted and molded? I do believe there should be more equality in the... let's call it equality in the curvature of the torso region, because realistically, aside from unhelmeted models with flowing hair, how else are you gonna know?

deathmagiks wrote:
Has anyone touched on the fact that, aside from the title of the thread including "normal women," that there are very few "normal men" abounding in the grimdark of the future?

Yeah, the low-quality nature of the BL collection has been mentioned a few times.

Well to be honest I've not read much from the black library, so while I have drawn from a book or two, what I mean specifically are the armies and the codecies (codexie? codexes?) themselves. Everything punches with god-fists, everything is sharp enough to cut through dreams, everything blows holes through mile thick super-plate made of mega-ultra-hyper-nitro alloy.

I mean don't get me wrong. I like the universe, the gothic nature of it, the juxtaposition of the audacity of it with the horror of actually living in that time, but in the same way I wouldn't look for round, dynamic characters from a 14 year old Michael Bay, I wouldn't really expect accurate representation, nor anything even remotely close thereof, of equal gender representation simply because there is no accurate representation of anything in the universe.

Now, since I happen to agree with an equality in gender representation, I do think that there should be females in a fair number in the fluff, as well as in the models, since the creation of both of these things happens in our world, rather than in 40k, but to call the 40k universe misogynistic is... flawed, both in definition and understanding imo.

I believe the "normal" asked for in the OP is less about "normal" in M2 and more about "normal" in M41. That is to say, women who appear as if they were average Imperial citizens from a standard Imperial or Hive world..... not stilletto-heel, thin-leather-body-harness-and-G-string wearing gunbunny assassin-babes.

That said, in regards to models being crafted and molded? I do believe there should be more equality in the... let's call it equality in the curvature of the torso region, because realistically, aside from unhelmeted models with flowing hair, how else are you gonna know?

Even in similar styles of body-armor, on average, women are shorter and narrower in the shoulders than a comparatively-athletic man, though their legs are proportionately longer and their torsos more compact. This is true regardless, however. While both of them may be identically capable of the same feats of strength and endurance, they are not physically the same.

 Psienesis wrote:
Even in similar styles of body-armor, on average, women are shorter and narrower in the shoulders than a comparatively-athletic man, though their legs are proportionately longer and their torsos more compact. This is true regardless, however. While both of them may be identically capable of the same feats of strength and endurance, they are not physically the same.

True, but for the size of models we're talking about, i.e. the ones played with, such differences could easily be seen as simple variations across the average model type. I.G. for example, or hell, Eldar Guardians. I think for something that small to be noticeable at any time other than painting the thing, you need to over exaggerate the differences.

You could make the model slightly thinner and with narrower shoulders, for one. If you wanted to exaggerate the features, without getting into Daemonette territory, give the female model a narrower waist and wider hips. Trail a ponytail out of the back of her helmet.

There's a number of non-GW miniature manufacturers that have female soldiers in full battle-rattle that are obviously female without falling into the boob-plate trap, at the same level of scale, so I know it's possible.

This isn't the chicken and the egg.

Tabletop wargames have, by the numbers, not appealed to women; so miniatures / artwork was not developed to their sensibilities.

<rant>Besides many women can barely maintain 10 minutes worth of non-repeating conversation, they would go stir-crazy at a 4-hour 3000pt. match. Sometimes if I'm talking to a woman at a bar or some other hole, I just copy CJ from GTA San Andreas, "Girl, that's so interesting, I'm jus' gonna listen."</rant>

I treat with the utmost repsect women who choose to entertain our hyper-masculine fiction with a sense of humor.

...and yes women of the latter sort do exist in great enough numbers that their opinions about our toys are -NOT- to be immediately dismissed.

RancidHate wrote:
This isn't the chicken and the egg.

Tabletop wargames have, by the numbers, not appealed to women

The overwhelming majority of the population, male or female, doesn't likely even know that tabletop wargames EXISTS.

He does have a point, although that's a situation that is changing as both genders slowly start to break down the artificial barriers separating their standing in society.

Hobbies and interests are connected to how we were raised, and with a slightly more liberal upbringing that is no longer enforcing strict gender roles as well as supporting media, it is no surprise that more and more women play video games, enjoy action movies or, yes, might pick up 40k.
Although the latter is probably somewhat hampered by its lack of advertisement outside the group and thus public awareness.

Still, the game itself was invented by a bunch of white nerdy dudes, and it's safe to assume that they were designing it in a way that would appeal to likeminded people - namely other white nerdy dudes. This isn't even a conscious process, but merely a matter of propagating one's own preferences. And keeping this in mind, it could have been so much worse.

<rant>Besides many women can barely maintain 10 minutes worth of non-repeating conversation, they would go stir-crazy at a 4-hour 3000pt. match. Sometimes if I'm talking to a woman at a bar or some other hole, I just copy CJ from GTA San Andreas, "Girl, that's so interesting, I'm jus' gonna listen."</rant>

Men have the same problem. Take a look at YMDC or some of the other forums here.

@RancidHate
This is kinda touching on the point I was trying to make earlier. We are not talking about a million people extra coming to the game scene just because there are suddenly some normal female models. So sales would not pick up sufficiantly to warrent the outlay.

Oh and I am sure the "ladies" here are going to feel soo much better about skinny waists with wide hips, So now we have a bunch of pear shaped guardspersons on the field that are a bit shorter. Oh but we can't do shorter, all guardspersons are 5'9" tall as Imperial standard dictates. All models in 40k are exagerated to show detail. They are the most mishapen bunch of plastic out there. The vast majority of guns are far to big, there feet are all huge, and nobody has a neck!!!! So how are you to represent the female form. What exactly do you want here? You cant have shorter, skinnier. You cant have buxom. About the only way I have heard of yet was to issue female heads, and ponytails.

PS Please don't take me too seriously I am being an idiot deliberately.

Camkierhi wrote:This is kinda touching on the point I was trying to make earlier. We are not talking about a million people extra coming to the game scene just because there are suddenly some normal female models. So sales would not pick up sufficiantly to warrent the outlay.

I'm not sure the hobby even has a million players now. Plus, GW produces new minis all the time - from special characters to entire army revamps - so I'm not sure why the outlay should be such a big concern only when it suddenly comes to female IG.

Camkierhi wrote:Oh and I am sure the "ladies" here are going to feel soo much better about skinny waists with wide hips, So now we have a bunch of pear shaped guardspersons on the field that are a bit shorter. Oh but we can't do shorter, all guardspersons are 5'9" tall as Imperial standard dictates. All models in 40k are exagerated to show detail. They are the most mishapen bunch of plastic out there. The vast majority of guns are far to big, there feet are all huge, and nobody has a neck!!!! So how are you to represent the female form. What exactly do you want here? You cant have shorter, skinnier. You cant have buxom. About the only way I have heard of yet was to issue female heads, and ponytails.

And those heads would already be a quick and easy fix, would they not? But that aside, I'm not sure I understand the point you are trying to make. Are you argueing that it's impossible for GW to create female minis? Because they actually do have a fair bunch of them already, just not for the Guard.

Or rather, not as standard troopers. Take Rocket Girl or the Catachan Grenade Launcher from this pic (far left and far right respectively) and slap some flak on them to turn them into Cadians. Voila. Done. Was that so hard?

I love the camo work on that Rocket Girl's combats.

Why does Camkieri feel the need to put 'ladies' in inverted commas, I wonder?

Well, this is the internet!

But yeah, the paintjobs on those minis are very nicely done! And I have a thing for sky camo as well.

I like blue camo myself.

I hate camouflage. Military uniforms used to look cool, camouflage ruined it.

You realize that most military personnel have a few different uniforms issued to them, right?

 Monster Rain wrote:
You realize that most military personnel have a few different uniforms issued to them, right?

Yes. The ugly ones and pretty ones. Yes, there are still plenty of nice looking parade uniforms.

Bearing that in mind, I guess I'm not seeing how camoflage ruined anything.

 Monster Rain wrote:
Bearing that in mind, I guess I'm not seeing how camoflage ruined anything.

In uniforms actually used in the field of battle. I prefer the look of 19th century and early 20th century uniforms, OK?

Which is fine if you like getting shot.

 Melissia wrote:
Which is fine if you like getting shot.

I give my Space Marine sergeants differently coloured helmets and back banners Let's just say that practicality is not high on my list of considerations when choosing an attire for my toy soldiers.

 Lynata wrote:
Are you argueing that it's impossible for GW to create female minis? Because they actually do have a fair bunch of them already, just not for the Guard.

As I recall though, most of those female minis tend to be wearing chainmail bikinis, boob armour, or some other exaggerated aspect to show that the model is female. Or Daemonettes, which just don't wear anything at all for the most part (3e Daemonettes forever). Which would be inappropriate for Cadians guardswomen. It is a fair point, IMO. The only real difference would be facial.

On the contrary, I mislike bright, primary coloured uniforms and think disruptive camo looks really cool. Hence why I worked so hard to paint my all-black Inquisitorial Vendetta in disruptive pattern camo.

You have to admire the skill involved with painting the camo on that Rocket Girl's legs though, even if you don't like the design itself.

I think a lot of these issues would be solved if the mixed sex aspect of many Imperial regiments comes more to the foreground, miniatures wise.

Crimson wrote:Military uniforms used to look cool, camouflage ruined it.

Point taken.

Void__Dragon wrote:As I recall though, most of those female minis tend to be wearing chainmail bikinis, boob armour, or some other exaggerated aspect to show that the model is female.

Most is not all, though.

And there are a lot of subtle differences. The only questionable point would be whether it's really worth producing one or two entirely new troop minis given this subtleness, or just the heads.
A whole new mini such as another variant of the officer, however, would obviously be created from scratch.

Most 40K Guard regiments, like the Astartes disdain camoflage - or have the wrong type for where they are sent.

You can talk a uniform from any period in history and use it in 40k - be that naked, half clad, fitted body armour or modern day unisex. Anything works.

Camo gear for most soldiers is very new way of fighting - for the majority of historical warfare it was non existant or even avoided.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Most 40K Guard regiments, like the Astartes disdain camoflage

Except they really don't.

I can see them having the WRONG camoflage, but the ones that disdain it entirely are usually the exceptions, not the rule.

Cadians are given a generic green/brown camo usually, which is good in most non-urban situations, Valhallans use a snow/ice/urban camo. Catachan use (partially anyway) a jungle camo. And Tallarn use a desert camo.

Yeah I guess that was a bit wrong however but then look at the huge selection of regiments on p28-29 of the old codex- very few of them are camo

Quite a few of them do seem to be primitive dressed or in a WW1 / WWII dress uniform

I'd like to see more females in the game, but I don't feel that sticking some female heads into the Guard sprues would be a good solution. In the case of hive gangs and other non-professional fighting forces, I think it's pretty cool to have mixed sexes. For Guard, though, they're an actual army, and it's been found in real life that mixed forces don't operate terribly well on the front lines. Given that Guard are often deployed in forces comprising multiple regiments, even an all-female regiment wouldn't be practical (although, of course, in 40k there's always space for corner cases).

As well as that, there's the basic reason humans have always sent men to fight: They're more expendable. Manpower is the Imperium's greatest resource, and sending legions of women into battle isn't good for the numbers game. If a Guard levy takes away a large percentage of males from a society, the population can recover within a few generations. If the same percentage of females leave, it may never recover. Why would the Imperium want to cripple its manpower in that way?

I'd like women to be better represented in the fluff, but I think the reasoning behind them not showing up much on the tabletop is sound.

ntw3001 wrote: In the case of hive gangs and other non-professional fighting forces, I think it's pretty cool to have mixed sexes. For Guard, though, they're an actual army, and it's been found in real life that mixed forces don't operate terribly well on the front lines.

Actually, it hasn't.

And besides, Guard regiments are often enough recruited right out of the very "hive-gangs and other non-professional fighting forces" you mentioned. Never read about the 8th Necromundan Spiders, I presume? Or the Asgardian Rangers? Not every world that tithes regiments to the IG has a PDF as professional as Cadia - which, ironically, recruits both males and females into its military by the way.

ntw3001 wrote:Given that Guard are often deployed in forces comprising multiple regiments, even an all-female regiment wouldn't be practical (although, of course, in 40k there's always space for corner cases).

Such as the Xenan regiments referenced in the 3E Guard 'dex.

ntw3001 wrote:As well as that, there's the basic reason humans have always sent men to fight: [...]

And women.

ntw3001 wrote:If a Guard levy takes away a large percentage of males from a society, the population can recover within a few generations. If the same percentage of females leave, it may never recover. Why would the Imperium want to cripple its manpower in that way?

Because it is overpopulated anyways?

... sheesh.

ntw3001 wrote:
I'd like to see more females in the game, but I don't feel that sticking some female heads into the Guard sprues would be a good solution. In the case of hive gangs and other non-professional fighting forces, I think it's pretty cool to have mixed sexes. For Guard, though, they're an actual army, and it's been found in real life that mixed forces don't operate terribly well on the front lines. Given that Guard are often deployed in forces comprising multiple regiments, even an all-female regiment wouldn't be practical (although, of course, in 40k there's always space for corner cases).

As well as that, there's the basic reason humans have always sent men to fight: They're more expendable. Manpower is the Imperium's greatest resource, and sending legions of women into battle isn't good for the numbers game. If a Guard levy takes away a large percentage of males from a society, the population can recover within a few generations. If the same percentage of females leave, it may never recover. Why would the Imperium want to cripple its manpower in that way?

I'd like women to be better represented in the fluff, but I think the reasoning behind them not showing up much on the tabletop is sound.

Nothing that you've written here as any actual basis in fact, even historical fact, excepting very short snippets of time. The Imperium also doesn't care about the population of a given Hive World. If, say, they somehow inducted 75% of its population into the IG (impossible, as most won't meet the minimum requirements, but bear with me).... 75% of the planet goes away never to be seen again. The IoM taps the populations of 5 other Hive Worlds and ships them to the first Hive World. Now the population is back up, and things can move right along.

ntw3001 wrote:
For Guard, though, they're an actual army, and it's been found in real life that mixed forces don't operate terribly well on the front lines.

That is not true.

 Lynata wrote:
]Actually, it hasn't.

Fair enough. I'm speaking from discussion with UK military personnel, an army in which women are still ineligible for front-line combat roles, for fears that female casualties would compromise decision-making amongst male troops on the ground. On further reading, it looks like a number of countries are ahead of the UK in terms of offering combat roles to women. Nonetheless, it appears that mixed units are not common and are typically assigned to lower-risk posts.

 Lynata wrote:
]And besides, Guard regiments are often enough recruited right out of the very "hive-gangs and other non-professional fighting forces" you mentioned. Never read about the 8th Necromundan Spiders, I presume? Or the Asgardian Rangers? Not every world that tithes regiments to the IG has a PDF as professional as Cadia - which, ironically, recruits both males and females into its military by the way.

I'm familiar with the Spiders, not with the Asgardians. A quick browse of Lexicanum shows that there's no extra detail added on the former beyond the snippet in Codex: Imperialis, and very little at all on the latter. They're both recruited from hive world gangs; that's scarcely conclusive. And in any case, while I'm in favour of mixed gangs for Necromunda, there's no canon supporting it and the chap in the Spiders article definitely isn't an Escher. And if the gangs are mixed (and despite the miniature ranges, there's no reason they wouldn't be), it still doesn't mean the recruitment process is obliged to bring all the buddies together.

That said, I don't imagine the governor of Necromunda fusses too much about exactly who goes into his military tithe. I think it'd be down to the assigned commander of the regiment. So yeah, I'll concede that it's feasible.

 Lynata wrote:
]

ntw3001 wrote:Given that Guard are often deployed in forces comprising multiple regiments, even an all-female regiment wouldn't be practical (although, of course, in 40k there's always space for corner cases).

Such as the Xenan regiments referenced in the 3E Guard 'dex.

ntw3001 wrote:Nonetheless, it appears that mixed units are not common and are typically assigned to lower-risk posts.

Depending on the nation.
There's a huge degree of variety concerning the role of women in the armed forces ranging from totally barred to noncom only to rear line support all the way to full frontline combat duty and special forces. It's an ever-changing environment influenced by the respective country's history and gender politics.

ntw3001 wrote:They're both recruited from hive world gangs; that's scarcely conclusive.

The Asgardians are actually feral worlders. But I wasn't bringing them or the Necromundans up as examples for female-inclusive regiments, actually, just to show that the IG does recruit from these sources. The reason for the Imperial Guard being so diverse isn't just because of varying tech levels between the individual worlds, but also because some are the pride of the planet's PDF, whereas the regiment right next to them could be a bunch of thugs recruited right out of the prison, or some feral world barbarians tithed from some clan. It all depends on the planetary governor, and as long as the quotas are fulfilled the Imperium cares little about the quality of the troops.

ntw3001 wrote:When? I'm not familiar with any sweeping armies of women (feel free to correct me). I'm not claiming there are no situations in which women have ever fought, but I'm not aware of any historical precedent for female or mixed armies, bar modern examples.

Well, the most obvious example would be the Soviet Red Army in WW2 - which is actually the basis for the Valhallan regiments in 40k. But it goes back in history much further, and not just for Russia (where women were already employed as frontline troops in WW1). The UK Royal Armouries is in possession of a historical document called the "Bridport Muster Roll" from 1457, and the peasent levy listed there includes 5 women (complete with arms and armour) amongst the 174 names to join the Lancastrian army. Or how about the crusading Order of the glorious Saint Mary, which included female knights (later suppressed by the pope). Thanks to old judicial documents only recently discovered, we also know of a woman called Claude de Armoises, who first fought in the army of the Papal States and later became a mercenary captain. Then, going back further in history, we have many, many accounts of the Roman Legions fighting male and female warriors in Europe. Why do you think the pope later had to issue an edict to ban women from bearing arms? And lastly, archaeologists have uncovered quite a number of ancient burial sites containing skeletons with arms and armour, where analysis of the bone structure indicated that a number of them were women. Oh, and just because I'm such a weeabo, I will also mention the Japanese onna bugeisha. Or did you ever hear about the Mino regiment?

Barring a few exceptions such as the Mino, these are not "sweeping armies of women", of course - but still perfect examples for mixed formations.

Really, the participation of women in warfare stretches throughout human history. There have just been eras of time where a male-dominated society tried or succeeded in barring women from participating in such activities as part of a wider effort to marginalise their participation in overall society, hence it becoming an oddity or even ceasing to exist at all in most parts of the world. Only now has society started to undo this.

A big problem of today's world seems to be that very few people are aware of the historic bits and pieces mentioned above. It isn't really common knowledge, which is a bit sad. When I was in school, we were all taught that only men could become knights. Imagine my surprise when reading about the all-female Catalonian Order of the Hatchet.

ntw3001 wrote:I don't think the Imperium has ever shown too much concern over population control. But I really don't imagine the Imperium see 'more meat for the grinder' as a problem ('less meat for the grinder', though, would probably be met with less enthusiasm). They certainly aren't worried overmuch about preserving quality of life for the citizenry.

Oh, what I meant is just that the issue of "less meat" doesn't even come up. Human lives are cheap in 40k, so much so that the gear they are issued is considered less expendable.
If the Imperium would have to worry about a steady supply of men, they wouldn't let guys like Chenkov march entire battalions over a minefield to clear a path for the tanks. Or send an entire planet's population into death camps because they might've seen a daemon (First War of Armageddon).

ntw3001 wrote:I think there's every reason for the general policy of the Guard's recruitment officers to take males where possible.

Now you're making stuff up. The Munitorum does not have any such policy - at least not in GW's fluff.

When? I'm not familiar with any sweeping armies of women (feel free to correct me). I'm not claiming there are no situations in which women have ever fought, but I'm not aware of any historical precedent for female or mixed armies, bar modern examples. In those cases, I'd argue that the lower casualty rate of modern war, compared to historical war, is what makes it a workable prospect, and 40k's approach to warfare has more in common with the Battle of the Somme than anything from today.

Sweeping armies? No. However, the idea of a "sweeping army" is a relatively modern concept. In ye olden days, you had a handful of knights (usually no more than a few hundred, though exceptions exist) surrounded by peasant levies or mercenaries (especially in Italy.... Italy loved its mercenary armies...)

... though it bears noting that modern warfare inflicts far more casualties in its course than historic warfare did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight#Women_in_orders_of_knighthood

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/orders/wom-kn.htm

That doesn't sound like a terribly economical decision. Why deplete one world and ship in people from others when you don't have to do either? If a regiment is hastily raised in response to some emergency I see it, but that would be one of the aforementioned corner cases. I think there's every reason for the general policy of the Guard's recruitment officers to take males where possible.

Because, as you said, the one thing the Imperium doesn't lack is warm bodies. If you have 6 Hive Worlds, and one of them has a reduced population (for whatever reason) you can take some people from the other 5 (thus slightly reducing over-crowding there) and ship them by bulk transport to the other. Now you have 6 fully-functional Hive Worlds, rather than 5.25.

Yes, the Imperium treats people as numbers. It does not treat men as superior or inferior. Men are just another number in the system. It does not treat women as superior or inferior. Women are just another number in the system.

The Imperium's most abundant resources are human bodies. And it also believes in the philosophy of "they wouldn't call them human resources if they weren't meant to be strip-mined."

Of course some individual planet and its culture could very well treat women as inferior. Just like it could treat men as inferior.
Which is how we might well get most of those mono-gender regiments, be them male or female.
Either way, the Imperium does not care as long as it gets its tithe.

Even if you don't want female soldiers in your IG army, with them released as separate purchases, conversion packs, and special characters (or just variations on generic characters even!), you are really under no obligation to purchase them or include them in any way.

So it's a bit silly to argue that your not wanting them in YOUR army means that they shouldn't be included at all. I don't want soldiers riding horses while wielding spears in my army, but that doesn't mean that roughriders have no place in 40k

 Melissia wrote:

ntw3001 wrote:
For Guard, though, they're an actual army, and it's been found in real life that mixed forces don't operate terribly well on the front lines.

That is not true.

Yeah, it is.

Regardless, Black Library fluff has made it abundantly clear that women serve in line regiments, so there's no reason not to do it.

Aside from the fact that the overwhelming majority of the 40K playerbase is male, doesn't care overly much about feminism, and stamping out some new sprues would cost money that GW's clearly loathe to spend.

 Seaward wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

ntw3001 wrote:
For Guard, though, they're an actual army, and it's been found in real life that mixed forces don't operate terribly well on the front lines.

That is not true.

Yeah, it is.

Regardless, Black Library fluff has made it abundantly clear that women serve in line regiments, so there's no reason not to do it.

Aside from the fact that the overwhelming majority of the 40K playerbase is male, doesn't care overly much about feminism, and stamping out some new sprues would cost money that GW's clearly loathe to spend.

The fact that the Israeli military has used women in front-line roles, including their elite Mossad units (a group with which it decidedly unwise to feth with), and has done so for a rather long time now, rather puts the lie to that viewpoint. The US military has also recently begun opening combat-arms roles to qualified female soldiers, including our various Special Operations Groups.

Being male, or pro-feminist, has nothing to do with the argument for or against. I'm male, and I want female IG units, female Commissars, female Inquisitors, female Tech-Priests, more female DCA, female Vindicare, and more female miniatures in the GW line in general. I can, of course, go third-party or do conversion work for such minis, but would GW not rather that I give them my money?

 Psienesis wrote:
The fact that the Israeli military has used women in front-line roles, including their elite Mossad units (a group with which it decidedly unwise to feth with), and has done so for a rather long time now, rather puts the lie to that viewpoint. The US military has also recently begun opening combat-arms roles to qualified female soldiers, including our various Special Operations Groups.

Responding to this - beyond saying you're conflating a lot of apparently half-heard-correctly information - would take this wildly into off topic territory, so I'll refrain.

Being male, or pro-feminist, has nothing to do with the argument for or against. I'm male, and I want female IG units, female Commissars, female Inquisitors, female Tech-Priests, more female DCA, female Vindicare, and more female miniatures in the GW line in general. I can, of course, go third-party or do conversion work for such minis, but would GW not rather that I give them my money?

I'm sure they'd like your money, yes, and as long as you could guarantee them that they'd actually make a profit on sprues of that sort, they'd probably even do it. The trouble is, you can't guarantee that profit, and they've evidently decided that their target market - young males - are not likely to be any more inclined to purchase female models than not. Perhaps even less so, if SoB sales are any evidence.

 Seaward wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

ntw3001 wrote:
For Guard, though, they're an actual army, and it's been found in real life that mixed forces don't operate terribly well on the front lines.

That is not true.

Yeah, it is.

Aside from it not being true, I suppose it might be true, when it isn't busy not being true (which is never).

Seriously, there have been no reputable reports of a reduction in fighting capability due to integration.

SoB sales aren't good evidence though, because on the one hand you're talking about very expensive, old metal models suffering from limited availability and on the other you're talking about recutting an already successful line of plastics that line the shelves.

As noted, getting SOB models *now* isn't an easy feat. Shoot, if they made a 1000 point army of Sisters cost less than a decent used car, they might be the most popular army of all time, who knows?

Also....
http://www.timesofisrael.com/what-the-mossads-female-agents-do-and-dont-do-for-the-sake-of-israel/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/features/7280625/Mossad-the-elite-women-who-work-for-the-family.html
http://www.forbes.com/sites/crossingborders/2012/09/30/why-the-best-spies-in-mossad-and-the-cia-are-women/
http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000786218&fid=1724

... some news articles on the role of women in the Mossad. Obviously, most of their missions and the roles they perform are considered Top Secret, so information on them is scant.

http://nation.time.com/2013/01/25/women-in-combat-vive-a-difference/
http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/01/the-most-counterproductive-policy-in-the-us-army-servicemembers-on-the-women-in-combat-ban-20-years-ago/272460/
http://greatist.com/fitness/military-women-combat-012413

... and a few articles about women entering combat arms roles in the US military. Not sure I "half-heard' anything.

 Psienesis wrote:

... and a few articles about women entering combat arms roles in the US military. Not sure I "half-heard' anything.

The roles have been opened, but as of yet no women have taken them, in large part because Big Military's trying to decide if it's going to lower physical standards or not for combat arms jobs. Also, special operations units have not decided whether or not they're even going to allow women to try it out. I'd say they probably will not, though it wouldn't surprise me if Ranger School allowed females. For what it's worth, the Marines have tried pilot programs for things like this a few times now, and so far they've been unable to get even carefully selected women successfully through Infantry Officer's Course down aboard Quantico. What Israeli spies have to do with combat roles in the military, I have no idea.

None of that matters to the issue at hand, though, which is whether or not female Guardsmen sprues would be profitable for GW. You say they would, Games Workshop seems to think otherwise, and I tend to agree with them on the matter. People around here like to pretend that what range sells and what doesn't is a chicken/egg question - i.e., Space Marines are only the most popular because they get the most support, and they get the most support because they're the most popular - but that's not really the case.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
What logical arguments? I was ignoring the crap you wrote about how women were inferior.

You'll notice that the part I replied to wasn't actually you being sexist, just you stating that feminism didn't exist in 40k, which (I suppose) might be a reasonable assumption if you've just read the first few posts of this thread.

You seem to have done a complete 180. The post I quoted had you saying there was no such thing as feminism, while now you're saying there's no such thing as misogyny, which is the opposite of feminism.

No it's not.
Misoginy is Artifical putting the women down; feminism is Artificially uplifting them.
A society can lack both of these artificial social limitations.
Don't confuse them with patriarchal/matriarchal, now these are opposed.
Oh and BTW in my I post I didn't say women are inferior - I said they are different from men and as such are better suited for different jobs.
Being "tolerance and diversity" type you are, you should know by now that being different is NOT the same as being inferior.

 Ratliker wrote:

Oh and BTW in my I post I didn't say women are inferior - I said they are different from men and as such are better suited for different jobs.

All men are suited for certain jobs and all women are suited for certain different jobs?

 The Airman wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I'm not really certain what you're responding to.

Although I'm not likely to care, given how dismissive you are of the entire topic it makes me wonder why you're even posting? It's not like I go around saying "marines suck" in every single thread about space marines.

Because it's entirely fair to say 40K, its creators and/or its fanbase hates women. The topic's already been debunked in previous posts (I bothered to read ten or so pages before giving up), so right now I'm stating how baseless the topic is to begin with. Hopefully that's okay with you, I wouldn't want to appear misogynistic myself.

Though marines do suck when you realize they're genetically-modified, hyper-genocidal and ultra-religious space monks/knights -- but that's another topic for another time.

It's easy: the ladies get the attention they lack and a chance to crusade for feminism
And we get the food .
Everyone is happy


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 Ratliker wrote:

Oh and BTW in my I post I didn't say women are inferior - I said they are different from men and as such are better suited for different jobs.

All men are suited for certain jobs and all women are suited for certain different jobs?

As a generalized groups - yes.
Individuals may vary and show traits more common in the other group (awesome male hairdresser for example, or brawler female), but i was speaking in general from the start min you.

This looks like it's getting into territory it shouldn't. I'm nothere to insult anyone, so if you take this as an insult,then you're just being childish and I'll ignore your immaturity.

A difference in roles for men and women isn't something new, many countries and cultures institute these and none of their people (or very few) have complained. They seem to be doing just fine. Do I agree with how Iraqi and Iranian women are treated as a whole? No, but that's their culture and I respect that.

As far as females in 40k being viable: by all means go right ahead. Every able-bodied man, woman (and child) would be pressed into service should the need arise. And let's face it: there's always a need in the 41st millenium.

 Ratliker wrote:
Misoginy is Artifical putting the women down; feminism is Artificially uplifting them.

This is stupid. Society is entirely artificial, therefor yes, all of it is artificial, and your point is nonsense.

 Ratliker wrote:

As a generalized groups - yes.
Individuals may vary and show traits more common in the other group (awesome male hairdresser for example, or brawler female), but i was speaking in general from the start min you.

And that's my point. You're not recruiting groups, you're recruiting individuals.

I read this on Facebook and thought of this thread:


Aaron Dembski-Bowden -
"Who do I have to sleep with for them to make new Sisters of Battle models?" -- Katie Dembski-Bowden"

Amazing how, what are probably, perfectly decent people, fall to this level when they talk about emotional topics.

"You talk s@**"
"No you talk s@**"

That is all this has become.

Instead of calling eachother stupid, why not just agree to disagree. You will never accept eachothers opinion.

As myself and others have said GW will not change, I agree it is possible to make the changes desired, but not finacially viable, I also know they could just make heads? These are currently available from others, I wonder how many they sell?

Is the world fair? NO.

 Camkierhi wrote:
As myself and others have said GW will not change, I agree it is possible to make the changes desired, but not finacially viable, I also know they could just make heads? These are currently available from others, I wonder how many they sell?

Actually I think it would be financially viable. Many players of either gender would like to add female heads or torsos as conversion pieces to their IG armies, and female characters like Lelith can be pretty popular regardless of their gender.

Actually I think it would not. I myself would buy female models and will be probably buying the ones available to convert existing models. But I dont think that many people will buy them in enough quantity to warrant outlay.

And you have yet a again proved my point, you say, i say, but you say, but i say blah blah blah........pointless.

 Camkierhi wrote:
Actually I think it would not. I myself would buy female models and will be probably buying the ones available to convert existing models. But I dont think that many people will buy them in enough quantity to warrant outlay.

They're a very popular request amongst guard players.

 Camkierhi wrote:
And you have yet a again proved my point, you say, i say, but you say, but i say blah blah blah........pointless.

This is a forum, used for discussing topics. If you don't like discussing the topic, you are free to stop.

"Vandal waits for the Inquisitor to finish, as he takes a look at his new squadmates. Judging by the equipment and posture of the dark-haired male, Vandal can only assume that he, much like Vandal himself, prefers seeing his enemy fall in close quarters, blade to blade. The man with the sniper rifle is obviously a guardsman, likely a marksman. The figure with the gas mask is likely also a guardsman, albeit one whose specialty eludes him. The woman of the Ecclesiarchy is clearly a filthy, vain, man-hungry whore, scheming to backstab the rest of the party to squeeze their manhoods and souls between her legs, devouring both."

Courtesy of Void__Dragon in a Dark Heresy RPG.

 ScreamPaste wrote:
"Vandal waits for the Inquisitor to finish, as he takes a look at his new squadmates. Judging by the equipment and posture of the dark-haired male, Vandal can only assume that he, much like Vandal himself, prefers seeing his enemy fall in close quarters, blade to blade. The man with the sniper rifle is obviously a guardsman, likely a marksman. The figure with the gas mask is likely also a guardsman, albeit one whose specialty eludes him. The woman of the Ecclesiarchy is clearly a filthy, vain, man-hungry whore, scheming to backstab the rest of the party to squeeze their manhoods and souls between her legs, devouring both."

Courtesy of Void__Dragon in a Dark Heresy RPG.

^Vouching for that. I'm in the roleplay as well and the cleric is my character.

She likes the mean guys, so he's probably getting dat ass later.

I regret nothing, and Vandal Varren regrets even less.

 Melissia wrote:
This is a forum, used for discussing topics. If you don't like discussing the topic, you are free to stop.

I think his point was more that, as nobody has any verifiable facts on whether or not female Guard would make any money, claims one way or another are essentially worthless.

The only verifiable evidence we have is that GW has not made any, and they're letting their flagship female line die a slow, barely-updated death.

Given that female soldiers are popular in non-GW lines, I'm fairly certain that we can provide some evidence that it is not some niche thing-- any more than GW as a whole is niche anyway.

 Melissia wrote:
Given that female soldiers are popular in non-GW lines, I'm fairly certain that we can provide some evidence that it is not some niche thing-- any more than GW as a whole is niche anyway.

Such as?

Privateer
Hasselfree
Copplestone
Raging Heroes
Statuesque Minatitures

I'd like to see proof that they're popular. Show me the sales figures please.

BlaxicanX wrote:
I'd like to see proof that they're popular. Show me the sales figures please.

Yeah cos I have access to those........................

The companies listed (and others) contonue to make many and varied female figures - they ain't doing it for the sheer fun of it..............

 Mr Morden wrote:
Privateer
Hasselfree
Copplestone
Raging Heroes
Statuesque Minatitures

I'm not familiar with any of those companies aside from Privateer - though if I'm thinking of the right one, aren't Hasselfree the dudes who make crazy over-sexualized miniatures?

The point wasn't that nobody makes female miniatures, the point was that female miniatures are remarkably niche, a point that I don't feel has been negated by the list posted. To use an analogy, and perhaps make this a little more clear: I'd love it if some of the big video game developers started making space sims like Privateer again. But they don't, because it's not profitable enough. That doesn't mean nobody's making space sims, it just means the big boys aren't. Because the market is much, much smaller than what they're aiming for. That, I imagine, is GW's position with regard to female IG.

Haseelfree make a wide range of figures usually based on film or tv - some of these are "sexy" - because thats what the character looks like on screen.

The fantasy /sci-fi market is already highly niche - apart from GW and Privateer who is a "big player" in this market?

Rachkham used to be - and had plenty of female figures -, Gamezone has plenty, the only one I am not sure is Mantic as I have not looked at their stuff recently?

Some companies advertise female minis for sale. That is all we can be certain of.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Some companies advertise female minis for sale. That is all we can be certain of.

Or just All sci-fi /fantasy mini companies (*) have female models - the number and quality vary within the range

(*) are there ANY that don't? Have not found any yet

Well, GW do have female body parts for Glade Guard.

 Mr Morden wrote:

BlaxicanX wrote:
I'd like to see proof that they're popular. Show me the sales figures please.

Yeah cos I have access to those........................

The companies listed (and others) contonue to make many and varied female figures - they ain't doing it for the sheer fun of it..............

I know Hassle Free even makes female armatures for those of us with no sense of proportion and a desire to have some army chicks.

Speaking of no sense of proportion, a prime example of what the OP wants to get away from popped up on the Dakka Dakka blog feed this morning.