Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
I know it's a silly question, but do they ever fully take off their power armor? Or are they stuck in it due to the Black Carapace? I've never seen a picture of a Space Marine without it...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/19 19:13:54
You know you're really doing something when you can make strangers hate you over the Internet. - Mauleed
Just remember folks. Panic. Panic all the time. It's the only way to survive, other than just being mindful, of course-but geez, that's so friggin' boring. - Aegis Grimm
Hallowed is the All Pie The Before Times: A Place That Celebrates The World That Was
In Angels of Darkness, the chaplain and his squad are in their ceremonial robes until deployment time. Their robes somehow signify their rank, but they don't quite detail how.
Arguing with some people is like playing chess with a pigeon. You can play the best chess in the world, but at the end of the day the pigeon will still knock all the pieces off the board and then gak all over it.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Space Marines can. they usually do when back home getting some RnR. and also for maintainance.
CSMs are often fused with their armor, but some can take their armor off. they will take loyalist armor whenever possable as its in usually in better condition and more advanced(PA is constantly improving in capabilities)
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Yes is the short and sweet answer to your question. They usually take it off when out of an engagement, and usually wear a robe or body glove, or some ceremonial cape. Their Black Carapace is designed to allow them to interface with their armour through access points. It's implanted under their skin so cant be removed.
Perhaps I wouldn't say they usually take it off. Rather leave it on most of the times because the armour has become part of themselves - in a philosophical manner, mind you. The Black Carapace would likely negate any urge to discard it because they don't feel much of a difference.
The setting is full of Traitor Marines who have fused with their armour because this connection was taken too far; even though it required the hand of Chaos to achieve this, I think this too is just an extension of a Marine's spiritual bond with his wargear.
Furthermore, consider the daily schedule of the Codex Chapters - with that much training and rituals all around, putting the armour off and on again would just be a waste of time.
I very much believe they occasionally slip out of it, but not most of the time.
They do take it off. They don't stay in it when training, praying or sleeping. Lynata is incorrect.
Firstly, The GK Novels and the HH novels both portray SM without armour. Nathaniel Garro even had a personal retainer taking care of his armour, and he did not attend meetings with his Primarch in armour but in some kind of officer's regalia.
Secondly, Alaric in the GK novels is seen without armour and he puts it on with great reverence.
There is no such thing as a "waste of time" when it comes to sacred objects. Putting on their armour is part of a sacred ritual and not a waste of time. Think Homer's Illiad - similar motif there with battle preparations that took the mind of the warrior away from the incoming battle allowing for focus.
Remember that in this fictional setting, people believe in machine spirits and that you can soothe them by prayer so they don't act up.
The Black Carapace is an underskin interface that allows Space Marines to make full use of their armour's abilities andp ossibilities.
Alkasyn wrote:They do take it off. They don't stay in it when training, praying or sleeping. Lynata is incorrect.
Apart from novels not being canon, where did I say that they never take it off? For sleep, it totally makes sense. Training or "praying" (perhaps another term would be more fitting) not so much as the armour is part of their "uniform". In fact, codex material specifically states that the older variants of power armour are very popular when it comes to ceremonial duties.
Me being "incorrect" is also a fairly harsh choice of words, considering we have next to no information on the subject and as such are all relying on a lot of interpretation. Unless you have a studio source to back up your claim.
Alkasyn wrote:There is no such thing as a "waste of time" when it comes to sacred objects. Putting on their armour is part of a sacred ritual and not a waste of time.
Indeed, and this sacred ritual takes quite some time that could be spent otherwise rather than allocating two, three hours per day just for putting the armour on and off and on and off again.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2011/08/21 16:58:52
Where is the studio source that claims they keep it on'?
Last time the daily rituals of the astartes were shown, ( codex SM 3rd ed page 48 ), maintance should hint on taking it off as I doubt it would be possible to reach every place whilst wearing the armor you try to cleanse and check for repairs.
Sure, without BL there is not much to base anything on.
Isn't it a bad choice to ignore the few sources that are there, just to keep a unwavering stance on "canon" ?
I'd suggest to expand into the unknown, dangerous waters of unleashed authors ...
Target locked,ready to fire
In dedicatio imperatum ultra articulo mortis.
H.B.M.C :
We were wrong. It's not the 40k End Times. It's the Trademarkening.
1hadhq wrote:Where is the studio source that claims they keep it on'?
That's the thing. I was suggesting my own interpretation, whereas the very next post was formed in the way of stating what sounded like official facts. Which simply isn't true, and I felt a little offended by being called out like that. If I really have missed something, I do appreciate any additional information on the subject - but I am not "incorrect" when all that another poster has to submit is his own opinion.
That said, on the basis of missing studio material, we cannot use much more, based on the conjecture of what we have seen/read in the material available. Just saying we cannot really say "you're wrong, I'm right" on these cases, that'd be a bit rude, 's all.
1hadhq wrote:Last time the daily rituals of the astartes were shown, ( codex SM 3rd ed page 48 ), maintance should hint on taking it off as I doubt it would be possible to reach every place whilst wearing the armor you try to cleanse and check for repairs.
Yeah, naturally. Note, however, that these maintenance rituals are carried out at the conclusion of a day, shortly before resting period - i.e. when they'd take off their armour for sleep. The daily schedule also contains sufficient "battle condition" exercise that not wearing armour sounds extremely unlikely, not to mention that there isn't much maintenance to do when all the suit did was waiting in the locker since the last maintenance rite on the day before...
1hadhq wrote:Sure, without BL there is not much to base anything on.
Isn't it a bad choice to ignore the few sources that are there, just to keep a unwavering stance on "canon" ?
I don't think so, for otherwise you will just end up with a load of contradictions, some of whom are rather facepalmworthy (and I can show you at least one BL author who agrees with this assessment). Interpretations of individual authors, which as per comments from the people responsible have no binding value for GW whatsoever, are not really much better than our own fanon ideas.
1hadhq wrote:Isn't it a bad choice to ignore the few sources that are there, just to keep a unwavering stance on "canon" ?
Indeed it is.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Lynata wrote:. I was suggesting my own interpretation, whereas the very next post was formed in the way of stating what sounded like official facts. Which simply isn't true, and I felt a little offended by being called out like that. If I really have missed something, I do appreciate any additional information on the subject - but I am not "incorrect" when all that another poster has to submit is his own opinion. :
Your interpretation feels tied to an imaginary holy grail of "studio" material.
The tone carries badly across the interweb, but I am sure its not only me who deems it questionable to discard anything based on things your POV does not take as canon.
Lynata wrote:That said, on the basis of missing studio material, we cannot use much more, based on the conjecture of what we have seen/read in the material available. Just saying we cannot really say "you're wrong, I'm right" on these cases, that'd be a bit rude, 's all.
3 accepted contributors to IP shall provide enough to draw our conclusions from.
To insist on "studio" as some sort of holy cow here is the problem.
But there is the 40k-stylish solution to it: Interested in a steak?
Lynata wrote:Yeah, naturally. Note, however, that these maintenance rituals are carried out at the conclusion of a day, shortly before resting period - i.e. when they'd take off their armour for sleep. The daily schedule also contains sufficient "battle condition" exercise that not wearing armour sounds extremely unlikely, not to mention that there isn't much maintenance to do when all the suit did was waiting in the locker since the last maintenance rite on the day before...
Holy throne our 15 min of personal free time are denied here and we'd have to go to bed like little kiddies?
The granted 0,5 hour there is barely enough to cleanse and repair the effects of hours of training. Wearing the armor 2oh wouldn't allow the armorers to get everything fixed. A 50/50 ratio of on/off would be practical as you may put the marines into conditions where the support of the armor would reduce the training effect.
Lynata wrote:I don't think so, for otherwise you will just end up with a load of contradictions, some of whom are rather facepalmworthy (and I can show you at least one BL author who agrees with this assessment). Interpretations of individual authors, which as per comments from the people responsible have no binding value for GW whatsoever, are not really much better than our own fanon ideas.
Contradictions are for xenos, who won't get as many updates... Its not neccessary to address every mistake. The level of quality I expect for money is above fanmade stuff so its not just a case of "canon" but also one of value of product. If IP is as important as the company claims, the basic level of fluff should be taken seriously enough to keep it save from lazy contributors.
Still authors around the world do their best to spread the facepalm (smilies) orkmoticon.
Its existance and creator be praised. Those who give us reason to use it be damned.
From your link:
n short, the belief is usually that the design studio has precedence, and everything else isn’t canon. That’s actually wrong,
Look, shouldn't you adapt to the presented take on "canon" as "loose canon", because the cited BL author has a point about the absence of enforced canon?
Its not so difficult to move on to 3 suppliers of IP without any given tier when it comes to right or wrong.
Until the company itself makes an official statement, critics on one of the 3 possible sources as invalid/less valid/ non canon are pure personal choice. OtoH, themes may change and the theme is what counts, so newer material is meant to replace things stated before even if this isn't always a welcome change. Its often tied to releases, the problem of putting a spotlight on something new where all has to be more and more awesome is certainly a bigger threat to model supplying stuff ( GW , FW ) than BL.
Target locked,ready to fire
In dedicatio imperatum ultra articulo mortis.
H.B.M.C :
We were wrong. It's not the 40k End Times. It's the Trademarkening.
Why does every fething thread you participate in always devolve into another argument about canon, Lynata?
1hadhq is right, its personal opinion until GW makes an official announcement. Personally, everything is canon, and nothing is canon. It's all a big jumbled mess of legends and myths, its up to each player to discern what's fact.
1hadhq wrote:Your interpretation feels tied to an imaginary holy grail of "studio" material.
It is. That's just my personal modus operandi, though - I really don't mind how others treat the issue of canonicity. What I do mind is the rampant claiming of "facts" that are, in the end, mere author interpretation though, as this will end up confusing others. And when it comes down to opinion versus opinion, nobody can be right or wrong - a reader can only decide he likes one suggestion better than the other.
Where my PoV does clash with canon, I will change it, IF a source is provided. I've done so in the past - even on the very subject on "what is canon" itself, for my opinion regarding this was completely different a mere 6 months ago.
As far as precedence is concerned, maybe it is right that there is no canon -at all- (as is hinted at in the blog and in the statement you quoted), yet George Mann gave a different answer and even Gav Thorpe differentiates between BL and GW material. Perhaps it comes down to the very definition of "canon", but the studio material could at least serve as a more reliable indicator of how the setting should look like according to its creators. Regardless of this, though, we're left with either "few canon" or "no canon" - no other option. So why am I catching flak for pointing out we shouldn't call each other as being wrong based on an assumed "everything is canon" position that seems to have come into existence based on nothing more than the community's wish for a more detailed setting? See also Andy Hoare's comment in that blogpost regarding this.
It's kinda funny and sad at the same time because we agree on the core principle of varying opinion, I just don't see how my opinion can be "incorrect". All I took offense on was how easily this term seems to be applied at times in situations where there simply is no definite answer.
Lynata wrote: I've done so in the past - even on the very subject on "what is canon" itself, for my opinion regarding this was completely different a mere 6 months ago.
Not every change is an improvement.
This should be kept on track and I think its best to shorten the post for those not interested:
Spoiler:
Lynata wrote: yet George Mann gave a different answer and even Gav Thorpe differentiates between BL and GW material.
I doubt the authority of both. Don't know this george mann guy, and basically I don't care, as what he said wasn't published as official statement of GW. Mr thorpe is known for his differences and his codices, so maybe we leave him alone.
Lynata wrote:
Perhaps it comes down to the very definition of "canon", but the studio material could at least serve as a more reliable indicator of how the setting should look like according to its creators. Regardless of this, though, we're left with either "few canon" or "no canon" - no other option.
Except ADB provided the solution, called loose canon. His variant isn't "few" or "no" canon, instead the validity of the fluff is closer to a real life situation where the POV is important.
The setting is evolving and the creators are gone IIRC. Studio material is not safe from attentions of those in the studio ( he who shall not be named..) so I wouldn't put too much faith in it. Kelly for example fought for the inclusion of wolves as rides. Did the "studio" want this
marines on puppies thing? You see, providing an audio-drama and a single model about them, not a boxed set is still investing time and effort into an idea that is now part of the "studio material" and you can't question it because the bl audio has a codex backing it up.
May I suggest to rethink the concept of studio material ?
Lynata wrote:
So why am I catching flak for pointing out we shouldn't call each other as being wrong based on an assumed "everything is canon" position that seems to have come into existence based on nothing more than the community's wish for a more detailed setting?
Youre taking something "beloved" from them. Their precious fluff, secured in canonity, the tool that makes "you" possibly "correct" or "right" if you cite that fluff.
Some need the rules as "set in stone" others the background. Canon grants that.
If some pieces of fluff cease to be under the umbrella of canonity, it may be necessary to adapt.
When a fangroup has to adapt, those playing flexible races turn into the most conservative ones and wave designers notes to ban a new codex....whilst the players of conservative armies accept the change and combine the best of both worlds, old and new.
So any challenge to the validity of fluff leads to retaliation. You have challenged the canonity of fluff, why do you feel unprepared for the answer? didn't see it coming?
I am surprised one who seems to field a army dedicated to a cause didn't expect to meet fans who have a cause to be dedicated too.
Lynata wrote: All I took offense on was how easily this term seems to be applied at times in situations where there simply is no definite answer.
Don't take offense. Have faith. Take your boltgun and let the 'Emperor sort out who was wrong.
Target locked,ready to fire
In dedicatio imperatum ultra articulo mortis.
H.B.M.C :
We were wrong. It's not the 40k End Times. It's the Trademarkening.
1hadhq wrote:This should be kept on track and I think its best to shorten the post for those not interested.
Good point. Best way, I guess.
Spoiler:
1hadhq wrote:Except ADB provided the solution, called loose canon. His variant isn't "few" or "no" canon, instead the validity of the fluff is closer to a real life situation where the POV is important.
But don't you agree that "loose canon" is an oxymoron? In a way, that's like saying "silent sound" or "dark light" or "hot ice". Canonicity in literature is meant to provide a set of solid rules for a given background to rely on. If something is left open to interpretation, it's not "loose canon" it's ... simply left open to interpretation - regardless of whether the interpreter is a freelancing BL author or the reader of his books. Else we would have the weird situation that a given "loose" source is called into question when it is contradicted by another simply because they both state two different things, yet the status of the former has not changed at all - it did not become "more" or "less canon" just because another book with contradictory information was released. For example, though I completely understand why Aaron opted to not follow current Codex material on the Night Lords armour, it remains his own take on the whole thing and no other author will really care, so there's no reason for why the fans should - unless they already were of the same opinion already. BL was never intended to be an authority on the setting, just "to tell good stories", as Mann put it (Head of GW Publishing and as such boss of BL, btw).
ADB stated he had no problem with ignoring novels that "completely violated his understanding of how 40k works like", so why should this liberty be limited to Black Library writers?
As Andy Hoare commented on in the same blog, there is no reason for why a writer needs to adhere to a true representation of a setting, so why is this information treated as such? I do believe this to be the actual cause of many disagreements amongst the community, for people don't have too little information, they now have too much and it contradicts itself, throwing the entire franchise into a state of unreliability because people don't speculate anymore, they claim. When you include only studio sources as "solid" information you'd find that there is suddenly a lot less conflict (just see the discussion on the average height of a Space Marine). As can be expected, though - too many cooks spoil the broth.
1hadhq wrote:So any challenge to the validity of fluff leads to retaliation. You have challenged the canonity of fluff, why do you feel unprepared for the answer? didn't see it coming?
I am surprised one who seems to field a army dedicated to a cause didn't expect to meet fans who have a cause to be dedicated too.
Perhaps because I am just as dedicated (for good or for worse), it's just that our causes are different now.
I'll admit the statement wasn't really surprise but rather a tool to (hopefully) trigger a self-analysis of one's arguments, though. I know what a hot and tricky topic this is; I'm a "canon nut" myself (not just limited to 40k - for some reason I just love soaking up every available detail there is about a given setting that I like a lot) and have been argueing from the other side of the fence for several years.
Hmm, if you want we can move this to private messages, though I think we already have a good understanding of each other's position and arguments.
In retrospect, I think I should've simply let that remark slide. Sorry for the short derailment there, commence with the original topic! I've already stated my two bolt shells on it above.
Of course they can take it off how else would they be able to repair it or have a medic deal with any injuries they might have.
Deathbringers 5500
"we are the defenders of humanity, we are the bringers of death."
Waaaghallans 4000
"We dont fight fer food, or fer teef, or guns, or cos we's told ta fight. We fight cos we woz born ta fight. And win."
Kabal of the Bleeding Shadows 1500
"Fear not the darkness. Fear that which the darkness hides."
(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny
(")_(") to help him gain world domination
Do they take their armour off to take a dump, or do they wear nappies (like U2 pilots) ?
"Bloody typical, they've gone back to metric without telling us."
"As the days go by, we face the increasing inevitability that we are alone in a godless, uninhabited, hostile and meaningless universe. Still, you've got to laugh haven't you?"
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
They have systems to deal with it while wearing it.
(It's not just navigators stolenhomaged from Dune. Elements of the Stillsuits also made their way into the marine power armour).
I'm OVER 50 (and so far over everyone's BS, too).
Old enough to know better, young enough to not give a ****.
That is not dead which can eternal lie ...
... and yet, with strange aeons, even death may die.
Oh I get that, but what I have never been able to work out is how it would actually work. Urine is easy - a relief tube would take care of that (see P-51 pilots escorting bombers over Germany), but number 2's?
Space marines are going to stink when they take that armour off after a hard-fought campaign.
"Bloody typical, they've gone back to metric without telling us."
"As the days go by, we face the increasing inevitability that we are alone in a godless, uninhabited, hostile and meaningless universe. Still, you've got to laugh haven't you?"
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
And if you're drinkin' well, you know that you're my friend and I say "I think I'll have myself a beer" 
3000 pts 
Holy throne our 15 min of personal free time are denied here and we'd have to go to bed like little kiddies? 
Waaaghallans 4000
Kabal of the Bleeding Shadows 1500
