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.

In the recent thread about the special forces in 40k, a post by Lynata struck my interest.

A regular infantryman in 40k is strength 3 and a Space Marine is strength 4 correct?

So, say an average soldier can bench his body weight, and the average body weight of a muscular soldier is 170 pounds. Divide 170 pounds by 3 (for every point of strength) and that means that in W40k, one point of strength is equal to ~57 pounds of lifting power. So, basing the assumption off of that, a 7 foot tall super human would hypothetically only be able to bench half of his weight, or ~227 pounds? Does this make sense to anybody? Shouldn't GW lower a I.G. soldier's strength to 2 or raise a Space Marine to 5?

Thoughts? And please realize I am basing my information of my own standards laid out above and the information is all relative and accurate to how I laid out my argument.

I think the in-universe strength of a space marine depends on the writer.

gman1401 wrote:In the recent thread about the special forces in 40k, a post by Lynata struck my interest.

A regular infantryman in 40k is strength 3 and a Space Marine is strength 4 correct?

So, say an average soldier can bench his body weight, and the average body weight of a muscular soldier is 170 pounds. Divide 170 pounds by 3 (for every point of strength) and that means that in W40k, one point of strength is equal to ~57 pounds of lifting power. So, basing the assumption off of that, a 7 foot tall super human would hypothetically only be able to bench half of his weight, or ~227 pounds? Does this make sense to anybody? Shouldn't GW lower a I.G. soldier's strength to 2 or raise a Space Marine to 5?

Thoughts? And please realize I am basing my information of my own standards laid out above and the information is all relative and accurate to how I laid out my argument.

By that equation a Bloodthirster can "only" bench press 399 pounds. I can bench-press nearly that much, and more than 227 pounds.

I would like to believe a Bloodthirster could bench signifigantly more than me... Ignoring that would be less than a tenth of its own weight, when such creatures can rip tanks in half.

The stat consists of large categories and don't work linearly, the system is an abstraction of the fluff. An Ork Boy is stronger than a normal human, but is still only S3, for example.

It doesn't break down linearly like that.

Angels of Darkness mentions space marines without power armour being something like 10x stronger than a normal man. IIRC 'Soul Hunter' mentions power armor amping talos' strength up by a factor of ten. that would imply 100x strength multiplier compared to a normal human. Also, there was a william King short story where a power armoured space wolf had a strength 'dozens' of times greater than a normal person.

There are a few other novels that show (like savage scars, and one other that eludes me at the moment, i think either firedrake or nocturne) which indicated that Power armor can adjust its strength level depending on how much power is fed to the armor, the levle of preparation involved, and the strain on the systems (for when you want to rip armoured doors off their mountings and such.) Basically they can be as strong as they need to be, but i suspect it has certain limits (EG no lifting tanks over your head and throwing them. i'm pretty sure thta's reserved for super psykers and primarchs.)

The tabletop rules aren't supposed to offer a 100% realistic depiction of the universe. They exist to create a playable, enjoyable, and profitable game.

If Space Marines on the tabletop were as powerful as they were supposed to, you wouldn't need to buy as many models. Or, the opposite. Players of the weaker races and armies would be buying two or three times more models. Which either means Space Marines get more expensive dollar wise, other armies have to be cheaper (heh), or, the most likely result, nobody plays any of the other armies and the game becomes even more heavily Space Marine centric.

Fluffwise an ork boy would rip the arm of an eldar guardian in an arm wrestling contest and force feed it to him. They are massively muscled, and the models match this.

In game terms, however, they are equal, despite the fact the ork has biceps bigger than the eldar's HEAD.

Abstraction is necessary to make the game work.

I tend to think each increment is at least twice what the last one was.

Connor MacLeod wrote:IIRC 'Soul Hunter' mentions power armor amping talos' strength up by a factor of ten.

And GW's Inquisitor RPG claims 20%. There is no consistency, so take your pick, but keep in mind that such details will vary greatly depending on the source.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:If Space Marines on the tabletop were as powerful as they were supposed to, you wouldn't need to buy as many models.

I still think it's the other way around. If Space Marines in the novels were as powerful as they are supposed to be, people wouldn't buy as many books. Their popularity seems to increase with how "super" they are. At least until a certain threshold is hit (Draigo).

KamikazeCanuck wrote:I tend to think each increment is at least twice what the last one was.

I've never quite gotten behind this. There are humans in the TT that have S2. The first rules for Sisters had them being T4. Hell, Straken has S6, that would make him twice as strong as someone who is twice as strong as a Marine.

Personally, I wouldn't try to put game stats into something like accurate physical quantities. It's just too much abstraction. For example, I tend to think that the TT's Strength value does not only incorporate raw strength but also the efficiency and accuracy of one or more melee attacks. WS only determines if a character may hit his opponent at all, S tells us how he hits him. And just like ranged attacks do not have to be a single shot, a single melee attack could also involve several blows. Thus, if anyone thinks S4 doesn't represent a Marine's superior physical strength sufficiently, maybe it helps to think that he doesn't hit as often as a S3 Guardsman, but with more force, so that he still comes out on top.
For example, a Guardsman can send a series of fist blows or bayonet stabs against an enemy, whereas a Marine will only swing his sword one or two times. This would enable your imagination to increase a single blow's power beyond the +20% increase that the TT stats deliver.

rules=/=fluff anwsers this one.

They don't combine.

Depending on the source you go by. GW fluff is often written after rules. Which makes sense, considering that the latter simply came first. The percentages given on the two-page-description on power armour in the AoD Codex line up perfectly with the TT stats, for example.

Soladrin wrote:rules=/=fluff anwsers this one.

They don't combine.

^This. The game was made to be enjoyable and balanced, and while the models represent the fluff characters, they don't represent what the characters in stories are capable/not capable of.

I always preferred the Inquisitor rulebooks way of doing it.

The standard (human) statline goes up to 100*. For a human to naturally have '100' in any single stat without bionics, chems or other boosts represents the best a human body could ever achieve, peak of perfection. The standard human civilian has a statline between 20-30 across the board.

Space Marines go beyond that. Because of their 'superhuman' bodies their strength statline is, as an average, 200. Power Armour then increases that by a fifth (20%), so if you were to use the mean statline from the rulebook a Space Marine in Power Armour has a strength of 240. Thats 210 more than the standard human, or 8 times the strength.

*WS, BS, S, T, I, Willpower, Sagacity, Nerve, Ld

The stats are more of an exponential growth rather then a linear growth.

each increase represents a doubling of the strength or toughness and so on...

In a more granular (and generally more fluff-accurate) scale, Inquisitor had stats where human strength tended to range in the 50-70 range on a 100 point scale (similarly, human WS was an average of 55 IIRC, points above 50 had a positive modifier, under 50 had negative modifiers). Space Marine average strength is 200 + 20% for augmentation from power armor.

Ah, didn't notice someone else made the Inquisitor note. "Great minds," and all...

Grey Templar wrote:The stats are more of an exponential growth rather then a linear growth.
each increase represents a doubling of the strength or toughness and so on...

I still have no idea where people get this idea from.

Sparks_Havelock wrote:I always preferred the Inquisitor rulebooks way of doing it.

The Inquisitor RPG feels "just right" for me in terms of the Marines. They're notably harder to kill than normal humans, but far from the levels they are attributed in a lot of novels or the Deathwatch RPG. Of course the whole subject is a very subjective thing - player opinions on this will vary just as much as author and designer opinions do.

Lynata wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:The stats are more of an exponential growth rather then a linear growth.
each increase represents a doubling of the strength or toughness and so on...

I still have no idea where people get this idea from.

The designers said it in interviews many years ago supposedly.

Grey Templar wrote:The designers said it in interviews many years ago supposedly.

"Supposedly"?

Now, I won't (can't) dispute this assessment, I've just become somewhat sceptical as there are lots of "supposed" things I found mis-interpreted or misquoted, as "word of mouth" tends to distort them. I have seen lots of people taking the Movie Marines rules for an accurate representation of the Astartes, for example, until I found the actual article where it flat-out states the opposite. Just like I recall the discussion about Space Marine height on this very forum.
It's not impossible, I guess, I'd just be surprised to see the designers taking such a clear stance for such an abstracted system. Especially given what this would mean for certain comparisons. Example: The difference between a heavy bolter and a bolter would be bigger than the difference between bolter and lasgun. That just seems silly. And Straken with his S6 compared to an S4 Marine? Does he lift ferrocrete pillboxes as exercise?

Alas, I guess the actual quote will remain lost for the time being. If anyone finds it, feel free to drop me a PM - it might change my perception.

Thanks for the answer, still.

Lynata wrote:

Veteran Sergeant wrote:If Space Marines on the tabletop were as powerful as they were supposed to, you wouldn't need to buy as many models.

I still think it's the other way around. If Space Marines in the novels were as powerful as they are supposed to be, people wouldn't buy as many books. Their popularity seems to increase with how "super" they are. At least until a certain threshold is hit (Draigo).

Can't agree here. There is a difference between the fluff of Black Library novels, and the fluff from the actual game. We do know, from game fluff, that the Marines are sufficient to turn the tide in major battles with extremely small numbers. We also know that this is almost impossible to reflect in the game. We also know that the Marines in the game fluff only exist in really small numbers. There is plenty of documentation of how strong the Marines are that isn't supported by the game stats. Of vicious wounds they can survive, etc. Most of which have persisted in the game fluff for more than twenty years. None of which are represented in the game.

Games Workshop, when all of this game fluff was created, was all about selling miniatures. Black Library novels came much much later. Besides, BL novels aren't even consistent. Space Marines are either impossibly tough and strong, or get cut apart like tissue paper depending on what needs to drive the scene.

The reality lies somewhere in between tabletop expendability and ridiculous fluff plot armor. But in the end, you have to realize it is miniatures sales that drives the game, and Games Workshop. Space Marines on the tabletop are empowered to the level GW has decided makes them most profitable. And to be profitable, their power level has to appeal to both fans, and to fans of opposing armies. That alone strongly suggests that there has been a significant minimization in the capabilities of Marines in order to maximize profits. It all comes down to selling models. And where capitalism is directly involved, you can be assured integrity is reduced in significance. In this case, the integrity of the back story.

Ah, but it is impossible to reflect in the game because the TT lets the armies fight head-on, not because of their stats. Sadly, the tabletop completely foregoes Astartes tactics, instead having them line up as if people were fighting the Napoleonic Wars, and only briefly touches upon the issue of morale, or that "neutralized" miniatures do not have to mean = dead.

The tabletop is extremely abstracted (-> rolling a single attack for fully automatic weapons, to name just one example). That doesn't change that certain rules and mechanics have found their way into GW's fluff, though. Ironically, it is these cases where we get solid numbers and percentages for a change, whereas this "plenty of documentation of how strong the Marines are" is delivered in the form of vague battle reports, in-universe propaganda or in short stories that could well be exceptions from the rule.

You already pointed out that the Marines' power level has to appeal to both their fans as well as to fans of opposing armies. Why then should the fluff that accompanies them be different from this power level as reflected by the rules?

Here's food for thought: If Marines were so much stronger, why would they need Terminator armour to carry assault cannons?

Marines can carry heavy bolters where (most!) normal humans need bionic augmentation or power armour. That right there is the difference. And it doesn't strike me as that big as some people make it out to be. And just to clarify: this is a notable difference and gives the Astartes a huge edge, I'm just advocating not to exaggerate an already superior feat.

gman1401 wrote:In the recent thread about the special forces in 40k, a post by Lynata struck my interest.

A regular infantryman in 40k is strength 3 and a Space Marine is strength 4 correct?

So, say an average soldier can bench his body weight, and the average body weight of a muscular soldier is 170 pounds. Divide 170 pounds by 3 (for every point of strength) and that means that in W40k, one point of strength is equal to ~57 pounds of lifting power. So, basing the assumption off of that, a 7 foot tall super human would hypothetically only be able to bench half of his weight, or ~227 pounds? Does this make sense to anybody? Shouldn't GW lower a I.G. soldier's strength to 2 or raise a Space Marine to 5?

Thoughts? And please realize I am basing my information of my own standards laid out above and the information is all relative and accurate to how I laid out my argument.

How many times did we tell?

Table rules and stats =/= fluff. They exist only to somewhat balance army's, if TT was like the fluff them SM would be invincible. ( Especially GK since they can take Draigo every time they play ).
I saw Marine lifting Sentinel from itself and not sweating at all. And I am betting my own soul that Terminator can flip over a tank without a problem.

I would have to disagree with the Termie flipping a tank. They may be strong, but flipping a 60+ ton vehicle is no easy task.

Just because Master Chief gets to do it doesn't mean SM can..

Lynata wrote:

Connor MacLeod wrote:IIRC 'Soul Hunter' mentions power armor amping talos' strength up by a factor of ten.

And GW's Inquisitor RPG claims 20%. There is no consistency, so take your pick, but keep in mind that such details will vary greatly depending on the source.

Veteran Sergeant wrote:If Space Marines on the tabletop were as powerful as they were supposed to, you wouldn't need to buy as many models.

I still think it's the other way around. If Space Marines in the novels were as powerful as they are supposed to be, people wouldn't buy as many books. Their popularity seems to increase with how "super" they are. At least until a certain threshold is hit (Draigo).

KamikazeCanuck wrote:I tend to think each increment is at least twice what the last one was.

I've never quite gotten behind this. There are humans in the TT that have S2. The first rules for Sisters had them being T4. Hell, Straken has S6, that would make him twice as strong as someone who is twice as strong as a Marine.

Yes, if that were his natural strength. When it comes to things like powerfists (and other wierdness) it would just be the impactfulness of his blows not lifting power. Kinda like how toughness bonuses don't help with instant death.

Aye, hence me suggesting that the TT's Strength value takes more into consideration than just muscles. Physical strength plays a role, but so does equipment, bionics, fighting style, accuracy, speed, ...

We know for sure that Marines are stronger, but we have zero information on by how much exactly. Apparently not enough to carry an assault cannon into battle without support of a Terminator suit.

Ascalam wrote:Fluffwise an ork boy would rip the arm of an eldar guardian in an arm wrestling contest and force feed it to him.

Except Eldar are equally strong as Orks Boyz which are both stronger than humans.

Also, 40k stats aren't linear.

Bare in mind the human's strength includes the bayonet, which he's presumably been trained to use. Default human strength may well be 2.

Lynata wrote:Thus, if anyone thinks S4 doesn't represent a Marine's superior physical strength sufficiently, maybe it helps to think that he doesn't hit as often as a S3 Guardsman, but with more force, so that he still comes out on top.

That would be odd, considering he's much faster than the guardsman.

Joey wrote:Bare in mind the human's strength includes the bayonet, which he's presumably been trained to use. Default human strength may well be 2.

And a Marine will use his bolter as a hammer. *shrug*

(also, not all Guardsmen have bayonets, though that's a bit besides the point)

Void__Dragon wrote:That would be odd, considering he's much faster than the guardsman.

Not necessarily, it comes down to what moves the Marine will choose. In the time it takes him to swing the above bolter-hammer, a Guardsman could have easily used his combat knife or whatever to stab two, three times. Doesn't change that when that bolter-hammer goes down his entire skull will be pulp.
There are ways, you just have to want to imagine them.

Lynata wrote:Not necessarily, it comes down to what moves the Marine will choose. In the time it takes him to swing the above bolter-hammer, a Guardsman could have easily used his combat knife or whatever to stab two, three times. Doesn't change that when that bolter-hammer goes down his entire skull will be pulp.
There are ways, you just have to want to imagine them.

Ah but consider that a chainsword or combat blade, a much more effective and more easily wielded close combat weapon than a mere bolter hammer, both have the same S as a bolter hammer, and a unit that wields one of these things, such as your bog-standard assault marine or a Scout, also only have 1 attack, like the Tactical Marine.

I don't think that the TT and the fluff stack up together particularly well, honestly.