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.
JNAProductions wrote: If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.
You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.
I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
Fwiw the novel Requiem Infernal shows a minor order who are fairly divergent in religious sect and hierarchy. But from the descriptions given their equipment and uniforms are all standard pattern and they have all the normal different types of Sororitas (militant and non-militant) other than those introduced in the most recent codices.
Edit: came out last year, so most up to date background.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/05 21:29:18
JNAProductions wrote: If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.
You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.
I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
There's not a statute of limitations on lore that I'm aware of.
If anybody with a more current book comes up with something to countermand my reference, that's great. Seriously does the opposing side just refuse to do any research?
Insectum7 wrote:Saying they sky is blue doesn't absolve any culpability for claiming trees are purple.
Except that's not what I said.
To put this in context properly would be me saying that most trees we've seen presented in botanist journals aren't purple, but there's nothing stopping you from making them so.
You're the one acting like I've made some great sweeping claim that dictates how all Sisters are supposed to look. I've stuck with my main point that GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions. That doesn't mean people *can't* customise their Sisters, but it definitely *does* mean something in the context of the OP which seeks to compare Astartes and Guardsmen.
Had the OP not done so, I would not have made that connection, but OP *did* ask for that comparison between them. I explained that Sisters are not demonstrated (in GW's various materials, aside from a single line in a nearly-two decades old book) to be as varied, but that they could do whatever they wanted with their models.
You've tried to make a lore centric argument (the actual topic of the thread) that SOBs will have less variety than Space Marines. I've just pointed out that's not necessarily true, and provided an actual quote to back it up.
And I've presented that in terms of *actual material put out*, there very much *is* less variety than Astartes.
The actual topic asked why/if Sisters were considered less diverse than Astartes. I posited a potential lore explanation, but ultimately said that you could ignore that if one so wanted, but that the main sticking point was that GW did not present much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but did do so with the aforementioned factions. Ergo, there *was* a difference in how diverse they were treated.
You provided a quote, yes (interestingly, not one that adhered to your own conditions and standards you levied at me), and I don't disagree with that quote. However, a single quote from a nearly two-decades old book is not the same thing as multiple varied depictions of both Guardsmen and Space Marines, and you well know that, especially considering you seem more than aware that Guardsmen and Space Marines also have different "levels" of depiction as "varied".
I'm not arguing that Sisters aren't, or can't, be varied - only that GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions.
You could make a completely equivalent quote about Space Marine variety in regards to codex adherence, roughly that "The vast majority of chapters are heavily codex adherent, but there are some that are less so."
Yes, you absolutely can - the difference is that we *see* these non-adherent Chapters, and that they are given extensive information and lore surrounding their deviancy, and their cultures, and why they're distinctly different from other Chapters.
The same cannot be said of these once-mentioned varied Sisters, because (deep breath) - GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions.
Is my argument sinking in yet?
If you can bring some actual research to the table, like a quote from a recent publication that overwrites my 3rd ed book, please provide it.
I have.
It's called the simple fact that GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions. This fact is self-evident, because there is little variation in how GW present their Sisters of Battle, which I've invited people to disprove repeatedly.
You still haven't.
So far you haven't provided much beyond the absurd claim that because specific models dont exist they must not exist in the lore.
That's not what I'm claiming at all.
In case you've gotten this far, and decided to skip to the end, don't worry, I'll repeat what my claim is, the claim I've re-iterated in this thread repeatedly:
GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions.
Is this statement wrong? If so, show me some variation in GW's Sisters - not just allusions to it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Lord Zarkov wrote:Fwiw the novel Requiem Infernal shows a minor order who are fairly divergent in religious sect and hierarchy. But from the descriptions given their equipment and uniforms are all standard pattern and they have all the normal different types of Sororitas (militant and non-militant) other than those introduced in the most recent codices.
Edit: came out last year, so most up to date background.
Thank you for providing an example! As I'm not familiar with the text, do you mind if I ask in what way they're divergent, even if not on an aesthetic level? My own Sisters are somewhat divergent from other Orders, but are also aesthetically similar to the "default" look.
Insectum7 wrote:
JNAProductions wrote: If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.
You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.
I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
There's not a statute of limitations on lore that I'm aware of.
Of course not, but again, you'd think that something so relevant and important would crop up in a more recent publication - again, were you not also the one to cherrypick from modern (rather flat) artwork to claim that Space Marines all looked the same, whereas older artwork would have shown how incorrect this was?
I'm not denying your quote, only attaching it with the little footnote that this is the only real reference to variety within the Sororitas (with the culture-only exception of Requiem Infernal, as helpfully presented above), as compared to the reams of variety we see in both the Guard and Astartes.
If anybody with a more current book comes up with something to countermand my reference, that's great.
If anybody can find any *actual* examples of variety, instead of allusions to it, that would be even better
Seriously does the opposing side just refuse to do any research?
What research is there to be done - there is a self-evident *lack* of evidence, which is what my argument comes from - that GW have not presented much variation in the design of their Sisters of Battle, but have done so with other factions.
What you're asking is like saying "prove to me that there's no food in your fridge" - I can open the door, and show you there's nothing in there - that *is* my proof. Now, if you could root around in my fridge and find me some food, that'd be great, and it would prove me wrong, but you seem unable to find any, possibly because *there is no food in my fridge*, just like how there's little variation of design in how GW have presented their Sisters of Battle, in comparison to other factions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/05 21:47:35
I really think this thread has entered a rat wheel... We can go on circle arround the same arguments, but its hard for nothing new to emerge right now... And certainly it dosent look as anyone is going to change their minds.
Better to leave the debate to rest for a while and to mature meanwhile.
So the best I can possibly provide is the recent revision of the entire Sisters Repentia line. Whereas before, it was boobs and bikinis with large swords, now it's more body suits and giant swords, but with some leathery bits. Much more tactical, less "male gaze" stupidity. I hate the new Penitent Engines though. I think given the entire lineup was JUST taken out of it's pewter state only two years ago, I think we agree to give GW some time on creating new and interesting "customizable" designs? As it is right now, from a lore stand point, they have pretty much railroaded themselves into a Female only Catholic Cult with Battle plate and Bolters. They are extremely intolerant of change or any modification of the past. It's going to take a Primaris level re-write of their existing doctrines/lore before GW is even capable of saying things like "Anyone can be a SoB" or "SoB can be non-standard". Speaking entirely from a LORE standpoint here.
Insectum7 wrote:If you can bring some actual research to the table, like a quote from a recent publication that overwrites my 3rd ed book, please provide it.
I have. . .
There has to be some particular hallmark of insanity when someone is vehemently claiming to not be doing a thing, and then going right ahead and doing that very thing.
You are claiming to not be making a claim about lore, but instead about models, and then you're turning right around and using models to claim lore.
Models are not the single defining variable when it comes to lore, that should be obvious.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: again, were you not also the one to cherrypick from modern (rather flat) artwork to claim that Space Marines all looked the same, whereas older artwork would have shown how incorrect this was?
It's not cherry picked. A similar chart is in every Space Marine codex going all the way back to before codexes even exist, back through the Compilation (1991) and the OG Rogue Trader (1987) book itself.
Vatsetis wrote: I really think this thread has entered a rat wheel... We can go on circle arround the same arguments, but its hard for nothing new to emerge right now... And certainly it dosent look as anyone is going to change their minds.
Better to leave the debate to rest for a while and to mature meanwhile.
All you need is someone who has access to one of the more recent publications to either find a similar piece of text about minor Orders, or to prove the omission of such a line. It should be easy for anyone with a current codex.
I'll note that the quote provided about traditions, doctrines, livery, and titles" covers all aspects of Space Marine appearance (and more) variation off the top of my head.
Space Wolves have Rune Priests instead of Librarians = title Space Wolves organize into "Great Companies" rather than the strictly-codex 10 = doctrine Space Wolves have their own unique traditions = traditions Space Wolves wear pelts and wolf teeth = livery
The framework for Sisters should be "the Adepta Sororitas engage in multiple different forms of worship of the Emperor, ranging from different methods of waging war, private rituals and ceremonies, or other more esoteric means of showing their devotion" - right there, you have a framework for what they might do, without constraining and saying "no, they definitely don't do this".
The piece of lore I found, again:
The Rise of the Lesser Orders Militant . . . These small, scattered bases . . .over time became independent of the Orders that founded them, establishing their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.
-Witch Hunters Codex pg. 6
I've literally provided a statement you've claimed to want, and you're bending over backwards to be upset about it and deny it's relevance.
There's a reason you are the sole dakkanaut I have on ignore.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/09/06 05:28:02
'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.' Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13
'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.' Codex: Adepta Sororitas (6th ed. ebook), pg.12
'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.' [Codex] 'Sisters of Battle' (5th ed.) in White Dwarf 380 (US), pg.92
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/09/06 06:56:41
Insectum7 wrote:There has to be some particular hallmark of insanity when someone is vehemently claiming to not be doing a thing, and then going right ahead and doing that very thing.
You are claiming to not be making a claim about lore, but instead about models, and then you're turning right around and using models to claim lore.
Models are not the single defining variable when it comes to lore, that should be obvious.
Did I say they were? No. Did I limit the evidence I asked of you only to models?* Also no. I asked you to find me any material that showed us aesthetical diverse Sisters - be that artwork, models, or literature. And here I am, still waiting on you to show me this.
Face it - it doesn't exist. And that's fine, you don't *need* pre-existing material to inspire whatever the hell you want to do - but when my argument is "GW haven't shown the variety within the Sororitas faction", that's a pretty damning piece of evidence supporting it.
Did you even read my comment, or are you just competing in a strawman contest here?
*Also, I still haven't forgotten how you asked me to find evidence only from the most current Codex, which I then asked you to do the same, and you had to go diving into a two-decades old book instead. I don't disagree with the quote, especially in the light of Damocles' helpful excerpts above, but come on, hold yourself to the same standards, please.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: again, were you not also the one to cherrypick from modern (rather flat) artwork to claim that Space Marines all looked the same, whereas older artwork would have shown how incorrect this was?
It's not cherry picked. A similar chart is in every Space Marine codex going all the way back to before codexes even exist, back through the Compilation (1991) and the OG Rogue Trader (1987) book itself.
"It's not cherry picked!!" they say, knowing full well that other art exists which fully distinguishes between Chapter aesthetics.
I'm not denying that Astartes share the same base armour pattern, but to act like that's the only depiction we have is wilfully ignorant.
All you need is someone who has access to one of the more recent publications to either find a similar piece of text about minor Orders, or to prove the omission of such a line. It should be easy for anyone with a current codex.
Thankfully, we've had that posted for us - and it's actually rather interesting!
I'll also mention that you don't even need that to "prove" it - you only need to show us an actual depiction of these varied Sisters. After all, if GW treated Sisters like they treated Astartes and Guardsmen, we'd surely see or read about descriptions of these visually distinct Sororitas, yes?
I'll note that the quote provided about traditions, doctrines, livery, and titles" covers all aspects of Space Marine appearance (and more) variation off the top of my head.
Space Wolves have Rune Priests instead of Librarians = title Space Wolves organize into "Great Companies" rather than the strictly-codex 10 = doctrine Space Wolves have their own unique traditions = traditions Space Wolves wear pelts and wolf teeth = livery
You're absolutely right! But guess what - I can read about these differences in books. I can see these differences in the artwork. I can represent these differences on my models with readily available bits. I can actually see and visualise these differences, both in the Space Wolves, but in multiple other Chapters too, because GW go out of their way to do so.
Show me Sisters who you can say the same for, because that's been my point all along - that GW do not represent them.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: The framework for Sisters should be "the Adepta Sororitas engage in multiple different forms of worship of the Emperor, ranging from different methods of waging war, private rituals and ceremonies, or other more esoteric means of showing their devotion" - right there, you have a framework for what they might do, without constraining and saying "no, they definitely don't do this".
The piece of lore I found, again:
The Rise of the Lesser Orders Militant . . . These small, scattered bases . . .over time became independent of the Orders that founded them, establishing their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.
-Witch Hunters Codex pg. 6
I've literally provided a statement you've claimed to want, and you're bending over backwards to be upset about it and deny it's relevance.
Actually, I've never denied that quote - read my argument.
Firstly, I found your comment amusing because you weren't able to fulfil the criteria that you yourself had set (you asked me to quote from the current Codex, I asked the same of you, and you couldn't even do that).
Secondly, a single line is not the same as multiple artistic depictions of diversity, and you well know this, considering the tantrum you threw over the idea of Guardsmen and Space Marines being considered "equally diverse". You're evidently aware that not all forms of diversity are made equal, so why are you arguing that this one is? It honestly just sounds like you're being contrarian, and ignoring my actual comments and arguments to do it.
I'm not denying your quote exists. What I *am* saying is that a single line saying "guys, we PROMISE that Sisters can be diverse!!!" isn't the same as "hey folks, look at all these cool examples of diverse Chapters and regiments, see how you can make your own!!"
Does that make sense?
There's a reason you are the sole dakkanaut I have on ignore.
I really don't care if you do or don't, but I'd suggest *actually* ignoring me and not responding if you're going to make that comment - otherwise, it just looks like an empty statement. But you do you, it's none of my business.
Lord Damocles wrote:'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.' Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13
Thank you for the examples! I've only quoted the first one (from the 8th ed Codex), both as it being the most recent source, but also as I'm actually genuinely surprised to see that it plays into both sides of the discussion - that the Sororitas *are* aesthetically near identical, and seem to only be separated by their rites and rituals, which we already long knew, and which I was agreeing with.
I didn't actually expect them to say outright that they "[cast] aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into", and actually are so aesthetically similar.
Lord Damocles wrote: 'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.' Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13
'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.' Codex: Adepta Sororitas (6th ed. ebook), pg.12
'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.' [Codex] 'Sisters of Battle' (5th ed.) in White Dwarf 380 (US), pg.92
Thanks for providing that. So it looks like, lore-wise, GW has "given permission" (not that it's needed) to mess with the base aesthetics.
Still not shown in any models-unless, from that White Dwarf, are there examples of converted Sisters? I don't buy White Dwarf, so I cannot access the magazine to check myself.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
The closest I have is the issue on the SoS that I have, where it had submissions by random people for their own stylized SoS. It was really just palette swaps. Are we counting palette swaps as "diversity"? I don't think we are. There has never been any releases that I am aware of to offer "extra bits" sprus. There are a ton for things like Chaos.
That gives me an idea, Fallen Sisters. They now worship Khorne, and are all spikes and Skulls.
They have it a bit difficult as I'm not aware of a lot of model lines selling (power)armored females or bits for those.
There are loads of un/flak/carapace armored baseline humans and also quite some (power) armored Superhumans and bits to customize your dudes. But almost all bits and models of female power armor has a pretty clear medieval european vibe.
On the topic of customization though: the User Max Moray here on Dakka has some pretty awesome SoBs that he personalized with greenstuff and the like.
Pyroalchi wrote: They have it a bit difficult as I'm not aware of a lot of model lines selling (power)armored females or bits for those.
There are loads of un/flak/carapace armored baseline humans and also quite some (power) armored Superhumans and bits to customize your dudes. But almost all bits and models of female power armor has a pretty clear medieval european vibe.
On the topic of customization though: the User Max Moray here on Dakka has some pretty awesome SoBs that he personalized with greenstuff and the like.
Anvil industry have a 'Daughters of the burning rose' line of medieval female power armour, with or without robes. They'd be among your best bets I think.
I'd like to see a robeless 'tacticool' option and a cuirass that isn't so aesthetically 'female' in its shape.
greatest band in the universe: machine supremacy
"Punch your fist in the air and hold your Gameboy aloft like the warrior you are"
I was aware of Anvil, but in my opinion they would fall under "european medieval vibe". But if anyone knows of producers of fitting parts/models that have a clearly other vibe to swap parts feel free to prove my comment wrong. I would love to find sources for conversion I'm unaware of.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/06 17:03:17
JNAProductions wrote: If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.
You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.
I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?
Pyroalchi wrote: They have it a bit difficult as I'm not aware of a lot of model lines selling (power)armored females or bits for those.
This is not meant to be a pointed comment at you specifically, so apologies in advance for it coming off this way, but has anyone saying this actually tried looking?
And I'm also going to be honest and say that "no, I don't think the WarGames Exclusive corrupt sisters are 'good'" they were some of their earliest sculpts, have dubious quality and are very representative "40k but boobs" aesthetic. I'm still including them because they fit the criteria that was asked.
EDIT: Oh! And I should note, I specifically only included things that I could think of which were explicitly meant to be used as bits for SoB but we're also not overtly Gothic-Europe-Churchy-Nun. If you start looking for general female heads you could probably make an even longer list.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2021/09/06 18:55:09
JNAProductions wrote: If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.
You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.
I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?
You *do* understand this is a fictional setting, right? Like, in that it's not real?
Pyroalchi wrote: They have it a bit difficult as I'm not aware of a lot of model lines selling (power)armored females or bits for those.
This is not meant to be a pointed comment at you specifically, so apologies in advance for it coming off this way, but has anyone saying this actually tried looking?
And I'm also going to be honest and say that "no, I don't think the WarGames Exclusive corrupt sisters are 'good'" they were some of their earliest sculpts, have dubious quality and are very representative "40k but boobs" aesthetic. I'm still including them because they fit the criteria that was asked.
Great finds, but I don't see a GW sculpt among them, which, while not what Pyroalchi specified, *is* what I specified in my stance - seeing as you specified that this wasn't aimed at Pyroalchi.
EDIT: Oh! And I should note, I specifically only included things that I could think of which were explicitly meant to be used as bits for SoB but we're also not overtly Gothic-Europe-Churchy-Nun. If you start looking for general female heads you could probably make an even longer list.
That's great! Let me know if you find any GW stuff in there, while you're at it.
Look, if we're going to start counting third party stuff* in the whole "Sisters are JUST as diverse in representation as Space Marines!!" argument, then should we not also take into account the even *larger* third party market for Space Marines, which would further distance the "customisation" between Astartes and Sororitas?
*not that we should be, because ultimately this is about GW's portrayal of them, and GW not encouraging the same level of customisation.
It's been a while that I looked at Artel W and I wasn't aware of their "chaotic sisters". Nice catch. And of course there are lots of female heads (Anvil Industry, Statuesque miniatures and Victoria Miniatures come to my mind). What I mean though: that's still not really something suited to give your powerarmored females a - culturally - new vibe.
You are right that I haven't specifically searched the depths of the internet for it, but is someone aware of lets say: baseline human female powerarmor (or something that could slip through as one) with a samurai/african/norse/ancient greek (and I don't mean half naked amazons) vibe?
For Guards(wo)men it's easy to come by parts and minis for conversions, for Space Marines too, as there are so many 3rd parties and also quite a range from GW itself.
JNAProductions wrote: If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.
You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.
I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?
You *do* understand this is a fictional setting, right? Like, in that it's not real?
Right, right . . . My copy of the Lord of the Rings is from the 60's. It's probably not canon anymore amirite?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/06 20:32:10
JNAProductions wrote: If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.
You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.
I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?
You *do* understand this is a fictional setting, right? Like, in that it's not real?
Right, right . . . My copy of the Lord of the Rings is from the 60's. It's probably not canon anymore amirite?
Because the work of a single long dead author is exactly the same as a setting that is still being written and rewritten….
Or can we still have half Eldar Ultramarine Chief Librarians?
Also Tolkein is not even that good an example for your point given that older versions of the Hobbit famously contain a non-canon sequence…
Sgt_Smudge wrote: Thank you for providing an example! As I'm not familiar with the text, do you mind if I ask in what way they're divergent, even if not on an aesthetic level? My own Sisters are somewhat divergent from other Orders, but are also aesthetically similar to the "default" look.
I’ve not got the book to hand and I read it a while ago so this is mangled somewhat:
It was the Order of the Last Candle who were based on a shrine world founded by a saint and his disciples. There were either 5 or 7 of them (can’t remember) each of which embodied a different virtue and founded a different sub-order (militant, famulous, hospitaller, diologus, etc). Each had their own keep in a ring with the main temple in the centre.
The disciples had very stylised appearances (think blind justice etc (though this is the Imperium so the justice one was pointedly not blind etc)) and the whole set up did the standard Ecclisiarchy thing of technically worshiping the Emperor and his saints but in practice essentially worshiping a pantheon of gods with the Emperor as overgod. Even to the point of swearing by and primarily praying to the main saint.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/06 21:18:37
JNAProductions wrote: If your source for diversity is a book almost older than I am, and you’ve nothing else to back it up, your point is not a strong one.
You’re asking Smudge to prove a negative-a notoriously difficult task. Whereas all you need to do is provide some more up to date examples. Just one or two would do.
I mean, SoB have novels, right? Can you find some “model” diversity there? Or in their current codex? Or anywhere that’s not close to two decades old?
Exactly like how academia doesn't reference, quote, and expand upon literature written decades or even centuries ago right?
You *do* understand this is a fictional setting, right? Like, in that it's not real?
Right, right . . . My copy of the Lord of the Rings is from the 60's. It's probably not canon anymore amirite?
I have been following this thread for a while, I have nothing to add to the OP but this “row” you are having with smudge is silly. They are clearly not saying what you say they are, they have repeatedly said they agree that they could be diverse are presented in that way by GW. One quote that you have found supports that stance fully. A few bits of text from what ever time shows that they can be diverse but there is not a picture or image or description of them appearing different anywhere in the “lore”.
Ergo, smudge’s point stands. They can be diverse but you don’t see it often from GW. I think all of us would like to see more diverse stuff from GW on this but we don’t. So stop getting all upset and fake exasperated because yiu actually agree with smudge.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well. Their designs are much more ornate, their details less conducive to the easy modification and variety that Space Marines have been afforded. Sisters are very strongly (and consistently) drawn from specifically European Catholicism and Medieval/Renaissance trappings - unlike the variety of "holy warrior" traditions that Space Marines find themselves drawn from - therefore, drawing from other branches of Catholicism isn't what we see GW doing with their specific design cues for the Sororitas.
You don't see you completely demolished your own point here?
Let's see, in Medieval European Catholicism, knights of France looked different to Germans, these to Italians, these to Spaniards. French used fleur de lys, Germans eagle, Italians, due to high artistic skills and development of Italian cities (and lack of centralization leading to a single symbol) used richly decorated plate. There is no reason sisters can't have similar split, one part using Aquila, other lily, third part defaulting to ecclesiarchy symbols much like some European nations heavily used cross. And that's just 4 nations bordering each other, separated only by a small mountain range.
Add say Polish and Russian knights into the mix (never mind Byzantium and Armenian ones), and you get far more diversity. Then you have Cathars, Huguenots, Hussites, Waldensians, Bogomilism, Lollards, etc, etc, all on small peninsula within stone throw of Rome. The idea religion would somehow centralize instead of constantly splintering over smallest ideological differences is just wrong. Especially seeing Imperial church was never shown as huge, centralized organization in fluff, more like umbrella of millions of cults that just have to agree on worshiping the Emperor to be accepted.
Hell, friend recently reminded me of 'Horse Heresy', namely local Imperial cult insisting Emperor was a famous horse tamer who smote 9 rebellious stallions led by Horse the heretic, and the Battle Sister listening to it just smirked at misunderstanding instead of shooting them for heresy. That's how 'unified' and 'monolithic' the faith in Imperium is. That is, not at all.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: The new HBO series based on the Simarillion will have sex and nudity as well. I'm sure thats what Mr. T wanted.
Yeah, I am sure Humans and Elves procreated 10.000 years using only storks, not body contact, eh?
I like how brainwashing of a single religion can be so strong it bends something that 95% of all human cultures see as completely normal thing to be unnatural and yucky, especially in a setting that never saw the horrors and mental warping of said cult, eh?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well. Their designs are much more ornate, their details less conducive to the easy modification and variety that Space Marines have been afforded. Sisters are very strongly (and consistently) drawn from specifically European Catholicism and Medieval/Renaissance trappings - unlike the variety of "holy warrior" traditions that Space Marines find themselves drawn from - therefore, drawing from other branches of Catholicism isn't what we see GW doing with their specific design cues for the Sororitas.
You don't see you completely demolished your own point here?
Let's see, in Medieval European Catholicism, knights of France looked different to Germans, these to Italians, these to Spaniards. French used fleur de lys, Germans eagle, Italians, due to high artistic skills and development of Italian cities (and lack of centralization leading to a single symbol) used richly decorated plate. There is no reason sisters can't have similar split, one part using Aquila, other lily, third part defaulting to ecclesiarchy symbols much like some European nations heavily used cross. And that's just 4 nations bordering each other, separated only by a small mountain range.
Add say Polish and Russian knights into the mix (never mind Byzantium and Armenian ones), and you get far more diversity. Then you have Cathars, Huguenots, Hussites, Waldensians, Bogomilism, Lollards, etc, etc, all on small peninsula within stone throw of Rome. The idea religion would somehow centralize instead of constantly splintering over smallest ideological differences is just wrong. Especially seeing Imperial church was never shown as huge, centralized organization in fluff, more like umbrella of millions of cults that just have to agree on worshiping the Emperor to be accepted.
Hell, friend recently reminded me of 'Horse Heresy', namely local Imperial cult insisting Emperor was a famous horse tamer who smote 9 rebellious stallions led by Horse the heretic, and the Battle Sister listening to it just smirked at misunderstanding instead of shooting them for heresy. That's how 'unified' and 'monolithic' the faith in Imperium is. That is, not at all.
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: The new HBO series based on the Simarillion will have sex and nudity as well. I'm sure thats what Mr. T wanted.
Yeah, I am sure Humans and Elves procreated 10.000 years using only storks, not body contact, eh?
I like how brainwashing of a single religion can be so strong it bends something that 95% of all human cultures see as completely normal thing to be unnatural and yucky, especially in a setting that never saw the horrors and mental warping of said cult, eh?
Wow, you've completely missed both points in an effort to be snarky, rude, and presumptive. In the same vein, maybe you like getting your jimmies off watching HBO-porn in your free time, but those of us who aren't shouldn't be forced to see our classic works of fiction reduced to GoT spank bait for troglodytes incapable of having actual relationships.
As for your posts toward smudge, how can you continually, almost willfully, miss the point of what they are saying? GW doesn't rep variety with them! It's not about how Victorian era themes lend themselves to diversity, it's about how we have 5 different sculpts of GW sanctioned Imperial Guard, god knows how many different flavor of SM, at least 3 flavors of orks, but only 1 type of SoB model, ever displayed. Why is that, do you think?
Sgt_Smudge wrote: From an aesthetic design perspective too, Sisters are very limited in their options as well. Their designs are much more ornate, their details less conducive to the easy modification and variety that Space Marines have been afforded. Sisters are very strongly (and consistently) drawn from specifically European Catholicism and Medieval/Renaissance trappings - unlike the variety of "holy warrior" traditions that Space Marines find themselves drawn from - therefore, drawing from other branches of Catholicism isn't what we see GW doing with their specific design cues for the Sororitas.
You don't see you completely demolished your own point here?
Let's see, in Medieval European Catholicism, knights of France looked different to Germans, these to Italians, these to Spaniards. French used fleur de lys, Germans eagle, Italians, due to high artistic skills and development of Italian cities (and lack of centralization leading to a single symbol) used richly decorated plate. There is no reason sisters can't have similar split, one part using Aquila, other lily, third part defaulting to ecclesiarchy symbols much like some European nations heavily used cross. And that's just 4 nations bordering each other, separated only by a small mountain range.
Add say Polish and Russian knights into the mix (never mind Byzantium and Armenian ones), and you get far more diversity. Then you have Cathars, Huguenots, Hussites, Waldensians, Bogomilism, Lollards, etc, etc, all on small peninsula within stone throw of Rome. The idea religion would somehow centralize instead of constantly splintering over smallest ideological differences is just wrong. Especially seeing Imperial church was never shown as huge, centralized organization in fluff, more like umbrella of millions of cults that just have to agree on worshiping the Emperor to be accepted.
Amazing! You showcased a bunch of varied aesthetics in the real world!
Now show me these varied SoB aesthetics in 40k which GW have showcased. I'll be waiting.
What seems to have happened is that you thought that I was implying that there was only a single Real World Catholic aesthetic - I did not claim that. What I *did* claim is that the Sisters of Battle only use a single facet of Catholic aesthetics, but that is all we get of them. It doesn't matter what the real world is, and how many options there are there, because I'm talking about the fictional one.
Now, with that cleared up, could you show some of these varied Sister of Battle designs?
That's how 'unified' and 'monolithic' the faith in Imperium is. That is, not at all.
Great - so show me these canon varied Sisters.
Spoiler:
FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: The new HBO series based on the Simarillion will have sex and nudity as well. I'm sure thats what Mr. T wanted.
Yeah, I am sure Humans and Elves procreated 10.000 years using only storks, not body contact, eh?
Just because something exists doesn't make it relevant to the story being told. If I was telling a story about the myriad perils of home decoration, and every second scene was a cutaway to sex and nudity, I'd question the artistic necessity of showing that content in the context of a story about the myriad perils of home decoration, and if that actually helped the story I wanted to tell.
As someone who has yet to see the new HBO series, I can't make that claim, but if it only exists to pander to the "wow, sex = edgy! and adult!" crowd, then I don't think it helps the story much.
I like how brainwashing of a single religion can be so strong it bends something that 95% of all human cultures see as completely normal thing to be unnatural and yucky, especially in a setting that never saw the horrors and mental warping of said cult, eh?
Eh, not religious, but rather I question it on the basis of "is this necessary in the story being told", in the same way that I wouldn't expect an epic quest to destroy some cursed jewellery to show up in risque content.
Lord Damocles wrote: 'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.' Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13
'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.' Codex: Adepta Sororitas (6th ed. ebook), pg.12
'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.' [Codex] 'Sisters of Battle' (5th ed.) in White Dwarf 380 (US), pg.92
ok but what does Livery MEAN?
yes it CAN mean a completely differant uniform (for example one could say that the differance between cadians and catachans apperance is their livery and be, largely accurate) but it could simply mean the colours of their uniform.
we've seen multiple examples of minor orders, such as the Order of the golden light, the order of the Blue robe, etc. so far all the art of them has suggested a largely uniform look of symbolism on the armor etc with the major differance thus far being that of the colours used. There's simply no evidance given by GW of sisters who say........... use fur robes instead of cloth. It's a great idea and I'd LOVE to see someone who models their stuff that way (seriously if anyone's done something like that please post a pic!) but so far the evidance seems to suggest that by and large the livery change is mostly "WE USE ORANGE ROBES AND RED ARMOR!"
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Lord Damocles wrote: 'Where the bulk of the Imperium’s military forces comprise the motley cultures of thousands of worlds, the Sisters of each Order are bound by the same faith and teachings as one another, casting aside the trappings of whichever society they were born into so that they may best serve the Emperor. / Yet there are some differences between Orders in terms of their rites, their rituals and the way they bring the Ecclesiarchy’s wrath to unbelievers.' Codex: Adepta Sororitas (8th ed.), pg.13
'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.' Codex: Adepta Sororitas (6th ed. ebook), pg.12
'...numerous other Orders Militant - the Orders Minoris - were founded across the Imperium, and they established their own traditions, doctrines, livery and titles.' [Codex] 'Sisters of Battle' (5th ed.) in White Dwarf 380 (US), pg.92
ok but what does Livery MEAN?
yes it CAN mean a completely differant uniform (for example one could say that the differance between cadians and catachans apperance is their livery and be, largely accurate) but it could simply mean the colours of their uniform.
we've seen multiple examples of minor orders, such as the Order of the golden light, the order of the Blue robe, etc. so far all the art of them has suggested a largely uniform look of symbolism on the armor etc with the major differance thus far being that of the colours used. There's simply no evidance given by GW of sisters who say........... use fur robes instead of cloth. It's a great idea and I'd LOVE to see someone who models their stuff that way (seriously if anyone's done something like that please post a pic!) but so far the evidance seems to suggest that by and large the livery change is mostly "WE USE ORANGE ROBES AND RED ARMOR!"
To add to what you mention, the only other areas in terms of "livery" we have beside colors is symbols with the all the Major Orders (and presumably all minor ones too) have their own heraldic symbol like the chalice of the Ebon Chalice or the red rose of the Bloodied Rose for example though all of them share the symbols of the Sisterhood in general and of the Ecclesiarchy. Furthermore, the difference in doctrines seem to be limited to patron saints, military strategy and military organization. While there is diversity in the SoB, that diversity isn't wide ranging. It's mostly in the detail section. In my opinion, this isn't a weakness per say. Some people like their faction well fleshed out and consistent while others prefer sandbox in which they can easily make their completely unique subfaction. It's smart and healthy for an IP like 40K to have some for every taste.
An Astartes Chapter that favours CQC and makes sparse use of Tactical or Devastator Squads is easily done but you can't really do a CQC Guard army in the same way.
That's only because the rules fail to represent the diversity implied in the fluff. Astartes are the most "customizable" because GW pushes them. Guard are much more diverse in actuality; you have Guard regiments that focus entirely on artillery, for example.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: yeah except that to make your guard differant you need to have entirely differant mini's to represent that differance.
And before GW went full corporate IP tyrant, we could use historical minis to represent IG with divergent looks.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/09/10 04:20:22
An Astartes Chapter that favours CQC and makes sparse use of Tactical or Devastator Squads is easily done but you can't really do a CQC Guard army in the same way.
That's only because the rules fail to represent the diversity implied in the fluff. Astartes are the most "customizable" because GW pushes them. Guard are much more diverse in actuality; you have Guard regiments that focus entirely on artillery, for example.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BrianDavion wrote: yeah except that to make your guard differant you need to have entirely differant mini's to represent that differance.
And before GW went full corporate IP tyrant, we could use historical minis to represent IG with divergent looks.
you still can, GW's not going to rush into your home, your local gaming shop etc and smash your knee caps.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
~6550 build and painted
819 build and painted
830 
