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.

agnosto wrote:And GW would never lie to save their bottom line, would they?

Sure they could lie, but there's far less reason to believe they would. One of the main reasons that Sisters haven't sold well in recent years (in fact, the primary reasons why people say they don't buy Sisters despite being interested) is their price and their all-metal range, which are rather linked. GW could make more profit from making a Sisters codex with plastics than from getting rid of it.

Grey Templar wrote:assemble a marine model, but leave the pauldrons off.

he will have fairly normal proportions.

No he won't. All modern GW figures have grossly distorted proportions. (I'm not including Sisters here because I am not familiar with them.)

Marines are even more grossly distorted by the shape of their armour.

Compare a GW figure with a Tamiya 1/35 scale figure to get an idea of just how distorted the GW figures are.

Melissia wrote:

agnosto wrote:And GW would never lie to save their bottom line, would they?

Sure they could lie, but there's far less reason to believe they would. One of the main reasons that Sisters haven't sold well in recent years (in fact, the primary reasons why people say they don't buy Sisters despite being interested) is their price and their all-metal range, which are rather linked. GW could make more profit from making a Sisters codex with plastics than from getting rid of it.

Indeed, I play Chaos Space Marines, and I would buy some sisters to convert and incorperate into my army. Probably buy only one or two boxes of them, and scatter them throught the units.

Edit: if they were plastic, I mean.

Melissia wrote:

You are reading into it what you want.

And somehow you aren't? You don't want the armor to provide the same amount of protection, and therefor that is what you read into the sentence apparently? Because I can apply this logic to your own post if you really want to insist on using it.

You don't understand what my statement even means. I'm making a statement based on a quantitative difference, yours is based on a qualitative quotation. Reading into numbers is empirical, reading into broad statements is subjective.

In logic terms, I am saying: 1+3=4 and 2+2=4. Or A+C=D and B+B=D.

What your absolutist quote is insisting upon is that if A+C=D and B+B=D then A=B and C=B.

Since there is more written that they are differences and since there are visible differences, its is clear not all terms are always equal.

I am saying that something can effectively be equivalent without being identically equivalent. It is a fact that Marine armor and SoB armor are different. That those differences are only significant in a more detailed system, but that those differences are otherwise insignificant.

You have to ignore a lot more to assume they're 100% identical than to simply accept that they're effectively equivalent.

With an understanding that they are only effectively equivalent you can open to the possibility, that like real life, there are different ways of accomplishing similar results. That those different methodologies manifest themselves through technology in different ways, altering appearance, but accomplishing a goal. For example a good number of countries build tanks to similar specification, yet their sizes, weight, and armor thickness vary.

What is described about power armor is that it derives its resistance to damage through two means: the inherent material properties of the armor plates and a low level energy field through the plates. Whether that low level energy field is like a force field or 40k technology taking advantage of the real world properties of certain ceramic metal alloy of becoming harder when an electric charge is applied to them, the total level of protection afforded by power armor could be approached in different ways.

If we were to assume that there is no difference of any kind between SoB armor and Marine armor, we are forced to assume that SoB are using superior technology that allows them to produce and use lighter thinner armor. So for the sake of consistency within the 40k universe you have to assume some difference in approaches used to manufacture each. For example, maybe SoB relies more on the energy field, while SM armor relies more on the bulk of the armor; where SoB want something lighter and SM want something that supplements strength and thus cannot devote as much power to the energy field.

I will say this one more time...

They are all designed to look cool.

The armor is not real.

They are made to look cool to sell.

The armor is not real.

You cannot debate whether a fictional item would provide different types of fictional protection.

The armor is not real.

But the 4+ is...

*scratches head* This is still going?

Guys, let's just break it down into simple terms here, because we're all going to go nuts otherwise.

The game only allows for a small variation in armor saves, yet covers a huge range of various styles, types, and methods of granting that save. Therefore, GW needs to make certain allowances:

A 3+ save is usually handed out to troops that have superior armor than the norm: again, generalizations abound as this save covers a wide variety of armors: Crisis suits, necrons, tyranid MCs, and power armor of all kinds. This is what is determined by the game designers, and has become a cornerstone for much of the development. You will notice that effectively all who have this are considered "elite" troops to some extent, which the Sisters definitely fit under.

I think we're also looking at this the wrong way. Yes, a sister looks far less armored than a marine. She also looks more armored and bulky than a stormtrooper, and is certainly lugging around larger weapons. Again, this is simply because they have a very, very limited range on which to give armor saves, and while it's clear that Sister's power armor might not be up to the same level as Marine armor, it is vastly superior than anything given out to the Imperial Guard.

Inquisitor and Dark Heresy both show this difference far better, with Marine armor being almost ridiculous in the protection it offers compared to normal power armor, which is nearly invulnerable to most small arms fire... something carapace armor can come close to but not quite achieve. However both systems allow for a far more detailed equipment system with a larger variety of statistics.

So this simply breaks down to a case of the Sister's armor looking (and being) stronger than the carapace of the IG, rather than not measuring up to the armor of the Space Marines (which is another discussion entirely). To complain that the normal sized, human woman's armor looks lighter than the 7 foot tall, 300 pound genetically enhanced super-soldier's is bordering on inane. He could be wearing an aluminum pot over his body and you could make the same argument, but that doesn't mean that the pot is going to be effective, it's just big.

It IS clear, to me, that they provide identical protection. Mind you, I believe that C:WH overrides Inquisitor, when they say they provide the same protection-- aka_mythos' argument (though quite well worded, far more eloquently than my own I should note) effectively amounts to, to me, the logical equivalent of saying that X ≠ X (or X != X for those of you that prefer it in coding). When an armor is stated to provide the same protection, then it does, and one can interpret those words to argue otherwise, but I don't buy it...

Nightsbane wrote:I will say this one more time...

They are all designed to look cool.

The armor is not real.

They are made to look cool to sell.

The armor is not real.

You cannot debate whether a fictional item would provide different types of fictional protection.

The armor is not real.

I know.

I covered the "aesthetic" interpretation in my earlier post. I'm not trying to debate different degrees of protection. Previous to the above, I layout a multi-faceted explanation to address look for those concerned with aesthetic, the broad application of saves to those concerned with rules, the explanation based on descriptions of power armor to address those concerned with fluff, and an engineering based explanation based on fluff for those concerned with reality.

I don't hold any one to a higher esteem, I'm just painting a picture that shows all sides of the interpretation to better allow a person to buy into a suspension of disbelief to enjoy the fantasy. Different people stand on different pillars to attain that, so showing reasonable degree of consistency across those pillars covers more bases and provide reasonable explanation to as many different people possible.

By the way, I commend you on your arguing. I'm just too stubborn on certain issues

Melissia wrote:It IS clear, to me, that they provide identical protection. Mind you, I believe that C:WH overrides Inquisitor, when they say they provide the same protection-- aka_mythos' argument (though quite well worded, far more eloquently than my own I should note) effectively amounts to, to me, the logical equivalent of saying that X ≠ X (or X != X for those of you that prefer it in coding). When an armor is stated to provide the same protection, then it does, and one can interpret those words to argue otherwise, but I don't buy it...

Identical in quantity and identical in quality are different sides of the same idea but are not mutually exclusive. My point has been that the extent of protection is the same, justifiable as 3+ in all cases (X=X), but that the methodology of accomplishing that level of protection can still vary while keeping your quotation true. "X" can be accomplished in a variety of ways; the "same level of protection" is not to the exclusion of the way that level of protection is achieved. Its just like cooking recipes that give you different ways of making the "same" thing.

Melissia wrote:

Kroothawk wrote:[snip]

A bad translation in the German codex does not make for fluff. The fact remains that the Repentia do not have the Adepta Sororitas special rule. Furthermore, here's something straight out of C:WH about the Repentia:

These sisters become outcasts seeking death in the heat of battle

Hold on, if your argument is that repentia aren't sisters then you just contradicted yourself with the very first two words of your example.

And people say no one cares about Sisters Of Battle.....


P.S. - I do in fact love boobies, be they on mini's or in real life.

I think Sisters of Battle just need to have decent chest and abdomen armour and they'd look the part better.

However, I also think that all Sisters of Battle should be covered in tons of parchment, purity seals, books and candles as standard, and they should all be ripped and look pissed off, no exceptions. Then again, I think that Sisters should look as psychotic and genocidal as act. And after that's done, they can resculpt all the Slaanesh models and thus there would be a range of psycho woman and a range of sexy woman and the balance would be set right once and for all.

Melissia wrote:By the way, I commend you on your arguing. I'm just too stubborn on certain issues

The quotation is "same degree" of protection - not the "same" but "same degree"

In the context of the WH:Codex, same degree means "on a scale of 2+ to 6+" - so the same degree of protection IS a 3+ - there is no 3.1+ that can be represented.

Inquisitor, a more detailed system, shows that the same degree on a 6 point scale is not the same on a 100 point scale. AS you would expect - the statement is not "it provides exactly the same protection in every way", after all.


Thus, the two sources of canon ARE identical, once you include the context.

aka_mythos wrote:

Melissia wrote:It IS clear, to me, that they provide identical protection. Mind you, I believe that C:WH overrides Inquisitor, when they say they provide the same protection-- aka_mythos' argument (though quite well worded, far more eloquently than my own I should note) effectively amounts to, to me, the logical equivalent of saying that X ≠ X (or X != X for those of you that prefer it in coding). When an armor is stated to provide the same protection, then it does, and one can interpret those words to argue otherwise, but I don't buy it...

Identical in quantity and identical in quality are different sides of the same idea but are not mutually exclusive. My point has been that the extent of protection is the same, justifiable as 3+ in all cases (X=X), but that the methodology of accomplishing that level of protection can still vary while keeping your quotation true. "X" can be accomplished in a variety of ways; the "same level of protection" is not to the exclusion of the way that level of protection is achieved. Its just like cooking recipes that give you different ways of making the "same" thing.

True enough, for example, if we are talking about Alpha Radiation, why wearing all those suits provide just as much armor as does a toilet paper wrapped kid dressed as a mummy for halloween...or a piece of paper...or a few inches of air... seeing as how alpha radiation can be stopped by pretty much ANYTHING between it and its target, hard to quantify "as much protection" without whats needing to be protected from. I for one, have no problem walking up to some Alpha radiation holding a large flattened cardboard box in front of me though I doubt it would stop a bullet or a crazy hopped up heretics blade from severing my spinal cord, unless half way through his swing I remind him I have a 3+ armor save because my cardboard acts like space marine armor against alpha radiation.. but then again, i don't think he'd care much

SoB armour looks like a 4+ but plays as a 3+ so, no problems.

compared to Astartes armour then it stars looking flimsy until you realise that the guys inside of are genetically adapted freaks, 7ft + giants who you would expect to have suitable armour which protects them and enhances their movement and already exaggerated strength.

Sisters are not superhumans and according to the imperium have no need of the bulky neuro fibres and muscle sheaves to augment sisters movements nor do they require extra medical support in the form of drugs and food supplies which Astartes require.

SoB suits are built, most likely using the same ceramite as Astartes armour, to protect the wearer not to provide long term accomodation in the field.