Navy infantry - Armsmen, Security... Stormtroopers?

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.

**Psienesis**

CpatTom wrote:Do the Space Marines not perform this function in some sort of fashion?

Not for the Imperial Navy, no.

The Imperial Navy doesn't even normally transport Space Marines around. The Astartes have their very own ships, crewed by their own Chapter Serfs and Chapter-built servitors, to do all of that.

**Lynata**

And normally you wouldn't even need Space Marines or some other elite troops either, because boarding actions aren't about taking over the enemy ship (good luck capturing what is essentially a floating city!) but rather causing as much damage as possible to a limited area of the ship - wherever those boarding torpedoes or attack craft manage to "dock".

Which is why GW's own BFG books only ever talk about armed crewmen / armsmen when it comes to such actions. Imho, this fits better into the "sailing age" naval warfare style, too.

**Connor MacLeod**

Out of curioisty where do we hear of naval stormtroopers? I've vaguely recalled mention of that but I can't recall all the sources. I know what Armsmen and Naval Security is, of course.

Also I'm surprised noone has mentioned the ratings either.

**Sturmtruppen**

Connor MacLeod wrote:Out of curioisty where do we hear of naval stormtroopers? I've vaguely recalled mention of that but I can't recall all the sources. I know what Armsmen and Naval Security is, of course.

Also I'm surprised noone has mentioned the ratings either.

In the Omnibus edition (can't say if it's the same in the standalone novel), it's at the bottom of page 200 in Xenos. Eisenhorn is on his way to meet Rorken and other assembled Inquisitors, and it's said Olm Madorthene greets him with navy stormtroopers. As far as I'm aware, they are never mentioned again, perhaps even in the whole 40k universe!

**Connor MacLeod**

I'm pretty sure that was Naval Security. We saw them in action against House Glaw in Xenos, and they pretty much acted Storm Trooper like there (I think they even mentioned carapace)

For some reason I was thinking of the storm troopers from the Fire Warrior novel (which seem like they would show up as an enemy in the game) as thy were stationed on warships.

In any case I always saw it as: ratings are the analogue to militia or conscript forces in the Guard. Armsmen are the "trusted" soldiers. They're better trained, better equipped, more trusted and generally more loyal than the ratings. Not quite analogous to your typical Guardsmen, probably a bit better. Somewhere between IG and ARbites I think. Naval Security is something like Arbites and Storm troopers, perhaps rolled into one. They're the elites, they do the spearhead assaults, special operations, etc.

**Soladrin**

Lynata wrote:And normally you wouldn't even need Space Marines or some other elite troops either, because boarding actions aren't about taking over the enemy ship (good luck capturing what is essentially a floating city!) but rather causing as much damage as possible to a limited area of the ship - wherever those boarding torpedoes or attack craft manage to "dock".

Which is why GW's own BFG books only ever talk about armed crewmen / armsmen when it comes to such actions. Imho, this fits better into the "sailing age" naval warfare style, too.

Except for Chaos/renegade Marines having this annoying thing with capturing enemy ships in about an hour or 2. They get most of their fleets back to strenght this way. Though they do also steal from each other.

**Lynata**

Soladrin wrote:Except for Chaos/renegade Marines having this annoying thing with capturing enemy ships in about an hour or 2. They get most of their fleets back to strenght this way. Though they do also steal from each other.

I'd say that is the exception rather than the rule - from what I've read, ships don't get captured so much, it's more that they defect to the enemy.

Realistically, there's no way to reliably "steal" ships of that size because it's far too easy for a loyalist crew to sabotage any such efforts - not to mention that a couple hundred or even thousand Chaos Marines won't be enough to fly that ship home even when they somehow manage to advance through hundreds of meters of solid metal towards the command section and manage to avoid the numerous traps and automated defenses to subdue the staff officers. Sure, you'll have some amongst the crew who are willing to cooperate. Some may even be heretics themselves who welcome their new masters. But the vast majority is Emperor-fearing folk regularly tended to by shipboard Confessors, and as such you'll have an enormous risk of an uprising. It'd be like taking over an IG regiment by killing its Colonel and Commissar and then expect everyone to follow you. Only that the survivors of this regiment are capable of blowing up generators and engines as well as the airlocks. Do you want to station a CSM on every single room on every deck on a 5 km ship? Or do you just kill the entire crew and begin ferrying over 10.000, 20.000 men from your own ships?

No, just doesn't swing with how I've taken to see the setting and how it is described in GW's own books. The best result you can achieve boarding an enemy ship in BFG is that the target vessel becomes a lifeless hulk drifting through space. Enjoy your prize.

That being said, I'm sure there are lots of Black Library novels telling it differently, and of course in that case it could make sense to have something like "Naval Security" or "Naval Stormtroopers". If you think that this is more cool than the "age of sail" style of simply having a cadre of sailors armed with weapons and, on occasion, boarding armour (Blanche drew a cool sketch for those), then feel free to roll with that. It's just as valid as any other interpretation, including the one presented in BFG.

**Sturmtruppen**

Connor MacLeod wrote:I'm pretty sure that was Naval Security. We saw them in action against House Glaw in Xenos, and they pretty much acted Storm Trooper like there (I think they even mentioned carapace)

For some reason I was thinking of the storm troopers from the Fire Warrior novel (which seem like they would show up as an enemy in the game) as thy were stationed on warships.

In every other instance, we hear of Naval Security, but just that once on page 200, the exact words 'navy stormtroopers' are used. And yeah, I've seen videos of the Fire Warrior video game, and the troops which raid the Tau ship and defend the Imperial ship are based on IG Stormtroopers.

**Lynata**

Navy Armsmen in boarding armour, by the way.

**chrisyella**

Sturmtruppen wrote:
Actually, if my idea of there being three Navy Infantry forces is true (assuming Navy Stormtroopers are not in fact just Security), I'd see it like this in comparison to the Royal Navy:

Armsmen = Armed deck crew (confined to the ship and defend it if necessary)
Security = Royal Marines (provide defence for the Navy, raid other ships and operate on land too)
Stormtroopers = Special Boat Service (covert sabotage and reconaissance)

Never really thought of there being a difference between Security and Stormtroopers, but you've made me want to pick up Eisenhorn again and that isn't a bad thing

What about Ratings, would they be the same as Armsmen? In the short story "Raptor Down" it makes mention of the Officer of the Watch and Ratings escorting a prisoner to the brig. (NB: The story was "Acceptable Losses", not "Raptor Down" - sorry for the confusion...)

Lynata wrote:
I'd say that is the exception rather than the rule - from what I've read, ships don't get captured so much, it's more that they defect to the enemy.

Realistically, there's no way to reliably "steal" ships of that size because it's far too easy for a loyalist crew to sabotage any such efforts - not to mention that a couple hundred or even thousand Chaos Marines won't be enough to fly that ship home even when they somehow manage to advance through hundreds of meters of solid metal towards the command section and manage to avoid the numerous traps and automated defenses to subdue the staff officers. Sure, you'll have some amongst the crew who are willing to cooperate. Some may even be heretics themselves who welcome their new masters. But the vast majority is Emperor-fearing folk regularly tended to by shipboard Confessors, and as such you'll have an enormous risk of an uprising. It'd be like taking over an IG regiment by killing its Colonel and Commissar and then expect everyone to follow you. Only that the survivors of this regiment are capable of blowing up generators and engines as well as the airlocks. Do you want to station a CSM on every single room on every deck on a 5 km ship? Or do you just kill the entire crew and begin ferrying over 10.000, 20.000 men from your own ships?

No, just doesn't swing with how I've taken to see the setting and how it is described in GW's own books. The best result you can achieve boarding an enemy ship in BFG is that the target vessel becomes a lifeless hulk drifting through space. Enjoy your prize.

I've always assumed that if the command section was replaced or taken over then the rest of the crew would simply follow any new orders given. Most parts of ship would only be communicated with via a vox/radio but not face-to-face, don't you think that the crew would follow any orders given to them? If a laser battery was given orders to fire on a ship, how would they know if the ship is friendly or not, they would only follow orders... wouldn't they ?
I have to admit I haven't read any BFG books or played that game, so please excuse my ignorance

**mwnciboo**

I have an ongoing project here on this exact concept...NAVY ARMSMEN and SECURITY TROOPS...Based around Veterans in Valkyries and Vendetta's.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/393885.page

I have my 1st troops done and will post up some pictures.

On the Karyskin vs Stormtroopers. It's not so much SAS vs SBS...

As UK Royal Marines vs US Marines. Very Similiar but with different sizes of forces and training.

The Cadians are without doubt one of the most if not the most Martial race in the Galaxy. So if you believe that the Kark's are distilled from the Cadian Forces then their very best will end up in the Karyskin. The Stormtroopers however are very good but come from the whole Orphaned children of Officers etc and are well trained and equipped but have not necessarily had a life of war to form them.

I think the ARMSMEN thing is ace, the PIG IRON miniatures are perfect for this. Boarding actions are very different to CQB or Section/ Company/Regiment Ground Ops. I think the terminology has been interchanged by various author's but I see ARMSMEN as "Master at Arms" in the Royal Naval parlance that we traditionally used to have. E.g the arbiters of justice and discipline and in the 40K universe they get the force protection role too.

**FerrusFair**

Space Marines can do these sorts ofoperations, when they're available. Space Marines are rarely available, because Space Marines are, numerically speaking, about one to a planet. Therefore, when there are no Marines available, you get the next best thing: Stormies.

**Lynata**

chrisyella wrote:I've always assumed that if the command section was replaced or taken over then the rest of the crew would simply follow any new orders given. Most parts of ship would only be communicated with via a vox/radio but not face-to-face, don't you think that the crew would follow any orders given to them? If a laser battery was given orders to fire on a ship, how would they know if the ship is friendly or not, they would only follow orders... wouldn't they ?

I think that would work for some time, but not on the long run ... People would get sceptical when they keep firing at the ships with the Aquila but not the deformed spiky ones. Then there's the slow corruption.

But more importantly, ships aren't run by vox alone - there's a chain of command, and even though there's tens of thousands of people on an Imperial warship, there are only a dozen or so ranks between the lowest deckhand and his Lord-Captain. The command staff is isolating itself only from the crew, not from other officers (who in turn deal with the crew), so all it takes is "the middle man" noticing something's not right, and a ship's bridge section will, in my opinion, not be taken without someone doing so, as even when the Chaos troops teleport directly onto the command deck (which is possible, in theory, but difficult and dangerous) a firefight would ensue, with nearby guards spreading the news to adjacent security forces, in turn causing a general alert. Apart from the possibility of weapon discharge or damage to bridge equipment itself already being enough to set off an automated alarm.

However, I'll point out that this is just my personal interpretation, and that this is merely to explain why the GW books say what they do. I usually stick to the studio's vision and like to find "excuses" for their ideas. But there is no "right" or "wrong" on this topic, only personal preferences and lots of different ideas.

chrisyella wrote:I have to admit I haven't read any BFG books or played that game, so please excuse my ignorance

There's nothing to excuse, we all have different foci - that's what makes communities and forums so exciting; the ability to pool the various members' knowledge!

If you want to read more about BFG (I haven't played the game yet, myself, but it looks damn intrigueing!) you can actually find the most important books on the GW website as free PDFs: http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=cat480005a&categoryId=1100007§ion=&aId=4300022

I also remember an article in some Codex or White Dwarf about navy armsmen being used as infantry to support an IG landing ... it was in a message from some Admiral disapproving of the idea to simply "seal in" the crew permanently (by welding the airlocks shut) just because of a few incidents during shore leave - but I can't recall where exactly that was, 't was years ago. :I

**Atrocity Exhibition**

Hi guys, pretty avid Battlefleet fan so I'll give my input for what it's worth.

The best book to understand the workings of the Imperial Navy from a Black Library point of view is probably 'Relentless' followed closely by 'Gothic War'. I've not yet seen Battlefleet Kronos (Rogue Trade RPG) but that will surely have everything in minute detail- whether or not its canon... meh:

For a small combat operations - like checking out an abandoned space station/ small 'polite' intrusion onto another ship/ escorting dignitaries down to planetside there are the armsmen - led by the master of arms and his sub officers (all non-commissed officers). These guys carry navy shotguns and are essentially guardsmen - during normal operational times they remain as 'guards-men' to keep a general order on the ship (there's a whole fortress level built between lower decks and upper decks complete with prisons). Ultimately this is a small number of personnel, I'd say numbering the hundreds compared to a crew of 1000s (BFG,BL,RT have all had notoriously different takes on the actual crew size with an average Imperial Cruiser numbering from between 1000-100,000 - I prefer 10,000-30,000 so maybe guardsmen at 800-2400)

There are Navy Security that are essentially military police - they appear in a Ciaphas Cain story and appear pretty much as arbiters.

Now in terms of boarding actions - full scale conflict - what happens is that the normal crew (trusted crew) are armed (strictly controlled by the master of arms who gives the order for the weapons depots to open) with navy shotguns when possible, but usually they attack another ship or defend their own with what ever weapon comes to hand - wrenches, crowbars, blow torches etc. Obviously the armsmen are put into action straight away...

Finally you have the ratings- these guys are essentially indentured slave types - forced to work in the lower decks in terrible conditions and extremely high mortaility. They come from planetary tithes (so the governors often give the navy the dredges of their population - drain out the prisons, sweeps threw slums etc) and also from previous boarding actions - the losers come aboard in chains. Therefore the ratings cannot generally be trusted in a fight, they are as likely to turn on the Imperial Navy as they are the invaders of the ship (hence the fortress level/armsmen). These guys are often chained together or locked inside rooms - they have overseers (who tend to be fragged) and may well attempt their own uprising if given a chance during some big battle.

As for the stormtroopers from Eisenhorn (which I have read) they seem to be abit of a Adnett addition as far as I know, that's not to say they wouldn't have a place on a ship but it's not in the standard fluff. Perhaps they are on ships that are on particular man-o-man missions rather than routine naval ships

hope that helps- all would make cool minis

**mwnciboo**

Atrocity, a great post. I really was inspired by the mental image that Dan Abnett conjured with the Black Suited, super tough Naval Troopers.

I am definitely going down this route, even though it fly's in the face of much of the Fluff. I could maybe say they are a specialist Naval unit of a Cobra class destroyer seconded permanently into service by a Lord Inquisitor?.

I will use a Lt and Lt Cdr as Officers with an Inquisitor and retinue in the force, probably 3-4 Valkyries/vendetta's. They will all be Veterans, with the Carapace Armour, and maybe a single squad Boarding Team based on Stormtroopers.

I know it's not fluffy, but I think it would fit with a Clandestine Inquisitors Naval unit, specialised in tracking and grabbing "Black Ships" which disappear with their valuable cargo.

**Lynata**

It's not less fluffy than what Abnett or Mitchell made up with their "Naval Stormtroopers" and "Navy Security" that all do things usually described as falling into the responsibility of common Armsmen ... so go for it!

If you really want a more solid explanation, you can pretty much excuse anything by just pointing at the Inquisitor. If you go by GW, they have access to their own version of Storm Troopers as well as even capital warships - so hey, all it takes it both assets being used by the same guy?

**Atrocity Exhibition**

hmmm now you mention it I think Abnett's stormtroopers have been written into BFG rules if:

a) they were from an inquisitorial vessel (either primary or commandeered) - been so long since I've read it can't remember the exact context
b) you agree with the unreleased BFG 2010 compendium - created by GW contracted experts but only a few of the docs were officially endorsed by GW on their site

have you seen the doc- m201003_BFG_Inquisition- perfect for the background fluff for any inquisitorial space faring army- your idea of cobras fits the rules just fine, they can have any Imperial escorts in their fleet - plus there's rules for the Blackships and cruisers/GK strike cruisers... seems the stormtroopers are just that- full time inquisitorial stormtroopers tasked with working full time on vessels

not sure what the deal is with access to these docs, they are on google docs uploaded by fans- http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=303290

I was also thinking today that even though I've not come across a stormtrooper class on vanilla Imperial Naval vessels in the fluff you could easily write them in as the poor sods sent over in the hit-and run attacks. I'm thinking in particular when you send over a crack/specialist team to the enemy vessel via teleportation (their shields have to be down) that seek out a specific mechanical/weaponry target, fight to it, set explosives and then supposedly get out of their - causing a spectacular critical hit in the process... suicide mission maybe but fits a similar role to the stormtroopers in the Imperial Guard

**Lynata**

I thought Abnett's Storm Troopers were Navy assets? Of course things would (imho) look entirely different if we're talking about ISTs here.

ISTs can appear pretty much anywhere an Inquisitor wants. In fact, ISTs manning Black Ships as mentioned in this unofficial Compendium linked on Warseer is "official" fluff from the Witch Hunters Codex, and I think I have seen those Black Ship stats in a GW source once before (either the website, the Warp Storm book or the BFG Magazine).

**mwnciboo**

Sorry I wasn't too clear, I mean I will model a Boarding team with lots of nice pieces (FW boarding shields etc) and use them in a "Counts as Stormtroopers" rather than Stormtroopers.

I could see a Cobra Destroyer chock full of Inquisitorial troops specialists and equipment. It would make a fairly logical HQ, but it would have to be stealth, as "Not through strength, through Guile" is the more the mantra of the inquisition.

Also I have always wanted to model Eisenhorns "Guncutter" It sounds like a great piece of kit.

**Atrocity Exhibition**

Well if they were Navy assets then we're just back to square one, it's an Abnett spanner in the works that I think we're all happy to except because it's cool - could justify them by the hit-run units I mentioned in my last post or just go with the Imperium being such a big place that different units crop up all the time - dunno which segmentum Eishorn is based in but in the fluff and in the rules each fleet has it's own traditions and it's own variations on units - like the flachion/armageddon classes - so could also be justified by that.

like I said 2010 compendium is halfway to being official, its not some fan based creation but an attempt to muster stats from warp storm and forgeworld into canon lists as well as to create some new fleet lists that were ultimately pretty poor. The reason why it wasn't endorsed is because they didn't balance it very well with the previous lists- take the Bakka list for example, they have escorts that do the same stats but for cheaper than before...then again what do GW know, what with the broken necon stats

Automatically Appended Next Post:

mwnciboo wrote:model a Boarding team with lots of nice pieces (FW boarding shields etc)

yeah that's something I've always wanted to do, except I'd want to make a vignette of a desperate boarding actions with the trusted crew or maybe even the ratings defending themselves with wrenches/chains. Some cool descriptions in 'The Gothic War'. One of those 'nice' pieces could be the crazy pole staff thing used by the Navy Officer in 'Enforcer' in his duel with a commissar. It's got needle tipped bristles at the end attached to a powerpack at the base so in the crowded decks what you miss with the blade gets a good electrical zapping. not sure how good a conversion would look tbh but want to try it at some point

**Lynata**

mwnciboo wrote:I could see a Cobra Destroyer chock full of Inquisitorial troops specialists and equipment. It would make a fairly logical HQ, but it would have to be stealth, as "Not through strength, through Guile" is the more the mantra of the inquisition.

Hmm, may depend on the Order. Hereticus doesn't shy away from overt displays of power, I think (ironically this also creates a "veil" for other Inquisitors to work behind, as everyone will just be looking at the guy making all the noise). And if you want to take inspiration from licensed products such as the Dark Millennium TCG or some BL novels, some Inquisitors do "own" large warships there - complete with black-red paintjob and a big =][= logo on the hull.

Atrocity Exhibition wrote:like I said 2010 compendium is halfway to being official, its not some fan based creation but an attempt to muster stats from warp storm and forgeworld into canon lists as well as to create some new fleet lists that were ultimately pretty poor. The reason why it wasn't endorsed is because they didn't balance it very well with the previous lists- take the Bakka list for example, they have escorts that do the same stats but for cheaper than before...then again what do GW know, what with the broken necon stats

Oh, on first glance I didn't find anything that could be criticized in that Compendium - all that it states is that there are IST's on the Black Ships, which is fluff from the Witch Hunter Codex.

I think you are still overestimating its degree of "officialty", though. At least from the description in your Warseer-link, there was no contract with GW at all, it's just that there was a GW-endorsed "council" of BFG players who thought this book was cool. Ultimately, this does not reflect GW's own opinion on anything that was newly added there. Not that this should have any effect on this discussion, as Inquisition Storm Troopers being found on Black Ships isn't anything "new".

As far as Abnett or Mitchell or many other authors are concerned, I just don't see why some writers have to invent new things rather than sticking to what had been established before. I get the idea about creative license and there being no canon, but some stuff really doesn't play a major role for a story at all, so there should be no need why it has to be added. In many cases, it just seems to be a lack of background research. Avoidable.

**CpatTom**

Lynata wrote: (text)... complete with black-red paintjob and a big =][= logo on the hull.

Subtle stuff. Haha.

(Text)... Avoidable.

Avoidable with effort and research. Shoot, BL should get some sort of review service going, have a few folks selected to read through it and bring up these points. Do they not do this? Maybe we could get it sourced to some dakka users.

**Brother Captain Andrecus**

Part of the problem is that the Eisenhorn novels are written by Dan Abnett, who takes some interesting liberties with the 40k canon. Which means that anything you read in one of his books is probably either completely made up on the spot, or a twisted version of some pre-existing piece of 40k lore. Ah, Dan Abnett. Your books are so trippy.

**Atrocity Exhibition**

I think you are still overestimating its degree of "officialty", though. At least from the description in your Warseer-link, there was no contract with GW at all, it's just that there was a GW-endorsed "council"

Well there's not really a exact level of unoffical on there, hands down it's unoffical because GW turned their back on it but from what I've read it was contracted by GW alongside the 2010 faq, as a way of tying up loose ends of BFG and most importantly keep people buying the lush forgeworld range that had no stats within a fleet list- besides you've read the warseer description wrong:

It has been approved by the High Admiralty, a group of GW approved reviewers and fans and has been submitted to GW for final approval and posting on the Specialist Games Resources website

That is the approval, the High Admiralty group are apparently also the creators so that's abit silly. The creators are, afaik, Nate Montes, Ray Bell and Bob Henderson who are professional but freelance specialist game developers and who have got other publications at least on the GW website - I haven't bothered to see whether they crop up in any books. You can tell by the quality of the docs that they have had official sanctioning during production. Personally I treat them as forgeworld rules, it's not been created by a wacko kid in his room but you also need to get the approval of your enemy to go ahead and use them.

**Lynata**

CpatTom wrote:Avoidable with effort and research. Shoot, BL should get some sort of review service going, have a few folks selected to read through it and bring up these points. Do they not do this? Maybe we could get it sourced to some dakka users.

BL has editors - it's just that ... I dunno, I guess even the editors don't know everything. Most people, including writers and editors, "specialize" in a few areas of the fluff where they are really good. Problem is, as soon as they write or read anything else (which can happen by "side appearances" in the novels), they run into a dead end. Unlike Star Wars, GW doesn't seem to keep an internal database around where authors can look up stuff, so most will probably not even know that there has ever been something written about it, much less where to look. This is more of a problem with things that aren't as popular or repeated in every second GW book or simply haven't been mentioned for many years, such as information about the Imperial Navy or the Sisters of Battle or the exact properties of Astartes equipment. For what it's worth, only the big fans of the affected army will ever notice it, which is probably why I'm more sceptical of BL, having seen how certain authors keep messing up the SoB (and, even worse, how readily the readers pick up these new interpretations, some of whom I deem quite controversial).

I guess it's a time/money thing. Both authors and editors can't be bothered to look up every detail, and I guess a BL editor assigned to an Inquisitor novel will know more about the Inquisition than, say, the Navy. Assuming of course that BL does assign its editors based on knowledge focus and not just randomly. In the end, neither Black Library nor Games Workshop seem to regard this as a problem, for they don't consider consistency to be as important as us fluff geeks do. In fact, Andy Chambers did comment on ADB's blog that he prefers to work in a setting that isn't "constrained" by canon, and I think a lot of writers will share this opinion. It means that everybody can write what and how he likes it more (which is admittedly a tempting thing, I suppose) at the cost of sacrificing any consistency between the various products.

**Kanluwen**

Brother Captain Andrecus wrote:Part of the problem is that the Eisenhorn novels are written by Dan Abnett, who takes some interesting liberties with the 40k canon. Which means that anything you read in one of his books is probably either completely made up on the spot, or a twisted version of some pre-existing piece of 40k lore. Ah, Dan Abnett. Your books are so trippy.

Part of the problem is that the Eisenhorn novels helped establish the current canon in regards to the Navy and Inquisition.

At the time of Eisenhorn, we didn't have all that much information about the Inquisition and the philosophies of the organization. We had some, but not all.
At the time of Eisenhorn, the Navy wasn't entirely well fleshed out other than we had very different sectorial fleets.

As for the Armsmen we saw in "Xenos", it's worth noting that they were referred to as "Battlefleet Scarus elite", so it's not impossible that the "standard" guys were equipped differently...which would explain why the Guard foundees who stole the pinnace and equipment took the Scarus elite gear rather than the standard gear, as it would be less effective at concealing their identities or any number of reasons why.

**CpatTom**

Lynata wrote:BL has editors - it's just that ... I dunno, I guess even the editors don't know everything. Most people, including writers and editors, "specialize" in a few areas of the fluff where they are really good. Problem is, as soon as they write or read anything else (which can happen by "side appearances" in the novels), they run into a dead end. Unlike Star Wars, GW doesn't seem to keep an internal database around where authors can look up stuff, so most will probably not even know that there has ever been something written about it, much less where to look. This is more of a problem with things that aren't as popular or repeated in every second GW book or simply haven't been mentioned for many years, such as information about the Imperial Navy or the Sisters of Battle or the exact properties of Astartes equipment. For what it's worth, only the big fans of the affected army will ever notice it, which is probably why I'm more sceptical of BL, having seen how certain authors keep messing up the SoB (and, even worse, how readily the readers pick up these new interpretations, some of whom I deem quite controversial).

I guess it's a time/money thing. Both authors and editors can't be bothered to look up every detail, and I guess a BL editor assigned to an Inquisitor novel will know more about the Inquisition than, say, the Navy. Assuming of course that BL does assign its editors based on knowledge focus and not just randomly. In the end, neither Black Library nor Games Workshop seem to regard this as a problem, for they don't consider consistency to be as important as us fluff geeks do. In fact, Andy Chambers did comment on ADB's blog that he prefers to work in a setting that isn't "constrained" by canon, and I think a lot of writers will share this opinion. It means that everybody can write what and how he likes it more (which is admittedly a tempting thing, I suppose) at the cost of sacrificing any consistency between the various products.

Certainly understandable that people would want to do less work and be able to say whatever it is that they want without regards to the setting's consistency at all. The "no canon" policy is meant to allow for the creation of fluff by the people who play the game, and the sheer magnitude of 40k is supposed to allow for all the different variations to be conceivable somewhere in the galaxy. At a certain level I understand this to be a good thing, because the individuals creativity should come first; however, I have my doubts as to whether some of these things are there for the benefit of the 40k fans, or just laziness on the part of writers and editors who can't be bothered to look at what has been written before. Obviously, this is a cynical viewpoint, and there are any number of reasons that the writers/editors would choose to make their own background on a particular point, so i have to keep that in mind as well.

In 40k, there is only contradictions.
Thats part of the reason I love it, though haha.

**Corporal_Reznov**

Atrocity Exhibition wrote:The best book to understand the workings of the Imperial Navy from a Black Library point of view is probably 'Relentless' followed closely by 'Gothic War'. I've not yet seen Battlefleet Kronos (Rogue Trade RPG) but that will surely have everything in minute detail- whether or not its canon... meh:

Its canon just like everything else.

Finally you have the ratings- these guys are essentially indentured slave types - forced to work in the lower decks in terrible conditions and extremely high mortaility. They come from planetary tithes (so the governors often give the navy the dredges of their population - drain out the prisons, sweeps threw slums etc) and also from previous boarding actions - the losers come aboard in chains. Therefore the ratings cannot generally be trusted in a fight, they are as likely to turn on the Imperial Navy as they are the invaders of the ship (hence the fortress level/armsmen). These guys are often chained together or locked inside rooms - they have overseers (who tend to be fragged) and may well attempt their own uprising if given a chance during some big battle.

Those guys don't do that, thats the Indentured workers job now as per Battlefleet Koronus. Here:

Battlefleet Koronus pg 70 wrote:raTings

Ratings take care of the functions that need muscle instead of
training—hauling shells and missiles, re-routing cables, clearing
debris and conducting basic maintenance (i.e., scrubbing the
decks). They are the basic voidsmen aboard a ship. Men in this
class typically have a myriad of sub-classifications (ratings) that
specify their role further, e.g. gun-layer third class, fuse-changer
second class and so on. Ratings make up the bulk of the crew and
will be the ones doing most of the fighting in boarding actions.
Contrary to popular belief, many Navy ratings are
volunteers—the pay is good and the conditions are better
than those on many Imperial worlds*. The Navy can make
generous promises when it knows barely half the ratings will
survive a cruise and collect their gelt at the end.

If there aren’t enough volunteers to fulfil a captain’s
requirements he always has the right to send press gangs to
tithe more crew directly from any planet along his way. This
can mean anything from emptying penal colonies to pressganging
collections of citizens out of hab-blocks. In practice this
is often achieved with the collusion of the planetary governor,
but an Imperial Navy captain does not need permission to take
crew from any world. The necessary practice of press-ganging
remains a potential flashpoint for rebellion on many worlds and
Navy ratings have an unsavoury reputation as little more than
convicts because of it.

As stated previously, there are multitudes of
different types of ratings, but they can often
be divided into two broad classifications,
armsmen and voidsmen.

ArmsmAN

Armsmen are crewmembers trusted to carry weapons at all
times onboard the ship and maintain the contents of the
weapons lockers. They keep discipline among the lower ranks
and protect the crew as needed—usually by wading in with
truncheons or shooting first and asking questions later. Unlike
most ratings, armsmen get to move around different decks
of the ship in the course of their duties and their loyalties
are carefully scrutinised. Many ratings spurn the chance
to become an armsman simply because they don’t want to
become part of the systematic brutality of ship discipline.

voidsmeN

Voidsmen (also referred to by the more archaic “shipmen” on
some Imperial Navy vessels) are those ship’s crew with some
training and skill, the ratings most likely to be entrusted with tasks
such as conduit-maintenance, bulwark repairs, cog polishing, or
other jobs that might require some skill and autonomy. Hiveworlders
are favoured as voidsmen due to their familiarity with
technology and the fact that they are inured to the worst of the
noise and claustrophobic conditions found on ships. However,
a captain sometimes has to take what he can get so a crew can
become an eclectic mix of feral barbarians, agri-world farmers
and cynical hive-worlders by the end of a long cruise.
The lowest ranking voidsmen are given the most mundane
drudgery. However, those who are smart, lucky, and dutiful may
advance in rank after many years of service.

On many ships,
these individuals are called able voidsmen, the title officially
acknowledging their skill and experience. Some captains require
examinations be passed to achieve able voidman rating while
others simply bestow it as a marker for time served onboard.
Occasionally, a voidsman with both brains and ambition
may become a leading voidsman. Officially, leading voidsmen
are simply those placed in charge of work gangs but
unofficially many officers use it as a proving ground for those
under consideration to be warrant officers. Needless to say,
only a very rare few reach this point.

indenTured WorKers

Almost every warship has a voracious appetite for unskilled hard
labour, and this appetite is fed by a steady diet of indentured
workers. Often these are unfortunates who are press-ganged
from a worlds slums or taken en masse from penal colonies—
some of the Imperium’s teeming hordes of humanity, only valued
for their ability to work. The Navy sees these unfortunates as
much a resource as fuel for the drives and food for the crew,
and they are given duties such as hauling guns into position,
turning flywheels, and carrying supplies, heavy equipment, and
macrocannon shells. Most ships must replenish their crews of
indentured workers every so often, as a steady stream die to
malnutrition, accidents, and disciplinary actions

Many indentured workers may be “upgraded” with crude
augmentics and even mental inhibitors to make them more
compliant to orders (and likely ensuring they’ll serve as
indentured workers for the remainder of their lives). For those
who avoid that fate, their best hope is to become a rating,
learning some task that makes them valued in the ship hierarchy

*= I take this as meaning in general seeing as FFG books like RT and DH have shown as pleasant Imperial planets that aren't hell holes as well as BL.

Brother Captain Andrecus wrote:Part of the problem is that the Eisenhorn novels are written by Dan Abnett, who takes some interesting liberties with the 40k canon. Which means that anything you read in one of his books is probably either completely made up on the spot, or a twisted version of some pre-existing piece of 40k lore. Ah, Dan Abnett. Your books are so trippy.

Oh heaven forbid, 40K has new stuff added into it like new tech or new info or retcons. Hell if this is your opinion why the hell not have the same opinion about the Tau cause they're also new?

Lynata wrote:SNIP

What you don't get Lynata is that GW don't care about canon and consistency they never have and never will cause if they cared they wouldn't have reorganized the SM's are organised with Vanguards and whatever or print the existence of Draigo. As long as rpg's and BL stay withing GW's defined limits like not resurrecting the Emp, changing too much, or going against the settings basics that aren't going to be retconned, anything goes.

**Atrocity Exhibition**

Yeah I realised the ratings error in another thread, the roles of indentured workers and ratings seems to overlap across novels

as for what's canon, GW official stance is that only their publications are canon - rule books and codexes. So BL RT and DH aren't offically canon but since GW offer such a little slice of 40kverse I think we're all happy to accept anything they endorse and over look the many contradictions

**Corporal_Reznov**

Atrocity Exhibition wrote:Yeah I realised the ratings error in another thread, the roles of indentured workers and ratings seems to overlap across novels

as for what's canon, GW official stance is that only their publications are canon - rule books and codexes. So BL RT and DH aren't offically canon but since GW offer such a little slice of 40kverse I think we're all happy to accept anything they endorse and over look the many contradictions

Who has ever stated that only rulebooks and codexes are canon? I'm generally interested in your sources and they better be recent.

Cause what I found on both this site and Warseer say this:

40k Canon debate again *sigh*.

Here is some facts that talk about canon found on 40k hobby sites which while means nothing here on spacebattles. Still I'm sure it will help you guys:

Seaward wrote:
There isn't ambiguity in the statements; there's not a lot of room for interpretation. They're simply not telling you what you want to hear.

Gav Thorpe wrote:Often folks ask if Black Library books are ‘canon’. With Warhammer and Warhammer 40,000, the notion of canon is a fallacy.

This quote can be found here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/402241.page

The below 2 can be found at here: http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=319182&page=4

Dead.Blue.Clown wrote:Let's just dismiss that ol' rumour right now. It's not true. The design studio, Black Library and Forge World are all canon. However, it's based on the fact that the 40K IP isn't concerned with "canon" in the way a lot of fans assume, since they're basing their perceptions on guesses, rumours, and occasionally a few old misquotes taken out of context.

http://www.boomtron.com/2011/03/grimdark-ii-loose-canon/

This guy^, from what I can tell on warseer, is ADB(a Black Library writer)

baphomael wrote:Quite right. Rather than having an established basis of 'canon truth', like some settings, 40k counts *all* material produced as, in some ways, part of the universe.

Rather, they seem to be taking an approach that views all the background stuff as some kind of historical nugget of information. Often, these are corroborative, and help fashion a consensus. Likewise, just as in history, there will be sources that are contradictory. We, as the readers, judge and interpret what is accurate, apocryphal, what are lies, whispers and propaganda. And even then, as with history, there will be conflicting interpretations of the same essential event or fact (indeed, I remember chuckling at the booklet I read containing the correspondence of two historians furiously arguing with each other, via letter, as to whether his club foot lay on the left or the right side of his body... strangely interesting reading, leaving me questioning what is more tragic - that obsessive pedantry of the two correspondents over something as trivial as the exact placement of Byron's club foot.... or that I actually read their correspondence... having said that, I think we all, as a community of wargamers, are guilty of the same level of obsessive pedantry over trivial things, otherwise we wouldn't have posts such as this )

Likewise, there are also parallels to theological inquiry - akin to the theological debates about what biblical stories are considered 'canon', 'apocrypha' or outright heresy (its not for nought the 30k fluff gives a nod to the Council of Nicaea). Likewise, even within established 'canon' there are rampant theological debates between academics, with more letters after their name than I knew were in the alphabet, about what aspects of religious texts are considered metaphorical model, symbolic, allegorical, literal etc etc. Indeed, there are debates over the authorship of certain parts of gospels (in much the same way as arguments amongst historians, linguists and literary experts, have debated whether some of Shakespeare's works are plagiarised (or, likewise, whether that accusation has stemmed from Shakespeare having changed his name, making the writing style similar to another) or else wrongly attributed.

And, in that sense, I rather like it that way.