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.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Did Khârn really win though? It's not as though Celestine will stay dead. Much like Draigo's victories against Daemons are fleeting and temporal, Celestine getting her head chopped off by Khorne's favoured son but coming back as though she didn't care later through the Grace of the Emperor (TM) is more or less telling Khorne that he has no power over her or the Emperor. Chop off her head as much as you like, she'll be back.

Infinite blood for the blood god and skulls for the skull throne > finite blood and skull.

Can't really judge this excerpt without knowing the entire story, but GW has had a long history of having Sisters of Battle suffer because of gak. It's a common enough thing with GW that 1d4chan even has a whole section about it: https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Sisters_of_Battle#Sisters_Snuff

-Removed by insaniak-

 Peregrine wrote:

Table wrote:
Let me refine my statement. A character should not win,lose or live or die due to sex. That is sexist. I thought we were trying to go away from that?

Not disagreeing with that. But you were originally talking about the number of women in the setting, which is an entirely different question.

Im not sure GW has chosen to engage in Identity politics.

Of course they have. Choosing to make the setting a bunch of white dudes (with occasional token non-white-dude characters) is identity politics. It just happens to be identity politics in a different direction.

I wanna talk about this one for a second because it's AMAZING how few people forget this: 40k abso-freaking-lutely plays identity politics.

Until very, very recently, the appearance of any race besides "white" or any females have been pretty much treated as a defining trait by GW.

If a female model appeared, "female" is at least a part of their shtick (Succubus/Wyches, Eschers from Necromunda, Sisters of Battle, Howling Banshees). If a not-white model appeared, not being white was part of their shtick (original Dark Angels/Salamanders concepts, Tallarn, White Scars, whatever the mongolia themed IG regiment was called).

That is identity politics, as defined by the people who complain about identity politics. And yet, they seem to have no problem with it. A model just HAPPENING to be female seems to cause much more complaints because "oh you're just shoving women in for no reason."

But if you're really trying to avoid identity politics, wouldn't just putting more women in WITHOUT calling out the fact that "oh, this is an IG regiment of only women, this is an elite warrior women order, this is the Space Watermelons marine chapter" be the absolute best way to do things? Having your gender/race/whatever be a part of your identity is exactly what people complain about when they're complaining about identity politics.

 kastelen wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Did Khârn really win though? It's not as though Celestine will stay dead. Much like Draigo's victories against Daemons are fleeting and temporal, Celestine getting her head chopped off by Khorne's favoured son but coming back as though she didn't care later through the Grace of the Emperor (TM) is more or less telling Khorne that he has no power over her or the Emperor. Chop off her head as much as you like, she'll be back.

Infinite blood for the blood god and skulls for the skull throne > finite blood and skull.

Sure, but it more or less traps Khorne and his followers in their own dumb rage. If their head-chopping has no consequence other than as a mild annoyance, you've effectively removed one of the four Chaos Gods as a threat. "The Emperor is so powerful that his most devout followers can brush off even the foulest of heretics with ease. If you're faithful and pious enough, YOU could become like her! Enlist in the Imperial Guard today!"

Khorne's followers are tratidionally scary because they show up as a gibbering mass of madmen who kill everything in the most gruesome way possible. If the Emperor can be shown to have such power that the negative effects of Khorne existing are largely mitigated, isn't Celestine's "sacrifice" and prompt rebirth the ultimate triumph of Mankind over Khorne?

Celestine as mentioned has the whole rising again thing. If this were literally ANY other named character, there would have been some convenient lazy deus ex machina to intervene and prevent that named character from dying and ticking off all their fans (seriously, can you imagine the butthurt over some precious spahs mahreen character properly dying?). Celestine doesnt truly die (heroes never die) she just gets knocked down and gets back up again. That is her machina. She doesnt need someone in blue power armour to swoop in and save the day. She IS the one that does the day saving and if shes going down then by crikey you know the brown matter has hit the fan.

That said, the excerpt OP has provided isnt a flattering light for her. Her spirit and her faith is unbroken which is good, but the except lacks any substance and context. As mentioned, this could be the end of a 12 page awesome fight; or a trashy blurb text (which is what it reads like). I think this is from a recent novel which i cant think of the name of because i havent been compelled to read new stuff of late as the impression ive gotten of it has been shallow.

Regardless she will be back. There is a book coming out soon entitled "Celestine" so kind of a giveaway there.

You made an account to start this thread? who's alt are you?

 Stux wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Table wrote:
The amount of females in the setting (while small) is not or should not be a factor in storytelling.

Why not? Why aren't women part of the story? Why is it taken for granted that women are few in number?

Identity politics ruin everything. Thankfully GW has avoided them......up to now.

Only if you declare "things I agree with" to not be identity politics. GW's chosen identity politics just happen to be very white, male, and often immature.

What you are asking for is to be pandered to. Literally. Im not touching the identity politics in play here but I am going to give you a suggestion. Stop doing this (what you are doing) every time you feel you are not being catered to. It just makes GW not want to include girls because if they do, they step into this hole of pandering.

Why is it "pandering" to ask for more women in the story, but not "pandering" to ask for a new ork codex?

For once Peregrine I agree with everything you say here.

I see you agreeing with him all the time lol

 SHUPPET wrote:
You made an account to start this thread? who's alt are you?

 Stux wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Table wrote:
The amount of females in the setting (while small) is not or should not be a factor in storytelling.

Why not? Why aren't women part of the story? Why is it taken for granted that women are few in number?

Identity politics ruin everything. Thankfully GW has avoided them......up to now.

Only if you declare "things I agree with" to not be identity politics. GW's chosen identity politics just happen to be very white, male, and often immature.

What you are asking for is to be pandered to. Literally. Im not touching the identity politics in play here but I am going to give you a suggestion. Stop doing this (what you are doing) every time you feel you are not being catered to. It just makes GW not want to include girls because if they do, they step into this hole of pandering.

Why is it "pandering" to ask for more women in the story, but not "pandering" to ask for a new ork codex?

For once Peregrine I agree with everything you say here.

I see you agreeing with him all the time lol

Today that seems to be the case, it usually isn't!

EDIT: wait, you read through the thread and this was the one point you found contentious enough to question? That seems a bit... Odd

 Vaktathi wrote:
It should also be noted that Kharn himself has been offed in rather unceremonious ways more than once, including being impaled on a Rhino's hedgecutter.

That didn't actually kill him, the only time Kharn died was at the Gates of Terra where he was either slain by Sigismund or a bunch of Blood Angels, and was either resurrected by his sheer anger or Khorne's whimsy.

If you have nothing constructive to add to the discussion then do not post.

Handmaiden wrote:
There aren't many female special characters in 40k, I can just think of Lelith Hesperax, Jain Zar, Celestine and Inquisitor Greyfax.

Well there is also Praxedes (killed by nids), Sabbat (nuked), Helena (old age), Ephrael... ecclesiarchal characters do have a tendency of dying in their fluff - Jacobus was killed off in his opening fluff for instance (lung disease).

They are a bit lazy with Celestine getting her killed in every appearance though, as if it's some kind of checklist they have to tick off when she is featured.

 Draco wrote:

Dai wrote:
GW is pretty poor at writing female characters but they tend not to fall into the pure fantasy that video games do. I'd imagine that the staff is largely made up of white geeky British boys.



Note: there is no judgement here, please no-one bring a toxic American culture war reply to this post.

GW have good female characters too. Koriel Zeth and Linya Tychon at least.

Inquisitor Amberley Vail, too.

Kharn died was at the Gates of Terra where he was either slain by Sigismund or a bunch of Blood Angels

Anywhere to read further on this?

Other decent female characters were the Navigator from the NLs trilogy and the female assassins in Nemesis.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Table wrote:
Let me refine my statement. A character should not win,lose or live or die due to sex. That is sexist. I thought we were trying to go away from that?

Not disagreeing with that. But you were originally talking about the number of women in the setting, which is an entirely different question.

Im not sure GW has chosen to engage in Identity politics.

Of course they have. Choosing to make the setting a bunch of white dudes (with occasional token non-white-dude characters) is identity politics. It just happens to be identity politics in a different direction.

I wanna talk about this one for a second because it's AMAZING how few people forget this: 40k abso-freaking-lutely plays identity politics.

Until very, very recently, the appearance of any race besides "white" or any females have been pretty much treated as a defining trait by GW.

If a female model appeared, "female" is at least a part of their shtick (Succubus/Wyches, Eschers from Necromunda, Sisters of Battle, Howling Banshees). If a not-white model appeared, not being white was part of their shtick (original Dark Angels/Salamanders concepts, Tallarn, White Scars, whatever the mongolia themed IG regiment was called).

That is identity politics, as defined by the people who complain about identity politics. And yet, they seem to have no problem with it. A model just HAPPENING to be female seems to cause much more complaints because "oh you're just shoving women in for no reason."

But if you're really trying to avoid identity politics, wouldn't just putting more women in WITHOUT calling out the fact that "oh, this is an IG regiment of only women, this is an elite warrior women order, this is the Space Watermelons marine chapter" be the absolute best way to do things? Having your gender/race/whatever be a part of your identity is exactly what people complain about when they're complaining about identity politics.

GW is doing excellent with gender in Age of Sigmar, which I believe is where they are pulling a more diverse audience. Personal experience is that women like fantasy more than scifi, especially when the scifi is basically a micheal bay movie on steroids. Sure, AoS has gender specific factions, like Daughters of Kain being only women, and kharadron overlords being only men, or daemons being only entities of pure chaos without gender. Other factions like sigmar and deepkin have a good diversity, and are not in your face about it, which is how it should be.

 gwarsh41 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Table wrote:
Let me refine my statement. A character should not win,lose or live or die due to sex. That is sexist. I thought we were trying to go away from that?

Not disagreeing with that. But you were originally talking about the number of women in the setting, which is an entirely different question.

Im not sure GW has chosen to engage in Identity politics.

Of course they have. Choosing to make the setting a bunch of white dudes (with occasional token non-white-dude characters) is identity politics. It just happens to be identity politics in a different direction.

I wanna talk about this one for a second because it's AMAZING how few people forget this: 40k abso-freaking-lutely plays identity politics.

Until very, very recently, the appearance of any race besides "white" or any females have been pretty much treated as a defining trait by GW.

If a female model appeared, "female" is at least a part of their shtick (Succubus/Wyches, Eschers from Necromunda, Sisters of Battle, Howling Banshees). If a not-white model appeared, not being white was part of their shtick (original Dark Angels/Salamanders concepts, Tallarn, White Scars, whatever the mongolia themed IG regiment was called).

That is identity politics, as defined by the people who complain about identity politics. And yet, they seem to have no problem with it. A model just HAPPENING to be female seems to cause much more complaints because "oh you're just shoving women in for no reason."

But if you're really trying to avoid identity politics, wouldn't just putting more women in WITHOUT calling out the fact that "oh, this is an IG regiment of only women, this is an elite warrior women order, this is the Space Watermelons marine chapter" be the absolute best way to do things? Having your gender/race/whatever be a part of your identity is exactly what people complain about when they're complaining about identity politics.

GW is doing excellent with gender in Age of Sigmar, which I believe is where they are pulling a more diverse audience. Personal experience is that women like fantasy more than scifi, especially when the scifi is basically a micheal bay movie on steroids. Sure, AoS has gender specific factions, like Daughters of Kain being only women, and kharadron overlords being only men, or daemons being only entities of pure chaos without gender. Other factions like sigmar and deepkin have a good diversity, and are not in your face about it, which is how it should be.

In general, I agree. And I don't have much of a conceptual problem with the passage posted by the OP, except to point out that it's a bit laughable to have people on this thread going "Celestine shouldn't have just won because shes a WOMAN that'd be sexist/stupid PC culture!" when the reason why Celestine loses the fight is because she's a freely killable character and you can nearly 100% of the time accurately predict who will win a given fight in 40k based on who is involved (Killable character vs important character who can't die because they make a model for them) and where it takes place (Tyranids must lose on Baal because otherwise Blood Angels cease to exist, for example).

It's lazy, obnoxious storytelling to have a female character win because they're female. it's also lazy, obnoxious storytelling to have a whole slew of characters who always win because there's models made for them.

If you wanna take a quick jump over to AoS, you can use Lady Olynder as an example... the Mortarch of Grief of the Nighthaunt. Another example, to the best of my knowledge, is Neave Blacktalon, Knight-Zephyros of the Stormcast Eternals.

Just my $0.02

SG

40 thousand years in the future humanity fights an endless war, united against aliens and the threat of chaos. Do you guys think they care if their fellow soldiers are black or white? Do you guys think they care how many of their lasgun sporting fellows are female? Get a grip and stop feeding the troll.

Besides, ladies play nids and drukhari, SoB is for neckbeards.

 Fueli wrote:

Besides, ladies play nids and drukhari, SoB is for neckbeards.

SoB group will change when they come into plastic as they will be more accessible. For the most part they have been collected by diehards ands masochists due to gakky rules(up until 8th) and being in metal for the most part.

I must say that having Celestine as an endless resurrection machine kinda makes her less dramatic. She sacrificing herself?! Nah, she'll be back next weekend. She becomes a writer's gimmick to make things look powerful, a bit like the poor Craftworld Avatar and its encounters with every single Space Marine.

On the other hand, being constantly slain in the service of the Emperor is quite the martyrdom, especially when that sort of thing is why Daemon Princes are slaves to darkness.

 Eldarsif wrote:

I must say that having Celestine as an endless resurrection machine kinda makes her less dramatic. She sacrificing herself?! Nah, she'll be back next weekend. She becomes a writer's gimmick to make things look powerful, a bit like the poor Craftworld Avatar and its encounters with every single Space Marine.

See also: Jain Zar.

Hell thats most of the original point of the Phoenix Lords: give the Imperium big names Xenos to knock off to fluff up the hero of the week without actually killing anyone.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Did Khârn really win though? It's not as though Celestine will stay dead. Much like Draigo's victories against Daemons are fleeting and temporal, Celestine getting her head chopped off by Khorne's favoured son but coming back as though she didn't care later through the Grace of the Emperor (TM) is more or less telling Khorne that he has no power over her or the Emperor. Chop off her head as much as you like, she'll be back.

Khorne cares not for if the skull comes back to like at some other point after being chopped...only that the skull was chopped. Kharne collected a skull..and moved on. Her coming back to like just lets he collect her skull again... Happy Day!!!

A.T. wrote:


They are a bit lazy with Celestine getting her killed in every appearance though, as if it's some kind of checklist they have to tick off when she is featured.

That's a trope that all characters with immortality have to suffer though. The writers want to show off the character's super power and they generally over do it.

Handmaiden wrote:


And she had to be written to die fighting him...why?
And even if she was, why's it a curbstomp? Not too long ago she was holding her own against Abaddon where it was implied she'd have taken him if it weren't for the pylons.

Why would this make women want to play 40k?

The problem is that GW did it in the wrong order. If I recall correctly, a character is supposed to get curbstomped by a champion of Khorne, then declare a great war of vengeance to prove themselves once again. Carve a bloody path to the Avatar of Chaos Undivided at the height of his power just before he seizes complete victory. Then sucker punch him, beat the snot out of him, spit on his face and say "Green iz da best" before walking away as the Chaos forces crumble.

Wait... were we talking about Celestine or Storm of Chaos Grimgor?

ccs wrote:

Handmaiden wrote:
IWhy would they put over Kharn and have Celestine job when Celestine's army is coming out soon?

Don't worry about it. I'm sure she'll heal up just fine in time for the release.
It's like when Marvel/DC screws up a character in their books. You'll get about a two year stretch of crap & then about a month before the character hits the screen again in their next movie, SURPRISE! Suddenly everything resets and is made right.

Besides, at least she got her ass kicked by Kharn. In actual play she's just as likely to get taken out by a grot blaster, a las-pistol, shrapnel from an exploding vehicle, or any other # of stupid random dice rolls. Heck along time ago (3e?) I saw her get killed by PLANT LIFE. Twice. Once by some man eating plant that got rolled up from a terrain chart - she landed too near it, dice were rolled & "gulp", she became a snack. The second time? She impaled herself on a tree. In that edition if you jumped/flew into terrain you had to make a check upon landing or take an un-savable wound. Dice were rolled, dead saint.
So at least she fell to Kharn, not slipped & drowned in a muddy crater or such.

I feel like after the Tomb Raider reboot we could call that means of dying "being Tomd Raider'd" considering the number of QTE deaths Laura could face versus trees and other dangerous spikey things in that game.

What book is this quote/page from. It's impossible to judge any story based on one page that the OP clearly isolated to support a particular agenda. Additionally her dying is kinda her thing, and she gives as good as she get's in a lot of stories. Hell, in Gathering Storm she stands toe to toe with Abaddon and manages to wound him pretty badly. Sisters being murdered off hand is kinda a played out trope but there are plenty of good stories about them were they actually win.

A.T. wrote:

Handmaiden wrote:
There aren't many female special characters in 40k, I can just think of Lelith Hesperax, Jain Zar, Celestine and Inquisitor Greyfax.

Well there is also Praxedes (killed by nids), Sabbat (nuked), Helena (old age), Ephrael... ecclesiarchal characters do have a tendency of dying in their fluff - Jacobus was killed off in his opening fluff for instance (lung disease).

They are a bit lazy with Celestine getting her killed in every appearance though, as if it's some kind of checklist they have to tick off when she is featured.

Yeah, martyrdom is a strong trait of the Sisters, and if you read what happened to the original six who overthrew Vandire they all had bad ends as well.

I also want to point out that while Celestine is a cool-headed Emperor-powered living saint, she's against a madness engine powered by BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD and SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE who has ten thousand years of fighting experience against anything and everything that moves. One of those things is going to have a leg up in a fight, and it ain't the girl with wings and shiny armour, it's the nutter who doesn't care if you have a flaming sword stuck through his chest as long as he can take the head off your neck.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 gwarsh41 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Table wrote:
Let me refine my statement. A character should not win,lose or live or die due to sex. That is sexist. I thought we were trying to go away from that?

Not disagreeing with that. But you were originally talking about the number of women in the setting, which is an entirely different question.

Im not sure GW has chosen to engage in Identity politics.

Of course they have. Choosing to make the setting a bunch of white dudes (with occasional token non-white-dude characters) is identity politics. It just happens to be identity politics in a different direction.

I wanna talk about this one for a second because it's AMAZING how few people forget this: 40k abso-freaking-lutely plays identity politics.

Until very, very recently, the appearance of any race besides "white" or any females have been pretty much treated as a defining trait by GW.

If a female model appeared, "female" is at least a part of their shtick (Succubus/Wyches, Eschers from Necromunda, Sisters of Battle, Howling Banshees). If a not-white model appeared, not being white was part of their shtick (original Dark Angels/Salamanders concepts, Tallarn, White Scars, whatever the mongolia themed IG regiment was called).

That is identity politics, as defined by the people who complain about identity politics. And yet, they seem to have no problem with it. A model just HAPPENING to be female seems to cause much more complaints because "oh you're just shoving women in for no reason."

But if you're really trying to avoid identity politics, wouldn't just putting more women in WITHOUT calling out the fact that "oh, this is an IG regiment of only women, this is an elite warrior women order, this is the Space Watermelons marine chapter" be the absolute best way to do things? Having your gender/race/whatever be a part of your identity is exactly what people complain about when they're complaining about identity politics.

GW is doing excellent with gender in Age of Sigmar, which I believe is where they are pulling a more diverse audience. Personal experience is that women like fantasy more than scifi, especially when the scifi is basically a micheal bay movie on steroids. Sure, AoS has gender specific factions, like Daughters of Kain being only women, and kharadron overlords being only men, or daemons being only entities of pure chaos without gender. Other factions like sigmar and deepkin have a good diversity, and are not in your face about it, which is how it should be.

One of my experiances is that women tend to collect Nids more than human factions in 40k (because, and I quote one person "they're cute").

At the end of the day though, once you start saying "women can't be hurt in stories because they're women" you start going down a slippery slope of "X can't because they're X" things I've seen bandied about too much. Don't restrict who can be the villian, or who can be killed as long as it properly serves the story. Celestine dying to Kharne highlights how dangerous the Chaos Space Marines are, even to the most powerful of humans, and it also works with her character since she doesn't stay dead. It serves the story well, even if the way its executed is poorly written.

On a different note, anyone else wonder if Kharne just gets an extra life for every 888 skulls he reaps?

Spitybits is click bait, Celestine fluff is she cant die. End thread.

the_scotsman wrote:

In general, I agree. And I don't have much of a conceptual problem with the passage posted by the OP, except to point out that it's a bit laughable to have people on this thread going "Celestine shouldn't have just won because shes a WOMAN that'd be sexist/stupid PC culture!" when the reason why Celestine loses the fight is because she's a freely killable character and you can nearly 100% of the time accurately predict who will win a given fight in 40k based on who is involved (Killable character vs important character who can't die because they make a model for them) and where it takes place (Tyranids must lose on Baal because otherwise Blood Angels cease to exist, for example).

It's lazy, obnoxious storytelling to have a female character win because they're female. it's also lazy, obnoxious storytelling to have a whole slew of characters who always win because there's models made for them.

My counterpoint would be to say that they're BOTH equally killable since Kharn has died more times than Celestine has over 10,000 years. The difference is one being a murder blender known for killing anything that moves in axe range (suprised he hasn't found a way to God of War things around him with that axe actually) against one of the most powerful humans in existance. At the end of the day the fight is still between an Astartes and a Human and even with them being powered by their individual patrons (the Emperor and Khorne respectively) the Astartes basically has cheat mode on in that fight no matter how good you are in combat.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fueli wrote:
40 thousand years in the future humanity fights an endless war, united against aliens and the threat of chaos. Do you guys think they care if their fellow soldiers are black or white? Do you guys think they care how many of their lasgun sporting fellows are female? Get a grip and stop feeding the troll.

Besides, ladies play nids and drukhari, SoB is for neckbeards.

I'l have you know my beard stays firmly on my jaw thank you.

My counterpoint would be to say that they're BOTH equally killable since Kharn has died more times than Celestine has over 10,000 years. The difference is one being a murder blender known for killing anything that moves in axe range (suprised he hasn't found a way to God of War things around him with that axe actually) against one of the most powerful humans in existance. At the end of the day the fight is still between an Astartes and a Human and even with them being powered by their individual patrons (the Emperor and Khorne respectively) the Astartes basically has cheat mode on in that fight no matter how good you are in combat.

She did put up quite an amazing fight against Abbadon on Cadia.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

My counterpoint would be to say that they're BOTH equally killable since Kharn has died more times than Celestine has over 10,000 years. The difference is one being a murder blender known for killing anything that moves in axe range (suprised he hasn't found a way to God of War things around him with that axe actually) against one of the most powerful humans in existance. At the end of the day the fight is still between an Astartes and a Human and even with them being powered by their individual patrons (the Emperor and Khorne respectively) the Astartes basically has cheat mode on in that fight no matter how good you are in combat.

She did put up quite an amazing fight against Abbadon on Cadia.

Oh I'm not saying she can't fight well, I'm just saying that she's fighting against an Astartes which to a human is basically like fighting someone with cheat mode on. The fact that she can go toe to toe with them so well is more a compliment to her ability than her dying to Kharne is a point against her ability.