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.

Ugh, tell me about it.

Check the references for the page on Miriael Sabathiel. It quotes Codex: Sisters of Battle 2e as a source on her. She isn't mentioned anywhere (because she wasn't created until years after it was published, and even then it was by a third party for a TCG), but the reference is still there. Incidentally, it points at a full-page image.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Ugh, tell me about it.

Check the references for the page on Miriael Sabathiel. It quotes Codex: Sisters of Battle 2e as a source on her. She isn't mentioned anywhere (because she wasn't created until years after it was published, and even then it was by a third party for a TCG), but the reference is still there. Incidentally, it points at a full-page image.

Oh, and that reminds me of the number one reason why I hate the W40K wiki for anything but grabbing pictures. No citations.

SOB are good enough, if not ballsier (heh) than marines simply because they go to war without all the fancy augmentations.

 Wyzilla wrote:
You sure about that? Or did you happen to forget that assault cannons are gatling full-auto autocannons?

Tacticals can't use assault cannons OR autocannons. Nor can scouts.

A lot of the "best equipment" isn't available to Marines. Thus, my statement about that being subjective and inconsistent between tabletop and lore. It's just a cool-sounding statement, not really a statement of fact. They have better equipment than most of the Imperium, but not necessarily always the best. Meanwhile, Sisters' armor having equal protection isn't subjective, and it's very consistent between tabletop and lore. So that's a more reliable statement. While Sisters' armor is smaller and doesn't have all the features of Astartes armor, it DOES protect equivalently.

But really, aren't we getting off topic here?

 Melissia wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
You sure about that? Or did you happen to forget that assault cannons are gatling full-auto autocannons?

Tacticals can't use assault cannons OR autocannons. Nor can scouts.

A lot of the "best equipment" isn't available to Marines.

Terminators are infantry.

That has approximately less than zero percent relevance to the topic at hand.

 Melissia wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:
You sure about that? Or did you happen to forget that assault cannons are gatling full-auto autocannons?

Tacticals can't use assault cannons OR autocannons. Nor can scouts.

A lot of the "best equipment" isn't available to Marines. Thus, my statement about that being subjective and inconsistent between tabletop and lore. It's just a cool-sounding statement, not really a statement of fact. They have better equipment than most of the Imperium, but not necessarily always the best. Meanwhile, Sisters' armor having equal protection isn't subjective, and it's very consistent between tabletop and lore. So that's a more reliable statement. While Sisters' armor is smaller and doesn't have all the features of Astartes armor, it DOES protect equivalently.

But really, aren't we getting off topic here?

You're late to the party. Wyzilla and Miko already cleared that out in the last page.

As for the tabletop, just... No. It should never be used as an example of anything and you know it. At best, you can argue that the shared 3+ means that the two different armours are reasonably close to the same ballpark but anything more is definitely stretching it. As for equal quality stated in lore, now that's another thing. It settles the deal, supposedly.

You're not reading what is being posted, yet again. This is not using tabletop as the sole source of evidence, but as merely a corroboration of other evidence.

You're not reading what I posted. I said that using lore sources are fine, but tabletop rules should never be used as an evidence of anything, corroboration or no.

Otherwise, please, go ahead and explain how a supersonic flyer is exactly 4 times faster than a Chaos Spawn, for example.

You are free to use gameplay anecdotes as much as you like, but until they start actually matching the fluff overall I won't see them as more than footnotes in fluff discussions.

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
You're not reading what I posted. I said that using lore sources are fine, but tabletop rules should never be used as an evidence of anything, corroboration or no.

That's silly. The lore is created to sell the tabletop and vice versa. They're never in perfect alignment, but they are also never perfectly disconnected like you claim.

 Melissia wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
You're not reading what I posted. I said that using lore sources are fine, but tabletop rules should never be used as an evidence of anything, corroboration or no.

That's silly. The lore is created to sell the tabletop and vice versa. They're never in perfect alignment, but they are also never perfectly disconnected like you claim.

They are not entirely disconnected, that I never said. But they are inconsistent enough to make me dispute claims like yours of one proving the other.

If a man is right 50% of the time in his predictions, does that make the man's predictions reliable?

No, it doesn't.

In exactly the same way, while rules and fluff may match some times, it is not often enough for me to take one as evidence in a discussion of the other.

 Melissia wrote:

 BrotherHaraldus wrote:
You're not reading what I posted. I said that using lore sources are fine, but tabletop rules should never be used as an evidence of anything, corroboration or no.

That's silly. The lore is created to sell the tabletop and vice versa. They're never in perfect alignment, but they are also never perfectly disconnected like you claim.

No, they're completely disconnected, as they are with all games, tabletop or virtual, and this is pretty damn clear if you've read any of the Black Library. The only resemblance between them is that they happen to both involve the same names and factions, but how each functions is completely different. Game mechanics being used for anything is simply moronic when we have a flood of feats available to us.

SOB are in the Inquisition, not the Astartes. The closet thing to a Space marine in the Inquisition is the Grey Knights, who even have a Literal space marine counterpart *Cough* Exorcists *Cough*.

The Ordo Malleus (The Threat Beyond) - Destroys daemonic threats and investigates the nature of the Daemon. The Ordo came into being immediately after the Horus Heresy, and therefore has been a part of the Inquisition from the beginning.

The Ordo Hereticus (The Threat Within) - Investigates and roots out heresy, mutation, and rogue psykers from humanity, and polices the Ecclesiarchy. The Ordo Hereticus was founded following the events of the Age of Apostasy.

The Ordo Xenos (The Threat Without) - Investigates and eliminates alien influence and plots against the Imperium. It is not known when the Ordo Xenos was founded, however it is believed to be of a similar age to the Ordo Malleus.

And the SOB and Grey Knights haven't really gotten along...Khornate knights.

Back on topic.
Female Space marines I'm not sure about, hey I'm all for it. But I'm not sure the IOM would be.
The IG are rarely seen with females too, but there are examples. Such as Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine.
Other than I've only seen women used for erotic 40K drawings unfortunately.

But theres hope in the Lore, research and look it up. Then write your own story. Its bound to work.

The two missing legions is a good base too.

The Bloodtide is not evidence of Grey Knights being "Khornate knights" or any such nonsense.

SOB are in the Inquisition, not the Astartes. The closet thing to a Space marine in the Inquisition is the Grey Knights, who even have a Literal space marine counterpart *Cough* Exorcists *Cough*.

They are not that either. They are the Militant arm of the Church, the Ordo Hereticus usually calls upon them, but they aren't fully interlinked as ordo mallus and Grey Knights.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

SOB are in the Inquisition, not the Astartes. The closet thing to a Space marine in the Inquisition is the Grey Knights, who even have a Literal space marine counterpart *Cough* Exorcists *Cough*.

They are not that either. They are the Militant arm of the Church, the Ordo Hereticus usually calls upon them, but they aren't fully interlinked as ordo mallus and Grey Knights.

Oh right.

Forgot about that, your totally right. I remember reading that most SOB are Orphans raised by the church. Makes sense.

 Archie The Death Rider wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

SOB are in the Inquisition, not the Astartes. The closet thing to a Space marine in the Inquisition is the Grey Knights, who even have a Literal space marine counterpart *Cough* Exorcists *Cough*.

They are not that either. They are the Militant arm of the Church, the Ordo Hereticus usually calls upon them, but they aren't fully interlinked as ordo mallus and Grey Knights.

Oh right.

Forgot about that, your totally right. I remember reading that most SOB are Orphans raised by the church. Makes sense.

I..Honestly cannot tell if this is Sarcasm or not.

 Archie The Death Rider wrote:


And the SOB and Grey Knights haven't really gotten along...Khornate knights.

The SoB don't know what happened there, and the GK are probably quote impersonal about it. They'd get along fine.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
the Ordo Hereticus usually calls upon them, but they aren't fully interlinked as ordo mallus and Grey Knights.

Even that's been retconned. The Inquisition codex made no mention of the Sisters and Ordo Hereticus having any special relationship.

 Troike wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
the Ordo Hereticus usually calls upon them, but they aren't fully interlinked as ordo mallus and Grey Knights.

Even that's been retconned. The Inquisition codex made no mention of the Sisters and Ordo Hereticus having any special relationship.

To be fair, the way I've always looked at it?

It's not so much that the Ordo Hereticus and the Sisters had a "superspecial working relationship"--but rather that some of the Ordo Hereticus Inquisitors themselves built up their ties with the Sisters.

They did have a special relationship, back in 3E. The Sisters were noted to be the Chamber Militant of the Hereticus.

Though your explanation is a great way to reconcile the Witch Hunters codex with the current fluff.

The rulebook states that they "maintain close alliances", which kind of makes sense.

The Adepta Sororitas and the Ordo Hereticus were both founded to do the same job, after all - to watch the Ecclesiarchy for heresy and secession.

Much as I love Sisters, I have always struggled to reconcile their presence on the battlefield and role as the militant arm of the Ecclesiarchy with their actual stated raison d'etre of being the Ecclesiarchy's Internal Affairs division.

Realistically, Battle Sisters would only take part in battles very occasionally so the examples we have in the background, and the ability to field them as a playable army, really only show very specific instances where the Sisters actually got to kick butt. The same is almost as true for the Astartes of course.

The next problem is that the background has been altered in patches which causes these inconsistencies. The Ordo Malleus for example, as well as being the Inquisition's daemon hunters, is/was the Inquisition's internal police force too and was an organisation as unknown to most Inquisitors as the Inquisition was to most Imperial citizens. That really can't be said to be true anymore given all the additional material we have for the Inquisition and its current portrayal.

Which also leads to problems with saying the Sisters have a relationship with the Ordo Hereticus. The affiliation an Inquisitor has with the Ordo should really only be a matter for other Inquisitors and even then, not much of one. It shows a preference in threat assessment and the circles, both Inquisitorial and general with other Imperial bodies, that the Inquisitor moves in, but really, to a Sister of Battle and Inquisitor is an Inquisitor is an Inquisitor or should be. Obviously those individuals that associate with the Ordo Hereticus are culturally more likely to seek assistance from the Sisters but from the Sisters perspective they should be assisting an Inquisitor as a matter of course if asked to do so and perhaps based on their own judgement of the Inquisitor's character and faith. Really though, if an Inquisitor turns up and tells them their aide is required they should hop to it and see it as doing the Emperor's bidding.

 Melissia wrote:
Even if youonly recruit "the best" of these people, you're still missing out on the non-bald, non-white, non-men, who are taller or shorter than 5'10", and whom have no familial relationship to you, many of whom could very well be far better applicants than the ones you did accept.

In 40k, big white bald men are the best. Deal with it.

But seriously, it's just a nod to certain historic armies, and it works. There were no knightly orders made of black guys, also how do you show a racist xenophobic facist whatever empire when it's full of accepted minorities? Of course black people can be racist too but it's not associeted with them.

Also, are you suggesting that applying racial political correctness would be good for 40k? Do you also have issue with Japanesse sf worlds where there are only Japanesse people. Seriously almost every American sf portrays multicultural, multiracial future societies, do we really have to make everything the same? You know the big part of the world did not enslave black people and we don't have to apologise and educate all the time with everything.

 the shrouded lord wrote:

look at a man,
look at a woman, notice a difference?

Apple fox wrote:
At the topic at hand, as before I don't think 40k needs female space marines, it could show something interesting about them, but in the end it's just a male power fantasy.
Men get to be cool and awsome and the asumed default.

I don't think so, no. I find SoB just as "cool" as SM if not more, space nuns purging everyone with fire, I buy a full army as soon as they go plastic. Helmets are better too, ripoff of Deadlock from ABC Warriors but still better than variation on Darth Vader like SM ones.

Apple fox wrote:
Women are second best.

Yes they are. It was clearly designers intent to put emphasis on the fact that women are worse, second class, inferior, weak, less cool, etc

I personally think the best theory is that once you take a woman, chemically castrate her, load her up with implants/genetic modifications, growth hormones, excessive musculature and the like, then encase her in six-inch-thick ceramite, it'd be hard to tell she's a woman.

More seriously there are strong arguments for both sides, but ultimately it comes down to personal preference. Some central authority trying to tell me how to run my Chapter doesn't sit well with me; I'm not going to listen to the 'official' fluff-writers telling me all my Space Marines must be men any more than I'm going to listen to Matt Ward telling me that my Space Marines consider Robute Gulliman their "spiritual leige" or my Grey Knights are fine with massacring uncorrupted servants of the Emperor to paint their armour red with. My Dark Angels successor Chapter doesn't include any women because the Chapter Master is a hard-headed staunch traditionalist and there's been no pressing need to change the recruiting practices that have been in place for millennia.(more practically because I haven't had the occasion to try and convert any), but that's no reason a Chapter with a shortage of recruits couldn't decide to let women try out, or that a Chapter that recruits from a Death World where the challenges of the environment don't lend themselves to the luxury of defined gender roles (which might also push natural selection over ten thousand years to produce beefier women). Hell, there's no good reason an isolated planet couldn't end up with a female-dominant culture where men aren't allowed to join the local Space Marine Chapter.

Bottom line: The Imperium isn't a monolithic entity with a single unified culture, and as much as the Administratum would like to be able to look over everyone's shoulders and make sure they comply with the rules it's not physically possible for them to do so; as long as the tithes keep rolling in on time they've got a very live and let live policy for outlying systems. Just because Games Workshop has never put female Space Marines into the dozen or so Chapters they've fleshed out in great detail doesn't mean it's impossible for them to exist.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I personally think the best theory is that once you take a woman, chemically castrate her, load her up with implants/genetic modifications, growth hormones, excessive musculature and the like, then encase her in six-inch-thick ceramite, it'd be hard to tell she's a woman.

More seriously there are strong arguments for both sides, but ultimately it comes down to personal preference. Some central authority trying to tell me how to run my Chapter doesn't sit well with me; I'm not going to listen to the 'official' fluff-writers telling me all my Space Marines must be men any more than I'm going to listen to Matt Ward telling me that my Space Marines consider Robute Gulliman their "spiritual leige" or my Grey Knights are fine with massacring uncorrupted servants of the Emperor to paint their armour red with. My Dark Angels successor Chapter doesn't include any women because the Chapter Master is a hard-headed staunch traditionalist and there's been no pressing need to change the recruiting practices that have been in place for millennia.(more practically because I haven't had the occasion to try and convert any), but that's no reason a Chapter with a shortage of recruits couldn't decide to let women try out, or that a Chapter that recruits from a Death World where the challenges of the environment don't lend themselves to the luxury of defined gender roles (which might also push natural selection over ten thousand years to produce beefier women). Hell, there's no good reason an isolated planet couldn't end up with a female-dominant culture where men aren't allowed to join the local Space Marine Chapter.

Bottom line: The Imperium isn't a monolithic entity with a single unified culture, and as much as the Administratum would like to be able to look over everyone's shoulders and make sure they comply with the rules it's not physically possible for them to do so; as long as the tithes keep rolling in on time they've got a very live and let live policy for outlying systems. Just because Games Workshop has never put female Space Marines into the dozen or so Chapters they've fleshed out in great detail doesn't mean it's impossible for them to exist.

Except that Female Astartes are explicitly impossible in the fluff.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I personally think the best theory is that once you take a woman, chemically castrate her, load her up with implants/genetic modifications, growth hormones, excessive musculature and the like, then encase her in six-inch-thick ceramite, it'd be hard to tell she's a woman.

More seriously there are strong arguments for both sides, but ultimately it comes down to personal preference. Some central authority trying to tell me how to run my Chapter doesn't sit well with me; I'm not going to listen to the 'official' fluff-writers telling me all my Space Marines must be men any more than I'm going to listen to Matt Ward telling me that my Space Marines consider Robute Gulliman their "spiritual leige" or my Grey Knights are fine with massacring uncorrupted servants of the Emperor to paint their armour red with. My Dark Angels successor Chapter doesn't include any women because the Chapter Master is a hard-headed staunch traditionalist and there's been no pressing need to change the recruiting practices that have been in place for millennia.(more practically because I haven't had the occasion to try and convert any), but that's no reason a Chapter with a shortage of recruits couldn't decide to let women try out, or that a Chapter that recruits from a Death World where the challenges of the environment don't lend themselves to the luxury of defined gender roles (which might also push natural selection over ten thousand years to produce beefier women). Hell, there's no good reason an isolated planet couldn't end up with a female-dominant culture where men aren't allowed to join the local Space Marine Chapter.

Bottom line: The Imperium isn't a monolithic entity with a single unified culture, and as much as the Administratum would like to be able to look over everyone's shoulders and make sure they comply with the rules it's not physically possible for them to do so; as long as the tithes keep rolling in on time they've got a very live and let live policy for outlying systems. Just because Games Workshop has never put female Space Marines into the dozen or so Chapters they've fleshed out in great detail doesn't mean it's impossible for them to exist.

Except that Female Astartes are explicitly impossible in the fluff.

If someone wants to put female Marines in their own army, it really doesn't bother me if it's against the fluff, it's their army, their time, their money. As long as when I play against them it's obvious what is what. Doesn't mean I want female marines, but if someone else wants to break the (flimsy) fluff to do it themselves, so be it.

Hell, if someone wants to say their IG army is actually a WW1 German army that got teleported through time and space in to the Imperium, I have no problems with that either.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Swastakowey wrote:
Then why not promote the idea of pig marines or monkey marines while you are at it.

Of course we arent too different genetically, we still need to mate, we still have 2 legs, 10 fingers, hair and so forth. We are all mostly the same with enough minor differences to be hugely noticeable. That does not mean that a "minor difference" is nothing in terms of genetics. Its huge, thats why assuming (and you are assuming, by the way) that women and men react to hormones in the same manner is a huge flaw in the argument. Because we dont. A girl wanted to be a boy when I was kid, from age 13 she took pills to make her more "boy like", guess what, she didnt naturally grow buff like the boys did, her voice only wen slightly deeper after she spent years practicing yo lower it and so on, but more importantly he physical make up didnt change. If she stopped taking the pills shed very quickly turn back to a typical everyday girl.
We share hormones yes but we react differently and one of the hormones is more prominent in each gender.

Genders are different, thats fine, and yes they could probably find a way to make female marines, but as it stands currently it is not possible as women lack the basics to become one before any change happens.

Boys do not naturally 'grow buff', they have to work at it. So do girls. The same equally applies to transboys and cisboys equally.

If this boy you knew when you were younger was not a transperson, he would never have been given access to hormone pills. Referring to him as a girl despite his evident diagnosis is not only disrespectful, it's downright insulting to people who have to go through the horror that is gender dysphoria.

You're basically saying he's not a real boy, he's just pretending. How would you like it if someone told you that you weren't really straight, you were just pretending to like girls? (or whatever variant actually applies to you. I don't know you, so I went with the default assumptions).

Well I guess people with that disorder suffer greatly but what I think about physical "treatment" of it was best summed up by this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Well I guess people with that disorder suffer greatly but what I think about physical "treatment" of it was best summed up by this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c

I was going to come out with a rather scathing retort, but to be honest, it's easy to think that way. I used to share your opinion, although I wish I never had.

There is no 'perfect solution' to gender dysphoria. Sadly, there is no way to give a transwoman the ability to conceive. There is no morphing ray, no genie in a bottle, no jusenkyo.

GRS isn't about fixing the problem. It's about making it manageable.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Well I guess people with that disorder suffer greatly but what I think about physical "treatment" of it was best summed up by this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c

I was going to come out with a rather scathing retort, but to be honest, it's easy to think that way. I used to share your opinion, although I wish I never had.

There is no 'perfect solution' to gender dysphoria. Sadly, there is no way to give a transwoman the ability to conceive. There is no morphing ray, no genie in a bottle, no jusenkyo.

GRS isn't about fixing the problem. It's about making it manageable.

Check out the recent womb transplant experiment in Europe, 9 women with non-functioning/missing wombs recently had transplant from relative donors with the goal of possibly conceiving and baring a child to term. With the current trend of 3 D printing organs, an artificial womb is very likely.

On subject, there have been a number of all female military combat units throughout history, the most infamous of which being disbanded due to their sheer ruthlessness in combat and flagrant violation of their captives' human rights. There is a reason for the phrase, "leave them to the women." Modern day warfare has seen a recent move back to women in combat, despite western and middle-eastern fundamentalist views to the contrary. Biologically speaking, there is no difference between a man, woman, or child pulling a trigger, as the bullet is doing the final work. As to 40k, I like to think the main reason for the exclusion of females from most of the Imperial Warmachine is that Humanity has designated 100% of it population to the war effort, and men are less useful at baring to term the next generation of fighters. That might not be PC, but neither is war.

SJ

 Furyou Miko wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:

Well I guess people with that disorder suffer greatly but what I think about physical "treatment" of it was best summed up by this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c

I was going to come out with a rather scathing retort, but to be honest, it's easy to think that way. I used to share your opinion, although I wish I never had.

There is no 'perfect solution' to gender dysphoria. Sadly, there is no way to give a transwoman the ability to conceive. There is no morphing ray, no genie in a bottle, no jusenkyo.

GRS isn't about fixing the problem. It's about making it manageable.

Nice that you didn't because I don't look down at people suffering from it. It's imo fact that their urge to be a different gender is a bit unrealistic and there are more important health problems than theirs but that is ofc a cold observation, it doesn't make it easier for them obviously. The treatment ideas are nuts though imo and 13 years old girl who wants to be a boy being fed with heavy hormones and undergoing serious surgeries is shooting flies with rockets, wait for 18 at least ffs. It's just like daily Aderall for ADHD kids (not to mention Desoxyn) to make them behave, complete madness.

Educate others, get psychological treatment for a kid, maybe find some special school or teach him/her yourself and see what happens, the issue may be gone 2 years later.