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.

hotsauceman1 wrote:Isnt the reason there is no male SOB is because they are a loophole? Didnt it say the inquisition can keep no "Men At Arms"

No, the reason there are no male SoB is because there were no male Daughters of the Emperor/Brides of the Emperor. It was that specific organisation that proved its loyalty during the Age of Apostasy, and so Thor was able to argue that they specifically should not be disbanded. At best, the"Men at Arms" loophole only provided a way for the guys in charge to save face by not going back on the letter of the original ban, only the spirit.

If Thor had really been trying to pull a fast one, nobody in their right mind (or most people in their wrong mind) would let him get away with it. They wouldn't just sit back and say "Well, shucks. What do we do now?" they'd say "Nice try, smartass," and enforce the ban anyway.

And ISnt te reason there are no male Space marines is because the geneseed can only be adpated to males because that is what the primarchs are?

Yes. The Primarchs are all male because the Emperor was male, and the Space Marines are all male because the Primarchs were male.

hotsauceman1 wrote:Isnt the reason there is no male SOB is because they are a loophole?

Sort of - AlexHolker already explained it in detail.

The distinction at the Schola already existed before the Decree Passive, though, only that during this era they also sent boys to the Frateris Templar - pretty much the "partner organization" of the Sisters who were at that time still limited to being Vandire's bodyguards and personal enforcers, whereas the Templars were the official martial arm of the Ecclesiarchy.

It could well be that even in GW's interpretation of the setting, there could have been female Storm Troopers before the Age of Apostasy, before the Sisters started tapping into the regiment's flow of recruits. Just an idea, though, I've never actually read anything like this.

I also think that the unique requirements expected from Storm Troopers would favor men over women. Whilst the regiment is comparatively big, it still is only one formation, so it stands to reason that the pool of able men - collected from all Scholas over the entire Imperium - would suffice to fill any open positions, before you'd get to the women who score best in these categories.

That's an interesting idea but you would think that from a pool of trillions they'd be able to get enough women being able to make the Sisters cut and fill out those 35,000 jobs and still have enough left over to have many female stormtroopers too.
But then again maybe they don't and maybe it only comes out to about that many.
I guess the question is why are there so few Soriatus? I can think 3 reasons:

1) That is simply the most the can keep operational at a time especially when taking into account stringent requirements and high fatality rates.
2) Limitations on equipment procurement of which the sisters also have the best of the best.
3) That's the way the rest of the Imperium wants it. In a post Vandire world they were already kind enough to let the Ecclesiarchy get away with that loophole in the first place. Similar to how the IoM in general is wary of groups of Astartes being bigger than a 1000.

Maybe a combination of all three?

Lynata wrote:Actually, whilst most organizations that recruit their members from the Schola Progenium (such as the Adeptus Terra or the Inquisition) indeed place little emphasis upon gender, the Storm Trooper regiment and the Orders of the Adepta Sororitas are the exception from this rule. Martially inclined male progena who are judged satisfactory in accordance to the highest requirements enter Storm Trooper training, just like female progena are enrolled by the Sisterhood. You could say that gender serves as the segregating trait which prevents both organizations from quarreling over the top performers under the orphans in Schola training.

5E Codex: IG wrote:Storm Troopers are recruited from the orphan sons of Imperial officials - such as planetary governors or high ranking members of the Imperial Guard or Navy - from all over the galaxy.

Of course, this separation does not exist for the other regiments of the Imperial Guard, meaning the countless Grenadier formations of the various worlds who do not draft their soldiers from the Schola, so you may well have female Grenadiers/Kasrkin/etc just like today's contemporary special forces also include female soldiers, depending on the country you are looking at.

PS: Commissars don't actually have to serve in the Storm Trooper regiment at some point in their career - it's just that they can. Even considering it's just a short tour of duty, the small number of ST companies would likely make it impossible for every Commissar in the galaxy to have seen action in them.

Disclaimer: The above is taking into consideration fluff from GW sources only. I'm quite sure there are numerous BL novels who may claim a different interpretation of the setting, so it'd be up to the reader to decide which one he likes more.

Its difficult to know if the intention was to have Storm Troopers as male only - the same codex also says: "The Schola Progenium nutures the sons and daughters of Imperial Officers from all over the galaxy".........and then goes on to say in the same section: "For natural warriors the Imperial Guard offers a place in one of the elite Storm Trooper companies"

So it could be that they just did not add daughters in that paragraph or as you say it was intentional..........?

KamikazeCanuck wrote:That's an interesting idea but you would think that from a pool of trillions they'd be able to get enough women being able to make the Sisters cut and fill out those 35,000 jobs and still have enough left over to have many female stormtroopers too.

They would, but given that the Storm Trooper regiment is even smaller than the Orders Militant (20.000 tops) it stands to reason that they'd run out of available slots long before they run out of men scoring higher than women. In our own world I could see this happen, but with the Imperium and its thousands of worlds ...

KamikazeCanuck wrote:I guess the question is why are there so few Soriatus? I can think 3 reasons:
1) That is simply the most the can keep operational at a time especially when taking into account stringent requirements and high fatality rates.
2) Limitations on equipment procurement of which the sisters also have the best of the best.
3) That's the way the rest of the Imperium wants it. In a post Vandire world they were already kind enough to let the Ecclesiarchy get away with that loophole in the first place. Similar to how the IoM in general is wary of groups of Astartes being bigger than a 1000.
Maybe a combination of all three?

That's exactly my interpretation, too.
Well, maybe except (1) - if they'd run out of novices they could always temporarily lower the recruitment requirements a bit. In fact, I would think that this has been done a few times throughout Imperial history, as the Major Orders were described to have been down to a few hundred Sisters in a couple instances already, but they were "quickly" (within a generation or so) filled up again. This doesn't mean that the Orders Militant would easily pick anyone during times of high attrition (as there does seem to be a notable gap between ongoing battle losses and reinforcements seeing the Orders grow dangerously small), but that, once a certain threshold has been reached, they would consider recruiting the next best applicant available in order to balance things.
During these times, it may also be possible that any scores an applicant has to meet are waived and that they (both the Storm Troopers as well as the Order Militant) would start to simply pick the best from top-down until the required minimum strength is reached once again. Just a thought, though. This would prevent the possibility of both the Storm Troopers as well as an Order Militant becoming unable to operate (or, Emperor forbid, even having to be dissolved), but come with the risk of a slight quality loss during a time of exceptionally heavy losses throughout the Imperium.

For the Sororitas, it seems that the establishment of a new Order Militant tends to come at a time when the Sisterhood went through a time of relative stability concerning their numbers and they were able to uphold an extremely high quality standard for their members, opening up the option of founding a new Order with the "overflow" - especially concerning that the new Orders now tend to be Minor Orders only, which may be formed by an offshoot detachment as small as a Mission or Preceptory (50-200 Sisters). This would explain how the first Orders were able to double their size in a relatively short timeframe, but it took them a whopping 2.500 years to go from 10.000 to 30.000 members. However, once an Order is established, the Ecclesiarchy might feel compelled to keep it staffed no matter what, though I imagine this would be something that is influenced by both the importance of the individual Order as well as the personal wishes and influence of its Canoness.

"When Sebastian Thor ascended to the position of Ecclesiarch there were roughly 4,000 Daughters of the Emperor under his command. Upon founding the Adepta Sororitas, these warriors were split between the Convents of Ophelia VII and Terra (the Convent Sanctorum and Convent Prioris respectively). With recruits passing through the hands of’ the Schola Progenium once again, the Adepta Sororitas’ ranks soon grew to over 10,000 fighters and the Ecclesiarch succeeding Thor (Ecclesiarch Alexis XXII) split each of the Convents into two Orders each, founding the Orders Militant of the Ebon Chalice, Valorous Heart, Fiery Heart and the Argent Shroud.

Two and a half thousand years later, two more Orders were created by Deacis VI ( the Orders of the Bloody Rose and Sacred Rose) and the Convent buildings were extended to accommodate almost 15,000 warriors each. In recent years, the number of the Militant Orders' members has declined slightly and each Order now number between 3,000 and 4,000 Battle Sisters, of which perhaps 500-750 will be trained as Seraphim. These warriors are spread throughout the galaxy in various battle zones and on extended tours of duty. The size of an Order waxes and wanes irregularly, depending on the quality of recruits availble and battle losses. On occasion an Order may number no more than a few hundred warriors, all fighting the enemies of the Emperor while at other times it may reach a peak of six or seven thousand warriors, with much of the Order fighting in distant wars but still leaving a reserve of several thousand Battle Sisters and Seraphim that can be despatched if needed."

Mr Morden wrote:Its difficult to know if the intention was to have Storm Troopers as male only - the same codex also says: "The Schola Progenium nutures the sons and daughters of Imperial Officers from all over the galaxy".........and then goes on to say in the same section: "For natural warriors the Imperial Guard offers a place in one of the elite Storm Trooper companies"
So it could be that they just did not add daughters in that paragraph or as you say it was intentional..........?

I don't see the contradiction - not every single sentence has to mention that the Storm Trooper regiment recruits only the sons of Imperial officials. However, this is only my interpretation, formed by reading the material the guys at GW have written. Certainly, a lot of people including authors of licensed works have disregarded it (either knowingly or unknowingly), which, given the lack of canonicity in the franchise, is a perfectly viable approach. In essence, it boils down to what you as an individual would prefer or how you see it making the most sense.

As we all know the fluff mutates and changes to meet the needs of the writers be they for codexes, Imperial Armour or the novels.

There are (still) just the two organisations that are defined as single sex - The Astartes and the Adepta Sororitas, everything else in the Imperium - IMO - they don't normally care unless there are individual traditions within Regiments, stations ships etc.

The Sons quote seems to be a copy/paste from the earliest IG codex - when of course they pretty much only talk about men and males in the whole thing - wheras the newer bit at the start just says "warriors".

Agreed in the end its all a matter of opinion and taste

Mr Morden wrote:wheras the newer bit at the start just says "warriors".

Though actually that bit is just as copypasted from the 2E Codex as the "sons" part. GW's position on this has never changed.

hmm should have read on a bit I guess

I think that when they do a new full blown SoB codex they'll do some retconning and suddenly they'll be millions of Sisters.

I sure hope not. It's neither necessary in terms of the setting (and actually the current situation makes more sense, given how GW keeps pushing for how special and rare stuff like power armour is), nor would it be beneficial for what's left of consistency in the background.

Regardless of what some freelance novel or RPG authors may think, the Sisters of Battle weren't designed to be Guardsmen in power armour - following their original vision, they're a token force meant to exist as a symbol of the Imperial faith for people to either rally around or be intimidated into submission. The Orders Militant are not even necessary in any way; the Imperium did just fine without them for more than 5.000 years.

If GW suddenly were to inflate their size that much - something they have shown no intention to do in the most recent rulebook nor the GW minidex - they'd actually have to start showing up in a regular fashion. Do you really believe that the increased headcount would be taken into consideration? Or that the Sisterhood might not grow too powerful to allow the occasionally harassed Marine Chapter to get away again and again? Personally, I could do without such shenanigans - the Space Wolves in particular started to look really MSue after singlehandedly beating back an entire Segmentum worth of Imperial Navy.

The same goes for the Storm Trooper regiment as well, to get back to the original topic. 20.000 men may not sound like much, but you've got to consider that these guys presumably get dispatched all over the Imperium into warzones whose response authority has been escalated to Segmentum Command only. For anything else, there's Grenadier formations and Kasrkin.

Of course, that's just my personal opinion. I like how things are now, but naturally this is influenced largely by the simple fact that this is how I've grown to know it for years. Consistency ftw - 40k could use more of it, not less.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:I think that when they do a new full blown SoB codex they'll do some retconning and suddenly they'll be millions of Sisters.

Depends who does it, eh?

It's like I keep saying.

Sisters are a symbol of the Imperium's faith. Just like the Astartes are a symbol of the Emperor's wrath.

Yay symbols!

Lynata wrote:I sure hope not. It's neither necessary in terms of the setting (and actually the current situation makes more sense, given how GW keeps pushing for how special and rare stuff like power armour is), nor would it be beneficial for what's left of consistency in the background.

Regardless of what some freelance novel or RPG authors may think, the Sisters of Battle weren't designed to be Guardsmen in power armour - following their original vision, they're a token force meant to exist as a symbol of the Imperial faith for people to either rally around or be intimidated into submission. The Orders Militant are not even necessary in any way; the Imperium did just fine without them for more than 5.000 years.

If GW suddenly were to inflate their size that much - something they have shown no intention to do in the most recent rulebook nor the GW minidex - they'd actually have to start showing up in a regular fashion. Do you really believe that the increased headcount would be taken into consideration? Or that the Sisterhood might not grow too powerful to allow the occasionally harassed Marine Chapter to get away again and again? Personally, I could do without such shenanigans - the Space Wolves in particular started to look really MSue after singlehandedly beating back an entire Segmentum worth of Imperial Navy.

The same goes for the Storm Trooper regiment as well, to get back to the original topic. 20.000 men may not sound like much, but you've got to consider that these guys presumably get dispatched all over the Imperium into warzones whose response authority has been escalated to Segmentum Command only. For anything else, there's Grenadier formations and Kasrkin.

Of course, that's just my personal opinion. I like how things are now, but naturally this is influenced largely by the simple fact that this is how I've grown to know it for years. Consistency ftw - 40k could use more of it, not less.

Lynata, you have two modes: "Thoughtful Lynata" and "Black Library Sucks Lynata". I wish you'd stick with the former more. There's no reason to take a shot at BL and FFg there. May I remind you that the massive swelling of Necron and Dark Eldar numbers came straight out of the studio.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tsz52 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:I think that when they do a new full blown SoB codex they'll do some retconning and suddenly they'll be millions of Sisters.

Depends who does it, eh?

I assume you're talking about Ward there but Commoragh became ginormous after Phil Kelly was done with it. I have no problem with that though it made them more dangerous.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:Lynata, you have two modes: "Thoughtful Lynata" and "Black Library Sucks Lynata".

Sorry if it came across as generalizing - Black Library doesn't suck, it's just that whereas the studio presents one version (which, depending on personal preferences, one would either like or dislike), Black Library represents a hundred different takes on the setting. And out of those, some really do suck. I've got my share of BL novels and fluff books as well, though, and even included various "outsourced" ideas into my personal interpretation of the fluff.

Maybe my defensive attitude on the subject is, in some cases, unwarranted; it's just that I have a feeling that a lot of people only have access to the representations in various licensed products, resulting in various individual interpretations deviating from the studio version steering public perception away from the original design (remember the "how big is a Marine" thread?). This may even come with a risk of the actual GW fluff some day evolving away from the original studio content and towards that which more people are familiar with - and given that the Sisterhood is often presented in a much less capable and less elite manner there, this is naturally something that I do not want at all. So I feel obliged to occasionally throw in a reminder that there's a difference. People can still prefer whatever they like, they simply should be made aware.

By now, I imagine many regulars will have already catched these disclaimers, so I understand that they may start to become a little annoying to some, specifically if they have a higher opinion of BL/FFG.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:May I remind you that the massive swelling of Necron and Dark Eldar numbers came straight out of the studio.

Good point, GW is certainly capable of "screwing up" as well, as far as my preferences are concerned. Or anyone's - I'm sure the dakkanauts who are fine with every change to fluff ever made can be counted on one hand.

Ironically the people who have the most similar attitude to you about the background work for BL. They are the ones often trying to "do right" by the fluff. It's the guys at GW who don't care. The biggest changers and retconners to the background are the studio guys. Guys like ADB are huge fans of 40K and like to get their nerd and really study up on this stuff. Whereas a guy like Matt Ward seemly pull random stuff out of his ass.

I'm not sure if I would agree there. ADB, too, has posted on his blog that he has no problem with ignoring a GW book if he doesn't like what he sees. So once more it boils down to personal preference.
Though he does seem to at least do his research, and he gets props from me for sticking to the classic Night Lords armour design.

In the end, I don't doubt that there may be some BL writers who try to "do right" as you say - but the bar for consistency has been set pretty low, and I would go as far as saying they are in the minority. That, or their "right" is simply not mine. As we can see on this very forum, we can have a lot of debate concerning the actual meaning of some obscure reference in a source.

Either way, GW has managed to uphold a consistent image of the Adepta Sororitas for more than 20 years. In BL they get a new face with every book, simply because the authors aren't required to stick to each other's writings (or GW's for what it's worth). It's like they say, "too many cooks spoil the broth".

I'll continue to buy Swallow's SoB novels, though. His interpretation is largely compatible with my own, and I've grown fond of the characters. If only he wouldn't have started to pull some newly invented ranks out of his rear, even contradicting the previous book that he himself has written.
I'd also wish Ben Counter would try his hand at the Sisters once more. I enjoyed his "Daemonblood".

ArbitorIan wrote:

Brother Coa wrote:They aren't just represented much because 40k is mostly male based game. If they had more female models the game would became some sort of fetish...and GW don't want that.

There's also quite a few fluff reasons why, even in the Imperium, there are many more male soldiers than female.

Fluff states that most guard regiments are about 50/50 when it comes to gender, the only clearly "biased" group are Space Marines for obvious reasons, and SoB.

Sturmtruppen

Funnily enough, here in the UK, women still aren't allowed to serve in front-line infantry regiments. Which means you'll see no women in the special forces, Paras, Royal Marines, etc.

Same with the US and almost every other western power. the only ones i can think of are Vietnam, Russia, China, North Korea, and Israel

Edit: that do i mean

South Korea has female special forces, too. Just read an article about them a week ago or so.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/worldnews/9007032/South-Korean-special-warfare-forces-exercise-in-the-snow-during-a-winter-drill.html?image=1

The soldiers shown on that picture belong to the 707th Special Missions Unit, aka the "White Tigers".

For Europe, I found this list. I'm sure that worldwide there's a couple more countries who sport female soldiers in combat roles.

In my opinion, it's pretty silly to try to preserve a policy flat-out refusing even to investigate their suitability for frontline duty, anyways. US forces too regularly see their female soldiers getting shot at and shooting back, even if it's just a supply train getting attacked. Yet for some reason, this apparently doesn't count as "proper frontline warfare" so that the precious male ego of a handful conservative policymakers can be preserved.

"This war has proven that we need to revisit the policy, because they are out there doing it."
- Col. Provancha, deployed in Iraq

But we're getting off-topic, I guess.

Apparently we (the Uk) also have at least one female Apache gunship pilot and they def serve on Warships so its not the getting shot at that is the issue.....

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dressed-Kill-Charlotte-Madison/dp/0755319613

I read about her exploits in another book and will def be picking up this to read her side....

Lynata wrote:In my opinion, it's pretty silly to try to preserve a policy flat-out refusing even to investigate their suitability for frontline duty, anyways. US forces too regularly see their female soldiers getting shot at and shooting back, even if it's just a supply train getting attacked. Yet for some reason, this apparently doesn't count as "proper frontline warfare" so that the precious male ego of a handful conservative policymakers can be preserved.

It's a bad idea in modern society and in the kind of wars that are currently being fought. IDF commando's have reported that male soldiers have a tendency to lose control when their female comrades get hit, and someone in the Australian special forces said that they'd rather not have women with them because in case of one of them getting hit the priority of the male soldiers might change to saving her rather than completing the mission.

Women can fight, sure. But (intentionally, shall we say, because guerrilla warfare doesn't really have frontlines) putting them on the frontlines is bad idea, and it's not just because it might hurt the male ego of some people.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:IDF commando's have reported that male soldiers have a tendency to lose control when their female comrades get hit, and someone in the Australian special forces said that they'd rather not have women with them because in case of one of them getting hit the priority of the male soldiers might change to saving her rather than completing the mission.

Which is entirely the result of centuries of misogyny and inequality, promoting the mindset that "women are weak and have to be protected by the stronger sex." Depending on your personal point of view as influenced by education and upbringing, this is either chivalrous or oppressive.

Give it a few decades or centuries and such observations - including these reports you mentioned - will fade into obscurity, as is already happening in a lot of countries throughout the world. It's also worth pointing out that there have been other reports of quite a different tone, so obviously the individual perception seems to differ.

SomeRandomEvilGuy wrote:Women can fight, sure. But (intentionally, shall we say, because guerrilla warfare doesn't really have frontlines) putting them on the frontlines is bad idea, and it's not just because it might hurt the male ego of some people.

I know a number of soldiers, both male and female, that would disagree with this assessment. As would history. There have been female warriors throughout all eras - here is just one of many examples: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onna_bugeisha

But maybe I'm just biased because my own squad was 50% female.

I'm not sure the enemy force is the problem:

http://www.care2.com/causes/war-among-comrades-1-in-3-women-raped-in-the-military.html

This 1 in 3 number just won't go away.

KamikazeCanuck wrote:This 1 in 3 number just won't go away.

With the correct policies and discipline, it most certainly would. In other nations, the integration of female soldiers seems to have progressed somewhat more smoothly and I admit I am somewhat shocked that the quota in this study is supposed to be that high. It shows some fundamental flaws in the military structure and spirit.

Apart from the aforementioned change in mindset, it takes three things, though: a willingness to report an incident, the integrity of the superior officer to actually act on such reports, and lastly unit cohesion encompassing more than one gender. Obviously, these factors are directly connected. A lack of trust in the command chain may be a strong motivator for these 75% of incidents not being reported; it would seem that the victims are either convinced it won't result in anything or that whoever they tried reporting it to played it down, much like the catholic church when it comes to certain scandals involving their clergy.

We have also heard many reports about war crimes that are similarly subjected to cover-ups by superior officers failing in their duty - but would you really abolish the entire military because of Guantanamo or certain "kill team" incidents ... rather than trying to fix this issue? I submit that violence against female comrades has the very same cause as violence against PoW's or civilians.

Another reference to Helsreach, there is a female stormtrooper ( at least I think she's a stormtrooper ).