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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_facto

"De facto (/dᵻ ˈfæktoʊ/, /deɪ-/,[1] Latin: [deː ˈfaktoː]) is a Latin expression that means "in fact, in reality, in actual existence, force, or possession, as a matter of fact" (literally "of fact").[2][3] In law, it often means "in practice but not necessarily ordained by law" or "in practice or actuality, but not officially established". It is commonly used in contrast to de jure (which means "according to (the) law"; literally "from law") when referring to matters of law, governance, or technique (such as standards) that are found in the common experience as created or developed without or contrary to a regulation. When discussing a legal situation, de jure designates what the law says, while de facto designates action of what happens in practice."

A de facto canon IS canon. The very existence of such a term denotes that things can exist in fact even if not in law or by name. De facto relationships are real relationships and people in de facto relationships can have similar legal rights as de jure relationships. You are bending backwards and trying to imply and redefine de facto to mean not real, to avoid admitting there is in fact a canon that is adhered to.

Space Marines exist in 40K. That is not "just" consensus opinion among a majority. It is a fact of the 40K universe. Someone arguing that Space Marines never existed at all is not expressing an equally valid minority opinion on an issue. They are wrong about reality in that fictional universe. Yes, Dan Abnett would be wrong. But then he has been wrong about many things in 40K because he can't be bothered to do his homework or wants to write his own special snowflake stuff. In a shared IP, it takes more effort to color within the lines.

 Psienesis wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Lord Damocles wrote:
It's clear that GW isn't following some 'nothing is canon' line, since 99% of their output is consistent (with the remainder being errors and/or retcons).

So then, how tall is a Space Marine?

Nothing is canon. There are no Space Marines.

That is literally how absurd the claim that there is no canon is.



Besides which, the majority of sources say/suggest around 7'. Model scale is all over the place. Where are you getting 9' from?


EDIT: I'm not sure how responding to 'there is broad consistency with only a relatively few exceptions' with 'here's an exception!' is a useful line of argument anyway..?

What a majority of sources say creates a consensus, not a canon.

This is where we point out that "broad consistencies" include having Space Marines... but the detail of their height (and everything else) varies from author to author, and has no canon definition. The ones that make an appearance in the first Eisenhorn book are said to have fingers "the thickness of an Arbiter's truncheon"... that'd be between one and two inches thick. That would make someone fething *huge* in size. Is Dan Abnett wrong? No... but neither is someone who claims the Marine is 7 feet tall (finger thickness about 1 3/4 centimeters).

Please note that the picture that Jes is sitting next to starts at the 1 foot mark, not the 0 foot mark.

A de facto canon is not an actual canon, it simply makes it a consensus.

is Dan Abnett wrong?....... Maybe, I'd argue in this case proably the entire Eisenhorn series is ICly Narrated by an individual. individuals (yes even Inqusitors) are prone to exaggeration etc. EVERYTHING said in Eisenhorn needs to be considered through the filter of the narrator.

BrianDavion wrote:

is Dan Abnett wrong?....... Maybe, I'd argue in this case proably the entire Eisenhorn series is ICly Narrated by an individual. individuals (yes even Inqusitors) are prone to exaggeration etc. EVERYTHING said in Eisenhorn needs to be considered through the filter of the narrator.

I think it more than just exaggeration. Wasn't there some phrase in one of his first books where some character threatens to speak to a Marine's Primarch, as if Primarch were merely the title of a superior officer rather than worshipped demigod that has been dead or missing for thousands of years? That is quite simply an error.

At some point it is better for a writer to just admit a mistake rather than resort to increasingly preposterous attempts to deny it or spin it as some intentional "deep" twist.

Wasn't the Freeblade in one of the novels that came out after the Knights book dropped a woman?

I was more under the impression that the women can't be Knights thing was more of a tradition amongst the Knightly houses rather than a hard rule. One of my Freeblades in my Freeblade army is a woman piloting a Knightly suit called 'Blind Faith'.

A bit of diversity ain't bad. I'm happy that Lady Solaria is a thing.

Alright ill post this now because i know this is going to quickly descend into a gak storm

Female guards: A O.K. no one cares

Female Freeblades: A O.K. no one cares

Sisters of battle: A O.K. no one cares....literally no one cares about them because still metal lol sorry SoB players ;~;

Female space marines: No, goes against lore, and would only serve as a shoe horn for reasons. Space marines are modeled after their primarchs which are dude which are modeled after the Big E. Besides lets not piss off the poor SoB plays more buy giving Female space marines before they give them SoB

Why do we assume that the Emperor, and therefore the Primarchs, have the basic XY male chromosome combination or that the Y chromosome plays the important role in the space marine genetic engineering process?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why do we assume that the Emperor, and therefore the Primarchs, have the basic XY male chromosome combination or that the Y chromosome plays the important role in the space marine genetic engineering process?

Because like it or not, men are genetically more proficient at combat and warfare because their are built for it.

Best analogy i can give is this. Lets say you have a Subaru WRX, and you have a Toyota Carolla. Now with enough time an energy you can make that toyota corolla perform just as good as a WRX, but the WRX has more potential end game, and a higher top end then the corolla will ever have and for less cost. So if you have a car that can already go fast and perform well, why try and upgrade a car that will need FAR more work to get to the place the WRX already is.

I would assume it does not, because they dont actually care about passing on the traits and geenes in the normal way, as space marines cant breed, its implanted into the gene seed so. If anything Space marines would more akin to being a gender but are pumped so full of testastrone to build muscles and strength it wont matter.

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why do we assume that the Emperor, and therefore the Primarchs, have the basic XY male chromosome combination or that the Y chromosome plays the important role in the space marine genetic engineering process?

Because like it or not, men are genetically more proficient at combat and warfare because their are built for it.

Best analogy i can give is this. Lets say you have a Subaru WRX, and you have a Toyota Carolla. Now with enough time an energy you can make that toyota corolla perform just as good as a WRX, but the WRX has more potential end game, and a higher top end then the corolla will ever have and for less cost. So if you have a car that can already go fast and perform well, why try and upgrade a car that will need FAR more work to get to the place the WRX already is.

I would assume it does not, because they dont actually care about passing on the traits and geenes in the normal way, as space marines cant breed, its implanted into the gene seed so. If anything Space marines would more akin to being a gender but are pumped so full of testastrone to build muscles and strength it wont matter.

But Space Marines undergo extensive genetic modification. They are no longer human men, so why assume that a human male chromosome is important to such a process?

Because for the example i just gave, both cars are so heavily modified they are no longer their original right?

Well whats going to be easier to modify into a better performance car? A Porsche 911 or a toyota carolla? The corolla you would need to rip everything out, completely built it from the ground up and would require much more time and energy to get it even close to the level that a sports care comes stock.

For the art of war in the 40k men are better suited from the get go, their bodies are already pre disposed to handle testosterone and build muscles it requires less genetic modification then it would to boost a human female to those levels.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Because for the example i just gave, both cars are so heavily modified they are no longer their original right?

Well whats going to be easier to modify into a better performance car? A Porsche 911 or a toyota carolla? The corolla you would need to rip everything out, completely built it from the ground up and would require much more time and energy to get it even close to the level that a sports care comes stock.

For the art of war in the 40k men are better suited from the get go, their bodies are already pre disposed to handle testosterone and build muscles it requires less genetic modification then it would to boost a human female to those levels.

You're not modifying them, though. You are effectively just building a new car. The chassis (skeletal structure) is completely different, the engine (internal organs) is completely different, the electronics (nervous system) is completely different. If you start with a mini, put in a ferrari engine, then replace the whole framework with ferrari framework, then all the electronics with ferrari electronics and so on, then at the end of the day you don't have a modified mini, you have a ferrari. For the transformation from human to Space Marine it doesn't matter what the initial start point really is, as everything in the final product is different to what you started with. By that point it is not modified, it is completely new.

A Space Marine is not just a modified human, they are effectively a completely different species. A Space Marine is just as alien in physiology to a human as Tau or Eldar are and in many ways more so.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why do we assume that the Emperor, and therefore the Primarchs, have the basic XY male chromosome combination or that the Y chromosome plays the important role in the space marine genetic engineering process?

Because the canon as it is now is that the process is only compatible with men. That a random sampling of women subjected to that process would die 100% of the time (as opposed to the same random sampling of men dying only like 99% of the time) and that begs some kind of rationalization.

I prefer the idea that the Y-chromosome plays a part in the process because it presents the idea that the limitation of that technology has to do with the fundamental building-blocks of what makes the person subjected to it, and not some arbitrary and, frankly, asinine notion that a more wholistic appraisal of a person's physical development somehow matters when you're talking about completely re-engineering their body anyway.

I mean, I prefer the idea that it has to do with the specific chromosome because I absolutely hate explanations like this:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Because like it or not, men are genetically more proficient at combat and warfare because their are built for it.

'Man tough!' is not an argument you can apply to Astartes. They aren't even men when they need to be collected and begin surgical alterations, and the end result is so above baseline humanity that the difference between the most fit unaltered man and woman is as inconsequential as the difference between the most fit and least fit unaltered human.

The only thing that leaves us with is the fact that canon states the process can't be used on women. We can speculate as to the reasons why in-universe but the statement itself is there...

Personally I think it was one of a set of precautions the Emperor took to prevent his creation from supplanting humanity...

"But Space marines undergo extensive Genetic modification "

"You're not modifying them though."

"Space marines is not just a modified human."
implying they are modified.

Well which is it haha, are you or are you not modifying them?

At the end you do have the moral question yes are they human anymore, but again, the male Physique is a better building platform for the space marine modification. Im not saying it cant be done on a female. But it boils down to why go to all the extra work when you have a better base platform to work with?

Even then, i think its safe to say the techniques in even doing the genetic modification to humans is long lost and the only reason it still exists for space marines is because they only know how to do it on human males since the modification on males would not be the same as those done on females.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Captain Joystick wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
Why do we assume that the Emperor, and therefore the Primarchs, have the basic XY male chromosome combination or that the Y chromosome plays the important role in the space marine genetic engineering process?

Because the canon as it is now is that the process is only compatible with men. That a random sampling of women subjected to that process would die 100% of the time (as opposed to the same random sampling of men dying only like 99% of the time) and that begs some kind of rationalization.

I prefer the idea that the Y-chromosome plays a part in the process because it presents the idea that the limitation of that technology has to do with the fundamental building-blocks of what makes the person subjected to it, and not some arbitrary and, frankly, asinine notion that a more wholistic appraisal of a person's physical development somehow matters when you're talking about completely re-engineering their body anyway.

I mean, I prefer the idea that it has to do with the specific chromosome because I absolutely hate explanations like this:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
Because like it or not, men are genetically more proficient at combat and warfare because their are built for it.

'Man tough!' is not an argument you can apply to Astartes. They aren't even men when they need to be collected and begin surgical alterations, and the end result is so above baseline humanity that the difference between the most fit unaltered man and woman is as inconsequential as the difference between the most fit and least fit unaltered human.

The only thing that leaves us with is the fact that canon states the process can't be used on women. We can speculate as to the reasons why in-universe but the statement itself is there...

Personally I think it was one of a set of precautions the Emperor took to prevent his creation from supplanting humanity...

ooooo i actually really like that last point, thats something i never thought about. Thats legitimately a good reasoning.

Hypothetical if some how though the centuries of modification and natural mutation, it could be possible for space marines to regain their ability to procreate, and if you had female space marines having the ability to have a child then i could see them start to think, why do we need normal humans then?

If we modify every gene in a tomato into the genes of a satsuma, is it still a tomato?

If you modify the genetics of a thing enough, then it will cease to be that thing which it initially was.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
If we modify every gene in a tomato into the genes of a satsuma, is it still a tomato?

If you modify the genetics of a thing enough, then it will cease to be that thing which it initially was.

Agreed, so with the extensive amount of modification needed to reach the level of an Astartes would you even be able to call them men or women at that point?

Even still the lore has been written it does not work on Women currently, if the Big E comes back maybe he will find a way to do it. But i really do like the idea of the Big E not doing it as a fail safe to prevent the space marines for going, "Well why do we need basic humans anymore?"

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
If we modify every gene in a tomato into the genes of a satsuma, is it still a tomato?

If you modify the genetics of a thing enough, then it will cease to be that thing which it initially was.

Agreed, so with the extensive amount of modification needed to reach the level of an Astartes would you even be able to call them men or women at that point?

Even still the lore has been written it does not work on Women currently, if the Big E comes back maybe he will find a way to do it. But i really do like the idea of the Big E not doing it as a fail safe to prevent the space marines for going, "Well why do we need basic humans anymore?"

I do like that explanation. It doesn't put some arbitrary limit on the technology. After all, X to Y transformation already happens in nature anyway, so the idea that technology so advanced it can make Space Marines cannot do it is a bit silly unless it was purposefully engineered to be that way.

Still, can't help but think that it would be better to just engineer infertility into the Space Marines during the transformation than cut off half your population as a possible source of super soldiers.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:
If we modify every gene in a tomato into the genes of a satsuma, is it still a tomato?

If you modify the genetics of a thing enough, then it will cease to be that thing which it initially was.

Agreed, so with the extensive amount of modification needed to reach the level of an Astartes would you even be able to call them men or women at that point?

Even still the lore has been written it does not work on Women currently, if the Big E comes back maybe he will find a way to do it. But i really do like the idea of the Big E not doing it as a fail safe to prevent the space marines for going, "Well why do we need basic humans anymore?"

I do like that explanation. It doesn't put some arbitrary limit on the technology. After all, X to Y transformation already happens in nature anyway, so the idea that technology so advanced it can make Space Marines cannot do it is a bit silly unless it was purposefully engineered to be that way.

Still, can't help but think that it would be easier to just engineer infertility into the Space Marines during the transformation than cut off half your population as a possible source of super soldiers.

Well iirc Space marines are already infertile, their bolt guns are shooting blanks

Now stepping out of the 40k relm and into the marketing relm, i think female space marines wont get made for a few reasons, one, sisters of battle exist, two, SOB did not sell as well or well enough to keep them going, and three, how much butt hurt would there be if they made female space marines, but not make SoB models.

Well, assuming that it was more than just some Space Marine heads with hair, it would at least provide plastic female power armour models for Sisters players to convert

I am so confused by this thread.

I think it got answered a while back, someone went through the Codex and couldn't find a single line about "women cannot at all in any way shape or form be Knight pilots".

So... er... it's just a cultural thing, so knock yourself out, have as many female pilots as you want, hurrah for Lady Solaria.

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
I am so confused by this thread.

I think it got answered a while back, someone went through the Codex and couldn't find a single line about "women cannot at all in any way shape or form be Knight pilots".

So... er... it's just a cultural thing, so knock yourself out, have as many female pilots as you want, hurrah for Lady Solaria.

yup that's exactly what it is, a cultural thing. now the throne thingy that basicly brainwashes the pilots does tend to push houses in a certain direction culturally but..lots of room for female knight pilots in 40k.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
I am so confused by this thread.

I think it got answered a while back, someone went through the Codex and couldn't find a single line about "women cannot at all in any way shape or form be Knight pilots".

So... er... it's just a cultural thing, so knock yourself out, have as many female pilots as you want, hurrah for Lady Solaria.

yup that's exactly what it is, a cultural thing. now the throne thingy that basicly brainwashes the pilots does tend to push houses in a certain direction culturally but..lots of room for female knight pilots in 40k.

Cultural prejudice has often taken the form of "known biological facts". In RL, in the past, it was claimed by some in Europe that women were inherently unsuited for formal education and that formal subjects like mathematics would damage their fragile brains. Those that did get an education were dismissed as rare exceptions or freaks of nature, rare enough to be dismissed as freaks going against the natural order of things. This same kind of reasoning may apply on the Knight worlds.

Iracundus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
I am so confused by this thread.

I think it got answered a while back, someone went through the Codex and couldn't find a single line about "women cannot at all in any way shape or form be Knight pilots".

So... er... it's just a cultural thing, so knock yourself out, have as many female pilots as you want, hurrah for Lady Solaria.

yup that's exactly what it is, a cultural thing. now the throne thingy that basicly brainwashes the pilots does tend to push houses in a certain direction culturally but..lots of room for female knight pilots in 40k.

Cultural prejudice has often taken the form of "known biological facts". In RL, in the past, it was claimed by some in Europe that women were inherently unsuited for formal education and that formal subjects like mathematics would damage their fragile brains. Those that did get an education were dismissed as rare exceptions or freaks of nature, rare enough to be dismissed as freaks going against the natural order of things. This same kind of reasoning may apply on the Knight worlds.

also there's tradtion, which is said to hold an absurd level of power among knight holdings.

BrianDavion wrote:

Iracundus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
I am so confused by this thread.

I think it got answered a while back, someone went through the Codex and couldn't find a single line about "women cannot at all in any way shape or form be Knight pilots".

So... er... it's just a cultural thing, so knock yourself out, have as many female pilots as you want, hurrah for Lady Solaria.

yup that's exactly what it is, a cultural thing. now the throne thingy that basicly brainwashes the pilots does tend to push houses in a certain direction culturally but..lots of room for female knight pilots in 40k.

Cultural prejudice has often taken the form of "known biological facts". In RL, in the past, it was claimed by some in Europe that women were inherently unsuited for formal education and that formal subjects like mathematics would damage their fragile brains. Those that did get an education were dismissed as rare exceptions or freaks of nature, rare enough to be dismissed as freaks going against the natural order of things. This same kind of reasoning may apply on the Knight worlds.

also there's tradtion, which is said to hold an absurd level of power among knight holdings.

Rational logical thought is also something which is not exactly taught or prized in the Imperium.

Male Knight: Women couldn't possibly be Knights. Their bodies and minds couldn't possibly tolerate the implants and training.

Modern minded questioner: How do you know they would not tolerate the implants and training? Have you tried before?

Male Knight: Of course not! That would go against all our traditions and besides, it would be pointless since we know they would not tolerate it!

Modern minded questioner: That's circular reasoning. How can you know they would not tolerate it if you have never tried it? Yet you refuse to try it because you already assume they would not tolerate it.

Male Knight stares blankly at questioner as he does not understand the question or what circular reasoning is.

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
I am so confused by this thread.

I think it got answered a while back, someone went through the Codex and couldn't find a single line about "women cannot at all in any way shape or form be Knight pilots".

So... er... it's just a cultural thing, so knock yourself out, have as many female pilots as you want, hurrah for Lady Solaria.

Yeah, it was started by me, when I was surprised to see a female knight in Dawn of War 3, when there are no female knights.

Where did I get that from, as we can't "find a single line" about it?

That would be the 6th edition codex, the one with only two knight variants in it, under the heading "TRADITION & RITUAL"

Here are excerpts:

"The only escape from the smothering ennui of courtly life lies
in conflict; both the heroic challenge of the field of battle as an
Imperial Knight, and the more ignoble but no less enthralling
political contests that take place between the knightly houses.
The first of these is solely the preserve of the first or second
sons of the aristocracy, for only they are allowed to pilot suits
of Knight armour."

So, only sons may pilot the armor, explicitely stated. What role of women in the knightly orders? They continue:

"The courts of the knightly houses are riven with political factions, each trying to
outdo the others in any way possible. These political intrigues
are not the sole purview of the Nobles themselves. All Nobles
have a high-born consort, it being considered vital that the
Noble has sons to inherit their name and titles, and daughters
to marry as consorts to other knightly families in order to
cement alliances. A Noble's consort can have considerable
influence, and political intrigue offers them just about their only
escape from the drudgery of courtly life. Many a Noble has
risen to high power thanks to the intelligence, cunning and
ruthless ambition of his consort, while the Noble himself has
found his pleasures on the field of battle."

So, again, the boys are in big stompy robots, the girls chattel to cement alliances, plotting and scheming behind the scenes.

And, here's what this thread got me to do: read the new codex. Because, when GW replaced the knight codex I bought within one year, I decided to not toss another $50 at them to re-read what I assumed was the same material, plus how ever many new data sheets.

But, when I read the new codex, I discovered this whole consorts and sons thing has been expunged. It's not repudiated, and all gender pronouns still refer to "he" and "his" and "high kings" without any "high queens." But, the actual part where pilot gender is defined, is not there any longer. So, yay, I love me some gender diversity.

As for the conversation about female marines going on in the thread... that concept is just gamer catnip, they can't resist it. Mention gender in 40k at all, and folks will be going on about how women could or couldn't be marines for pages.

Iracundus wrote:
Male Knight glares hatefully back at the questioner, draws his side arm and executes the Emperor's Will upon the Heretic.

Fixed that for you.

Oggthrok wrote:

 Gen.Steiner wrote:
I am so confused by this thread.

I think it got answered a while back, someone went through the Codex and couldn't find a single line about "women cannot at all in any way shape or form be Knight pilots".

So... er... it's just a cultural thing, so knock yourself out, have as many female pilots as you want, hurrah for Lady Solaria.

Yeah, it was started by me, when I was surprised to see a female knight in Dawn of War 3, when there are no female knights.

Where did I get that from, as we can't "find a single line" about it?

That would be the 6th edition codex, the one with only two knight variants in it, under the heading "TRADITION & RITUAL"

Here are excerpts:

"The only escape from the smothering ennui of courtly life lies
in conflict; both the heroic challenge of the field of battle as an
Imperial Knight, and the more ignoble but no less enthralling
political contests that take place between the knightly houses.
The first of these is solely the preserve of the first or second
sons of the aristocracy, for only they are allowed to pilot suits
of Knight armour."

So, only sons may pilot the armor, explicitely stated. What role of women in the knightly orders? They continue:

"The courts of the knightly houses are riven with political factions, each trying to
outdo the others in any way possible. These political intrigues
are not the sole purview of the Nobles themselves. All Nobles
have a high-born consort, it being considered vital that the
Noble has sons to inherit their name and titles, and daughters
to marry as consorts to other knightly families in order to
cement alliances. A Noble's consort can have considerable
influence, and political intrigue offers them just about their only
escape from the drudgery of courtly life. Many a Noble has
risen to high power thanks to the intelligence, cunning and
ruthless ambition of his consort, while the Noble himself has
found his pleasures on the field of battle."

So, again, the boys are in big stompy robots, the girls chattel to cement alliances, plotting and scheming behind the scenes.

And, here's what this thread got me to do: read the new codex. Because, when GW replaced the knight codex I bought within one year, I decided to not toss another $50 at them to re-read what I assumed was the same material, plus how ever many new data sheets.

But, when I read the new codex, I discovered this whole consorts and sons thing has been expunged. It's not repudiated, and all gender pronouns still refer to "he" and "his" and "high kings" without any "high queens." But, the actual part where pilot gender is defined, is not there any longer. So, yay, I love me some gender diversity.

Actually neither of those quotes show the gender restriction to be anything more than tradition and culture not allowing. There is no physical or technical reason given in those quotes, so no actual impossible barrier. That was what the "can't find it" was in reference to: actual physical reasons barring women from being piloting Knights.

So, basically, on some worlds, the idea of female Knight pilots is anathema, on others it's totally normal, on others still the idea of male Knight pilots is weird, and finally there's the Mechanicus, for whom the definition of human ... varies.

Yes? Good.

I think we are going to start to see more...balance.
"Battle for Vedros" ad marketing has a boy and girl playing together and one of the recent kill team reports was also a guy and a girl.

Privateer and Wyrd showed you can create strong female characters and models and GAIN players...not lose them.

I wish people would get off this diversity train. Women and brown people are in 40k stuff all the time, quit whining about it.

can you show us the great number of women and brown people in the TTG?
SIsters don't count...they are cringe worthy and NOT what female players need in this game.