Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Psienesis wrote:

I don't recall height being mentioned at all in the 6th Edition Space Marine codex, not to mention that older codices are old and irrelevant anyway.

Incorrect assertion. Older Codices are replaced only when information in a new Codex replaces it. Such as the statement that the SOB are the Chamber Militant of the Ordo Hereticus from C:WH being replaced by CAS stating that they simply "work closely".

Except by that logic then Madboyz should still be a thing. An outdated codex is just that, outdated.

There isn't as much evidence for that though Ash. Codex say 7 - 7'6". Designers say 7' - 7'6". Novels say a Primarch is seven and a half feet tall and not much larger than a normal Marine.

Again, you REALLY want 9' marines. Good for you. The OP wanted as close to canon as he could get, or it seemed that way to me. If the ONLY evidence you have for a 9' marine is "Half again the hieght of a man" that doesn't really counter the above points.

Come on man. I don't care too much. IF the codex came out in 8th saying they were 9' tall, I couldn't care less. I am just trying to give the OP what he asked for, and that is that the majority of the information available makes it VERY clear that they are in the seven foot range. Some, like Abaddon, are monstrously large. Some might even be 9' tall. But thats not the norm.

Marine size has remained consistent in every source I have seen since 1999. I am not trying to be condescending, I am saying it is tough to get me to accept 9' if there are real numbers printed in multiple books from multiple sources pointing to the same number.

Considering some regular humans are only 5 foot 9 like me, and some are over 7 feet tall I dont see why this question endlessly causes such furious debate.

I think obviously some regular humans are even taller, but they are super rare so lets not count them, the point is obviously that being a little over 7 isn't actually that rare, because I read that something like 20% of NBA players leave the 6's behind.

Anyway, doubtless Jes said 7 at the time, but after a little thought the idea has been expanded upon by BL writers, and rightly so in my opinion.

Considering how much height varies in humans, it doesn't seem silly to say the same about Space Marines, but with all of the extra nutrition and enhancements I would reckon 7 foot is the low end for Space Marines. So probably between 7-10 doesn't seem to be ridiculous... considering regular people have such diversity, why would they be any different?

Oh, and I found this cool picture while reading up on the subject.



Taken in 1900, from left to right - British, American, Australian, Indian, German, French, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Japan. I suppose we (Brits/Yanks) had the best food and quality of life at the time or something?

 PhillyT wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
It's ludicrous to ever use the tabletop game as a reference for discussing the universe.

The 40K tabletop game is some kind of imaginary version of how combat works in an already imaginary universe, lol. Where battles are fought on neutral ground by evenly matched forces whose individual values shifts depending on what the marketing department says will best promote sales.

A Rhino holds 10 henchmen and 10 Marines because in the game it has a transport capacity measured in "models", not weight, or space.

Let's derail this discussion before it crosses from silly, to stupid.

And yet, there are rules for particularly large beings consuming greater transport space...

Yeah, and shockingly, they're models mounted on a larger base size, almost without exception. And it's done in whole numbers, not fractions.

What did I just tell you about going from silly to stupid?

 Wyzilla wrote:
Except by that logic then Madboyz should still be a thing. An outdated codex is just that, outdated.

Eh? Madboyz are still a thing in the fluff. They just don't have rules to represent them in Warhammer 40k.

OK the pictures have been shown of something 10 foot tall and they are so unbelievably ridiculous as to make this debate silly.

There are stories of marines and humans interacting somewhat normally, of humans only reaching the marines chest etc. of humans duelling with marines and surviving (if not for long) I'll just bring up Ciaphas Cain here as one random example of being able to deflect two strikes.

http://media.islandpacket.com/smedia/2014/09/02/15/06/18-usLd0.AuSt.55.jpeg

That is 9 foot tall. A space marine that tall would be wielding a blade the size of the man working on him, it says the weapons are to big for a human to lift sometimes but OF course that is true if a 7-6 super muscled human has a gun of course it is going to be to big to lift. Hell if I was wielding a zweihander sword (strong 6 foot bloke) then my 5 foot wife definitely can barely pick it up let alone swing it.

But it doesn't say that a space marine wields bolters and chainblades as big as a human.

Its all very silly. People want Space Marines to be primarch sized? And can someone explain to me why pg26 of the space marines codex is not enough?

2.5 meters is 8.2 feet btw.

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
OK the pictures have been shown of something 10 foot tall and they are so unbelievably ridiculous as to make this debate silly.

There are stories of marines and humans interacting somewhat normally, of humans only reaching the marines chest etc. of humans duelling with marines and surviving (if not for long) I'll just bring up Ciaphas Cain here as one random example of being able to deflect two strikes.

http://media.islandpacket.com/smedia/2014/09/02/15/06/18-usLd0.AuSt.55.jpeg

That is 9 foot tall. A space marine that tall would be wielding a blade the size of the man working on him, it says the weapons are to big for a human to lift sometimes but OF course that is true if a 7-6 super muscled human has a gun of course it is going to be to big to lift. Hell if I was wielding a zweihander sword (strong 6 foot bloke) then my 5 foot wife definitely can barely pick it up let alone swing it.

But it doesn't say that a space marine wields bolters and chainblades as big as a human.

Its all very silly. People want Space Marines to be primarch sized? And can someone explain to me why pg26 of the space marines codex is not enough?

2.5 meters is 8.2 feet btw.

To be fair, that guy looks smaller by being at the far end.

Otherwise that looks like a very good size for Marines to be.

Good god, who the hell cares about how tall a fictional goddamn monk is? Does it really kill your enjoyment if a Marine is seven or nine feet? Is that really the deal breaker when you have crap like Spiritual Liege's to gripe about?

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
Good god, who the hell cares about how tall a fictional goddamn monk is? Does it really kill your enjoyment if a Marine is seven or nine feet? Is that really the deal breaker when you have crap like Spiritual Liege's to gripe about?

This is the 40k Background forum. Debating over trivial stuff like that is just what we do.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
Good god, who the hell cares about how tall a fictional goddamn monk is? Does it really kill your enjoyment if a Marine is seven or nine feet? Is that really the deal breaker when you have crap like Spiritual Liege's to gripe about?

This is the 40k Background forum. Debating over trivial stuff like that is just what we do.

Exactly.

I think the real issue here is that people are trivializing just how tall 7'6" actually is when you also add a massive amount of muscle to that.

The largest person I have ever spent any amount of time with was The Big Show from the WWE. I met him in Portland Maine back in 1997. I had seen Kane earlier in the night from a distance and he looked really big, but Big Show was totally different. He got out of a Ford Expedition and came around the back. The roof at the back of the expedition was at his collar bone. His girlfriend (I assume it was his girlfriend) came up just past his belly button. The top of her head wasn't even at his pec. When I shook his hand, it was a mit, not a hand. Crazy how huge the guy was. He is billed as 7'4" or something. I don't know if that is accurate, but he was much taller than Kane who is likely around 6'11". But beside that, he was just massive.

Take someone like him, turn the fat into genetically engineered muscle, add about 200 pounds and stretch him another 3 or 4 inches and you have a space marine. The thing people seem to forget is that space marines are not only massive, they are insanely quick, especially given their enormous size.

I am not forgetting anything, yet I still argue for 9'.

In fact.

Codex: Chaos Space Marines 6th edition, Chaos Space Marines entry, first paragraph wrote:The Adeptus Astartes were created as the Emperor's
ultimate fighting force. Implanted with the gene-seed of
the Primarchs, the Space Marines stand seven feet tall,
with thickened bones, two hearts, hyper-dense muscles and
all manner of special organs that allow them to survive
and fight in the most hostile conditions. They feel little
pain and heal wounds at a remarkable rate. Their wiII is
hardened by constant training and fighting, and they battle
with dedication and zeal, brooking no hesitation, mercy
or cowardice. All of these things combine with the best
weaponry and armour in the galaxy to make the Space
Marines the most fearsome warriors of the Imperium.

Isn't it funny how everyone says 'It definitely says seven feet, it must be true!' and when it equally specifically states a few sentences later that they have the best wargear and weapons in the galaxy, it is brushed off as propaganda?

The double standard is pretty funny. If you too are going to cherrypick what you prefer, then at least admit you do. Don't point fingers when others do the same while you are trying to hold on to the high ground.

In fact, I am firmly of the belief that both 'seven feet' and 'best armour and weapons in the galaxy' is propaganda.

Make of that what you will.

(Edits: Typos, additions, and more typos.)

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
But it doesn't say that a space marine wields bolters and chainblades as big as a human.

That's because "real" weapons aren't made to be too massive for a guy (even a huge strong guy) to use all day. Assault rifles weigh 3-4 kilograms at most, and they're not made in heavy versions for a bigger guy. Any real zweihander swords - as in these were actually meant to be used - weighed 2-3 kilograms. Anything 4 kg or above was what the Germans usesd to call a "Paratschwert", a ceremonial (useless) weapon. And the soldiers selected to weild such things on a field of battle were generally quite big and strong for the period. Someone who had to overcompensate could ofc ask a smith to make a bigger heavier blade, but seeing what the normal size did to people it was just overkill and posturing.

Yes, because propaganda often portrays those we are trying to uplift as being less important and significant...

I am done. carry on your one man crusade. The original poster has his answer and we can all move on as better people.

Spetulhu wrote:

Jaq Draco lives wrote:
But it doesn't say that a space marine wields bolters and chainblades as big as a human.

That's because "real" weapons aren't made to be too massive for a guy (even a huge strong guy) to use all day. Assault rifles weigh 3-4 kilograms at most, and they're not made in heavy versions for a bigger guy. Any real zweihander swords - as in these were actually meant to be used - weighed 2-3 kilograms. Anything 4 kg or above was what the Germans usesd to call a "Paratschwert", a ceremonial (useless) weapon. And the soldiers selected to weild such things on a field of battle were generally quite big and strong for the period. Someone who had to overcompensate could ofc ask a smith to make a bigger heavier blade, but seeing what the normal size did to people it was just overkill and posturing.

And while I am not sure of what the average adult human male is capable of lifting, I am pretty sure it is a helluva lot more than what those guns weigh.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 PhillyT wrote:
Yes, because propaganda often portrays those we are trying to uplift as being less important and significant...

Of course. With a few seconds of thought, you can find several plausible reasons. It is in a Chaos Space Marines codex, so it might be in their interest to portray Marines as small (It should be noted that this seven feet passage specifically refers to the Emperor's Space Marines, nothing else). Conversely, if this is assumed to be an Imperial text, the Imperium may want to make Marines seem less powerful and thus their deeds more heroic. After all, if all those insane feats were committed by warriors not much taller than you or me, perhaps you, the common guardsman, has hope of doing something similarly heroic?

I am done. carry on your one man crusade. The original poster has his answer and we can all move on as better people.

Not sure what you are implying here, but it did not look very nice. Is debating Marine height ITT and being ''''''''''''''better people''''''''''''' mutually exclusive?

 Ashiraya wrote:
And while I am not sure of what the average adult human male is capable of lifting, I am pretty sure it is a helluva lot more than what those guns weigh.

Yes. But you have to be able to lug it around all day, and keep using it all day. Just take a 3-4 kilogram weight from the local gym and carry it with you for a day, then decide if you want a bigger weapon just because you can carry that weight. And try to use that weight for an extended period of time. A battle is not ten repetitions with a minute of rest after, it might be a hundred or a thousand without any rest.

Spetulhu wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
And while I am not sure of what the average adult human male is capable of lifting, I am pretty sure it is a helluva lot more than what those guns weigh.

Yes. But you have to be able to lug it around all day, and keep using it all day. Just take a 3-4 kilogram weight from the local gym and carry it with you for a day, then decide if you want a bigger weapon just because you can carry that weight. And try to use that weight for an extended period of time. A battle is not ten repetitions with a minute of rest after, it might be a hundred or a thousand without any rest.

Marines are very very resistant to tiring, mind you.

The fact that Marines carry weapons too heavy for humans to lift implies more than that their lifting capacity is higher than a human's. It indicates that the weight Marines are capable of carrying as their assault rifle is more than what a human can lift, which is something significant indeed!

I feel like 'too heavy to lift' might be exaggerated language. People can lift quite a lot. For a boltgun to be so heavy that no human could lift it, it would probably need to be car sized.

 Smacks wrote:
I feel like 'too heavy to lift' might be exaggerated language. People can lift quite a lot. For a boltgun to be so heavy that no human could lift it, it would probably need to be car sized.

I think the statement is an exagerration.While a human can lift and fire a boltgun they just can't use them nearly as fluidly as an astartes can.

It's probably not just weight, but size too. A cinder block is heavy, but it's compact.

An FN MAG machinegun is both heavy, and long. The average person (heck, the average real world soldier) would struggle to shoulder it to fire standing up because its weight is distributed across its nearly 50" length. The average arm length for a male is only 32 inches, by comparison, and if you've tried to hold something heavy steady at arms-length you can imagine where the weight of a boltgun isn't just about "lifting" it.

You can see how big that weapon is, and it weighs only almost 30 pounds (unloaded), lol.


Now imagine a magazine fed rocket rifle designed for a seven foot superhuman.

It's not that nobody could do it. It's just that most people couldn't.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Now imagine a magazine fed rocket rifle designed for a seven foot superhuman.

But is it designed for a superhuman? Sisters carry bolters too, and they're girls :p

Also machine guns are made of steel, which is heavy. 40k is supposed to have better metals, which are likely stronger and lighter. Also a rocket 'launcher' shouldn't need to be heavy since there isn't as much force acting inside the chamber. You can launch a rocket out of a cardboard tube.

 Smacks wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Now imagine a magazine fed rocket rifle designed for a seven foot superhuman.

But is it designed for a superhuman? Sisters carry bolters too, and they're girls :p

Also machine guns are made of steel, which is heavy. 40k is supposed to have better metals, which are likely stronger and lighter. Also a rocket 'launcher' shouldn't need to be heavy since there isn't as much force acting inside the chamber. You can launch a rocket out of a cardboard tube.

They're probably upscaled for Marines. It's debatable whether or not they chambered for a larger cartridge (Most likely) but I would hazard a guess that Marine boltguns has a much more dense and/or strong construction for the same reason Ripper Guns are: So that the super strong wielder doesn't break the damned thing.

 Smacks wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Now imagine a magazine fed rocket rifle designed for a seven foot superhuman.

But is it designed for a superhuman? Sisters carry bolters too, and they're girls :p

Also machine guns are made of steel, which is heavy. 40k is supposed to have better metals, which are likely stronger and lighter. Also a rocket 'launcher' shouldn't need to be heavy since there isn't as much force acting inside the chamber. You can launch a rocket out of a cardboard tube.

Considering bolters have been depicted as being ruggedized so you can use them to bonk large, disagreeable aliens on the head with them in a pinch, I'm guessing they aren't too light.

As far as the Sisters weapons, they've been occasionally depicted as being smaller in both caliber and size than the ones Marines carry, but not enough of a difference that it impacts how the bolters stats are depicted in the tabletop game (obviously when you're working on a fixed 16.7% margin of error/difficulty there isn't any room for small nuance like that). I'd imagine the weapons scaled for normal human use are similarly downsized.

When the game talks about lifting weapons not meant for regular humans, I'm guessing they refer to the Marines' ability to lug around heavy weapons though. Not just the Marine bolters.

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Smacks wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Now imagine a magazine fed rocket rifle designed for a seven foot superhuman.

But is it designed for a superhuman? Sisters carry bolters too, and they're girls :p

Also machine guns are made of steel, which is heavy. 40k is supposed to have better metals, which are likely stronger and lighter. Also a rocket 'launcher' shouldn't need to be heavy since there isn't as much force acting inside the chamber. You can launch a rocket out of a cardboard tube.

Considering bolters have been depicted as being ruggedized so you can use them to bonk large, disagreeable aliens on the head with them in a pinch, I'm guessing they aren't too light.

As far as the Sisters weapons, they've been occasionally depicted as being smaller in both caliber and size than the ones Marines carry, but not enough of a difference that it impacts how the bolters stats are depicted in the tabletop game (obviously when you're working on a fixed 16.7% margin of error/difficulty there isn't any room for small nuance like that). I'd imagine the weapons scaled for normal human use are similarly downsized.

When the game talks about lifting weapons not meant for regular humans, I'm guessing they refer to the Marines' ability to lug around heavy weapons though. Not just the Marine bolters.

Also, an Astartes bolter recoil would probably kill or seriously maim a mortal human being. Seeing how we finally got sensible bolter casing sizes in the new Deathwing trailer, bolters are pretty using an AA round for a rifle.

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Smacks wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Now imagine a magazine fed rocket rifle designed for a seven foot superhuman.

But is it designed for a superhuman? Sisters carry bolters too, and they're girls :p

Also machine guns are made of steel, which is heavy. 40k is supposed to have better metals, which are likely stronger and lighter. Also a rocket 'launcher' shouldn't need to be heavy since there isn't as much force acting inside the chamber. You can launch a rocket out of a cardboard tube.

Considering bolters have been depicted as being ruggedized so you can use them to bonk large, disagreeable aliens on the head with them in a pinch, I'm guessing they aren't too light.

As far as the Sisters weapons, they've been occasionally depicted as being smaller in both caliber and size than the ones Marines carry, but not enough of a difference that it impacts how the bolters stats are depicted in the tabletop game (obviously when you're working on a fixed 16.7% margin of error/difficulty there isn't any room for small nuance like that). I'd imagine the weapons scaled for normal human use are similarly downsized.

When the game talks about lifting weapons not meant for regular humans, I'm guessing they refer to the Marines' ability to lug around heavy weapons though. Not just the Marine bolters.

Also, an Astartes bolter recoil would probably kill or seriously maim a mortal human being. Seeing how we finally got sensible bolter casing sizes in the new Deathwing trailer, bolters are pretty using an AA round for a rifle.

I don't think the recoil is that bad. It is a rocket propelled grenade that the bolter is firing.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Wyzilla wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:

 Smacks wrote:

 Veteran Sergeant wrote:
Now imagine a magazine fed rocket rifle designed for a seven foot superhuman.

But is it designed for a superhuman? Sisters carry bolters too, and they're girls :p

Also machine guns are made of steel, which is heavy. 40k is supposed to have better metals, which are likely stronger and lighter. Also a rocket 'launcher' shouldn't need to be heavy since there isn't as much force acting inside the chamber. You can launch a rocket out of a cardboard tube.

Considering bolters have been depicted as being ruggedized so you can use them to bonk large, disagreeable aliens on the head with them in a pinch, I'm guessing they aren't too light.

As far as the Sisters weapons, they've been occasionally depicted as being smaller in both caliber and size than the ones Marines carry, but not enough of a difference that it impacts how the bolters stats are depicted in the tabletop game (obviously when you're working on a fixed 16.7% margin of error/difficulty there isn't any room for small nuance like that). I'd imagine the weapons scaled for normal human use are similarly downsized.

When the game talks about lifting weapons not meant for regular humans, I'm guessing they refer to the Marines' ability to lug around heavy weapons though. Not just the Marine bolters.

Also, an Astartes bolter recoil would probably kill or seriously maim a mortal human being. Seeing how we finally got sensible bolter casing sizes in the new Deathwing trailer, bolters are pretty using an AA round for a rifle.

I don't think the recoil is that bad. It is a rocket propelled grenade that the bolter is firing.

....

You do know how missiles work, and how bolters are completely different from them, yes?

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I don't think the recoil is that bad. It is a rocket propelled grenade that the bolter is firing.

Yeah, I'm never sure what the official line is on this. A rocket propelled grenade should not really produce any recoil (hardly any). But I guess they could have a small cartridge to get them started. Some of the artwork shows cartridges being ejected, but that might just be an error by the artist.

 Smacks wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I don't think the recoil is that bad. It is a rocket propelled grenade that the bolter is firing.

Yeah, I'm never sure what the official line is on this. A rocket propelled grenade should really produce any recoil (hardly any). But I guess they could have a small cartridge to get them started. Some of the artwork shows cartridges being ejected, but that might just be an error by the artist.

Bolters have multiple charges- a primary gunpowder charge to kick it out of the barrel, and then the gyrojets which activate long enough after leaving the barrel that they do not kill the person firing it. All personnel missile weapons with large rockets (like a bolter) has a hole on the end of the "gun" which is worn on the shoulder. The explosion as the rocket activates is harmlessly blown out behind the shooter's back in a large fireball as the rocket launchers the grenade away. Bolters however, are a just a traditional gun. If they fired it with purely rockets, the kickback of the flames would either maim or kill the shooter, not to mention the recoil of firing a 20mm round would probably kill them or shatter their shoulder.



And they would have kick, because there's no hole in the back to direct away the force. Bolters are like rifles, they're a closed cylinder to build up pressure, where-as a missile launcher is an open tube.

@Wyzilla

Bolters function by firing a miniature rocket which, after a certain distance, engages it's rocket engines to accelerate it to it's maximum speed. I would imagine that there is some recoil to the gun since Marines need a round that can still punch but not as much as one would think since a bolter round doesn't need the same amount of initial force to reach it's optimal velocity.

Unless, of course, it -does- fire with the full force such a round can offer and the rockets in the bolt propels it to even greater speeds.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
@Wyzilla

Bolters function by firing a miniature rocket which, after a certain distance, engages it's rocket engines to accelerate it to it's maximum speed. I would imagine that there is some recoil to the gun since Marines need a round that can still punch but not as much as one would think since a bolter round doesn't need the same amount of initial force to reach it's optimal velocity.

Unless, of course, it -does- fire with the full force such a round can offer and the rockets in the bolt propels it to even greater speeds.

Yes.... but in order to actually hit what you were aiming at, it would still need enough gunpowder to send it flying straight, and you're firing a weapon that uses anti-aircraft caliber rounds.

 Wyzilla wrote:
All personnel missile weapons with large rockets (like a bolter) has a hole on the end of the "gun" which is worn on the shoulder. The explosion as the rocket activates is harmlessly blown out behind the shooter's back in a large fireball as the rocket launchers the grenade away. Bolters however, are a just a traditional gun. If they fired it with purely rockets, the kickback of the flames would either maim or kill the shooter, not to mention the recoil of firing a 20mm round would probably kill them or shatter their shoulder.

But we already have/had experimental gyrojet sidearms, they were light and had much less in the way of 'flames' and recoil than regular ammunition.