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.

Which race are usually the underdogs in a battle? and which race usually makes the other races the underdogs?
Im thinking Space Marine are usually the underdogs when fighting any other factions since they're numbers are extremely low most of the time.
And im thinking Daemon/Chaos usually makes every other race looks like the underdog since they have magic, daemons, terror, and a bunch of other supernatural tricks and horrors.

Whatever faction isn't being written about is the underdog

Seriously, though, in Codex fiction at least, you get wild swings in relative fluff power level based on which Codex it is.

In general, Space Marines are rarely the underdogs, they're gods of war.

You're generally correct on Daemons, their appearance in fluff is generally as a very powerful force.

Sisters of Battle are always the underdogs.

 Manchu wrote:
Sisters of Battle are always the underdogs.

In fluff not always.

The IG are always the underdogs.

To be fair, SoB are the ones who get:

-massacred to introduce Necrons
-massacred by Flesh Tearers in a blood rage
-massacred by Grey Knights because Matt Ward

Being the "underdog" does not necessarily mean one always loses. Being the underdog means being at some meaningful disadvantage relative to your opponents. The Sisters are a small group of regular humans. Individual members of every other faction in the game are as strong/capable/powerful as or better than an individual Sister, excepting only the IG. But the IG has (and even the PDFs have) numbers over the Sisters. Thus Sisters are always at a disadvantage in fluff. That's what I love about them, what makes them absolute badasses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

codemonkey wrote:
massacred by Flesh Tearers in a blood rage

Nah, the FT never actual fought the Sisters on Armageddon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nomotog wrote:
The IG are always the underdogs.

PDFs are worse off but still have numbers over Sisters.

Eldar

For the simple reason that GW has been showing them being bumbling incompetents and being beat up and losing in almost every publication. As an example, the Eldar Avatar hasn't been shown doing anything of note or winning any victories since literally around 2nd edition. We are now in 6th edition.

Worse was how the Avatar got re-written from doing well on Iyanden against the Tyranids to a bumbling idiot that goes up to a swarm challenging for a duel only to be swarmed under. In other words, one of its victories got re-written to be a defeat.

The Eldar seem to be the go to choice for when a victory over an intelligent non-animalistic xeno race needs to be shown. They have been the whipping boy of GW now, beyond any other race in the sheer frequency of depictions. I am quite aware and fine with every faction getting wins and losses distributed but it is also quite apparent the Eldar have been singularly lacking in recent victories and having lots of defeats.

For example, the list of Avatar deaths:

Codex Space Marines: The infamous Calgar incident. *Alaitoc Avatar

Codex Tyranids : Iyanden's Avatar goes from being good and winning to being a blundering idiot that loses. To add insult, Farseer Kelmon (a character from way back 2nd edition Epic Space Marine) and leader of Iyanden is written to have died in the attack when previously his fate was not written (and presumed to have survived). The Doom of Malan'tai would presumably also have resulted in the destruction of an Avatar when it destroyed the craftworld.

Codex Blood Angels: Sanguinor appears and defeats the Avatar and routs the Eldar

Codex Chaos Daemons: Kher-ys Avatar destroyed by Slaanesh daemons

Planetstrike: Eldar Avatar kills a few expendable insignificant Guardsmen before being blown off a bridge into a river of pollution that the burning body then sets alight. *Saim-hann/Biel-tan Avatar

Fulgrim: Fulgrim chokes an Avatar. *Ulthwe Avatar

WD 368: THREE Avatars get killed by daemons

If one plots on a chronological 40K timeline, there have been at least 8 Avatars defeated in the past 213 years (not counting the 3 in WD), and some of these are from major named Craftworlds.

For a time it was literally every Codex was featuring an Avatar death.

If it comes to special Characters, then the Eldar also have the dubious distinction of having more of their special characters recently shown as dying:

Eldrad after the Eye of Terror campaign.

Jain Zar getting her weapons and armor smashed then getting smeared to a paste by Night Lords in Void Stalker

codemonkey wrote:
To be fair, SoB are the ones who get:

-massacred to introduce Necronshe
-massacred by Flesh Tearers in a blood rage
-massacred by Grey Knights because Matt Ward

That last one is awesome! Yes the massacre they endured at the hands of Matt Ward was perhaps the most brutal of them all. However, like a glorius pheonix, rising from the ashes, they may be exceptional if the BA pattern hodls true.

I think GW has always done a decent job at making every faction badass, That being said, after the Sisters of Battle and excluding individual SM Chapters, I'd say the Tau are probably the weakest. Though their potential strength output plus their probability of reaching or exceeding said output makes them the faction to watch. I'll be very excited when the new Tau codex comes out.

Iracundus wrote:
Eldar

It's true that Eldar lose a lot. But you can always say this was part of their plan.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shlazaor wrote:
I'd say the Tau are probably the weakest.

Sure, Tau are weakest on a galactic scale. But we're talking underdogs so this is a battle-by-battle question. The Tau do pretty well for themselves at that level. They just can't mount a galaxy-wide war on anybody at this stage.

 Manchu wrote:
Being the "underdog" does not necessarily mean one always loses. Being the underdog means being at some meaningful disadvantage relative to your opponents. The Sisters are a small group of regular humans. Individual members of every other faction in the game are as strong/capable/powerful as or better than an individual Sister, excepting only the IG. But the IG has (and even the PDFs have) numbers over the Sisters. Thus Sisters are always at a disadvantage in fluff. That's what I love about them, what makes them absolute badasses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

codemonkey wrote:
massacred by Flesh Tearers in a blood rage

Nah, the FT never actual fought the Sisters on Armageddon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nomotog wrote:
The IG are always the underdogs.

PDFs are worse off but still have numbers over Sisters.

Just regular humans in super power armor performing miracles. They are not underdogs.

codemonkey wrote:
massacred by Grey Knights because Matt Ward

No .
The Grey Knights havealways been secret and killing anyone that isn't supposed to know of them.
That includes sisters. Good ol' Mat just wrote a bit about sisters and some nonsence about their blood, wich lately has become very populer to Wardhate about.
May just be me not understanding people.

nomotog wrote:
Just regular humans in super power armor performing miracles. They are not underdogs.

I don't think the power armor thing accounts for that much, honestly. And the miracle business is kind of the point -- it would take a miracle for these ladies to survive the odds stacked against them. But even then, the cost of one miracle seems to be a thousand martyrs.

If we're talking about "loses a lot", Sisters of Battle and Craftworld Eldar easily are the winners. I can't decide if the Doom of Malan'tai or Bloodtide Incident is worse.

 thenoobbomb wrote:

codemonkey wrote:
massacred by Grey Knights because Matt Ward

No .
The Grey Knights havealways been secret and killing anyone that isn't supposed to know of them.
That includes sisters. Good ol' Mat just wrote a bit about sisters and some nonsence about their blood, wich lately has become very populer to Wardhate about.
May just be me not understanding people.

It's unpopular because it's rather nonsensical (Unless you assume that physical corruption=/=falling to Chaos) and very tasteless. If the Sisters had sacrificed themselves, it would have been somewhat acceptable and fairly true to the SoB character; having the Grey Knights slaughter them makes me suspect Ward has issues.

 Manchu wrote:

Iracundus wrote:
Eldar

It's true that Eldar lose a lot. But you can always say this was part of their plan.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shlazaor wrote:
I'd say the Tau are probably the weakest.

Sure, Tau are weakest on a galactic scale. But we're talking underdogs so this is a battle-by-battle question. The Tau do pretty well for themselves at that level. They just can't mount a galaxy-wide war on anybody at this stage.

Indeed, if the discussion is based on tactical strength as opposed to a strategic one then I would stick the Tau up near at the top. They lost a battle to SW and had some difficulty defeating Hivefleet Gorgon and some Orks but by and large the Tau have been supremely successful at destroying their enemies with little cost (in comparison to the other races). Shadowsun defeated an entire Splinter Fleet without losing a single ship (and Tau vessels aren't that advanced).

Tyranids are probably number one though.

There's a lot of Worf Effect going on in fluff writing these days. Indeed, might as well call him Mat Worf.

Imperial factions are usually the underdogs despite their overall power, unless they're putting down a human rebellion or whatever in which case the codex writers make the utter curbstomp nature of it apparent.

I was going to make a joke and say Ratlings, because they can actually fit under dogs, but realised it was a rather bad joke. Anyhoo ...

I don't think there are any underdogs or overdogs amongst the biggies as they all have their moments.

Some of the lesser races perhaps like the Tarellians or the Scythians are underdogs, the Scythians managed to kill a Chapter master of the Crimson Fists.

Manchu wrote:I don't think the power armor thing accounts for that much, honestly. And the miracle business is kind of the point -- it would take a miracle for these ladies to survive the odds stacked against them. But even then, the cost of one miracle seems to be a thousand martyrs.

"Miraculous to the unschooled". To me, one of the Sisters' main theme seems to be that "faith can overcome any obstacle" - and not just religious faith (although that is obviously the "vessel" presented here), but the sheer strength of conviction and belief pushing people past what they'd normally be capable of. It's all about psychology and a certain focus of mind.

Essentially, imagine an entire army of these guys. There's incredible stories about men and women like that all over history, including the medieval crusaders' zeal (which may obviously be somewhat closer to the SoB's actual theme), but those are of course harder to verify than modern stories, as they rely on potentially biased accounts centuries old that may have become exaggerated as time passed. That being said, the inspiration for much in 40k is legend rather than truth, anyways...

The Sororitas suffer somewhat in that, unlike with most other factions, their individual stories throughout the fluff are almost always focused on martyrdom rather than victory - yet the general description still paints a different picture, so that I too cannot see them as "underdogs". That is a title the Imperial Guard can claim, whose troops have to face the horrors of the 41st millennium without the high technology and indoctrination of the Sororitas or the Astartes. The vast majority of them are fairly normal people who were ripped out of a fairly normal life, too, barring exceptions such as the DKoK or the Catachans whose entire life seems to be one big hell. Not that they'd mind.

That, and many fans aren't even aware of half the stuff GW wrote about the Sisters. How many here have read the White Dwarf story of how Sister Martika recovered the bones of Saint Emiline from a camp full of Orks all by herself?

thenoobbomb wrote:The Grey Knights havealways been secret and killing anyone that isn't supposed to know of them. That includes sisters.

Not quite true. As per the GK Codex fluff, Guardsmen are executed, because they're easy to replace and individually not of any real value to the Imperium at large. More elite troops get away with mindscrubbing or are not even touched at all, and even some few IG troops have been spared. It all depends on how much the Inquisition trusts somebody - and the Sisters of Battle are still allies of the Ordo Hereticus and privy to much secret knowledge due to the nature of their duties and the purity of their service.

Don't understand the criticism regarding the Bloodtide stuff either, though. All the GKs did was being pragmatic. To them, it was either sacrificing these Sisters or get tainted. They chose the former so they could continue their mission.

 Lynata wrote:


Don't understand the criticism regarding the Bloodtide stuff either, though. All the GKs did was being pragmatic. To them, it was either sacrificing these Sisters or get tainted. They chose the former so they could continue their mission.

I think the complaints come from the fact that dear old Matt spent every single page of the codex gushing about how Grey Knights were totally immune to corruption and could never, ever fall to Chaos, then turns around and says they needed to murderize some SoBs so they could be immune to the extra-bad corruption.

codemonkey wrote:I think the complaints come from the fact that dear old Matt spent every single page of the codex gushing about how Grey Knights were totally immune to corruption and could never, ever fall to Chaos, then turns around and says they needed to murderize some SoBs so they could be immune to the extra-bad corruption.

That's a complaint I could understand better, but I swear to the Emperor, I've never seen anyone word it like that. Every time people only seem to rage about how GKs would never slaughter their allies like that, often followed by a comparison to "Khorne berserkers". Is it a subconscious thing?

On a sidenote, Ward's addition there does not even conflict with an immunity against Chaos - he just added the crux that, sometimes at least, they may require "paraphernalia" to achieve this effect. Most often, hexagrammic runes would suffice. Other times you need the blood of an innocent soul untouched by the taint. That's how I am interpreting this anyhow. I am fairly sure that even older fluff already mentioned protective gear for the Grey Knights, so it should have been obvious for a long time that it's not 100% based on some innate ability.

A regular person can only do so much in the realm of their own volition, no matter how zealous they might be. At some point, luck or fate or the circumstances or grace or whatever you want to call it must intervene. The Sisters are okay fighters, better than IG but not as good as IM. They are not enhanced, genetically or otherwise. They have no psychic powers of which they themselves are aware. The only check they really have in the advantage column is power armor. (The brain-washing they undergo is more ambivalent, I'd argue.) So what does that leave them with? I'll take my chances with a million other regular humans in blast armor than with 99 others in power armor.

Humans are the underdogs the always triumph in the end.

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
Humans are the underdogs the always triumph in the end.

Unless it's a Chaos novel, in which case bad things happen.

Underdogs eh?

Orks and Tyranids are making all other races underdogs when it comes to sheer numbers.

Space Marines makes everyone else underdogs when it comes to battle. They usually make the most results with minimal losses and maximum damage ( they are after all special forces even by galactic standards ).

Manchu wrote:A regular person can only do so much in the realm of their own volition, no matter how zealous they might be. At some point, luck or fate or the circumstances or grace or whatever you want to call it must intervene. The Sisters are okay fighters, better than IG but not as good as IM. They are not enhanced, genetically or otherwise. They have no psychic powers of which they themselves are aware. The only check they really have in the advantage column is power armor. (The brain-washing they undergo is more ambivalent, I'd argue.) So what does that leave them with? I'll take my chances with a million other regular humans in blast armor than with 99 others in power armor.

But that's the thing - strong conviction and power of will can enable people to overcome a "regular person's" limitations. Or would you expect a regular person to behave like the soldier in the example I linked? And that is what I perceive as the nature of their Acts of Faith. GW themselves wrote that "what the Sisters lack in genetic enhancement they make up for in faith and devotion" when comparing them to Space Marines, and the potential to simply ignore pain and fear is, I think, a very powerful asset in combat.

You are correct in that the indoctrination is a double-edged sword, however, for the Sisters' intense zeal can easily result in emotion clouding tactical acumen, with results quite similar to those of some of the Astartes turning into berserkers due to a geneseed flaw or some of the more careless IG commanders' strategies. Not to mention that the religious component, whilst an important part of their monastic lifestyle and the source of their excessive dedication, can have adverse effects on the ability to wage war as well. Be it ad-hoc purges of other Imperial military groups, or a temporary lack of readiness. For example, the aforementioned Sister Martika would have never been required to prove her badassness by infiltrating an Ork camp all on her own if her convoy had not stopped on the roadside with all Sisters exiting the armoured vehicles for "morning prayers", allowing the Greenskins to overpower them in a surprise attack...
That said, such drawbacks are of course necessary for the "narrative balance" of a faction. Matter of preferences, but I just find it boring if someone would be "too perfect".

How are people defining "underdog", anyways? It does not have to do much with numbers but, I think, with being disadvantaged. And I actually do not see Orks and Tyranids as disadvantaged as the IG facing them, at least in most situations. Then again, I could be mistaken, biased due to just having read about a few big battles.

Among the Gaurdsmen, there are heroes like you described. It is not really a useful distinction between them and Sisters -- even if Sisters are brainwashed to believe that miracles are the norm (when this is clearly not the case for them or anyone else).

In the seventh post above, I stated:

Being the underdog means being at some meaningful disadvantage relative to your opponents.

From the standpoint of a faction, however, numbers do count as an advantage or disadvantage.

The question was more directed at others, because the Ork and Tyranid thingie confused me. I should have probably worded it better.

That being said, numbers alone are a very relative advantage. Numbers without equipment appropriate for whatever task lies ahead can transfer quantity from an advantage to a mere balancing factor at best, not to mention that vast swathes of an army could simply turn and run when faced with a particularly terrible foe.

What's more, I think we would have to look at the individual soldier and his (or her) life even moreso than we look at the army as some faceless faction. Just because Chenkov has enough troops to waste them on stuff like clearing minefields with their boots does not make the Valhallans any less of an underdog - I would be tempted to say it only increases this perception. The more gakky you have it, the more you are the underdog. At least that's how I tend to view it, I think.

Under this perspective, Orks are right out because they tend to enjoy every minute of the action, and 'nids have the nimbus of being unstoppable regardless of how many losses they take, coupled with their rank-and-file being little better than animals lacking any sort of actual personality.

Manchu wrote:Among the Gaurdsmen, there are heroes like you described. It is not really a useful distinction between them and Sisters

It is a distinction when it is a remarkable exception for some few Guard characters throughout the galaxy, but fairly common for the Sisters of Battle in general. I mean, if we would go by some individual exceptions like Harker, the only notable difference between IG and Marines would be what armour they wear (or do not wear ).

I don't think remarkable heroism is necessarily more common among Sisters. I think they look at it in a very different way from other factions. When you're looking for miracles all the time, you're bound to find some. The Sisters ascribe every fortune to the intervention of the God Emperor.

As far as Acts of Faith, I'm deliberately trying to keep rules and fluff separate here.