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.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Formosa, please cut the bit you are referring to in big quotes like this .

I don't understand what you are saying. I said that there are already relatively easy ways for marines to reproduce, so adding a potential, very very hard way for them to reproduce is no big deal. How is the fact you already mentioned some easy way for marines to reproduce contradict my affirmation that there are already easier way for marines to reproduce?

Sorry dude, your right

My personal feeling on it is that marines cannot reproduce, but the argument that the possibility of marines reproducing is something that would have to be considered, given that chaos (and imperial) apothecaries, magos and dark mech have shown not only the willingness, but the ability to screw with astartes genetics and succeeded.

Astartes recruitment as is not easier that the possibility to have self replicating marines, a baby that has all the organs naturally grown within the body, born with its abilities, is much more efficient that finding a recruitment world, finding a child that passes a trial, taking the child and training it, implanting the organs over the space of 15 years, possible rejection and mutation and further training, and then put into the scout company.

All it would take is someone to succeed once, Cawl, Bile, Dark Mech have all shown the ability to make this kind of thing happen, especially Bile, we also know that its possible to produce marines with all the organs needed through cloning, Demonculaba and the Primarchs themselves (they have all the organs naturally grown in their bodies).

So in universe, were I the emprah, I would consider this (and we know that he and Malcador discussed female marines), and stop it from happening, I dont want my fodder finding a way to replace the species they are supposed to be protecting.

Niiai wrote:I do not agree with you that one can not have strong opinions on culture. And game is culture just like anything else. We have arts, books and movie critique, why not games? I studied all four of them to some degree at universaty. (Read critique not nesaseraly as critesimn.)

No-one's saying that games aren't culture. However, how does adding Female Marines add to that culture? We don't want all cultures to be the same - having an all male and an all female society in a fictional culture is still culture.

How big do I rate this on the 'things that matter scale in the world' it rates very low. But when we are talking about the actual game I feel quite strong about it.

As do we all. I wouldn't go on a march for this in real life, but internet talk is free and easy - hence why I can wax lyrical about it.

Now from a practical point of view, if you are thinking production pipelines, it is very easy to implement. Change some of the fluff the next time they print it. And then you need to craft the head spruces. Either make new spruces as they are want to do. But more easaly make some upgrade spruces like they have done for GSC. Some packaging for the upgrade spruces and that is it. It is a very easaly implementation.

If you compare this to sisters of battle for instance they woudl need to design all of the boxes. I do not know if the molds are compatable with plastic. You would need to do a codex, and that includes hiering authors etc. It is much more work, and a bigger financial risiko. What if sisters do not sell? Who is sisters main audience? Is it ment for women in the 'representation argument' for instance? That is a tangent with a lot of speculation.

See, I think this is the issue you're having.

You simply don't care about Sisters, the existing all female army. You admit it in the paragraph below. And that's why, from what I see, you want to reinvent the wheel, as it were.

We ALREADY have female supersoldiers in the lore. They're called the Sisters of Battle and Sisters of Silence - and there's only one gap I see female Marines filling that the SoB/SoS can't (that being genetically modified).
As I put in a previous post (which you still haven't replied to), Sisters and Space Marines are very similar, differing in tiny ways.

You say that the problem with Sisters is that you'd need to do them in plastic. Why SHOULDN'T they be in plastic? Plastic Sisters should have been a thing years ago, supporting an actual existing army rather than having to redesign Space Marines for the umpteen time. With your Space Marine one, they need to make upgrade sprues - with Sisters, they're supporting an army that's been in the game longer than most players, and still hasn't been updated.

To have Female Space Marines, you need to change what currently exists. With Sisters, you just need to give plastic models to a faction.

Are you actually against plastic sisters, is what I'm saying? Because for saying you're trying to "support female issues", not supporting the actual female army is baffling.
Do you want to SQUAT the Sisters?

And the audience argument? That's been terrible used against Female Marines, and now it's being used to squat Sisters? Not just women play Sisters. Sister's main audience is people who want female models, church models, like the aesthetic, like the gameplay, or really, ANY of the reasons people like ANY of the other armies.

But for me at least, I do not like sisters of battle.

And herein lies the root of the problem. You ignore the easiest answer to the problem because you don't like it.

Perhaps I do not know them well enough, but as statet eralier my experience with them is from Storm of Souls in 2008 and then they where bat gak crazy. Fanatic is the word. I do not like them. And it also feels like playing 'at the kids table'. I like that SM lends themself to so much. I have a SM army, I was very close to having a GK and BA army, I have some of their models. I also really like the minotars and the cha-charadons in the badab war. SM is the icon on 40K, there is no way sisters of battle would ever grow to that status, they are not iconic enough. And I think itw ould be folly for GW to invest a lot of money into it when SM are so iconic.

IOW Let's squat everyone from the game because they're not Space Marines.

Nope. Sorry, but that's a terrible idea. Sisters fulfil the craving for Female Supersoldiers, and if they were updated, then there could be a vast influx of players, a new lease of life for their lore and representation, and could be JUST a diverse as Space Marines. Space Marines and Sister have JUST as much opportunity to be diverse and varied as eachother - if we gave Sisters a chance.

You're saying "Sisters aren't iconic because they're not iconic" - WHY? It's because GW hasn't given them any actual care beyond existing. Not because there's a fundamental flaw with their concept.

I also really dislike that sisters are T3 and S3. They might have rhinoes and that 3+ save, but form a rules perspective SM they are not. Having T4 is like a very confertable blanket.

So for me, sisters no, SM yes, SM based on both genders, yes please.

That's a gameplay issue. We're in the background section. If you don't like that Sisters are T3, then don't play them, and don't complain that you can't have your cake and eat it too.
You want female models? Play Sisters. Don't like T3? Don't play them.

Same as if someone came up to me and said "I love Orks, but I wish they had a 3+ save". Does that mean we should give Orks power armour now, or should the player just deal with it and choose which one they want? Or, even better - they can use the Sisters models, and Space Marine rules! No lore changes, no need to make Female Marines at all.

We have two monogender factions. We don't need to change Space Marines when something else fits what we want.

Edit: Just read the above comment. I think perhaps I can try to bridge it with a methaphore. If the 40K was a joke being told, I think the joke would flow a lot better if females SM where part of the setting instead of this artificial conveluted thing it is now.

I disagree. And that's all that needs to be said about it.

Niiai wrote:No, they are not good guys, I meant the SW. I think SW are the closest I have come to good guys in the setting. They look out for the little guy (being mad at the inquestition when they kill the humans) and that is a very sympathetic trait. When they fall to chaos mutation, they apear to exlusivly get physical mutations that turns them into where wolves instead of anything else.

But they are super shady. So many skeletons in the closet. I like the arogance about them knowing better. And the texas standoff they have with the inquesition and sisters of battle.

So you really don't know that much about SW then.
Salamanders are more protective of civilians, and Ultramarines and Lamenters are close too.
Space Wolves don't turn into Wulfen when exposed to the Warp - that's geneseed degradation.
Other factions have standoffs with the Inquisition. However, unlike the Space Wolves who have A-Grade plot armour, they don't get away with irritating one of the most powerful single bodies in the Imperium - see Celestial Lions.

Just proves how flexible SM are when it comes to being fitted to fictional cultures.

Tell me, why can't that apply to Sisters?
Why aren't they as diverse as SM? Answer - they ARE just as diverse, if only GW would embrace the narrative potential of it.

I shall repeat my question for the third time, seeing as you still have yet to answer it:

What role can Sisters not fill that Space Marines can, barring popularity, which is subjective, and something which my proposal aims to solve?

To be fair The Canis Helix Does turn Space Wolves into Wulfen as a result of warp exposure, its a defence mechanism is was theorised, thats not solid fact, but the warp turning wolves into wulfen is, it was in white dwarf way back in 13th black crusade.

 Formosa wrote:
To be fair The Canis Helix Does turn Space Wolves into Wulfen as a result of warp exposure, its a defence mechanism is was theorised, thats not solid fact, but the warp turning wolves into wulfen is, it was in white dwarf way back in 13th black crusade.

Again, theorised, and I don't know how canon the WD article is now - especially with the existence of Skyrar's Dark Wolves.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
To be fair The Canis Helix Does turn Space Wolves into Wulfen as a result of warp exposure, its a defence mechanism is was theorised, thats not solid fact, but the warp turning wolves into wulfen is, it was in white dwarf way back in 13th black crusade.

Again, theorised, and I don't know how canon the WD article is now - especially with the existence of Skyrar's Dark Wolves.

Yeah its theorised, a theory that Ragnar Blackmane thinks could be true, but we will never know

 Formosa wrote:
Astartes recruitment as is not easier that the possibility to have self replicating marines, a baby that has all the organs naturally grown within the body, born with its abilities, is much more efficient that finding a recruitment world, finding a child that passes a trial, taking the child and training it, implanting the organs over the space of 15 years, possible rejection and mutation and further training, and then put into the scout company.

I don't want to go all science-y in a 40k thread, but normally if you implant a bunch of organs but don't change the genetic code in the gametes, you'd get normal human babies from those gametes, not babies with the astartes organs naturally grown into them. Similarly, if you modify the genetic code of a normal human, and only that, you can make them birth weird creatures. That doesn't mean that it should have to work like this in space fantasy 40k, but that is just an argument to say it could be written like this.

Out of curiosity, what are the resource needed that stopped Chaos from spamming marines through cloning or the Demonculaba?

 Formosa wrote:
So in universe, were I the emprah, I would consider this (and we know that he and Malcador discussed female marines), and stop it from happening, I dont want my fodder finding a way to replace the species they are supposed to be protecting.

That make sense from a head-canon point of view, but that's not official canon though. I mean, it works great as filling a hole in the lore, but if GW decided to write female marines in, and to make it so that there are reasons for which they could never be used to produce new marines, then introducing female marines would still be a minor rather than major change in the setting

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Astartes recruitment as is not easier that the possibility to have self replicating marines, a baby that has all the organs naturally grown within the body, born with its abilities, is much more efficient that finding a recruitment world, finding a child that passes a trial, taking the child and training it, implanting the organs over the space of 15 years, possible rejection and mutation and further training, and then put into the scout company.

I don't want to go all science-y in a 40k thread, but normally if you implant a bunch of organs but don't change the genetic code in the gametes, you'd get normal human babies from those gametes, not babies with the astartes organs naturally grown into them. Similarly, if you modify the genetic code of a normal human, and only that, you can make them birth weird creatures. That doesn't mean that it should have to work like this in space fantasy 40k, but that is just an argument to say it could be written like this.

Out of curiosity, what are the resource needed that stopped Chaos from spamming marines through cloning or the Demonculaba?

 Formosa wrote:
So in universe, were I the emprah, I would consider this (and we know that he and Malcador discussed female marines), and stop it from happening, I dont want my fodder finding a way to replace the species they are supposed to be protecting.

That make sense from a head-canon point of view, but that's not official canon though. I mean, it works great as filling a hole in the lore, but if GW decided to write female marines in, and to make it so that there are reasons for which they could never be used to produce new marines, then introducing female marines would still be a minor rather than major change in the setting

The Demonculaba was destroyed and the adepts that knew how to make it were killed, the book indicates it was a pretty new thing that used gene seed captured from hydra cordatis to implant the woman, they used warp dickery to enhance the size of the woman and more warp dickery to force a bonding of gene seed to them, the result was a mutated hulk that produced fully grown astartes, or mutants.

Thus far we dont know if they made more Demonculaba, but we do know they use clones, to what extent it unknown, it may be a time consuming process or some such, we just dont know.

We do know that The Emprah considered female marines, he and Malcador discussed it "why not make them sisters", so that part is not head-cannon, the rest of what I said is conjecture of course. It would be a major change as you would have a self replicating species... and actual species, crack on a few centuries and now you have millions of potential marines running around, it completely changes the setting and direction, this is enought reason not to introduce them, and a damn site better than the "I want them wa wa" reasons that others have used on here.

Hybrid I tried that argument. The clasic example with cutting of the rat tails of the parrents will not make a rat child without rat tails. The argument about how genetics work and post humanistic definitions was not absorbed then either.

Likewice if demonculaba already is in the setting I do not see how having SM based upon females changes anything. Particurarly when the cannon so far show reproductive organs survive the SM proces. (SM sperm has yet to be illegaly obtained on the black marked in the setting.)

 Formosa wrote:
It would be a major change as you would have a self replicating species...

Again, if they cannot reproduce, or cannot reproduce without very intensive manipulation to alter either the male marine, the female marine, or to allow one to impregnate the other, then we wouldn't have a self-replicating species.
You don't seem to believe it would be possible to introduce female marines while making it clear that marine cannot produce marines.
Is there any particular reason why you find implausible the fact that, for instance, not only any possible fetus is treated by the female marines immune system as a parasite and instantly killed, but even when doing in vitro fecondation, you would just have a normal human being born?
If it was so, then the difference between making a demonculaba from a female space marine instead of a female human, would be that there would a another step needed to prevent the host body from killing it's "babies" (female space marines would be bigger than normal women, but not big enough to birth FULLY GROWN space marines).
I guess the solution to have a self-replicating species would require to have demonculaba that can give birth to other demonculaba.

 Formosa wrote:
and a damn site better than the "I want them wa wa" reasons that others have used on here.

I have not been disrespectful of your opinions, have I? Can I expect similar courtesy?

 Niiai wrote:
Hybrid I tried that argument. The clasic example with cutting of the rat tails of the parrents will not make a rat child without rat tails. The argument about how genetics work and post humanistic definitions was not absorbed then either.

Likewice if demonculaba already is in the setting I do not see how having SM based upon females changes anything. Particurarly when the cannon so far show reproductive organs survive the SM proces. (SM sperm has yet to be illegaly obtained on the black marked in the setting.)

And I debunked your rebuttle with in universe examples, you were wrong pure and simple, it may not be how it works in real life, but that how it works in universe, we have had clear examples of the DNA, Organs and other dickery done to Astartes that would be HARDER to get to work than making a female marine produce astartes children, but again, just for you.

Alien Organs implanted into marines, that a totally different kind of evolutionary chain that has been made to work with marines, thats beyond science magic, we cant even get organs from similar organs to work with humans in most cases.

Cawl created a whole new type of marine by creating new organs to allow them to be enhanced, its also backwards compatible, also "impossible" prior to it happening.

Demonculaba had Gene seed implanted into human woman, warp magic enhanced the size of them, produced fully grown astartes with all the organs, from children planted inside the womb.

Fabious bile has cloned primarchs, essentially "natural" marines that have all the organs (and more) and grew naturally (but at a faster rate)

Its possible within the setting, like it or lump it, its still possible, however unlikely.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
It would be a major change as you would have a self replicating species...

Again, if they cannot reproduce, or cannot reproduce without very intensive manipulation to alter either the male marine, the female marine, or to allow one to impregnate the other, then we wouldn't have a self-replicating species.
You don't seem to believe it would be possible to introduce female marines while making it clear that marine cannot produce marines.
Is there any particular reason why you find implausible the fact that, for instance, not only any possible fetus is treated by the female marines immune system as a parasite and instantly killed, but even when doing in vitro fecondation, you would just have a normal human being born?
If it was so, then the difference between making a demonculaba from a female space marine instead of a female human, would be that there would a another step needed to prevent the host body from killing it's "babies" (female space marines would be bigger than normal women, but not big enough to birth FULLY GROWN space marines).
I guess the solution to have a self-replicating species would require to have demonculaba that can give birth to other demonculaba.

 Formosa wrote:
and a damn site better than the "I want them wa wa" reasons that others have used on here.

I have not been disrespectful of your opinions, have I? Can I expect similar courtesy?

I have covered what you are saying in previous posts, yes it would take a lot of work to get females to produce astartes babies, but hey! who cares, there are plenty of people in 40k who WOULD try, and thats the point.

I have never stated that female marines would produce fully grown marines, that is what the Demonculaba did, the size would be proportionate to the female marine.

"reasons that others"

Clues in the quote, so "I have not been disrespectful of your opinions, have I? Can I expect similar courtesy" is just a reading error on your part.

 Formosa wrote:
I have covered what you are saying in previous posts, yes it would take a lot of work to get females to produce astartes babies, but hey! who cares, there are plenty of people in 40k who WOULD try, and thats the point.

You seem to think it would be easier to have male astartes reproduce with female astartes than to have male astartes reproduce with female humans. Why so?
In universe people have tried the latter too. And almost succeeded with the demonculaba. If it's even harder when you start from a female astartes than when you start from a female human, then since in the settings no one has succeeded with a human females, no one will succeed from a female space marine, no?

 Formosa wrote:
Clues in the quote, so "I have not been disrespectful of your opinions, have I? Can I expect similar courtesy" is just a reading error on your part.

Okay, my bad. Maybe then don't be disrespectful of their opinions either, it doesn't foster an productive environment .

I do not like these segmented multi quotes. I feel they are very bad for discussion but let us try one.

 Formosa wrote:

 Niiai wrote:
Hybrid I tried that argument. The clasic example with cutting of the rat tails of the parrents will not make a rat child without rat tails. The argument about how genetics work and post humanistic definitions was not absorbed then either.

Likewice if demonculaba already is in the setting I do not see how having SM based upon females changes anything. Particurarly when the cannon so far show reproductive organs survive the SM proces. (SM sperm has yet to be illegaly obtained on the black marked in the setting.)

And I debunked your rebuttle with in universe examples, you were wrong pure and simple, it may not be how it works in real life, but that how it works in universe, we have had clear examples of the DNA, Organs and other dickery done to Astartes that would be HARDER to get to work than making a female marine produce astartes children, but again, just for you.

I do not think you debunked them. You made some arguments but they where not very valid arguments awnsering the problems you where debating.

 Formosa wrote:

Alien Organs implanted into marines, that a totally different kind of evolutionary chain that has been made to work with marines, thats beyond science magic, we cant even get organs from similar organs to work with humans in most cases.

I do not think they are beyond 'science magic'. Warhammer is a science fiction setting. It is a not a hard science fiction setting (hard science fiction meaning only scientific theories that are plausible.) Warhammer has magic parts as well, especially when it comes to psyckers and the warp. Argumenting humans into post humans are stil firmly in the aria of science fiction, but not hard science fiction. The explanation for how they make space marines, although fictional, is stil explained in game by science. Not by magic. You can stil apply scientific theory to the process where aplicably.

 Formosa wrote:

Cawl created a whole new type of marine by creating new organs to allow them to be enhanced, its also backwards compatible, also "impossible" prior to it happening.

What does this have to do with any argument about basing SM on females? Do they have another in game opetunaty to change marines? Yes. But you are stating a fact, not making ar argument because this fact does not have any relevance to the argument it is trying to support. At least not in the current context.

 Formosa wrote:

Demonculaba had Gene seed implanted into human woman, warp magic enhanced the size of them, produced fully grown astartes with all the organs, from children planted inside the womb.

Yes this is already established in the setting. Again, this is a statement of fact, but it lacks any relevans to what you are trying to argue against. What about this stops SM from being based upon females?

 Formosa wrote:

Fabious bile has cloned primarchs, essentially "natural" marines that have all the organs (and more) and grew naturally (but at a faster rate)

Yes, fabius bile has done these things. Why is this relevant to the argument of SM based upon females. You need to say why this is a problem.

 Formosa wrote:

Its possible within the setting, like it or lump it, its still possible, however unlikely.

Yes, the statements you made above are possible within the setting. How are they relevant? Please provide a bridge to why this is a problem with basing SM upon females. For the most parts you are trying to poisen the well by talking about other things instead of focusing on the topic at hand. And then you claim you explain something. I do not even know what it is you are trying to explain, or how you are explaing what ever point you are trying to make.

 Formosa wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
It would be a major change as you would have a self replicating species...

Again, if they cannot reproduce, or cannot reproduce without very intensive manipulation to alter either the male marine, the female marine, or to allow one to impregnate the other, then we wouldn't have a self-replicating species.
You don't seem to believe it would be possible to introduce female marines while making it clear that marine cannot produce marines.
Is there any particular reason why you find implausible the fact that, for instance, not only any possible fetus is treated by the female marines immune system as a parasite and instantly killed, but even when doing in vitro fecondation, you would just have a normal human being born?
If it was so, then the difference between making a demonculaba from a female space marine instead of a female human, would be that there would a another step needed to prevent the host body from killing it's "babies" (female space marines would be bigger than normal women, but not big enough to birth FULLY GROWN space marines).
I guess the solution to have a self-replicating species would require to have demonculaba that can give birth to other demonculaba.

 Formosa wrote:
and a damn site better than the "I want them wa wa" reasons that others have used on here.

I have not been disrespectful of your opinions, have I? Can I expect similar courtesy?

I have covered what you are saying in previous posts, yes it would take a lot of work to get females to produce astartes babies, but hey! who cares, there are plenty of people in 40k who WOULD try, and thats the point.

I have never stated that female marines would produce fully grown marines, that is what the Demonculaba did, the size would be proportionate to the female marine.

"reasons that others"

Clues in the quote, so "I have not been disrespectful of your opinions, have I? Can I expect similar courtesy" is just a reading error on your part.

I can not follow your reasoning at all here, yet you seem to scold Hybrid Son of Oxayoyl for not understand the way you express yourself.

It seems to me that your argument is 'there are currently people trying to make new marines in the setting". And that somehow prevents something outside of the setting like GW to change weather females are compatable with the SM process. There is nothing about the 'there are currently people trying to make new marines in the setting" that prevents that from happening. And there is nothing about 'there are currently people trying to make new marines in the setting" that would change if females where compatable with SM.

It seems like you make a claim that has no connection to the thing being discussed, and then you expect people to be swayed for that claim. It would be like me saying A: 'Clouds distribution of water is an essential part of the water distribution cycle on earth' and B: therefore SM can not be based upon females. This is what we in Norwegian logic theory call the 'rellevance argument' the thing that conects fact A with claim B, and it seems to be missing.

 Formosa wrote:
Alien Organs implanted into marines, that a totally different kind of evolutionary chain that has been made to work with marines, thats beyond science magic, we cant even get organs from similar organs to work with humans in most cases.

I don't like bringing too much science into 40k because space marines can get the memories of a creature if they eat it shortly after killing it, and that is way beyond all the space magic required for implanting alien organs into humans and having those being transferred to their offspring (which is pretty similar to what happens with genestealer cults imo).

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Alien Organs implanted into marines, that a totally different kind of evolutionary chain that has been made to work with marines, thats beyond science magic, we cant even get organs from similar organs to work with humans in most cases.

I don't like bringing too much science into 40k because space marines can get the memories of a creature if they eat it shortly after killing it, and that is way beyond all the space magic required for implanting alien organs into humans and having those being transferred to their offspring (which is pretty similar to what happens with genestealer cults imo).

Yep its pretty crazy all told

To Nihai

"I do not think you debunked them. You made some arguments but they where not very valid arguments awnsering the problems you where debating."

Yep you were debunked, you then claimed strawman, and are now claiming that the argument is not valid, you claim female marines are possible, yet claim marine babies are not, in spite of there being evidence that it could infact be possible, albeit rather unlikely.

"I do not think they are beyond 'science magic'. Warhammer is a science fiction setting. It is a not a hard science fiction setting (hard science fiction meaning only scientific theories that are plausible.) Warhammer has magic parts as well, especially when it comes to psyckers and the warp. Argumenting humans into post humans are stil firmly in the aria of science fiction, but not hard science fiction. The explanation for how they make space marines, although fictional, is stil explained in game by science. Not by magic. You can stil apply scientific theory to the process where aplicably."

Warhammer 40k is a Science FANTASY setting, you cannot apply any meaningful scientific theory in a universe where such things dont matter, so moving on.

"What does this have to do with any argument about basing SM on females? Do they have another in game opetunaty to change marines? Yes. But you are stating a fact, not making ar argument because this fact does not have any relevance to the argument it is trying to support. At least not in the current context."

It sets a precedence of people monkeying with how marines works, this is a fact, that is why I have phrased it as one, its relevant for that reason.

"Yes this is already established in the setting. Again, this is a statement of fact, but it lacks any relevans to what you are trying to argue against. What about this stops SM from being based upon females? "

Again I am stating this as a fact as it is a fact, and again it shows precedence.

"Yes, fabius bile has done these things. Why is this relevant to the argument of SM based upon females. You need to say why this is a problem. "

Aaaaaand yet again, sets precedence, starting to think you didnt even bother reading the context of these examples.

"Yes, the statements you made above are possible within the setting. How are they relevant? Please provide a bridge to why this is a problem with basing SM upon females. For the most parts you are trying to poisen the well by talking about other things instead of focusing on the topic at hand. And then you claim you explain something. I do not even know what it is you are trying to explain, or how you are explaing what ever point you are trying to make."

Precedence, this statement cements that you havent bothered reading what I have been discussing for several pages, I have maintained throughout that I do not have any particular issue with female marines, however the implications need to be considered properly, you decided as "the gatekeeper" that these can be ignored and from your replies here, you did, but again you are wrong, the precedence shows that many people have the knowledge and will to try to create a self replicating Astartes were they female, I have even said the results would be up for debate, but again, you ignored that to push your political beliefs.

"It seems to me that your argument is 'there are currently people trying to make new marines in the setting". And that somehow prevents something outside of the setting like GW to change weather females are compatable with the SM process. There is nothing about the 'there are currently people trying to make new marines in the setting" that prevents that from happening. And there is nothing about 'there are currently people trying to make new marines in the setting" that would change if females where compatable with SM.

It seems like you make a claim that has no connection to the thing being discussed, and then you expect people to be swayed for that claim. It would be like me saying A: 'Clouds distribution of water is an essential part of the water distribution cycle on earth' and B: therefore SM can not be based upon females. This is what we in Norwegian logic theory call the 'rellevance argument' the thing that conects fact A with claim B, and it seems to be missing"

Had you bothered to read all of my previous replies to you, then you would know that I have continued to raise the very valid in universe reason to as why the Emperor would have not wanted female marines, you keep injecting your political beliefs into this discussion, I have not tried to sway you, I have asked you to consider the large ramifications of adding female marines to the setting, but because it doesnt fit your personal narrative, you have dismissed it, I did not scold Hybrid, I just informed him he made a mistake, I just didnt sugar coat it, no safe spaces here buddy.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Table wrote:
I have yet to have a fem marine advocate answer one simple question. Why do we need diversity in WH40k?

I think you mean "I have yet to have a fem marine advocate answer one simple question and convince me that my previous opinion was wrong", because many have answered it, even in this thread. You were not convinced by the answer, fine, but don't pretend they didn't answer.

Table wrote:
I accept some players have a need to identify with toy soldiers, that is fine.

As I mentioned before, it's not as much having the need to identify (which would be "This toy soldier is just like me"), it's more about not feeling like one of your characteristic is excluded from the setting ("Why are they no/very few [women/blacks/left-handed/whatever]"), that I'll call "representation" for short from now on. Having a token faction that gets very very few attention falls into the "very few" part. So, to get some representation, we would have to either have less focus on marine and get female IG, more focus on Sisters, etc, etc, or we need to have female marines. I personally like the "Less focus on marine" thing because I'm not too fan of marines. However, I still think female space marines would be nice to have because it helps with marines "blank canvas" statute that I developed on earlier in the conversation.

Table wrote:
Still, no one has answered my question so I will present it once more.

What does the game and community have to gain from making a major and divisive change to established lore spanning over two decades? It is a very simple question (i am trying not to be snarky here).
I look forward to your answer.

I'm calling you out. It's not the same question!
While the bulk of my answer for what the gain is for this particular change (because the bring loyalist primarch back, create primaris marines, destroy cadia, timeline advancement major and divisive change to established lore spanning over two decades, I am not going to defend it, I hate it!) is the same as what I wrote just above, I am also going to mention that I am right now trying to make the change less divisive through discussion, and that, as I mention below, I don't think it would be a major change in term of story, but rather a very minor one. Certainly way less minor than bringing Guilliman back.

Table wrote:
Regardless, GW is welcome to pander to the SJW's. Not my problem. But I am very sure the same exact thing will happen to them as happened to marvel comics.

40k cinematic universe !!!!

 Formosa wrote:
First its not a small change in the fluff, its a major one with far reaching implications that you have chosen to ignore.

It could be written as a major one with far reaching implications. It could be written as a small one with barely any implication. It's all up to the writers.
As far as I can tell, the "major implication" you are talking about is all about reproduction. Currently Marines can already reproduce, that's how they get new Marines. It's not sexual reproduction, but it's reproduction nonetheless. If you had female marines and mention that all marines (male and female) are rendered infertile by the marinification process. Then you arrive to a position where Marines can reproduce relatively easily using the already existing means, or could spend a potentially enormous amount of effort to be able to reproduce in another, less efficient way. How would this change anything? It's an option that would never be explored because it's extremely useless for anyone. We are more likely to see a space marine create small genestomarines after having been infested by a genestealer (they do changes to your reproductive system) than female marines having babies.

Yes others have answered but I find the answer lacking. Personal preference does not equate to helping the community as a whole. You as a player have options to make female miniatures. You should use them before asking to change someone elses toys. Ill agree in retrospect that others have answered me, I just find those answers to be lacking.

You are using double speak. There is no difference between what you have said and needing to identify. If you did not need to identify then it would not matter if your own physical features are not present. So I think your line of logic is invalid IF I am understanding you correctly. Now, also by your admittance you want the attention given to space marines for your own preferences. I have always felt that this is why many fem marine supporters want fem marines. Well, tough beans. I want that level of attention for my Thousand Sons but it wont happen until the 1ksons start selling how marines sell. Not everyones tastes should and or needs to be represented equally.

And while I appreciate a bit of humor and snark in this banter I have to point out something. Marvel Comics has pushed a "SJW" agenda in their comics. Marvel Comics as a company and subsidiary of Disney has lost huge amounts of market share since the forced inclusion of "diversity" into existing titles. They have resorted to tactics such a double shipping product just to not see even higher market loss's. The Marvel Cinematic universe is another entity and one that has not had the same level of diversity pushed into it. Since marvels forced political changes to their titles many many stores have had to close due to lack of sales. The number one complaint that these shop owners heard is why the comics are nothing like the movies. How they enter the shop looking for tony stark but can only find a black lesbian iron man. So equating marvel comics of today to the cinematic universe is not possible as many of the cinematic universes personalities no longer exist in the printed medium. This is all very verifiable and if you need any links to explain what I have typed then I will post them.

As I have said before, I have no skin in this fight on a personal level. There is not even a space marine army in my play group. But I disagree with identity politics and "SJW" values on many levels. And my dislike of this topic is related to that fact. And one of my biggest beefs is replacement politics. If you were to push for a wider sisters release and support OR a new faction I would be right there with you. But to tell others their toys need to be changed because you feel that you need to identify with them is a bad thing. Let marines be what they are. Create something new. And this loops back to my original question and why I do not accept the answers given.

Fem Marines are di·vi·sive by nature. Because there is no middle ground in the subject matter. You have them or you do not. And at least half of the player base on dakka has stated that this would be a bad change for them. Once more, push for options, do not push to replace.

 Formosa wrote:
I did not scold Hybrid, I just informed him he made a mistake, I just didnt sugar coat it, no safe spaces here buddy.

That's not what "safe space" means. Here, "sugar coating" is more about being civil than making a "safe space".
"Sugar coating" allows the discussion to progress with each side hearing each other out, rather than it devolving into a shouting match and the thread being closed, so I'm all for sugar-coating the discussion. I mean, it's way more pleasant when others "sugar-coat" it when they talk to me, and I'm very willing to extend the courtesy at the moment.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
I did not scold Hybrid, I just informed him he made a mistake, I just didnt sugar coat it, no safe spaces here buddy.

That's not what "safe space" means. Here, "sugar coating" is more about being civil than making a "safe space".
"Sugar coating" allows the discussion to progress with each side hearing each other out, rather than it devolving into a shouting match and the thread being closed, so I'm all for sugar-coating the discussion. I mean, it's way more pleasant when others "sugar-coat" it when they talk to me, and I'm very willing to extend the courtesy at the moment.

Not refering to you in this context Hybrid, you made a mistake previously and thought I was refering to you with the "I want female marines Wa Wa" comment, I dont get that impression of you, I am refering to not sugar coating in general and stopped a few pages back as Nihai keeps ignoring my and other peoples points, and "safe space" is a dig at his "SJW" political beliefs.

If we can stop using terms like SJW as buzzwords, that might help improve the tone of this thread.

Niiai, I don't mean to sound harsh here, but you've not addressed my point several times now, but are happy to repeatedly reply to Formosa. If you concede the point, that's fair enough, but I'm afraid understanding your argument is more difficult when you don't answer my questions.
Again, and of course, in your own time, please.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If we can stop using terms like SJW as buzzwords, that might help improve the tone of this thread.

Niiai, I don't mean to sound harsh here, but you've not addressed my point several times now, but are happy to repeatedly reply to Formosa. If you concede the point, that's fair enough, but I'm afraid understanding your argument is more difficult when you don't answer my questions.
Again, and of course, in your own time, please.

Its kind of hard not to use the buzzwords. If someone can tell me a polite way to say social justice warrior, forced diversity and virtue signaling then I would gladly replace all instances of buz word usage. Sadly I am not that creative with language so I tend to ape what others have used. Just know it is not my intention to over use these words, I just lack a better vocabulary.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If we can stop using terms like SJW as buzzwords, that might help improve the tone of this thread.

Niiai, I don't mean to sound harsh here, but you've not addressed my point several times now, but are happy to repeatedly reply to Formosa. If you concede the point, that's fair enough, but I'm afraid understanding your argument is more difficult when you don't answer my questions.
Again, and of course, in your own time, please.

There are a lot of things being said. And I have a hard time understanding when someone is responding to someone else, to something I said, or if it is anything I should take an apinion on.

I am also certain you have asked many questions. Please ask your question and provide a contest. (And please do not ask about how SM have babies.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Table wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If we can stop using terms like SJW as buzzwords, that might help improve the tone of this thread.

Niiai, I don't mean to sound harsh here, but you've not addressed my point several times now, but are happy to repeatedly reply to Formosa. If you concede the point, that's fair enough, but I'm afraid understanding your argument is more difficult when you don't answer my questions.
Again, and of course, in your own time, please.

Its kind of hard not to use the buzzwords. If someone can tell me a polite way to say social justice warrior, forced diversity and virtue signaling then I would gladly replace all instances of buz word usage. Sadly I am not that creative with language so I tend to ape what others have used. Just know it is not my intention to over use these words, I just lack a better vocabulary.

When you use words like SJW you are drawing up two boxes. The constructed box labeled SJW. From my experience very few of those people have aplied that lable to themselves. And that means some one that are not them are allowed to construct what the alegedly SJW are all about. While I think I could very well be a person others would qualefy as an SJW, my want for female based SM are based on the fact that I just find it very weard that there are no female based SM. This might be that I am from Norway and we are very progressive on things like that, so this unatural divide just fells odd.

Also, when you label someone as SJW you are labeling yourself as someone who use the SJW term. And while you are an induvisual the people who use that term are steriotypicaly presented in a way that you might not be. So you are painting both sides of the argument into pre-percieved corners.

Every time I make a reasonable post or ask someone a question about 'Why female marines?' or 'What Female marines?' or even 'Do you want female marines in the fluff, or marine plastics?' I get ignored.

I think I should start using more "Buzzwords..."

AdmiralHalsey wrote:
Every time I make a reasonable post or ask someone a question about 1 'Why female marines?' or 2 'What Female marines?' or even 3 'Do you want female marines in the fluff, or marine plastics?' I get ignored.

I think I should start using more "Buzzwords..."

I feel like those questions get awnsered but in the following order. Although I do not want female marines, I want marines being able to be female compatable. This is a bit of a distinction, because I do not think SM are currently male. They are some post human I have a hard time qualefying. They plant seeds into other candidates to reproduse, the term male and female has lost a bit of its meaning by then. But we keep the words because it is easy, and because the retain their male names.

But question:

1. I want them.

2. Just that your arveradge marine can happen to be based on a female.

3. I want them in the fluff. I do not consider this a big change, just change on sentence and slowly introduce female marines later on. I also want them in plastic. Mind you by the time your muschelmass has doubled, you have grown a meter and you are wearing a power armour they do not look diferent except when they take of their helmets. Particularly BA, SW and chaos heads could be cool. It would alså be easy to and cheap to implement with a conversion spruce.

The only problem I have with these threads is that they are akin to having multiple threads about how the Ork fluff should be re-written (for the sake of argument let's ignore that it was actually rewritten once already) to have female Orks, because that race should have females represented. Or that so e other element of the 40k fiction should be altered substantially.

Sometimes fiction should just be enjoyed as it exists. Especially in how it differs from other fiction or conceptions.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
The only problem I have with these threads is that they are akin to having multiple threads about how the Ork fluff should be re-written (for the sake of argument let's ignore that it was actually rewritten once already) to have female Orks, because that race should have females represented. Or that so e other element of the 40k fiction should be altered substantially.

Sometimes fiction should just be enjoyed as it exists. Especially in how it differs from other fiction or conceptions.

Totally agree, it's one of the reasons I love 40k fiction, it's dark, gritty and has a sense of humour, if I want to see everyone getting along in a semi utopian society, I watch Star Trek, which is also why I love that, people being good to each other "just because" and not having a motive... except when dealing with non federation Xenos scum

Niiai wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If we can stop using terms like SJW as buzzwords, that might help improve the tone of this thread.

Niiai, I don't mean to sound harsh here, but you've not addressed my point several times now, but are happy to repeatedly reply to Formosa. If you concede the point, that's fair enough, but I'm afraid understanding your argument is more difficult when you don't answer my questions.
Again, and of course, in your own time, please.

There are a lot of things being said. And I have a hard time understanding when someone is responding to someone else, to something I said, or if it is anything I should take an apinion on.

I am also certain you have asked many questions. Please ask your question and provide a contest. (And please do not ask about how SM have babies.)

Of course not about the babies - I don't have any stake in that argument, beyond the "if X is lore supported, why isn't Y", but that's another thing I addressed earlier.

The question is "Why specifically must females be in the form of Space Marines and not Sisters of Battle, without mentioning Space Marine popularity? "

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Niiai wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
If we can stop using terms like SJW as buzzwords, that might help improve the tone of this thread.

Niiai, I don't mean to sound harsh here, but you've not addressed my point several times now, but are happy to repeatedly reply to Formosa. If you concede the point, that's fair enough, but I'm afraid understanding your argument is more difficult when you don't answer my questions.
Again, and of course, in your own time, please.

There are a lot of things being said. And I have a hard time understanding when someone is responding to someone else, to something I said, or if it is anything I should take an apinion on.

I am also certain you have asked many questions. Please ask your question and provide a contest. (And please do not ask about how SM have babies.)

Of course not about the babies - I don't have any stake in that argument, beyond the "if X is lore supported, why isn't Y", but that's another thing I addressed earlier.

The question is "Why specifically must females be in the form of Space Marines and not Sisters of Battle, without mentioning Space Marine popularity? "

I do not understand what sisters of battle has to do with anything, or why it gets mentioned. The only thing they have in common with SM is that they happen to have that 3- save. I agree that if you like SM it is bad that they are not more in the setting. The same could be said for Squats. And GSC, and they brought GSC back.

I have no idea why SM can not be based on females. It seems very contrived that they can not be made from females. From an aethsetics perspective I would like to see females among the space marines.

Now if you want to contrast SM with sisters of battle, and I do not like to do that, I find them very different, but if you want to contrast it SM lends themselves much more to different cultures. Actual human cuktures like Roman (Ultra) Greek (Minotaur) Angel/Vampire (BA) Norse/Celtik/Where wolves (SW) Orderly Munks (DA). You can even do animal themes like Salamanders (Salamanders) Sharks (Cha-charadons). You can theme them to ideals like covert ops (Alpha Legion) worship (word legion) pleasure (slanesh). The list can go on. I might know less about sisters, but are they not more culturarly locked? It seems dull. From a ludosistisk perspective they also play very differently.

 Niiai wrote:

Sgt_Smudge wrote:The question is "Why specifically must females be in the form of Space Marines and not Sisters of Battle, without mentioning Space Marine popularity? "

I do not understand what sisters of battle has to do with anything, or why it gets mentioned. The only thing they have in common with SM is that they happen to have that 3- save. I agree that if you like SM it is bad that they are not more in the setting. The same could be said for Squats. And GSC, and they brought GSC back.

I have no idea what the second half of this comment is on. However, Sisters are different to Squats and GSC in that they've never been removed from the game at all since their inception, and have been largely supported with Codexes since - however, these Codexes are inferior (in production quality, not rules) to others, and they STILL HAVE NO PLASTICS.
Newly created armies (see Deathwatch and Skittari, who didn't have much, as far as I'm aware, in the way of fully formed armies) are getting plastic kits before armies that have been in the game longer than them - this isn't about liking Sisters. This is about supporting a proper army which has been abused for decades.

Sisters are mentioned because, as I wrote earlier, they are INCREDIBLY similar to the Astartes. I shall write down as much as I can remember:

Space Marines:
Power Armour
Bolters
Elite Military and Prestige
Monogender
Potential for Diverse Range of Stylistic Qualities
Fanatical Devotion to the Imperium (though not necessarily the Emperor)
Genetically Enhanced

Sisters of Battle:
Power Armour
Bolters
Elite Military and Prestige
Monogender
Potential for Diverse Range of Stylistic Qualities
Fanatical Devotion to the Imperium (via worship of the Emperor)
Holy Powers

As this shows, the ONLY difference discernibly is that Space Marines are genetically enhanced, giving the source of their strength, and Sisters are given strength through their piety. If there was ANY other faction which isn't an Astartes to be classed as MEQ, it would be Sisters, and as my list goes above, they are incredibly similar. Why shouldn't they be considered together?

I have no idea why SM can not be based on females. It seems very contrived that they can not be made from females. From an aethsetics perspective I would like to see females among the space marines.

The lore explains why not. Same as the lore saying that Space Marines are infertile. Someone might think that's also contrived. But the Space Magic That Be has told us that the geneseed is incompatible with females. That's the lore - the same lore which tells us that the Warp exists (which could be seen as a contrivance) and that humanity hasn't changed much in 10,000 years - again, contrivance.

You follow this up with an opinion. I ask WHY. Why Space Marines? Why not Sisters? What is it about Space Marines that Sisters wouldn't fill?

Now if you want to contrast SM with sisters of battle, and I do not like to do that, I find them very different, but if you want to contrast it SM lends themselves much more to different cultures. Actual human cuktures like Roman (Ultra) Greek (Minotaur) Angel/Vampire (BA) Norse/Celtik/Where wolves (SW) Orderly Munks (DA). You can even do animal themes like Salamanders (Salamanders) Sharks (Cha-charadons). You can theme them to ideals like covert ops (Alpha Legion) worship (word legion) pleasure (slanesh). The list can go on. I might know less about sisters, but are they not more culturarly locked? It seems dull. From a ludosistisk perspective they also play very differently.

So really, your whole motivation for having female marines, from what I can gather, is that you don't like Sisters, and that's why you're okay ignoring the female soldier role they offer?

Clearly, as my above list shows, Space Marines and Sisters are incredibly closely linked. So, onto the different cultures argument. You say that ONLY Space Marines could lend themselves to the variety of cultures we see.
Why can't Sisters?
Truth is, they can. There is NOTHING, nothing beyond their loyalty to the Ministorum that prevents this. Sisters are culturally locked in that they're female and religious. Oh, and might be obliged to wear the Fleur-de-Lys - but Space Marines are obliged to wear the Aquila or various skull motifs, and are culturally locked as males and zealous.

Why can't we have Roman-inspired Sisters?
Greek Sisters?
Angelic themed (even though Celestine is a prime example)
Viking themed?
Monk/Nuns (most Sisters in general, although a robed order is completely possible)
Animal themed?
Style of warfare?
Nothing about the Sisters' lore hamstrings this. So long as they worship the Emperor, they are culturally free to do as they want.

I don't understand what you mean by ludosistisk perspective in playing, but if you're referring to gameplay - that's not important. We're in 40k BACKGROUND.
Plus, I'll repeat my Ork analogy - if I love Ork lore, but I hate the fact that they have 6+ armour, am I then justified to rewrite the Ork lore to give them all power armour, despite the fact I could choose to play a power armoured army instead and compromise between the lore and gameplay?

So no, I'm afraid you haven't really answered my question. All you've shown is that you dislike Sisters, and because you're unwilling to accept the viable solution to the Female Supersoldier problem, you want to change something which many people want to see unchanged, and acting as some kind of lore gatekeeper in doing so.

I love those suggestions for sisters, especially the Greek and roman inspired Ines !

Sisters of battle differ a lot form SM though do they not?

- S3T3 vs S4T4
- Sisters exclusivly use bolters or melta based ranged weapons. Space Marine has a wider repotar including lascannons, plasma, autocannons etc. (This might be from the old days when 4th edition codexes where very narrowly focused and could be changed)
- Sisters ingame are justefied by a literal interpretation that so and such should have no armies of menn, and then make an armie out of wimen. SM are mass produced warriors.
- Sisters use faith magic. SM do not.
- Sisters are recruited from a young age and are brainwashed in a convent. SM are recruited from a young age and are geneticly re-enginered,

Now you can look at the similareties that you point out and say they are similar. You can look at what I point out and you can see they are different. Just because they overlap in some parts does not mean they are the same. When people say MEQ on these forums, that usualy means general strategies against power armour and rhinoes. As opposed to 5+ saves and russes, or shuriken weapons and grav tanks. MEQ is an abriviated shorthand that strategies against power armour and rhinoes, but it does not meen they are similar. Even between marine armies, like chaos berserker lists vary a lot as opposed to guliman gunlines. I do not find sisters similar to marines.

Ludoistsisk means gameplay yes. And ludoistsisk sisters play very differently them SM. You can not call them the same. I also have zero experience with sisters from a ludoistisk perspektive, but know SM quite a lot. That means that from my perspective sisters might not as well exist for the argument that sisters already performs this function. Gw could change this probably, but no, I have no experience with sisters. The eralier comment about GSC is that it is much easier to collect GSC then sisters. Sisters just clung to their 4th edition codex, into a white wolf update in 5th edition, and then got an index in 8th edition. GSC has been out of the setting and back again and are in much better shape then sisters. My only relationship to sisters was from a computergame in 2008.

And you are right, you can probably retcon sisters of battle to be compatable with several cultures. That would involve much more work from GW, making models, rules etc, As opposed to just make a head swap spruce. It would also involve actually releasing sisters.

But I stil do not see what sisters existence or non-existence in the setting has anything to do with why we can not have female based SM. I think we are mostly will have to end up agreeing that I do not understand you and you do not understand me.

Can I ask you how big of a change it would be to have SM compatable with females on a scale of one to ten?

Just to make some points on the scale.
1. -Writing some backstory in a codex.
2. - introducing a new unit and retconning to always have been there (think all new monsters in the nud codex since 4th edition)
7. - Major change to one race in the setting. 5th edition necrons or introducing a new race into the setting.
8. - Major change in the setting, like the 100 year jump to 8th edition.
10. - A total rewamp of the setting, like they do in Age of Sigmar

So on that scale, for me, having SM being combatable with females would be a 1 or 2 on the scale. Would you rate it hiegher? Is it like a 7 in your eyes?

Your points of them being different are weak and half of them are gameplay based. You offer nothing in terms of why they SHOULD exist beyond you want them, so I reply I don't.