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.
I wonder how many of the people saying that us anti-nu-repentia should just shut up and accept the change received Primaris marines? Or the killing of WHFB for AoS? Or Primarchs in 40k?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/27 10:05:03
Sim-Life wrote: I wonder how many of the people saying that us anti-nu-repentia should just shut up and accept the change received Primaris marines? Or the killing of WHFB for AoS? Or Primarchs in 40k?
I don’t know; why don’t you actually try to find out?
I mean, you have their names and accounts here so you can check their post history and compile a list, with evidence, of whoever you think is an outrageous hypocrite or not.
Or you can just make a wild accusation and leave it like that, as though people are going to take your sweeping generalisation on faith, because screw actually expending effort.
"Three months? I'm going to go crazy …and I'm taking you with me!"
— Vala Mal Doran
Old models were limited to 3 power.
1) Standing straight up with eviscerators straight forward.
2) standing straight up but with one foot forward and eviscerators pointing up a bit.
3) eviscerators overhead, standing straight up but with a foot raised and bent knee.
Small nitpick, there were more than 3 original poses. I think the three you are talking about are the current three available on the website. There were more at release.
Giantwalkingchair wrote: They wear a mask - not to conceal their identity. Part of the oath of the penitent the sisters declare the penitent to be nameless to them. The hood/mask doesn't represent hiding identity, rather that the wearer no longer has identity.
That's entirely head-canon, it's not mentioned in the lore and it's not depicted on early illustrations either!
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
You're absolutely right, that was his point, and it is arguing in bad faith.
"One singular example of two cybernetic ports at the nape of the neck and on the skull in the entire history of Sisters-related media which show or describe zero ports and have stated the opposite on several occasions(but I personally don't care about those publications and so have declared them invalid), and which have no actual indications they're specifically ports for armour interface, completely overrides all other said media and renders any objections on that basis moot." is a nonsense argument.
Like others have said, you can make an argument for or against the ports, but arguing they're not a new thing at all is just sheer farce.
There are several examples of cables being attached to the Sisters. Look at the Cover of Witch Hunters codex for example. Other sisters in the Kopinski piece have such cables too. And no one still has managed to provide a quote for them not having such an interface. The fact remains that before this the matter was unclear, not decided in one way or another, and different artists interpreted it differently and writers were silent about it. In the end, the interface interpretation won. Saying now that they don't have such an interface wouldn't have been a retcon either, just like saying that they do isn't; there just wan't a solid state of affairs to be retconned.
Where is it listed? Considering I have no idea what Baronlveagh's real name is, I've had no reason to believe you. Just like you have no reason to believe that I'm European Royalty, based on that picture of Captain Caveman by my name. Furthermore, I still have no way of knowing that you're telling the truth if you give me a name that happens to be in the credits section, because I have no way of knowing if you're actually that person.
Which is unfortunately, the Crux of the issue. Before, in the long long ago, we had guys like Ross Watson, etc posting under their own names. If you had a question about if *I* was worked on something you could just ask. Unfortunately, that's largely stopped being a thing, due a variety of reasons. I think Warp Rift was the only thing to ever credit me in an article as 'BaronIveagh', and IIRC that was an article on the age of various ship classes in fluff at the time and what classes were succeeded by what, when. (IE before HH changed them all).
While this is nice, it really doesn't address my concern. It also brings your "We'll have to see about future changes" claim into a different light, because it made you sound like you were a current employee, and this makes you seem like a former one.
Manchu wrote: Baron, did you know that all Sisters have spikes implanted into their scalps? It’s just that in 99.99999% of the OFFICIAL illustrations you can’t see it.
Show us something that has them with spikes in their scalps.
If I show you one such picture of one Sister with spike implants would that be enough to convince you that all Sisters have spike implants and we just don’t see them because of their hair and helmets? This is the argument Crimson is making about PA interface plugs in art preceding this retcon.
No, what he's been arguing is that there is sister's art that shows plugs are used. Not that all the art has it, or that previous to the Repentia spoiler that they were ubiquitous. If you show me some official artwork of Sisters with head spikes (and not the chaos sister squad), then I'll agree that some sisters did it, and that it's a thing in the fluff, not that it's something that all sisters have.
Stop trying to build strawmen.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sim-Life wrote: I wonder how many of the people saying that us anti-nu-repentia should just shut up and accept the change received Primaris marines? Or the killing of WHFB for AoS? Or Primarchs in 40k?
On this thread? Literally no one.
The only argument being made is that this change isn't completely out of left field.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/07/27 11:14:28
ekwatts wrote: Anybody familiar with any kind of creative process should understand that art, design and lore being changed in subsequent iterations should be expected. You don't have to welcome it, but cripes, don't be surprised that a few things have changed in the intervening decades since the last release!
Those changes being "good" or "bad" is entirely subjective. You wanted it to stay exactly the same? Welp, you were the one person that was absolutely guaranteed to be disappointed, to the point that your complaints actually end up looking kind of silly.
This has hit the nail on the head. GW were always going to re-interpret the source material when developing a new model range from scratch. Knights had this treatment over the last few years, and given several common aesthetic elements that tie the model range together. This meant dropping some of the older ideas from the original Epic artwork and model range. Just google some of the stuff that was 'canon' back then and see what made it to now. We've also seen things like Armigers and Helms Mechanicum retconned into the fluff without much kerfuffle.
GSC were rebooted from 20+ year-old fluff with the Chaos-worshipping parts quietly culled and a brand new aesthetic built around mining civilians. Some people were sad about no longer having limousines but overall the finished product was a welcome re-interpretation.
Complaining about the finer details of how fictional powered armour works is so odd thing when you still buy products from a company that resurrected Eldrad.
Sim-Life wrote: I wonder how many of the people saying that us anti-nu-repentia should just shut up and accept the change received Primaris marines? Or the killing of WHFB for AoS? Or Primarchs in 40k?
I don’t know; why don’t you actually try to find out?
I mean, you have their names and accounts here so you can check their post history and compile a list, with evidence, of whoever you think is an outrageous hypocrite or not.
Or you can just make a wild accusation and leave it like that, as though people are going to take your sweeping generalisation on faith, because screw actually expending effort.
Sim-Life wrote:I wonder how many of the people saying that us anti-nu-repentia should just shut up and accept the change received Primaris marines? Or the killing of WHFB for AoS? Or Primarchs in 40k?
Considering I support all those developments, yes I do. You can whine as loudly as you like but your dislike of something is no more valuable than mine or anyone else's enjoyment of it. So stop acting like a victim.
I first got into Warhammer when I was 12 years old, close to over 15 years ago. The rate at which technology has increased in the span of just my lifetime has been enormous. So maybe that's a boon to me, but I don't throw childish tantrums when the world around me changes, much less for something as trivial as a minor detail in one of my hobbies.
You're absolutely right, that was his point, and it is arguing in bad faith.
"One singular example of two cybernetic ports at the nape of the neck and on the skull in the entire history of Sisters-related media which show or describe zero ports and have stated the opposite on several occasions(but I personally don't care about those publications and so have declared them invalid), and which have no actual indications they're specifically ports for armour interface, completely overrides all other said media and renders any objections on that basis moot." is a nonsense argument.
Like others have said, you can make an argument for or against the ports, but arguing they're not a new thing at all is just sheer farce.
There are several examples of cables being attached to the Sisters. Look at the Cover of Witch Hunters codex for example. Other sisters in the Kopinski piece have such cables too. And no one still has managed to provide a quote for them not having such an interface. The fact remains that before this the matter was unclear, not decided in one way or another, and different artists interpreted it differently and writers were silent about it. In the end, the interface interpretation won. Saying now that they don't have such an interface wouldn't have been a retcon either, just like saying that they do isn't; there just wan't a solid state of affairs to be retconned.
I think the best part is that this whole thing argument is a handful of people trying to flex their own headcanon onto the rest of the board.
How hard is it to say,
"There are historical depictions of SoB both with cables and without. Therefore there is a possibility that, in a universe where various manufacturing world's produce differing patterns of the same equipment, there are patterns of SoB armor using nerve connections as well as those using body gloves. It just so happens that the recent GW minis are the former."
Wooooow, problem solved. Shave the ports off and move on.
Keep in mind, it is merely an assumption that the picture in question illustrates interface plugs. We actually have no idea what those cybernetics are, one way or the other. Meanwhile, weighing against that assumption is the lack of any mention whatsoever anywhere, in art, in written background, in fiction, that Sisters interface with their PA via cybernetic implants.
Adding these plugs on Repentia is clearly a retcon. Whether one likes it or not is a separate question.
I rather like the nu-pentia.. heavy swords, tunics, etc.
I am THINKING that I might try to kitbash some more out of Escher, Sheildwolf Maidens and other random plastics.. but now I really want 1 of each of the older metal poses to add variety .. wonder where I can get them that wont cost an arm and a leg...
2+2=5 for sufficiently large values of 2.
Order of St Ursula (Sisters of Battle): W-2, L-1, T-1
Get of Freki (Space Wolves): W-3, L-1, T-1
Hive Fleet Portentosa (Nids/Stealers): W-6, L-4, T-0
Omega Marines (vanilla Space Marine): W-1, L-6, T-2
Waagh Magshak (Orks): W-4, L-0, T-1
A.V.P.D.W.: W-0, L-2, T-0
www.40korigins.com
bringing 40k Events to Origins Game Fair in Columbus, Oh. Ask me for more info!
I am THINKING that I might try to kitbash some more out of Escher, Sheildwolf Maidens and other random plastics.. but now I really want 1 of each of the older metal poses to add variety .. wonder where I can get them that wont cost an arm and a leg...
Or you can just buy those from Raging Heroes / Wargame Exclusive - they're already whole and still show a lot of nude skin. Wargame Exclusive even has models that are...well, effectively nude. But if you'd like them a bit more covered, there's that as well.
Using that many kits for a kitbash can give a nice result, but it's way too complicated to do it on a full army level, IMHO.
Either way, I bet most people will just take the full kit and be glad with it alone.
Eh, the Raging Heroes minis are kinda bad for Repentia IMO. Wouldn't say no to someone using them ofc (it's your money after all, not mine), but they aren't evocative of the concept, to me.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Melissia wrote: Eh, the Raging Heroes minis are kinda bad for Repentia IMO. Wouldn't say no to someone using them ofc (it's your money after all, not mine), but they aren't evocative of the concept, to me.
I have twenty of them, as I liked them better than the old GW ones. The new ones are better though.
Manchu wrote: Keep in mind, it is merely an assumption that the picture in question illustrates interface plugs. We actually have no idea what those cybernetics are, one way or the other.
Meanwhile, weighing against that assumption is the lack of any mention whatsoever anywhere, in art, in written background, in fiction, that Sisters interface with their PA via cybernetic implants.
Adding these plugs on Repentia is clearly a retcon. Whether one likes it or not is a separate question.
There was not a state of affairs to be retconned (except in your head.) This is like people who cried that giving Sulu a husband in the Kelvinverse Trek movies, thus making him gay or bi, was a retcon, even though it was never established before that he was straight.
(Though for the situation to be more analogous with the cybernetics seen in SoB art Sulu should have had paintings on half naked med in his quarters in the original series.)
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/07/27 14:07:53
Giantwalkingchair wrote: They wear a mask - not to conceal their identity. Part of the oath of the penitent the sisters declare the penitent to be nameless to them. The hood/mask doesn't represent hiding identity, rather that the wearer no longer has identity.
That's entirely head-canon, it's not mentioned in the lore and it's not depicted on early illustrations either!
Which part? The reference to the oath of the Penitent and the oath maker being nameless to the sisters? Or my reading into the symbolism of the mask?
If the former, I should point you to the novel Faith and Fire where this ceremony is described and this exact thing happens with the repentant immediately being given a hood.
If the latter, well I wouldn't be the first to read into something.
But that literally is not true. We have seen them.
No we haven’t. You have merely assumed a depiction of fictional tech in a setting rife with cybernetic augmentation is an instance of very specific thing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/27 14:29:47
And you've assumed that those cybernetic ports cannot in any way be used to interface with power armor. We've established that Sisters have used cybernetic ports for decades in the lore. Why is the fact that the new models are using cybernetics to interface with their armor so egregious to you? Who appointed you as Lord Arbiter of the Chambers of Lore of the Adepta Soriritas?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/27 14:36:14
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress 2000 Slaves to Darkness (Ravagers)
Manchu wrote: No we haven’t. You have merely assumed a depiction of fictional tech in a setting rife with cybernetic augmentation is an instance of very specific thing.
We didn't know how Sister PA works. One might have surmised that the cables and plugs we have seen having something to do with it. Now it has been revealed that this indeed is the case. It is additional information, not a retcon.
I am eagerly awaiting your tantrums when in the Seraphim article it will be revealed that they use vents in their backpacks to jump around, instead of using them to dry their hands after washing them and their armour just being able to jump 'because that's just how it works because this is fiction' (to paraphrase your expert technical analysis from another thread.)
EnTyme wrote: And you've assumed that those cybernetic ports cannot in any way be used to interface with power armor.
I don’t need to make that assumption. The burden of showing that a certain picture illustrates PA interface plugs is on you. All I am saying is, they could be anything so they cannot demonstrate any specific point. One could say this picture means at least one Sister had an interface implant. One could just as validly say that the same picture does not support that point.
Pretty sure that Crimson is saying this is more of a clarification than a retcon, which you could argue is just mincing words. Previously, the situation was unclear and inconsistent. Now, GW is stepping in to clarify it so it's consistent going forwards (assuming they can actually keep it consistent).
Whether you consider that to be a retcon depends on how bitter or charitable you're feeling.
Sometimes ports before. Always ports now. Much gnashing of teeth.
Fan of lore, stealthy black-armored marines, life-alert black-armored marines, and lunatic necrons.
I don’t think this is a meaningful distinction in this case.
Rather, the point is simple: Previously, there was no indication that Sisters required surgical modification in order to use their armor. Now, with this bulletin, that seems to have changed.
Nor was there indication that they didn't have that. Unlike you think there actually must be some method for the PA to follow the wearer's movements, but it was not specified what that method was.
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
But that literally is not true. We have seen them.
No we haven’t. You have merely assumed a depiction of fictional tech in a setting rife with cybernetic augmentation is an instance of very specific thing.
I don’t think this is a meaningful distinction in this case.
Rather, the point is simple: Previously, there was no indication that Sisters required surgical modification in order to use their armor. Now, with this bulletin, that seems to have changed.
There was no indication before that they didn't either.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/27 15:12:13
But that literally is not true. We have seen them.
No we haven’t. You have merely assumed a depiction of fictional tech in a setting rife with cybernetic augmentation is an instance of very specific thing.
People have posted art showing examples of them.
Incorrect, as explained in the post you quoted.
Mmmpi wrote: There was no indication before that they didn't either.
Other than them not being there. Take a look the original Repentia models. And now the new ones. What you are observing is called change.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/27 15:25:08
EnTyme wrote: And you've assumed that those cybernetic ports cannot in any way be used to interface with power armor.
I don’t need to make that assumption. The burden of showing that a certain picture illustrates PA interface plugs is on you. All I am saying is, they could be anything so they cannot demonstrate any specific point. One could say this picture means at least one Sister had an interface implant. One could just as validly say that the same picture does not support that point.
If you're going to make that sort of hairsplitting argument, you can just as easily argue that the ports on the new models aren't PA interface plugs either.
Either way, can we get back to the thread rather than your personal headcanon? It matters to no one else.
2000 Khorne Bloodbound (Skullfiend Tribe- Aqshy)
1000 Tzeentch Arcanites (Pyrofane Cult - Hysh) in progress
