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.

Forgive my ignorance on the Primaris lore, but I've been grappling with something ever since I started working on my Raven Guard army. Why would a Primaris Intercessor have a beakie helmet? The part of me that wants to be true to the aesthetic of the chapter wants to put a beakie helmet on every other model, but I'm just not sure the lore supports it. I mean, if beakie helmets were a relic of MkVI Corvus armor, and the Primaris were manufactured after its heyday, would an intercessor that is using a beakie helmet be doing it solely for its aesthetic? Wouldn't the technology in the MkVI beakie helmet be insufficient as a MkX Tacticus helmet?

And how would that be acquired? They wouldn't have come off of the assembly line with a beakie. When Guilliman presented the Primaris reinforcements to the Raven Guard, would some of them have looked at the cool stock of beakie helmets they had in a closet at the Ravenspire and thought, "I'm taking one of those!" and then traded out his stock helmet? I can understand why someone like Shrike has one because he previously used one. But how would one of these new stock come to get one? Seems like it would be the mark of a "firstborn" Raven Guard marine.

I dont know about the Primaris, but in the Soulhunter Novel, the Night Lords have Armour that is bit's and pieces from all over. Like a Mark 2 helm with mark 5 chest-plate with mark 6 backpack etc. this mixing and matching is the norm and does not effect their internal systems whatsoever. But im still not sure about the Primaris armour though.

The answer is, "Yes, they would".

Why? Because, well- a lot of chapters will have some modifications to armor, at least aesthetically. It was VERY common during the Crusade an Heresy for some to have their own distinctive headgear.

Now, for Ravenguard- I would say that having a Mark X Beakie helmet would be a sign that the Primaris Marine has demonstrated himself in battle, and proven himself- sort of like a 'mini-veteran' status symbol. Mostly their sergeants, and perhaps a few specialists would have them- but it's entirely possible that the entire detachment has earned those honors over time.

I have MKIII, IV, & VI on various Primaris units and they look great.

Racerguy180 wrote:
I have MKIII, IV, & VI on various Primaris units and they look great.

Thanks, although my question is more about how they'd get those earlier pieces of armor. Why would they have them rolling off the assembly line? And if they didn't, why would they trade their gear out for older models? I know this is largely subjective, but I was curious if anyone has read anything on the subject.

A primaris only Chapter would get a couple of "relics" from their genesire.

For my Salamanders they mastercraft everything and each helmet is an individual item. It also helps to use the FW legion helmets to specifically call out the uniqueness.

For RG the helmets kick ass and have variation. You get vented and non vented beaks to sprinkle in amongst you army.
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-US/Raven-Guard-MKVI-Heads-Upgrade-Set

Lorewise, no, Mark X armour would not have beakie helmets, ever.

But GW want their cake and eat it too, or Cawl somehow is amicable to aesthetic requests for his new shiny toys.

Well, y'know, except for the Chapter Master of the Ravenguard, who does indeed have a Beakie helmet on his Mk X.

I just assumed that all the fancy new technology from the Mark X can easily be incorporated into different helmet designs.

I mean why not? For me that is the most obvious thing and does not require any head canon on why anybody would use outdated tech.

There are beaky helmets on the RG Primaris sprue, so I assume it is some form of standard equipment. Maybe a special distinction, as others mentioned.

Who wouldn't want a beaky helmet on any kind of armour #beakies4lyfe

Look at the chapter upgrade kits. There are various older armor pieces added in. It’s just a case of taking old armor and wearing it, with maybe a few modifications, as Space Marines have always done this. Tacitus armor still provides the same protection as Aquila or Corvus armor.

Jes Goodwin in one of the early Voxcasts discussed how just like standard marines, Primaris might carry their own armour or bits of their armour once they go through the Rubicon Primaris as keepsakes or what have you, which is a neat little way of allowing you to model your minis how you please while remaining true to the fluff.

Space Marine power armors have been shown to use largely interchangeable parts. There are undoubtedly some forge worlds out there still churning out beakies - heck, your average Techmarine might have the knowledge to make beakies if he has enough reason. Almost every chapter of space marines turn out unique pieces of gear either built or modified by their techmarines, and give a Primaris chapter a few centuries and they'll start doing it too.

 Tyranid Horde wrote:
Jes Goodwin in one of the early Voxcasts discussed how just like standard marines, Primaris might carry their own armour or bits of their armour once they go through the Rubicon Primaris as keepsakes or what have you, which is a neat little way of allowing you to model your minis how you please while remaining true to the fluff.

This was sort of what I was looking for, thanks! I think I'm going to reserve beakie helmets as status symbols or for older armor models or for models that have been promoted like captains and the like. Thanks guys!

 puma713 wrote:

This was sort of what I was looking for, thanks! I think I'm going to reserve beakie helmets as status symbols or for older armor models or for models that have been promoted like captains and the like. Thanks guys!

If it helps, I have my own chapter I've created. I get some special helmets for Primaris Sergeants, and the truth of it is- the cosmetics of a helmet can be adjusted as long as they don't interfere with the functionality of the helmet or armor. So the Sergeants and accomplished veterans of the Chapter will take time to cosmetically modify their helmets to suit their taste, and to identify them. When that marine is slain, he will pass his armor on to a worthy 'successor'.

After all, the appearance of the helms, for the most part, is entirely a 'shell' around the functional parts. It could look like a bucktoothed Ork and still function the same on the inside.

 Flinty wrote:
Who wouldn't want a beaky helmet on any kind of armour #beakies4lyfe

Which breaks established lore, but GW don't care about lore accurate models, nor do most players, sadly. This is why we get things like Knights painted in Ultramarine colours.

GW made a primaris beakie model and it's up to the players to figure out some sort of retcon to allow it.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
After all, the appearance of the helms, for the most part, is entirely a 'shell' around the functional parts. It could look like a bucktoothed Ork and still function the same on the inside.

Eh, not really, while armour is largely a shell, SM helmets are parts that show the most differences between them - like extra armoured plate of III, better computers and targeters in IV, or extra sensors and protection equipment in VI (which is why it's the biggest helmet despite having thinnest plate, added stuff takes a lot of extra room inside).

As for the OP, the reason might be as simple as 'neighboring Forge World gave them crate of Mk VI helmets as thanks and now they are being used as spares when main helmet gets damaged'. You don't really need a 'reason', normal tactical squad is full of 'wrong' parts on the gear of its members to show ad hoc repair with whatever was on hand, you might simply say your primaris are starting the same process, done. A word of warning, though, normal Mk VI helmets might be kinda bad fit for primaris without filing or greenstuffing, you want the bits from Raven Guard upgrade frame.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Lorewise, no, Mark X armour would not have beakie helmets, ever.

But GW want their cake and eat it too, or Cawl somehow is amicable to aesthetic requests for his new shiny toys.

Yup, it's not like there are two named characters now with one. Oh wait.

And it's not like you get multiple of these in RG upgrade frame, indicating it's nowhere near rare process. Oh wait

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
Who wouldn't want a beaky helmet on any kind of armour #beakies4lyfe

Which breaks established lore, but GW don't care about lore accurate models, nor do most players, sadly. This is why we get things like Knights painted in Ultramarine colours.

GW made a primaris beakie model and it's up to the players to figure out some sort of retcon to allow it.

Both of which are completely accurate in lore.

Jes Goodwin himself has said that he always intended for Primaris to have the same mix'n'match armour as the old marines, and I don't think it's unreasonable for Mark VI helmets to still have the best sensorium arrays, after all, Marks VII and VIII came afterwards, and they were inferior in that respect to Mark VI. I don't see why Mark X *had* to be superior. Not only that, but for those who have crossed the Rubicon Primaris, they might be rather attached to their old gear, and the parts of it they can salvage (ie, helmets, pauldrons, various trappings) they would continue to wear, perhaps due to vestigial Machine Spirits or simple nostalgia.

As for Knights painted in the colours of Space Marine Chapters, that's not impossible at all. Freeblade Knights, and Knights from even notable Houses (like Hawkshroud) have been known to bear the heraldry of their allies to commemorate their union and out of respect. A Freeblade that has earned the respect of a Space Marine Chapter may be able to latch onto that Chapter and bear their heraldry. Just because it's blue and has the Ultramarines sigil on it doesn't make a Knight an Ultramarines Knight.

It's cool not to like it, but claiming it "break established lore" is both completely untrue, and some people would rather have an army with a unified paint scheme than "lore accurate" models, which is just as valid.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
GW made a primaris beakie model and it's up to the players to figure out some sort of retcon to allow it.

No they don't. As many people have pointed out, mixed armour marks (because of individual preference or otherwise) has been part of the lore for ever. Also, the big pointy beak in a MK6 helmet is apparently where all the cool sensors are stored, which makes total sense as a preference for a stealth-based chapter.

It's all right there in the fluff.

 ArbitorIan wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
GW made a primaris beakie model and it's up to the players to figure out some sort of retcon to allow it.

No they don't. As many people have pointed out, mixed armour marks (because of individual preference or otherwise) has been part of the lore for ever. Also, the big pointy beak in a MK6 helmet is apparently where all the cool sensors are stored, which makes total sense as a preference for a stealth-based chapter.

It's all right there in the fluff.

Mixed armour marks were fine because they were intended to be compatible and because the Heresy forced a shortage of the mark 5 and 6, with 7 and 8 being refinements of the Heresy era armour. Mark X is a totally new thing and Cawl isn't one to let anyone mess with his new toys.

You can claim rule of cool and that's fine, but it doesn't conform to the lore, unless you're going to handwave the raven guard magically cramming Mark X helmet innards into a mark VI helmet casing.

Aside: is Cawl actually Bill Gates and Steve Jobs soulfused and reincarnated? He seems to be afraid of the number 9 too

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Mixed armour marks were fine because they were intended to be compatible and because the Heresy forced a shortage of the mark 5 and 6, with 7 and 8 being refinements of the Heresy era armour. Mark X is a totally new thing and Cawl isn't one to let anyone mess with his new toys.

Sounds like a personal opinion to me.....

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Mixed armour marks were fine because they were intended to be compatible and because the Heresy forced a shortage of the mark 5 and 6, with 7 and 8 being refinements of the Heresy era armour. Mark X is a totally new thing and Cawl isn't one to let anyone mess with his new toys.

So Cawl designed a modular MkX armor to not be modular with the modular armor of the past? Citation needed.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 ArbitorIan wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
GW made a primaris beakie model and it's up to the players to figure out some sort of retcon to allow it.

No they don't. As many people have pointed out, mixed armour marks (because of individual preference or otherwise) has been part of the lore for ever. Also, the big pointy beak in a MK6 helmet is apparently where all the cool sensors are stored, which makes total sense as a preference for a stealth-based chapter.

It's all right there in the fluff.

Mixed armour marks were fine because they were intended to be compatible and because the Heresy forced a shortage of the mark 5 and 6, with 7 and 8 being refinements of the Heresy era armour. Mark X is a totally new thing and Cawl isn't one to let anyone mess with his new toys.

You can claim rule of cool and that's fine, but it doesn't conform to the lore, unless you're going to handwave the raven guard magically cramming Mark X helmet innards into a mark VI helmet casing.

Aside: is Cawl actually Bill Gates and Steve Jobs soulfused and reincarnated? He seems to be afraid of the number 9 too

Man, I expected better than regurgitating 1d4Chan level knowledge from you, BCB. Having an off day?

 John Prins wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Mixed armour marks were fine because they were intended to be compatible and because the Heresy forced a shortage of the mark 5 and 6, with 7 and 8 being refinements of the Heresy era armour. Mark X is a totally new thing and Cawl isn't one to let anyone mess with his new toys.

So Cawl designed a modular MkX armor to not be modular with the modular armor of the past? Citation needed.

USB is modular, but you can't cram a type c connector into a type a socket

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 John Prins wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Mixed armour marks were fine because they were intended to be compatible and because the Heresy forced a shortage of the mark 5 and 6, with 7 and 8 being refinements of the Heresy era armour. Mark X is a totally new thing and Cawl isn't one to let anyone mess with his new toys.

So Cawl designed a modular MkX armor to not be modular with the modular armor of the past? Citation needed.

USB is modular, but you can't cram a type c connector into a type a socket

DO NOT WORRY, BROTHERS! I, YOUR TECHMARINE, HAVE DEVISED A CONVERTER!

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 John Prins wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Mixed armour marks were fine because they were intended to be compatible and because the Heresy forced a shortage of the mark 5 and 6, with 7 and 8 being refinements of the Heresy era armour. Mark X is a totally new thing and Cawl isn't one to let anyone mess with his new toys.

So Cawl designed a modular MkX armor to not be modular with the modular armor of the past? Citation needed.

USB is modular, but you can't cram a type c connector into a type a socket

Cawl is the Steve Jobs of the warhammer 40k universe.

BaconCatBug wrote:Mixed armour marks were fine because they were intended to be compatible and because the Heresy forced a shortage of the mark 5 and 6, with 7 and 8 being refinements of the Heresy era armour. Mark X is a totally new thing and Cawl isn't one to let anyone mess with his new toys.

And your proof that it also wasn't designed to be modular is...

Oh. There isn't any.

You can claim rule of cool and that's fine, but it doesn't conform to the lore, unless you're going to handwave the raven guard magically cramming Mark X helmet innards into a mark VI helmet casing.

It's far more likely that (and it's not been denied anywhere in the lore) that the Mark VI is compatible with Mark X, like every other Mark, and is favoured by some Astartes because of sentimentality, increased sensor arrays, or simply aesthetic.

Aside: is Cawl actually Bill Gates and Steve Jobs soulfused and reincarnated? He seems to be afraid of the number 9 too

My guess would be that Cawl tried to make IX and failed, and moved on to X, but given how Cawl actually does absorb consciousnesses and personalities, and the skull of Nikola Tesla is in the 40k universe?

I'm just saying it's not impossible.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
My guess would be that Cawl tried to make IX and failed, and moved on to X, but given how Cawl actually does absorb consciousnesses and personalities, and the skull of Nikola Tesla is in the 40k universe?

I'm just saying it's not impossible.

Maybe he's Linus Torvalds? The early Linux kernal used odd numbers to denote development versions and even to denote release versions.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 John Prins wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Mixed armour marks were fine because they were intended to be compatible and because the Heresy forced a shortage of the mark 5 and 6, with 7 and 8 being refinements of the Heresy era armour. Mark X is a totally new thing and Cawl isn't one to let anyone mess with his new toys.

So Cawl designed a modular MkX armor to not be modular with the modular armor of the past? Citation needed.

USB is modular, but you can't cram a type c connector into a type a socket

USB not being interchangeable is by design.

All of the 40k lore thus far states all old Astartes Armour is interchangeable, and it simply does not talk about the Primaris. You still have not offer'd anything to the contrary, other than something about Cawls toys. unless there is a mention somewhere?
GW is not relying on the players to retcon any lore or make up head cannon, we are simply extending the ongoing theme of interchangeability.

MK IX was proably his early prototype primaris armor. maybe less modular then MK X and thus not worth deploying.