Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Philip S

Rouge Trader (1987) era Sisters of Battle = Space Marines?

Recommended Posts

I am so very suspicious now but, hey, it's all cool.

N0-1_H3r3 said >>>

A Marine isn't just the armour or the weapons or the biology... he's those things and the strategies that accompany them, the doctrines designed around their capabilities that make them terrifyingly effective shock troops. IMO, the combination of those elements is what makes the Astartes just so deadly, even when faced with "a normal guy with a precise anti-vehicular weapon".

And strangely enough I agree with you.  With the specific modus operandi of the Adeptus Astartes, whatever that might be (and the boat is open on that one), they are for me very much "terrifyingly effective shock troops."  I would suggest, however, that many of the rules that we have seen have done little to simulate this.  Rather, those rules have buffed Marines to disproportionate levels.

Well, for me.  The joys of 40k hobbyism.

N0-1_H3r3 said >>>

Well, that's the other thing - looking at the characteristics in DH/RT/DW themselves, a Marine's Strength Bonus is just over twice that of a normal, unaugmented human... it's only an extrapolation of them using the lifting/carrying table that creates the "22x stronger" notion.

And that's an inappropriate notion?  The system gives a very specific interpretation of the relationship between strength and toughness (or their bonuses).  If the system cannot deal with the "reality" then fair enough, or at least the difference between "skill" and "power."  I think that this is what I refer to as "systemic buffing."  It's the kind of problem that dogged Inquisitor and, maybe, the one that continues to make Marines the "broken step child of balance."

N0-1_H3r3 said >>>

Sooner or later, there's a means to view the differences in any way you want... which only really demonstrates that cross-system analysis like this isn't particularly fruitful.

Or it shows a systemic unconcern about consistency or, perhaps, even applicability?  Your argument ultimately boils down to the idea of the independence of each game from the other and, of course, from the established body of material that we, the fans, judge as "relevant" (or more aptly "potentially relevant").

BaronInveagh said >>>

You know, I've always wondered why, after the Emperor usd them to conqure most of the galaxy, why the enemeies of mankind (internal and external) haven't developed as many power armor shredding weapons as one might think.

Because Marines are AWESOMEZ?

And, now, getting back to Phil's post since it might deserve it...

Kage

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BaronIveagh said:

Kage2020 said:

 

 

With that said, though, Marines are AWESOMEZ.  You have to remember than keying into the hyperbole (or so I would like to think) of such individuals as Alan Merrett.  I'm not sure that he made the statement, but when you think about "modern" divisions they ultimately have the ability to respond rationally to different threats.  40k doesn't tend to incorporate such things.  Marines are AWESOMEZ and that's all that makes a difference.  After all, how could every army ever prepare against the possible threat that a Marine might show up?  It makes no-never-mind that one might deal with armour-negating weaponry, just that you're dealing with Marine-negating weaponry.  Thus, we're in the cyclotron of 'fluff' just without the awesomeness.

YMWLV.

Kage

 

 

 

You know, I've always wondered why, after the Emperor usd  them to conqure most of the galaxy, why the enemeies of mankind (internal and external) haven't developed as many power armor shredding weapons as one might think.

 

I mean, I'm sorry, no matter how awsome you are, multi-melta > meltagun > power sword > bolter > lasgun.

 

I just gotta love watching people watching trying to dissect the realism of a setting that has its fair share of pulp, originating from a tabletop that needed some kind of (fairly lame) justification and background story for its minis.

The setting isn't realistic. It was never meant to be realistic nor profound. The beings don't act completely logical. Instead contributors invent a setting that pleases them aesthetically and invent thin rationalizations for why things are that way.

 

If you want realism get drafted for the Afghanistan war, it should give you a healthy(?) dosis of that. For the rest turn to Hollywood or pulp magazines or your average rpg.

 

Alex

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ak-73 said:

 

If you want realism get drafted for the Afghanistan war, it should give you a healthy(?) dosis of that.

I've already seen more then enough people shot and blown up, thank you.  I didn't like it where i was, and I seriously doubt I'd like it in Afghanistan. 

 

The problem is that what works as the (admittedly flimsy) background for the TT game really isn't that great for a role playing setting.  I have my group dissecting this thing all the time, because they're used to working in a rational world like, say, Planescape or GURPS IOU.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, Colonel Tartleton's Law in effect.  It's a law that needs a better, more punchy name since it was acquired not because of the person that coined it, but because they just happened to be the last one it described.  Anyway, the general gist of the law is that in any discussion about a fictional setting where rationality is mentioned, someone will always point out that discussing or otherwise dissecting a fictional setting in such a way is ridiculous.  In 40k, this often involves mentioning all the "ridiculous" imagery—Space Marines, the warp, the distance future, etc.—and then saying, "Yeah, realism, right." as if the discussants were unaware that it was a fictional setting.  The general tone is sometimes self-mocking, but often smugly condescending and patronising, the latter usually because of the implicit inability for the discussants to actually separate reality from fiction or to understand the artistic intent of a given setting.

Always nice to see the law pulled out and used, since much like Godwin's Law the likelihood of it appearing in any length discussion approaches unity. gran_risa.gif

Seriously, though, you're on a forum where nerds, geeks and the occasionally dork will discuss a fictional setting through different interpretive lenses.  They will array the "primary and secondary evidence" to support particular "hypotheses," will question the veracity of certain sources or the subjectivity-objectivity of specific authors or materials.  Everyone—hopefully everyone, anyway—understands that it is a fictional setting and that the "reality" of that setting as written has a somewhat spurious relationship with the one that they perceive in the "real world" (phenomenological arguments aside).

Different people bring different interests and approaches to the gaming table.  It's one of the reasons that some people find it fun.  So, some people will like the background-as-described (because B.A.D. is a cooler acronym than B.A.W., though both are strangely and arguably applicable), using it as a narrativist backso that they can get all snarly with angst-laden themes of despotism, the ends justifying the means, Godwin's Law, etc.  Others are going to get all simulationist on it, exploring the setting and the cross-links between various aspects of it, be that the nature of interstellar trade and communications, the biology of Marines, etc.

So, yes, superficial "cool" setting for a tabletop wargame.  Setting for a roleplaying game?  I guess that depends on what you're bringing to the table.

So, about them Sisters...

Kage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kage2020 said:

Ah, Colonel Tartleton's Law in effect.  It's a law that needs a better, more punchy name since it was acquired not because of the person that coined it, but because they just happened to be the last one it described.  Anyway, the general gist of the law is that in any discussion about a fictional setting where rationality is mentioned, someone will always point out that discussing or otherwise dissecting a fictional setting in such a way is ridiculous.  In 40k, this often involves mentioning all the "ridiculous" imagery—Space Marines, the warp, the distance future, etc.—and then saying, "Yeah, realism, right." as if the discussants were unaware that it was a fictional setting.  The general tone is sometimes self-mocking, but often smugly condescending and patronising, the latter usually because of the implicit inability for the discussants to actually separate reality from fiction or to understand the artistic intent of a given setting.

Always nice to see the law pulled out and used, since much like Godwin's Law the likelihood of it appearing in any length discussion approaches unity. gran_risa.gif

Seriously, though, you're on a forum where nerds, geeks and the occasionally dork will discuss a fictional setting through different interpretive lenses.  They will array the "primary and secondary evidence" to support particular "hypotheses," will question the veracity of certain sources or the subjectivity-objectivity of specific authors or materials.  Everyone—hopefully everyone, anyway—understands that it is a fictional setting and that the "reality" of that setting as written has a somewhat spurious relationship with the one that they perceive in the "real world" (phenomenological arguments aside).

Different people bring different interests and approaches to the gaming table.  It's one of the reasons that some people find it fun.  So, some people will like the background-as-described (because B.A.D. is a cooler acronym than B.A.W., though both are strangely and arguably applicable), using it as a narrativist backso that they can get all snarly with angst-laden themes of despotism, the ends justifying the means, Godwin's Law, etc.  Others are going to get all simulationist on it, exploring the setting and the cross-links between various aspects of it, be that the nature of interstellar trade and communications, the biology of Marines, etc.

So, yes, superficial "cool" setting for a tabletop wargame.  Setting for a roleplaying game?  I guess that depends on what you're bringing to the table.

So, about them Sisters...

Kage

 

I figured that sth like argumentum ad fireballum might be mentioned; it doesn't detract from what I have said though.

These debates about realism tend to get carried away; it would be healthy of debatants were to remember that it's a fictional setting with a serious amount of non-sense contained and that at best people can exchange why a particular thing does sound totally implausible to their ears - or doesn't.

That way one dodges at least the trap of getting carried away in one's fandom or else one would have to wonder if it didn't take on the form of some escapism.

 

It's a game. It's a game with a fairly pulpy setting. Some things are outrageously unbelievable, other are conceivable. Take your pick which is which and either react by sticking to Canon or deviating by creating your own interpretation.

The time that is being spent on prolonged debates about the realism of sth would in my mind better spent in a creative way; creating your own scenario, chapter, xeno race, whatever. Maybe the people going for it don't have inspiration to pursue a particular idea at the moment.

 

More likely everyone's waiting for Deathwatch to arrive. :-)

 

Alex

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ak-73 said:

These debates about realism tend to get carried away; it would be healthy of debatants were to remember that it's a fictional setting with a serious amount of non-sense contained and that at best people can exchange why a particular thing does sound totally implausible to their ears - or doesn't.

You will note that this is mentioned in the previous post or is a given truism of any form of discussion on a fictional universe.

ak-73 said:

That way one dodges at least the trap of getting carried away in one's fandom or else one would have to wonder if it didn't take on the form of some escapism.

Roleplaying is often considered a form of escapism.

ak-73 said:

The time that is being spent on prolonged debates about the realism of sth would in my mind better spent in a creative way; creating your own scenario, chapter, xeno race, whatever. Maybe the people going for it don't have inspiration to pursue a particular idea at the moment.

Kudos.  If you have trouble doing both then, sure, focus on just the one.  There's a lot to do in the modern world so time management is increasingly important.  Along with the occasional interesting discussion on the 40k fan forums, I'm currently juggling anything from learning some complex software suites, managing the creation of several different websites (one of which is a "creative" 40k project), the day job, the second day job, etc, etc.

I think that I hear a small violin playing for me.  Ah well, guess I'll just wait for Phil to respond to the last on topic post.

Kage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kage2020 said:

ak-73 said:

 

These debates about realism tend to get carried away; it would be healthy of debatants were to remember that it's a fictional setting with a serious amount of non-sense contained and that at best people can exchange why a particular thing does sound totally implausible to their ears - or doesn't.

 

 

You will note that this is mentioned in the previous post or is a given truism of any form of discussion on a fictional universe.

ak-73 said:

 

That way one dodges at least the trap of getting carried away in one's fandom or else one would have to wonder if it didn't take on the form of some escapism.

 

 

Roleplaying is often considered a form of escapism.

ak-73 said:

 

The time that is being spent on prolonged debates about the realism of sth would in my mind better spent in a creative way; creating your own scenario, chapter, xeno race, whatever. Maybe the people going for it don't have inspiration to pursue a particular idea at the moment.

 

 

Kudos.  If you have trouble doing both then, sure, focus on just the one.  There's a lot to do in the modern world so time management is increasingly important.  Along with the occasional interesting discussion on the 40k fan forums, I'm currently juggling anything from learning some complex software suites, managing the creation of several different websites (one of which is a "creative" 40k project), the day job, the second day job, etc, etc.

I think that I hear a small violin playing for me.  Ah well, guess I'll just wait for Phil to respond to the last on topic post.

Kage

 

The nature of truisms is that we seem to need to remind ourselves of those.

Everybody of course gets to spend their time the way they like. :-) Me, I wonder which good use is going to come out of some of those exchanges though. Or is it that people engage in it for entertainment only? A nerd form of philosophizing? Without anything having to emerge from it?

 

Anyway my contribution to the exchange is my stating that I don't get what people get out of debating the realism of some things in pain-staking detail. I'll swallow the lack of realism of the 40K setting instead unless it gets too outrageous or simply not according to my taste and march on.

 

But then again there's no accounting for taste. gran_risa.gif

 

Alex

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ak-73 said:

 

The nature of truisms is that we seem to need to remind ourselves of those.

 

 

If you say so.

ak-73 said:

 

Me, I wonder which good use is going to come out of some of those exchanges though. Or is it that people engage in it for entertainment only? A nerd form of philosophizing? Without anything having to emerge from it?

 

 

Since it's a forum dedicated for nerds, one imagines that nerds are getting something out of it, be it entertainment, debate, inspiration to drive forwards their own creativity, or whatever.  One likewise imagines that they are more productive/creative/inspiring when you don't have to stop every other post and qualify it.  Those that aren't getting anything out of it?  Well, more interesting discussion is but a finger movement away.  

ak-73 said:

 

Anyway my contribution to the exchange is my stating that I don't get what people get out of debating the realism of some things in pain-staking detail. I'll swallow the lack of realism of the 40K setting instead unless it gets too outrageous or simply not according to my taste and march on.

 

 

Jolly good.  Wonderful to hear, etc., etc.

So, about them Sisters...

Kage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the God-Emperor ak-73, you're doing things more harm than good half the time, you know that?

Anyway, while we've already established bringing realism in to discussion of a fictional game is.. difficult to implement, let's try and use some common sense for a few minutes...

"You know, I've always wondered why, after the Emperor usd them to conqure most of the galaxy, why the enemeies of mankind (internal and external) haven't developed as many power armor shredding weapons as one might think.

 I mean, I'm sorry, no matter how awsome you are, multi-melta > meltagun > power sword > bolter > lasgun."

How about because they're not the optimal weapons for every situation? For the same reason the US armed forces doesn't give every man an FN Minimi (or SAW as they're otherwise known) or Milkor MGL (a 6-shot, 40mm grenade launcher). The Eldar know that the Space Marines are not the only armed force at the Imperium's disposal, and so they don't arm all their soldiers with Plasmaguns because if they were to find themselves up against the massed infantry of the Imperial Guard they'd be buried under the weight of numbers which they can't kill fast enough, due to the relatively low rate of fire in comparison to the Shuriken Catapult. Then there are the inherent weaknesses of the weapons themselves, that are less than situational. A Multi-Melta is an anti-tank weapon that needs the incredibly augmented strength of a Space Marine to lug around 'man portable', though could possibly be done with a two-man team like the Imperial Guard does with other weapons. And while the tabletop stats are hardly the best judge to go by, I think it's not too unreasonable to assume that Meltaguns have a fairly short range (The Munitorium Manual backs this up).

Another big reason is expense. Remember the fancy body armour from Batman Begins? Able to stop just about everything, but the army didn't implement it because it cost something like $100,000 a piece? Yeah, **** like that is real. And like in the movie, the reason why they aren't using it is because it is insanely expensive to make. While the Imperium doesn't run off money so much, it does find itself limited by available resources, and technological expertise, while other races have similar limiting factors. Plasmaguns are just too **** expensive and complicated to give out to every tom, ****, and harry in the Imperial Guard (or Fire Warrior, or Guardian militiaman). Likewise, if every man could have a Power Sword, then they would, but again they're difficult to make, and so are reserves for people who earn them somehow (officers, Space Marine veterans, etc.). To again use a real life simile, it's like how some equipment is reserved for use by the special forces, instead of being handed out to every grunt Private, because its more expensive, or simply requires more specialized training to use.

"So, even if a SM is 10 times as strong as a strong human, or 20!, so what? He's still an easy target for a normal guy with a precise anti-vehicular weapon.

I tend to agree with Kage, SMs are somewhat over-rated, I watched the DW trailer movie today and it said a single SM is able to easily take on and beat a modern day division! Really? I don't accept that, it doesn't really make sense. A modern day division, or let's say more relevantly a IG company, possesses weapons that can take out armoured vehicles - I think they'd have a fair chance of taking down one marine."

Therein lies The Rub, so to speak. Modern anti-vehicular weapons aren't precise. Or rather, they are precise when it comes to hitting something as large and un-agile as a friggin tank. None of the modern armoured fighting vehicles available, even the LAV's used by the Marines and Canadian Forces, are especially manueverable, fast certainly but they're not turning on a time, meaning that it's relatively easy for modern anti-tank weapons to be "precise". While a Marine in their armour is three or even four times as large as a regular infantryman, that's still a hell of a lot smaller than any sort of vehicle, combined with the manueverability of a man on foot and a speed that greatly exceeds that or a normal man. So yeah, while I certainly wouldn't rule out the usefulness of anti-tank weapons, it's not a simple case of swapping guns for Javelins and winning the day.

Now as for their effectiveness, well I'm of the opinion that it increases exponentially with the quanity of Marines involved, and while certainly I don't think a single Space Marine could take down a modern Infantry Division (10,000-15,000 men), I think a squad of 10 Marines could do a hell of a lot of damage to one (for the sake of arguement, we'll say it's regular infantry and not Rangers, or anything like that). Between their Power Armour and the fact that they're being shot with what are basically Autoguns, the majority of the fire they're recieving is going to bounce right off them (in many cases, quite literally). Now the type of fight we're involved in matters a great deal, a big flat open plain with the two sides 300 yards apart is going to play to the Division, allowing them to employ those anti-tank wepaons to their full effect. But an extremely close range firefight in city-streets is going to favour the Marines, and just for this expample we'll assume that the Marines get an arrangment that favours them, due to benefiting from Drop Pod insertion, or whatever.

Now, even with all this I don't think Space Marines would do something so insane as deploying 10 men to fight 10,000. Like the US Military, deploying overwhelming force to totally anihilate your enemy would be quite typical operating procedure for a force of Marines, and if we were to up the numbers to 50, I think a modern infantry division would be quite utterly butchered, almost to a man, assuming the Space Marines got to fight the battle on their terms (IE: they pick the battlefield and deploy themselves to take advantage of it). Now, the 10 Marines, even with all they had going for them, would need to close to close range for the best chances, which isn't really difficult for them to do afterall. Once closed with the infantry, they'd have greatly negated the majority of their anti-tank weapons, leaving 40mm grenade launchers, and hand grenades as the best weapons against them, which soldiers would be reluctant to use out of concern for hitting their fellow soldiers. As such ranges the Marines could place their shots with extreme accuracy, getting the most out of automatic and burst fire from their Bolters, and close the gap to melee whenever the opportunity presented itself, which is where they'd wreak absolute slaughter, because despite the close quarters training that all soldiers in a modern army recieve, they're just not trained and eqiuped to handle something of that magnitude. So, and again remembering that this is being fought on the Marines' terms, the whole battle probably would take a general form of close-range firefights, followed by intense melee, whereupon the infantry would fall back, initiating another close-range firefight until the Marines could make it in to melee again.

A smart commander would probably have part of his forces move way way back while another portion kept the Marines occupied, taking advantage of the range to lay down fire with their anti-vehicular weaponry. Of course, Marines are smart too, and if they brought along a Heavy Bolter, that's the point where they'd lay down some heavy fire of their own, probably pinpointing the the men taking aim with their anti-tank rockets and such, which isn't an unreasonable assumption. I'd imagine everyone here is familiar with video games enough to know what a Heads Up Display (HUD) is, which just gotta be something Marines have in their helmets, which is where the targeting would come in as I'd also imagine that it helps with threat assesment and target acquisition, highlighting the men with the anti-vehicular weaponry so they can be eliminated before inflicting serious damage to the squad. Carrying on, the side that's victorious depends on how we're setting goals here. If one side has to eliminate the other entirely, well the Marines can't win simply because they just don't have enough ammunition to do the job (extrapolating from what a modern soldier carries, they'd only have roughly 4,000 rounds, give or take a few hundred). So we'd have to go with the more sensible condition of routing your enemy from the field of battle, which the Marines have a better chance of doing. The blow to morale and unit coherency, after being literally decimated by a mere 10 Space Marines (even, and perhaps especially, because they're giant godlike warriors of deadly skill and excellent equipment), would take a large toll on the division in addition to the casualties actually inflicted.

Can ya believe I actually dropped out of basic training? God that really was the worst mistake of my life (Canadian Forces, if anyone is interested).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blood Pact said >>>

By the God-Emperor ak-73, you're doing things more harm than good half the time, you know that?

angel.gif

Blood Pact said >>>

How about because they're not the optimal weapons for every situation?

Good point that (wo)man!  (Sorry, didn't want to assume either way, so no offence intended!)  With that said, I think that you're illustrating a part of the point in that Marines are plot-armoured more than anything else.  It's just the "plot" in question happens to be the setting... if you let it.

Again, though, I think that the good post attests to the very specific and dedicated modus operandi of the Marines.  As the "scalpel" that they are (purportedly) it's going to be pretty hard to plan for where and how they're going to strike.

On the other hand, I don't think that this detracts from the point that the "Sisters" don't have to be physically equivalent to a Marine to make the "awesome," or even the "Marine Police."  That's more of the "plot armouring" again.  It just means that they're going to have to be given the tools to do so, be that "faith powers" or something else.

Blood Pact said >>>

Therein lies The Rub, so to speak. Modern anti-vehicular weapons aren't precise. Or rather, they are precise when it comes to hitting something as large and un-agile as a friggin tank. None of the modern armoured fighting vehicles available, even the LAV's used by the Marines and Canadian Forces, are especially manueverable, fast certainly but they're not turning on a time, meaning that it's relatively easy for modern anti-tank weapons to be "precise". While a Marine in their armour is three or even four times as large as a regular infantryman, that's still a hell of a lot smaller than any sort of vehicle, combined with the manueverability of a man on foot and a speed that greatly exceeds that or a normal man. So yeah, while I certainly wouldn't rule out the usefulness of anti-tank weapons, it's not a simple case of swapping guns for Javelins and winning the day.

I think that a number of developments in the real world have shown that this is not necessarily the case in the modern world, where it is entirely possibly to deliver APHE rounds accurately.  With that said, the modern world is also not when 40k was original written, so there's definitely some wiggle room.  Unfortunately that wiggle room encompasses the difficulty that one has when dealing with a "superficial setting" (for the wargame) and an RPG, which tends more towards narrative.  

Either way, given that the Q&A thread could not be sidetracked by off topic discussion, maybe it's good to get back to Phil's post?

Kage

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kage2020 said:

ak-73 said:

 

The nature of truisms is that we seem to need to remind ourselves of those.

 

 

If you say so.

 

Thanks for reminding everyone that I did say so. ;-)

 

Kage2020 said:

ak-73 said:

Me, I wonder which good use is going to come out of some of those exchanges though. Or is it that people engage in it for entertainment only? A nerd form of philosophizing? Without anything having to emerge from it?

 

 

Since it's a forum dedicated for nerds, one imagines that nerds are getting something out of it, be it entertainment, debate, inspiration to drive forwards their own creativity, or whatever.  One likewise imagines that they are more productive/creative/inspiring when you don't have to stop every other post and qualify it.  Those that aren't getting anything out of it?  Well, more interesting discussion is but a finger movement away.  

So much for truisms. ;-) Anyway, I fail to see why a conversation shouldn't be able to carry on and have the question about its purpose answered when posed by someone who states that he fails to recognize its purpose.
 

Kage2020 said:

ak-73 said:

 Anyway my contribution to the exchange is my stating that I don't get what people get out of debating the realism of some things in pain-staking detail. I'll swallow the lack of realism of the 40K setting instead unless it gets too outrageous or simply not according to my taste and march on.

 

 

Jolly good.  Wonderful to hear, etc., etc.

So, about them Sisters...

Kage

Why, thank you.

 

Anyway @BloodPact: "By the God-Emperor ak-73, you're doing things more harm than good half the time, you know that?"

Well, you know, the same could be claimed about various long-winded debates about whether something is realistic or not (that cannot be known most of the time anyway) or whether sth is Canon or not (why would that issue be worth a prolonged debate?). A number of those prolonged ones seem to have a tendency to bring out some hosility between participants.

 

Alex

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Well, when we're talking about the Rogue Trader 1987 Space Marines/ Sororitas, and comparing them to 5th Edition SM/SoB is like comparing Apples to Oranges.

Rogue-Trader Space Marines weren't symbiotic organisms, they were basically Sardaukar.   Men, who due to their homeworld, culture, or psychological illness weren't civilized, they were natural predators, Conans compared to the normal civilized Imperial citizen.  Use drugs and hypnosis to control those men, outfit them with the best armor and equipment and turn them loose.

Rogue-Trader era Sisters were basically like they are today, Nuns given the best armor and weapons with the additional remit to enforce Doctrinal Purity.

Both are very different in modern era.

Modern SM's now have Primarch's, gene-seed, etc... and are placed in the command structure basically answerable only to the Emperor.  

The Sisters now exist in a different Imperium.  Their remit is much narrower.  As the Ecclesiarchy's soldiers, their responsibilities lie with Ecclesiarchal concerns, they are not the universal enforcers they were in 1987.  That aspect was removed as early as 2nd Edition Codex Imperialis.

So how can you reconcile the two? It's very difficult.

Physically is the easiest.  Yes, they will not have unnatural toughness and strength, but you could give them Best quality weapons and armor, load them up with bionics, cybernetics and high-tech gear and they can approach a Marine in combat effectiveness.  Obviously, they would have to have greater numbers in order to go toe to toe with a chapter, but numbers shouldn't be a problem.

The problem is the authority.  In order to have them "policing the marines" you'd basically have to do some rewriting of history.  

One way you could do it, is reveal the conversation between the Emperor and Dominica.  Have the SoB's operating under the direct Word of the Emperor.  In order to fulfill his dream of elevating humanity to a level of psychic power where they are incorruptible to the Warp like the Emperor and the Sensei, the Sororitas need to institute a breeding program (which explains the Bene Gesserit thing they have going among the Noble families) and keep an eye on Space Marine gene-seed to analyze it for mutations, both useful and corrupting.

This would be a secret between the SoB's, the SM's, and possibly the =I=, but provided the Chapter Masters, Librarians and Chaplains back in the day were convinced that Dominica actually followed the Emperor's Word, then I could see it carry forward to today.

Having them do so under the authority of the Ecclesiarchy is just ludicrous on it's face without rolling everything SM back to 1987 story-wise.

The thing I don't really get is the fan-hatred.  The SoB and SMs are both servants of the Emperor, there should be some measure of respect.  Far too often, I think the fan's gender politics and psychological issues end up causing all the Sturm Und Drang.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly...

Honestly, do whatever you want in your game, but using the current fluff for the Marines, making the Sisters of Battle some sort of police force for them not only detracts from their own fluff, but that of the Marines.

Part of the cool thing about the Space Marines is just how little control the Imperium has over them, a fact which scares the Imperium no small amount, in fact. They serve the Imperium out of loyalty to the God-Emperor and their Primarchs, out of devotion to what (they think) he stood for and, out of thanks for the legacy of their Chapter that he created. They're very much akin to fuedal knightly orders, bound only by ancient pledges of fealty and obligation. Noone, and I mean noone, can really order a Space Marine Chapter Master to do anything, and they know it.

And frankly, unaugmented Sisters of Battle aren't up to the task of policing that sort of thing. They have numbers on their side, but they're able to maintain those numbers specifically because they're 'merely' a bunch of well equiped and well trained humans. Trying to pump every one of them with enough bionic, chemical, and bionetic augmentations to bring them up to par with Space Marines on an individual level would by necessity limit their numbers. The latter also begs the question of how they carry out their duties as the Space Marine police and be the militant arm of the Echlesiarchy, because they wouldn't have the number for both those tasks, as the latter entails a lot of garrisson work, which is quite frankly a waste of time for a being that is as powerful as a Space Marine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blood Pact said:

 

By the God-Emperor ak-73, you're doing things more harm than good half the time, you know that?

Anyway, while we've already established bringing realism in to discussion of a fictional game is.. difficult to implement, let's try and use some common sense for a few minutes...

"You know, I've always wondered why, after the Emperor usd them to conqure most of the galaxy, why the enemeies of mankind (internal and external) haven't developed as many power armor shredding weapons as one might think.

 I mean, I'm sorry, no matter how awsome you are, multi-melta > meltagun > power sword > bolter > lasgun."

How about because they're not the optimal weapons for every situation? For the same reason the US armed forces doesn't give every man an FN Minimi (or SAW as they're otherwise known) or Milkor MGL (a 6-shot, 40mm grenade launcher). The Eldar know that the Space Marines are not the only armed force at the Imperium's disposal, and so they don't arm all their soldiers with Plasmaguns because if they were to find themselves up against the massed infantry of the Imperial Guard they'd be buried under the weight of numbers which they can't kill fast enough, due to the relatively low rate of fire in comparison to the Shuriken Catapult. Then there are the inherent weaknesses of the weapons themselves, that are less than situational. A Multi-Melta is an anti-tank weapon that needs the incredibly augmented strength of a Space Marine to lug around 'man portable', though could possibly be done with a two-man team like the Imperial Guard does with other weapons. And while the tabletop stats are hardly the best judge to go by, I think it's not too unreasonable to assume that Meltaguns have a fairly short range (The Munitorium Manual backs this up).

Another big reason is expense. Remember the fancy body armour from Batman Begins? Able to stop just about everything, but the army didn't implement it because it cost something like $100,000 a piece? Yeah, **** like that is real. And like in the movie, the reason why they aren't using it is because it is insanely expensive to make. While the Imperium doesn't run off money so much, it does find itself limited by available resources, and technological expertise, while other races have similar limiting factors. Plasmaguns are just too **** expensive and complicated to give out to every tom, ****, and harry in the Imperial Guard (or Fire Warrior, or Guardian militiaman). Likewise, if every man could have a Power Sword, then they would, but again they're difficult to make, and so are reserves for people who earn them somehow (officers, Space Marine veterans, etc.). To again use a real life simile, it's like how some equipment is reserved for use by the special forces, instead of being handed out to every grunt Private, because its more expensive, or simply requires more specialized training to use.

"So, even if a SM is 10 times as strong as a strong human, or 20!, so what? He's still an easy target for a normal guy with a precise anti-vehicular weapon.

I tend to agree with Kage, SMs are somewhat over-rated, I watched the DW trailer movie today and it said a single SM is able to easily take on and beat a modern day division! Really? I don't accept that, it doesn't really make sense. A modern day division, or let's say more relevantly a IG company, possesses weapons that can take out armoured vehicles - I think they'd have a fair chance of taking down one marine."

Therein lies The Rub, so to speak. Modern anti-vehicular weapons aren't precise. Or rather, they are precise when it comes to hitting something as large and un-agile as a friggin tank. None of the modern armoured fighting vehicles available, even the LAV's used by the Marines and Canadian Forces, are especially manueverable, fast certainly but they're not turning on a time, meaning that it's relatively easy for modern anti-tank weapons to be "precise". While a Marine in their armour is three or even four times as large as a regular infantryman, that's still a hell of a lot smaller than any sort of vehicle, combined with the manueverability of a man on foot and a speed that greatly exceeds that or a normal man. So yeah, while I certainly wouldn't rule out the usefulness of anti-tank weapons, it's not a simple case of swapping guns for Javelins and winning the day.

Now as for their effectiveness, well I'm of the opinion that it increases exponentially with the quanity of Marines involved, and while certainly I don't think a single Space Marine could take down a modern Infantry Division (10,000-15,000 men), I think a squad of 10 Marines could do a hell of a lot of damage to one (for the sake of arguement, we'll say it's regular infantry and not Rangers, or anything like that). Between their Power Armour and the fact that they're being shot with what are basically Autoguns, the majority of the fire they're recieving is going to bounce right off them (in many cases, quite literally). Now the type of fight we're involved in matters a great deal, a big flat open plain with the two sides 300 yards apart is going to play to the Division, allowing them to employ those anti-tank wepaons to their full effect. But an extremely close range firefight in city-streets is going to favour the Marines, and just for this expample we'll assume that the Marines get an arrangment that favours them, due to benefiting from Drop Pod insertion, or whatever.

Now, even with all this I don't think Space Marines would do something so insane as deploying 10 men to fight 10,000. Like the US Military, deploying overwhelming force to totally anihilate your enemy would be quite typical operating procedure for a force of Marines, and if we were to up the numbers to 50, I think a modern infantry division would be quite utterly butchered, almost to a man, assuming the Space Marines got to fight the battle on their terms (IE: they pick the battlefield and deploy themselves to take advantage of it). Now, the 10 Marines, even with all they had going for them, would need to close to close range for the best chances, which isn't really difficult for them to do afterall. Once closed with the infantry, they'd have greatly negated the majority of their anti-tank weapons, leaving 40mm grenade launchers, and hand grenades as the best weapons against them, which soldiers would be reluctant to use out of concern for hitting their fellow soldiers. As such ranges the Marines could place their shots with extreme accuracy, getting the most out of automatic and burst fire from their Bolters, and close the gap to melee whenever the opportunity presented itself, which is where they'd wreak absolute slaughter, because despite the close quarters training that all soldiers in a modern army recieve, they're just not trained and eqiuped to handle something of that magnitude. So, and again remembering that this is being fought on the Marines' terms, the whole battle probably would take a general form of close-range firefights, followed by intense melee, whereupon the infantry would fall back, initiating another close-range firefight until the Marines could make it in to melee again.

A smart commander would probably have part of his forces move way way back while another portion kept the Marines occupied, taking advantage of the range to lay down fire with their anti-vehicular weaponry. Of course, Marines are smart too, and if they brought along a Heavy Bolter, that's the point where they'd lay down some heavy fire of their own, probably pinpointing the the men taking aim with their anti-tank rockets and such, which isn't an unreasonable assumption. I'd imagine everyone here is familiar with video games enough to know what a Heads Up Display (HUD) is, which just gotta be something Marines have in their helmets, which is where the targeting would come in as I'd also imagine that it helps with threat assesment and target acquisition, highlighting the men with the anti-vehicular weaponry so they can be eliminated before inflicting serious damage to the squad. Carrying on, the side that's victorious depends on how we're setting goals here. If one side has to eliminate the other entirely, well the Marines can't win simply because they just don't have enough ammunition to do the job (extrapolating from what a modern soldier carries, they'd only have roughly 4,000 rounds, give or take a few hundred). So we'd have to go with the more sensible condition of routing your enemy from the field of battle, which the Marines have a better chance of doing. The blow to morale and unit coherency, after being literally decimated by a mere 10 Space Marines (even, and perhaps especially, because they're giant godlike warriors of deadly skill and excellent equipment), would take a large toll on the division in addition to the casualties actually inflicted.

Can ya believe I actually dropped out of basic training? God that really was the worst mistake of my life (Canadian Forces, if anyone is interested).

 

 

 

I'll point out the glaring hole in this entire argument known as the M82A3, or even the humble M995 armor piercing round loaded into a SAW. 

 

That said:  I think that hte sisters would have to have some sort of higher grade armor to make up the difference.  Something that connects via MIU or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh how did I know that you'd make a flippant and dismissive reply? I'll have you know that I consider you every bit as bad as ak-73, because of how often you pull that and other ****.

But since I respect you more than you obviously respect anyone else here, I'll actually give your post serious consideration.

Space Marine Power armour is made from composite materials, pretty much all of which are fictional, which provides some problems for judging its effectivness. Personally I've always considered Ceramite to be something like a combination of concrete and ceramic, but that's just supposition on my part. What we do know is that it is extremely effective against small arms, which is what the SAW is, despite its high rate of fire. The M995, which you seem to think is all that's needed to counter their armour, can punch through only about a half-inch of steel. Even assuming that their Power Armour is only as strong as steel armour plate, it would be a great misbelief to think that it was only half an inch thick, I'd be more inclined to think it was at least two inches thick.

While the Barett is so overrated it's really become quite absurd. It weighs about 30 pounds, is over 4 feet long, and is incredibly loud. It's only real advantage as a sniper rifle is that it has an extremely long range. Aside from range, there's no reason you'd use it against a human target any more than the many other rifles available. Of course Space Marines are hardly human, making it a good choice to use against them, as long as one keeps in mind the above. But it's still not going to be the Staff of Instant Death that you seem to be making it out to be. Bolters fire .75 calibre armour piercing rounds, and Space Marines still manage to survive them, if not as well as they can shrug off conventional small arms, and I think it's fair if we considered the Barett to be about equal to them, if anything I think I'm being a bit too generous to the Barett. There is some sense in this, considering that the game even makes Heavy Stubbers suspiciously similar in appearance to the Ma Duece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blood Pact said:

Oh how did I know that you'd make a flippant and dismissive reply? I'll have you know that I consider you every bit as bad as ak-73, because of how often you pull that and other ****.

But since I respect you more than you obviously respect anyone else here, I'll actually give your post serious consideration.

Space Marine Power armour is made from composite materials, pretty much all of which are fictional, which provides some problems for judging its effectivness. Personally I've always considered Ceramite to be something like a combination of concrete and ceramic, but that's just supposition on my part. What we do know is that it is extremely effective against small arms, which is what the SAW is, despite its high rate of fire. The M995, which you seem to think is all that's needed to counter their armour, can punch through only about a half-inch of steel. Even assuming that their Power Armour is only as strong as steel armour plate, it would be a great misbelief to think that it was only half an inch thick, I'd be more inclined to think it was at least two inches thick.

While the Barett is so overrated it's really become quite absurd. It weighs about 30 pounds, is over 4 feet long, and is incredibly loud. It's only real advantage as a sniper rifle is that it has an extremely long range. Aside from range, there's no reason you'd use it against a human target any more than the many other rifles available. Of course Space Marines are hardly human, making it a good choice to use against them, as long as one keeps in mind the above. But it's still not going to be the Staff of Instant Death that you seem to be making it out to be. Bolters fire .75 calibre armour piercing rounds, and Space Marines still manage to survive them, if not as well as they can shrug off conventional small arms, and I think it's fair if we considered the Barett to be about equal to them, if anything I think I'm being a bit too generous to the Barett. There is some sense in this, considering that the game even makes Heavy Stubbers suspiciously similar in appearance to the Ma Duece.

 

The .75 HEDP round typically used by bolters would be stopped fairly effectivly by composite armor with an anti-spalling layer (which might explain how occasionaly gaurdsmen survive being hit by it too).  A tungsten core kinetic penetrator will more then likely do just that as it's no more then half an inch thick according to most sources.  Even figuring future super materials make it stronger, composite armor tends to have greater volume but lower weight then a comparable amount of metal.  In power armor, where the device itself carries the weight, not the person, the only reason to use composits is to provide greater protection from shape charge based weapons or to increase the physical strength boost given by the armors servos.  While this would make the armor more agile, it also reduces it's effectiveness per inch of thickness.  This issue is actually what gave rise to the MK III "Iron" armor, as fighting in confined areas was negating the benefits of the increased agility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is really only one reason why GW fluff couldn't be interpreted to make a female PC which is equal to Space Marine. The reason is the (un)official rules of the figh... eh, fanboy club:

First Rule of Space Marine Fanboy Club: You will never accept anyone or anything as equal or (emperor forbid!) better than a space marine.

Second Rule of Space Marine Fanboy Club: You will never accept anyone or anything as equal or (emperor forbid!) better than a space marine.

Third Rule of Space Marine Fanboy Club: No logical argument can ever be used to discuss rules #1 or #2.

So yeah, you can use DW rules for PC SoB:s (RT era or otherwise) for as long as you steer clear of SMFBC. On the other hand, if you are a dedicated member of SMFBC then you are pretty much out of luck. Nothing, NOTHING, can ever touch your beloved Space Marines without seriously undermining your convictions, self-image and sense of self-esteem. Sorry.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sisters still perform purity sweeps through all Imperial Organziations (including Marines) at the behest of the Ordo Hereticus. Their remit from Sebastion Thor allows them to police the Ecclesiarchy without needing to go the Ordo Hereticus though they are alos beholden to the Church. That must make things complicated. To quote the codex ," These and a thousand other duties are entrusted to these most holy servants of the Emperor." (Witch Hunters codex (printed version) page 11)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

andrewm9 said:

Sisters still perform purity sweeps through all Imperial Organziations (including Marines) at the behest of the Ordo Hereticus. Their remit from Sebastion Thor allows them to police the Ecclesiarchy without needing to go the Ordo Hereticus though they are alos beholden to the Church. That must make things complicated. To quote the codex ," These and a thousand other duties are entrusted to these most holy servants of the Emperor." (Witch Hunters codex (printed version) page 11)

Yes, and the Space Wolves Codex demonstrated just how well that sort of thing works when the Space Marines don't feel like cooperating. These guys kill Inquisitors for snooping around too much, so it's a pretty good bet that these sorts of thigns are only tolerated at their sufferance.

BaronIveagh said:

The .75 HEDP round typically used by bolters would be stopped fairly effectivly by composite armor with an anti-spalling layer (which might explain how occasionaly gaurdsmen survive being hit by it too). A tungsten core kinetic penetrator will more then likely do just that as it's no more then half an inch thick according to most sources. Even figuring future super materials make it stronger, composite armor tends to have greater volume but lower weight then a comparable amount of metal. In power armor, where the device itself carries the weight, not the person, the only reason to use composits is to provide greater protection from shape charge based weapons or to increase the physical strength boost given by the armors servos. While this would make the armor more agile, it also reduces it's effectiveness per inch of thickness. This issue is actually what gave rise to the MK III "Iron" armor, as fighting in confined areas was negating the benefits of the increased agility.

That's better...

And they've since replaced the "Depleted Dueterium" inside bolter rounds with Depleted Uranium, which makes a hell of a lot more sense, and would finally explain where a lot of a Bolter shell's umph comes from. And DU certainly can be compared to tungsten when it comes to effectivness. While as for the protective qualities of Power Armour, well unless it's inthe Insignum Astartes somewhere (which I don't have) or maybe even Deathwatch, the fluff doesn't give too much information on just how thick it is, aside from "thick ceramite plates". But given the immense strength of the Space Marines, and the armour's own power, I don't think it would be out of the question to assume that they can really pile it on, and that the torso is where the thickest armour would be found (probably a lot thicker than half an inch, but unfortunately it's all guess work either way here).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blood Pact said:

 

 

That's better...

And they've since replaced the "Depleted Dueterium" inside bolter rounds with Depleted Uranium, which makes a hell of a lot more sense, and would finally explain where a lot of a Bolter shell's umph comes from. And DU certainly can be compared to tungsten when it comes to effectivness. While as for the protective qualities of Power Armour, well unless it's inthe Insignum Astartes somewhere (which I don't have) or maybe even Deathwatch, the fluff doesn't give too much information on just how thick it is, aside from "thick ceramite plates". But given the immense strength of the Space Marines, and the armour's own power, I don't think it would be out of the question to assume that they can really pile it on, and that the torso is where the thickest armour would be found (probably a lot thicker than half an inch, but unfortunately it's all guess work either way here).

 

 

 

Mk6corvuscompositiom.JPG

 

From Page 116 of Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader. 

 

Admittedly, it's from the old days where removing the suit equaled death for the marine, and in all honesty I'm not sure how you'd put it on anyway, since no one shaped like a human being could wear that. 

 

Now, admittedly, I have a .75 round sitting next to me and one of GW's promotional 'bolter casings' as I type this, so I figure I have a good idea of how large that clip would be. 

If the scale is the same, the armor thickenesses are about 1/4th an inch on the back, and about 1/2 inch on the front, with thicker plating around the chest, shoulders, shins and pauldrons.

 

As far as bolts go: they can't be dep uranium core, or they would not be both explosive + armor penitrating.  It'd have to be something that uses the Munroe effect to penetrate armor, more like a HEAT round.  Using dep uranium in that would actually make it less useful.  (One of the reasons we use copper instead in HEAT is that it's lighter, and just as effective)  It might have some sort of dep uranium tip that the shaped charge propels, but the size of the .75 precludes it being more then a few grams. 

 

I'd give a tungsten core .50 better then even odds against armor that it can punch through.  A McMillan Fatmac with a tungsten core would be better though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BaronIveagh said:

Admittedly, it's from the old days where removing the suit equaled death for the marine, and in all honesty I'm not sure how you'd put it on anyway, since no one shaped like a human being could wear that. 

Well, at least the editions are, for the most part, staying consistent with regards to the last point.  With regards to your first point about the lethality of removing the armour, this is a new one to me, or at the very least one that I have long since misremembered.  Do you have a source for this?

Kage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm afraid I just can't trust that picture, not only because of its age, but also because it's just... not very good. And I would hardly want to guess at the thickness of their armour based on that.

As for Bolter shells, all I have to go by is what is says in the Lexicanum, which is the most up to date source we have anyway. I'd still say it's a comparison to put them on about equal terms with a .50 cal, Tungsten or no. But to give the benefit of the doubt, we could say they're the same as Kraken rounds then, which still just have a Pen of 8. Oh yeah, I'd also say they do less damage, about 'only' as much as a Heavy Stubber, considering that they don't explode inside their target, like Bolt rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kage2020 said:

 

BaronIveagh said:

 

Admittedly, it's from the old days where removing the suit equaled death for the marine, and in all honesty I'm not sure how you'd put it on anyway, since no one shaped like a human being could wear that. 

 

 

Well, at least the editions are, for the most part, staying consistent with regards to the last point.  With regards to your first point about the lethality of removing the armour, this is a new one to me, or at the very least one that I have long since misremembered.  Do you have a source for this?

Kage

 

 

 

In all honesty, I've forgotten where I originally read that, it's been so long. 

 

Edit: See, that's one of the things that's never made sense to me: How can it be armor piercing and a delayed action dum dum round?  The mechanisms by which these two things work, on an object as small as a .75 cal bullet, preclude each other.  Using something like RDX, you'd have to hollow out the majority of the round to provide room for enough of a charge and it's detonation mechanism.  However, it takes up so much room that you end up with a HESH round.  Also useful against armor and brutal against humans wearing regular milspec body armor, but clearly not a bolt round. 

 

The problem is that is that shells which can puncture armor and then explode in a meaningful way tend to be very large. 

488px-80_cm_Gustav_shell_compared_to_T-3

 

And by 'very large' I mean 'VERY LARGE'.  Think a person hit with a 30mm oerlikon.

 

The limitation has to do with the round.  Unless your explosive is something way beyond even what 40k seems capable of (as by and large thier explosives seem comparable to todays, with the exception of things like vortex grenades and krack)  like a micro nuke or anti-matter rounds, the explosion has to happen first, and then the armor penitraition.  If it works the other way, it'd have to be much, much bigger then .75. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...