BaronIveagh said:

To be honest I'm starting to think he's taking the right approach as nothing can be said that will dissuade you from your bizarre notions regarding an issue that has been made very, very clear over and over for over twenty years...

It really is as simple as he makes it sound. There are no canon female marines. There never will be canon female marines. Adding female marines to your game makes it non-canon. It's very simple.

And there is nothing wrong with that. You can still have female marines. You can have female orks with pink skin if you want. It's your game.

Atheosis said:

This simply cannot be proven. GW retcons could happen at any time, and you really can't predict it won't happen with certainty.

HappyDaze said:

After all the current information repeatedly going "You must be male to become a Space Marine", they would have to go through a lot of background and piss off a lot of people to change that now, and for what? There's no gain in it for them to start allowing canon female Astartes.

Now, if they started giving genetic augments to Sisters of Battle, so that they are S + T 4 and basically like Space Marines, you'll have females on the same level as Space Marines, but they would still not be Space Marines, they'd be Sisters of Battle.

Since everyone seems to not accept the idea of just handwaving it and accepting that having female Space Marines will make your game non-canon, it seems stating the canon position of "no female SMs" is the only argument open to those who disagree with the idea of canon female SMs anymore. We have the proof of 20 years worth of background and canon to support our argument, all that it seems Baron has is theories based off barely covered areas of development (the 21st Founding) and stuff he has made up that he believes fits with the 21st Founding, despite having no evidence to suggest he is correct.

MILLANDSON said:

The gain would come if GW thought that a female SM army would sell minis. That's it. If they think they can make money off of it, they'll do it. If they think something won't make them money (like Squats), then it's doomed. GW's concern for their own canon is less extreme than that of some posters I've seen here, and certainly doesn't appear to be based upon loyalty to the line - it's loyalty to the money.

Hell, I'd be willing to bet money that a sufficient bribe to one of the top GW writers would get them to include a canon tale of a group of female SMs in a White Dwarf article, even if there were no minis to be made.

True, maybe someone should start that bribe money pool. All I have is lent however.

MILLANDSON said:

... granted, it's a poorly fleshed out area of canon. ... I might point out that, until very recently, the Horus Heresy, one of the most important events in 40k canon was poorly fleshed out. And in that 20 years of maleness, that they were male was only mentioned once in WD 98 and in the same artical when reprinted later in the compilation. I may have missed it, but it does not appear in the current codex.

...and frankly, the only thing I've quoted was written for White Dwarf By Graham McNeill to cover the 21st founding. I might point out that, the only canon article that space marines must be male came from the same Index Astartes series. (though by different authors).

And, if my interpretation is no good, and Graham McNeill's is no good, let's hear what Rick Preistly has to say:

"The twenty first founding was the largest sinced the Second Founding... Every surviving chapter of the founding is affected by spontaneous genetic mutation of it's gene-seed... Worse still, some chapters have developed genetic indiosyncracies, mutations which strain the tolerance of the Inquisition and threaten the Chapter's survival. " (Index Astartes, reprinted Codex: Space Marines [current edition])

The only real difference is McNeill's not too subtile hints that the 'mutations' might have been engineered. Given that this is 'the largest founding since the Second' it would mean that more then 30 chapters were founded. (Since 30ish are still known from the second, and it's impl;ied that many of the chapters founded at that time did not make it down to the present)

Tell me where I'm making **** up, please!

The only 'theory' I'm suggesting is that one of these chapters may have a mutation allowing them to induct women.

BaronIveagh said:

There's also that little detail of every single marine in every bit of fluff ever has been male...

HappyDaze said:

It won't happen. They aren't going to take a risk like that. Meanwhile they would be undercutting Sisters of Battle who have never been that popular (another reason they would be leary). Oh and yes they are mindful of their fluff. No they don't see it as sacrosanct, but they know certain things could hurt their customer base. I'm pretty sure they know female marines are one such move that could have such an effect.

So I 'll repeat. There are never going to female marines in the canon.

Atheosis said:

Granted. Though I'll point out that most of the Marines in Fluff have been members of the founding Legions. Out of 1,000 'known' chapters, only 244 of them are even named. I would suggest that gives us a very, very small crossection, particularly if the majority of SM chapters are Codex chapters.

Of the 21st founding, only the Lamenters have gotten any significant coverage in fluff.

On your argument against there EVER being female marines: GW doesn't care about existing fans. What they want are NEW fans. See, existing fans have already bought their armies. Unless there's a major codex overhaul, they're probably not going to need to buy a whole bunch of new minis. NEW fans, however, need to buy whole armies. They spend a LOT more money. And if some advertising guru decides that there might be a market in female space marines, GW will try and exploit it.

Also: Huh, Welcome to page 28 of this thread, btw. and they said it couldn't, shouldn't, wouldn't be done.

I find the idea of the 21st Founding creating a Chapter with a mutated gene-seed that only takes in female aspirants to be more plausible than the other oddities that have been ascribed to Chapters stemming from that Founding (Ghost Rider-styled flaming Marines, really?).

And Human Torch style flaming Marines, really. Though that was a bit much for the Inquisition and they were purged.

Artemesia said:

Seconded... -___-;

BaronIveagh said:

Imperial Armour 9: The Badab War Part 1, contains background for both the Lamenters and the Fire Hawks, while Imperial Armour 10: The Badab War Part 2, will contain information on the Minotaurs - both in addition to a variety of chapters of other foundings (the full list for IA9 is Astral Claws/Tyrant's Legion, Fire Hawks, Marines Errant, Novamarines, Red Scorpions, Fire Angels, Howling Griffons, Raptors and Lamenters; IA10 will add the Salamanders, Minotaurs, Sons of Medusa, Exorcists, Carcharodons (the new name for the Space Sharks, reportedly), Star Phantoms, Mantis Warriors and Executioners)

And not a single female Space Marine to be seen amongst any of them.

BaronIveagh said:

I don't think anyone ever claimed that it wouldn't or couldn't happen, but many things have taken place that never should have occurred.

BaronIveagh said:

Actually thats about as far away from the truth as things can be, read up on product advocacy. Turning fans into advocates is one of the "buzz" words in advertising currently, but thats another story.

The reason why your FLGS doesn't stock GW FSM's is that there is a story and a lore established, it has its own (twisted) logic and reality to it. In this logic wether or not its real world scientifically correct there are no female marines, its part of what makes the world grim and dark, that there is oppression and that the astartes the ultimate tool of oppression is of course male and mostly also white who's primary ability is to hate something so much that they just want to kill all of it foul xenos that they are.

Now I think that we have established that the "no fsm" camp and the "yay fsm" camp can't get to common ground here, the arguments of the yfsm are just too flimsy and unelegant for us canon guys, it doesn't fly and on the other hand the yfsm's just want it or all the toys go out the pram.

I'v stated this before, isn't it (because it takes a little more work and thinking) more interesting to come up with good solid believable alternatives to the FSM instead of this?

But hey thats just me I like my settings to have at least some internal logic and yes i know that all RPG's are sandbox's, but at some point you do reach the edge of the sandbox and beyond that is the rest of the garden and if you go there then your not playing in the sandbox anymore.

Two options for Female Space Marines.

Allow them and accept you are going against canon and fluff.

Dont allow them an risk annoying players who want to play female space marines.

So why are we on page 28?

Which happens to be the page in the new Deathwatch RPG (have you heard about that) that states that Space Marines must be male.

Next topic.

UncleArkie said:

For your first point, I'll note that (at this point in the line), the writers have not done the "little more work and thinking" to give us mechanics for alternate female characters. FSMs are likely to be the favored option because they are the only option mechanically supported by the Deathwatch game since allowing females to use the SM rules doesn't involve a single change to the crunch of the game.

As to the second point, the arguments that it "should be possible" to tweak geneseeds to work on females is logical. You may not like it, but it is logical. Considering that in the world of WH40K it's possible to gain the Traits of xenos through technology (see Ascension), I don't think that arguing that Imperial genetics are totally incapable of adjusting for gender differences is logical.

BaronIveagh said:

Deathwatch Core Rulebook is pretty explicit in saying there are no female marines.

HappyDaze said:

Well the rulebook also states that there are no female marines, whachya gonna do about it, your breaking the rules

So now that you have had your silly semantic moment are you actually going to contribute or just sit there and feel like you made a point while taking up space that could have been used to take the debate in a constructive direction?

Also Peacekeeper_b we are on page 28 cus thats the one that states that there are no fsm's

**** you double post

What i would really like to know is:

How did FFG solve the Problem?? On Page 396 Deatwatch Corebook you will find following Playtesters:

Sarah Cawkell

Rebecca Williams

Chenoa Crabb (which is hoepfully a femal Name...)

I would like to know which kind of character these three Female Playtesters played !

FFG ! TELL US! SOLVE THE RIDDLE NOW!!!!!!!

Under this condition there must be a moment in the development of Deathwatch, where it was clear to the developers that there will be the big "FSM-Problem". They must have thought about it at least because there is a BIG Market of female Rpg-Players out there. But maybe they couldnt solve it and so they didnt write a Word about it in the Corebook.

For me it is especially hard, because over 50% of my players are female. So im sitting here now with Deathwatch, feel the Fluff of the Space Marine everytime i read it, but canot play it until i find a solution how a female character fit in a dethwatch kill team and uses the same rules for team and solo mode and so on...

So i hate it, becaus i love the fluff, but a female chapter would be the easiest solution: You just have to change the story a little bit... i mean , in the name of the emperor, there must be a Magos out there or a Apothecarius who has try it! Nearly 50% of the Popolation on a space marine home world are female, so it would increase the possibiltys for any recruitment. Genetic and drug enhanced Women would be strong as any other male SM! (Even today you can do it... just need some steroids...). And at last: FSM would look a little bit different, but they would follow the same Codex as any Space Marine. Its nit importent if you are a FSM or a MSM... when suit up for War und put on their power armor they are all the same:

Space Marines!

I think there could be really nice roleplaying in which the players characters not only have to leave their Chapterbehavior behind to build a functionally kill team, but also leave their gender behind and all the prejudice that cames along with it!! Man and Women, leaving behind all prejudices and fight side to side in the name of the Emperor! I like that...

Live is really hard.. isnt it?

Kallador said:

You'll also notice in Final Sanction, in my playtest group, the names Keri Harthoorn (my fiancee) and Julia Smith (one of my best friends who is married to one of my other best friends), and the way to solve the riddle easily is thus:

Have a roleplay group that is mature enough to not care about what gender character they are playing, and allows cross-gender roleplay.

It's really that simple.

Peacekeeper_b said:

If you don't want a thread to continue ... try not posting on it. It may not cause the thread to end, but it certainly wouldn't fuel it any further.

BaronIveagh said:

I don't care if you or anyone has female Space Marines. I do care when you attempt to say that it's possible within the existing fluff (it isn't) and that it fits perfectly with the 40K universe (it doesn't).

BYE

BaronIveagh said:

-OR-

2. There are no female Marines because the fluff says that there aren't any.

*slash*

BYE

MILLANDSON said:

Just wondering : did the gender question ever came up in game ? when playing space marines ?

I can see gender coming up when playing an imperial guard, an assassin, an inquisitor, a rogue trader, .....
But not much when playing a space marine.

H.B.M.C. said:

But "everything you've been told is a lie"