Peacekeeper_b said:

This, exactly.

In fact, why do we keep having to field these same arguments ... again, and again, and again!!!

If you want female Space Marines, then House Rule them in. If you don't ... then don't allow them.

Whatever your argument ... it has been expressed, repeatedly. Let ... It ... Go.

Everyone by now knows your stand.

Suck It Up, and Drive On! already!!!

Sister Cat said:

FAQ.

Alex

FAQ it. If it has become this bad where the rant repeats itself over and over, its not helping. Most of the comments thus far have failed to prove points on either side, except establish sides.

Canon says females cannot become Space Marines. Canon says the 2nd and 11th Legions suffered some horrible travesty (Horus Heresy books). DW rulebook states sometimes there are Marines who arrive, with heraldry removed and are admitted, no questions asked. Some serve entire career as Deathwatch. A lot can be read into all these. Just house rule it, FAQ it, do what you want. If you work for GW or FFG then make it canon or clearly define it cannot be canon.

Just to be perfectly clear I meant "players" as group (all of us) and added a "GM too btw" in brackets for good measure in my post. It is obviously a collaborative experience and my enjoyment as GM is as important as any of the players. Adding a Hogwarts' wizard to my warhammer 40k would definitely sour my enjoyment and I would therefore not allow it - player's fun be damned. No question.

GMs have different criteria on what is acceptable in their game:

• does it fit the themes of my campaign? serious, humorous, scary...
• does it fit my storyline?
• will it unbalance the party or put them all at a disadvantage?
• is it too powerful? is it too weak?
• does it have potential to add deeper roleplaying?
• is it fun for the group?
• is it fun for me the GM?
• is it Canon, and if not - will it strain the setting's integrity beyond "suspension of disbelief"?
• can the player pull it off?

...and probably a whole bunch more besides. It's certainly not just about "is it Canon?" or "Is it fun?" All of these are as important (if not more so) than what is Canon. If we focus only on the Canon, you're going to get a continuum of people who don't care, who care very deeply and those who just don't know and will make their decision on different criteria.

That said, I'd go so far as to assume that no GM here would allow a Hogwarts' wizard (with goblin sidekick) in their warhammer 40k, regardless of where they are on the continuum, because that's really obviously wrong and will effect the entire group's (gm's too) enjoyment. In contrast, in my opinion, playing a female space marine, in a world where there are already female warriors of pseudo religious orders in power armour that are awesomely powerful, isn't as much of a stretch as Harry & Hermione with a Bolter. And because of that, it doesn't place a strain on the setting's integrity. It's fluff.

And yet for others, it just cannot happen at their table. Will never happen. You have to respect both sides, I do.

torquemadaza said:

It's all much less complicated though. You got with an interpretation that you like and hope your players will like it too. My friends fortunately are not lieratlists and will play in about any setting that the GM creates. Same with me as a player.

Alex

thread and serial killing clone threadds need to die already.

As a poster states above, the players buy into the game setting as it is presented. In this case male Adeptus Astartes. House rule it all you want, but it comes down to keeping the setting true, whilst enjoying the game.

Next people will want orc SMs because someone tested them out and they are bigger and better etc. There are many ways to incorporate female characters without butchering the setting, and I am sticking with my munchkin argument as to whay people want female space marines.

torquemadaza said:

Actually, I think the Hogwart's Wizard is more Warhammer Fantasy than Female Space Marines are 40K.

Its true that there exist female religious warriors who are bad ass in power armour wielding bolters, but they are not space marines (different stats, different minds, different orders). But in fantasy there are wizard schools (a la Hoqwart's), there are goblin sidekicks (familiars could be seen as goblinoid at times, depends on who views them, how they are used and so forth), there are young apprentice wizards and with good stat rolling, lucky skill and talent picks you could build "the chosen one" character and not risk ruining the setting at all.

But establishing a whole new order of space marines and altering a basic stricture of 40K (space marines are boys).

And, if you already have power armour wearing female religious warriors with super powers, why do you need another set. Maybe Battle Sisters will be a career added in another book later for Deathwatch (like the way Sisters were in DH).

I imagine altering the history for female space marines (for your female players of course) is fully within your remit as a GM. I would advise against standing on a soap box, preaching with all the gusto of a fire and brimstone preacher that everyone who doesnt subscribe to your way of thinking is an "idiot". If I had a female player, that wanted a female space marine, I would simply use it as a roleplaying tool for future missions or continued plots. I dont mind accomidating players small things like that, hell FFG established the Black Shields (I think thats their name) for space marines wandering in with no questions asked.

I would however, stand against a male player being a female space marine. A male will already have issues playing a normal female character (not having a female mindset and all), they will have more problems roleplaying such an oddity. My two cents.

Took me a while to go through my old links folder but here you go....

The Tigers of Kali

I have a simple rule, no female SM's until GW learns how to sculpt the female body. I do not need a repeat of Sisters of Sigmar thank you very much.

Fizzywig said:

Amen to that. Maybe we can get Hasselfree to make something?

BaronIveagh said:

I would be more impressed if you could get Hasselhoff—"The Hoff"—to do them. I'm sure he would be up for a new career option.

Kage

Kage2020 said:

plus,thanks to baywatch, we know that the hoff has spent more time studying the female body than the entire GW staff.

Fizzywig said:

And that's a sad, sad truth, since GW's artists should have taken at least one anatomy class....

The main problem I see with female space marines is that is conflicts with one of the few things commonly accepted as canon. In a setting that very much leaves itself up to interpretation, conflicting with it or several other similar ideas risks dissolving what little coherency remains. You can create your own worlds, sectors, chapters, regiments, hell you could have a whole group of all female warriors exactly like marines but you can't make female space marines. Why people complain about rigidness in setting that allows so much and bars very little is beyond. In fact I would that people who can't come up with a way to have female warriors with space marine like abilities have only themselves to blame. It's already been suggested that you could use Inquisitors, their servants, SoBs, and even mutant mercenaries to get a female with abilities similar to Space Marines. I fear though people will still complain. Then again, this complaint has existed as long as Space Marines have.

Also, for people who wonder how you could attach a SoB to an Ordos Xenos team, you could use an obscure oath such as the Oath of Oblatia. This just means the SoB has sworn to redeem something or die trying. Those who take up that oath travel alone and relatively independent of the rest of the Sisterhood. Thus you could have the Sister be attached to Deathwatch whenever she wants because it's up to her on to pursue the oath.

LordMunchkin said:

If the rigidness is not in the setting, one might consider where else it might lie?

Kage

Kage2020 said:

Sorry if I wasn't clear. What I meant to say was that WH40k allows for some many possibilities just because of the scale of setting. It's not like others where every bit of the world or at least a large portion of it is mapped out. Instead most of the 40k is unmapped/unimagined, left only to imagination of the reader. Thus when people complain about rigidity of the canon it irks as they ignore the amount of freedom 40k offers.

It's like I said earlier, there's nothing in the fluff that says you can't have a female with abilities equal or greater than a space marine. There are even multiple avenues already established. The fact that people choose to ignore this and say that if they can't be a female marine they won't play strikes me as being obstinate just for sake of being so. That's my opinion though so take it for what it's worth(very little).

good point but:

in warhammer 40'000 there are no chapter of women. there are instead the sister of battle......

use those....

cheers

This reminds me of the debates I used to have when playing a Star Wars RPG (before movies I-III).

Q: Can I play a Rebel Storm Trooper?
A: No you can not. Storm Troopers are all fanatically loyal clones, and would never be a Rebel.

. . . later we find out that Storm Troopers can indeed have personalities, and go rogue.

Q: My Jedi likes to play around with merchant stuff as a game. Is that a cool concept?
A: Jedi are all like Luke and Obi-Won. All Jedi only care about the stuff that Luke and Obi-Won care about.

. . . later we find out that Jedi can indeed have personalities, and some disagree with Luke and Obi-Won (further, this is normal).

No you can not play X, because we have not seen X yet. Is stupid.

I am sure I can see a situation where a Sister of Battle does something remarkable, is granted a boon, and she uses the boon to get chitin, and armor. The deed is so cool that the Space Marine chapter is honor bound to comply.

Q: What is the goal of the Emperor and his empire?
A: To protect humanity!

Q: Can women protect humanity?
A: Yes! We have Inquisitors and Sisters of Battle!

Q: Would the Emperor care if women enter battle?
A: No! Inquisitors and Sisters of Battle do it all the time!

Q: Would the Emperor care if women wore power armor?
A: No! They can wear power armor.

Q: Would the Emperor care if women wore the best power armor?
A: I do not see why he would. The Emperor's goal is to protect humanity!

darkrose50 said:

Pretty much the mindset I have when I GM our games, and my group is exactly like that. I've taken to just telling them "Look, we could spend 40 minutes arguing over whether or not it COULD exist or you could shut up and keep playing."

I am part of the controversial group that will tamper with the setting if it makes the game/story more interesting though, so take what I say with a grain of salt. Also please don't hurt me.

darkrose50 said:

You're touching on a very good point there - honorary membership.

Alex

This still going on...

The difference is unlike the analogy, this isn't a matter of choice; their is no character driven decision to be a male or female space marine. It is genetic, it is fixed, and immutable that to physically become a marine you must be male.

There are plenty of ways to have female characters, sisters of battle isn't a good one. To include them as a character amongst a Deathwatch squad goes against the nature of the organization that SoB and DW are each members of. They would sooner kill each other than assist each other. There is inherent distrust and motivation to act supercede the other. If someone wants a female character who is extra religious and a zealot clad in power armor go ahead, but don't make them a marine or a sister of battle. Its contrary to the setting.

There is no precedent for honorary membership into a chapter and even if there were no chapter would send such a person since the members of a chapter sent are part of a tithe the chapters commit to in exchange for materiel support from the mechanicum. Marine chapters have retainers, she could be such a person accompanying a marine but she wouldn't be a marine.

In the end, I don't think it should even matter. I don't think that marines would care. I don't think in the hypothetical of their being female marine, they'd act any different.

A gender check box shouldn't come up in a game. It shouldn't alter game play. It does nothing. So why does it matter?

aka_mythos said:

Just a quick reminder: we're not talking reality here but a fictional setting.

aka_mythos said:

She would be whatever the GM says she is.

aka_mythos said:

Ask a girl who wants to play a female marine. :-)

Alex

darkrose50 said:

Q: Are you familiar with the setting or the internal logic that precludes female marines or honorary Chapter members?

A: Apparently not.