bogi_khaosa said:

Sure Himmler put on a martyr-like face for the world. But there is no denying that the nazi regime catered to a psychopathic behaviour if you were an aryan doctor or military-employed person. Sure some people detested doing what they were doing, but with people being people some of the scumbags probably enjoyed what they did. (no, I generally dont have the best outlook on mankind, but at least it doesn't fill my head with illusions that people are enerally nice and friendly folk)

bogi_khaosa said:

Hehe, if you think thats f****d in the head. Do yourself a favour and stay away from the dark RPGs produced here in Sweden (like the notorious "Kult" or the newly made "Noir"). Both of which are great RPGs, but definetly not for the squeamish of heart.

I remember when we played the latter one where I played a psychothic hitman suffering from a few sexual neuroses. Now he was REALLY f****d in the head... And I loved it! In fact when we played that particular RPG we had probably the deepest immersion experience ever.

And where other RPGs takes PCs "out of play" when they have accumulated to many insanity points or corruption points, Kult BEGINS at that point! >

However i must point out: when we create disturbing characters and commit equally disturbing acts when playing its always meant for the good of the story. I get the feeling that some unhinged players go mental "just for the heck of it" (sort of the same behaviour when you beat up a corpse in an FPS, and hack of its limbs or something). I certainly do not condone such behaviour in RPGs. Not because im squeamish, or think it is "too dark" or anything, but simply because the violence gets a little watered down if sufficient amounts intrude on the playing. It doesn't contribute to an interesting story (it could just ruin it) and thats when i usually tighten the leash on the players. But still i am generally positively inclined to disturbing events in RPGs, for the same reasons authors write books about disturbing psychopathic killers. But that doesn't mean that we are f****d in the head. ; P

Sure your sadists existed in the SS. Now rapists while they existed they were rather generally summery executed if they were found out, especially if they raped an undeserable. Forgive this in advance, but to the Nazi's ****** a Jew or a Gypsy or what-have-you was akin to ****** an animal, if not worse. There was no chance of inpregnating a dog or goat, but a Jew could actually become pregnant with a child, and then you have just destroyed the purity of the human race. Did it happen sure, but if you got caught (and didn't have the friends to get you out of trouble) you were shot.

****** has over the years been an (semi-effective) way to quell a population, especially if there is a taboo connected to having sex while unmarried. You don't have to kill that 13 year old girl, just **** her, and no one will ever touch her again. Happens in Africa all the time. So I'd be surprised if it didn't happen in Warhammer 40k from time to time.

Still I just don't see it being seen as acceptable in most circles even in the military. Basically if you're fighting something in 40k, its either a rebellion or not human. In the rebellions case there is many more effecient ways to subdue a community, and **** would just anger them more then subdue them. Killing every third person, man, woman, and child would be much more efficent and have the added bonus of possibly reducing the number of people who can come back to haunt you later.

If they're not human, we fall back onto the Nazi view of having sex with an undesirable. Associating with a mutant or a heretic or a psyker is bad enough, and is worthly of getting shot over, but having sex with one would be worse, especially since you run the risk of possibly allowing them to give birth to another child who is a mutant or psyker. And ****** an Alien would be unheard of I would assume. You'd just be shot on the spot, just simply for consorting with such filth.

Well this has taken a yet more disturbing turn... alright.

First off, there was never any mention or intimation of **** being used by the Imperium as a means to quell a population, add to that the fact that the Astartes are all chem-gelds (until the events of the Fulgrim book with the Emperor's Children, when a specific mention of that feature leaving them was mentioned) and I really want to know what you were smoking when you read HH, Maxim.

Can we take the Nazi/Hitler portion of this conversation out please? The party line was that torture was unfortunate but required, though the reality was that a great many of the people involved got off on it. **** was never any more acceptable to them than it was elsewhere. If you really believe something different from these statements are true, then let's hear it, otherwise can we drop the Nazi thing? Taking everything back to Hitler just obscures the real discussion.

The original discussion was "where is the line between acceptable and seriously messed up?". Or more accurately "where does insanity end and corruption begin?"

**** is never going to be justifiable as being for "the greater good of the Imperium" without already being so insane that you could justify building a moose-cannon to destroy the eye of terror from the backseat of a chimera on Fenksworld. At that point it doesn't matter what you think or believe, you're way too crazy for it to be relevant to the consideration of the population at large. So let's leave **** as an addition to the title for the sake of hyperbole, and focus on torture.

Torture should, generally, result in at least a small amount of insanity for a sane person that performs it, and only a small amount when they feel they have no choice and do the absolute minimum they have to with reluctance. In this case, the subject is disturbed by the actions they were forced to take, but preserved in the knowledge that they did so because they had no choice, and their actions do not threaten to redefine how they percieve their own character (character as in the quality of person, not the person in a PC/NPC sense). I say generally, because there is always an exception to almost any rule, and weird things happen.

Once a person has done something enough, especially in the context of an accepting society and for reasons that are consistent, the effects on the subject are greatly diminished, and no further damage will be incurred from repeated events. So once the torturer has tortured a few enemies of the Imperium, they'll have picked up a handful of crazy points, leaving them a little out of touch with reality but fully-functional, and able to keep torturing the heretics when needed without going completely insane... most of the time anyway (some people just never learn to cope). So I'd say that you should consider how crazy someone already is before you hand out the crazy for an atrocity, especially if the atrocity is sanctioned, justified, and has been commited by the same person before.

As for corruption, we can all agree that physical forces of corruption are pretty consistent (warp exposure, etc). So let's just discuss what psychological or metaphysical situations can result in incurring corruption points. Obviously any sort of exchange with a daemon or similar warp entity, especially non-hostile exchanges, are very likely to result in corruption. If one is whispering suggestions that you follow, you probably picked up some corruption, even if the whisper was as otherwise benign as "Ice cream.... you must have some ice cream NOW!", simply because not confronting and questioning even the most pointless of demonic actions is a form of surrender.

So what, if any, actions that don't directly contact or court the forces of the warp can result in corruption? My opinion, as I've stated, is that it's about motivations, not the activity itself. Murder for the sake of killing might result in corruption, but killing someone because it's just easier that dealing with the problem they present would only result in insanity at the very worst. If the motivations for the act are in line with a chaos power's "principals", then there would be a chance (in my game) of resonating with those powers and becoming somewhat corrupted.

Aureus said:

"never" is a very powerful word that doesn't leave much leaway for extreme situations. Lets say that the Acolytes are searching for a wanted slaanesh cultist. Being a dashing and charming bastard (either naturally or due to supernatural gifts from his patron god) he have managed to make a pretty noblewoman fall for him, and the Acolytes only lead to him is through her. However the girl is in love with him and she is a bit arrogant to boot, and simply refuses so give the slaanesh cultists location to the acolytes. Remember also that the acolytes have forgotten their excrutiator kit at home, and they are pressed for time because they suspect that the slaanesh cult i about to summon a very nasty daemon that will wreak havoc upon the local population (numbering in the hundreds of thousands).

Quite simply, we got a desperate group of acolytes (and what the hell, lets say that one of them is a particularly unscrupulus Scum), and an obstinate woman who knows the location of a dangerous heretic. Although a very disturbing and horrible idea to consider, **** (or the threat of ****) might serve as an effective method for the acolytes to extract the information they require.

And no, this is not my own twisted and disturbed train of thought. In fact i saw a similar scenario on a television-series called "The Shield" (that actually is about corrupt and unscrupulus cops).

Now combine this scenario with the general train of thought that the Inquisition and several other Imperial institutions have (a very medival one that dont shy away from torture and similar atrocities), and suddenly **** dont seem so "far out" a concept any longer. However i can understand that far from all gamemasters like the idea of handling the topic in their games...

Varnias Tybalt said:

Problem is **** is a terror weapon, but in 40k you should have better methods of intimidation then **** anyway, concidering you're all alcolytes to the Inquisition. Also, while said woman may or many not have access to the information, **** is a very physical style of terror that actually forces you to consort with your target. If said target is a heretic or a chaos worshipper or a mutant, then you'e just consorted with said creature.

Considering the lack of love for the above named, the less "contact" you have with them the better the Inquisition likes it. And if she's just some poor shlup who has information who doesn't want to give it to you because she doesn't like the look of you, ****** her probably isn't going to be the best way to pry it out of her lips.

And I'm pretty open to all kinds of things in 40k. Generally if something bad needs to be thought of creatively, everyone looks my way. I can just see more complications coming from said ****, including the rapist being burned as a heretic for consorting with undesirables, then through better and more proven torture methods.

Xathess Wolfe said:

Hehe!

Inquisitorial Generals Warning: Practice SAFE TORTURE! Heretics are foul and dirty things and they most certainly carry several nasty diseases. So remember to use the rubber...(gloves) and lots of lubrication (least your excruciator kit might suffer from corrosion). Also remember to wear ear-plugs since heretics can howl in pain very loudly when "interrogated", and an acolyte with hearing damage is a useless acolyte! So be smart, have fun and practice SAFE TORTURE!

Im sorry, just trying to lighten the mood a little. XD

Aureus said:

Did it say this in an obscure novel somewhere? In over fifteen years of 40k I've only ever seen this "fact" presented by people on forums. I know this is kind of off topic, but to see this repeated over and over again w/ no basis/source provided just irritates me.

DocIII said:

I think its sort of mentioned somwhere in Horus Heresy. Something about Astartes having their synapses rewired surgically so they feel emotions of joy when in battle (in order to make them as fearless as possible). And this was something that Emperors Children Apothecary Fabius Bile experimented with, re-wiring their Legions brains so they felt pleasure when injured, instead of pain. Or somehting like that : /

Varnias Tybalt said:

This is stated about the traitor marine (Emperor's Children) in the novel Farseer , but I had gotten the impression it was something sort of specific to him and/or the Emperor's Children. It didn't state explicitly one way or the other.

This is from a long time ago so it may not be the case anymore. I was told by the fanboys at my local GW shop when I was there that space marines with the exception of a few specific chapters were castrated. So from that I'd extrapolate that chem geld would be appropriate. Now I just need to go and dig up where they got their information.

And I think in the Horus Heresy saga they've got going right now there was something about the Marines being altered to the point where fear was a foreign emotion to them that they vaguely remember from before they became Space Marines.

Space marines are warrior monks, so im presuming they have chastity as a high ideal, even if its not chemical or otherwise induced in them. Most live only for battle, and that is all they are designed to do. There is very little romance in the 40k universe! Especially not for space marines.

The Emperors Children are a definate exception. If they were unable to engage in sexual acts, quite a sizable amount of slaanesh worship would be off the cards, even by the very censored versions that are released as to what slaanesh worshippers get up to. As an avid collector of Emperors children, and reader of much of the older background as well, I am 99% sure that they engage in sexual activity.

**** would be definately something they would engage in, although its mostly hinted at these days.

Zarkhovian_Rhythm said:

Exactly my point. Everywhere I have ever seen this "space marines are castrated" (chemically or otherwise) stuff has always been from fanboys who decided that was the case without being able to cite the source.

Citing BL novels is better, but certainly not absolute as they regularly contradict each other and lack continuity of canon.

Also I don't see where being altered so as not to feel fear is even relevant to capacity for sexual acts, violent or otherwise.

I don't really care one way or the other. The thing that irritates me is people quoting as absolutes something with zero basis except for how they once heard it was/want it to be.

That and folks using such unsupported rationale to try to force those players who'd like to experiment w/ playing marines into portraying castratos.

I'd find it just as aggravating if someone were to swear that "space marines are so incredibly virile that its impossible to chem geld them!"

Castrated implies a bunch of wierd innaccuracies. They are all, by virtue of the gene-seed and implant treatments, chem-gelds. They are chemically rendered incapable and uninterested in sex, nothing is cut-off or removed as far as any description is concerned (and it is implied in a couple HH books that the physical parts are present). This is confirmed in the Fulgrim novel, and heavily implied in the first two Horus Heresy novels, Horus Rising and False Gods.

DocIII said:

Kind of off topic, but what then would you concider canon? Hell the rules of 40k regularly contradict each other and lack continuity, why shouldn't the books? One thing about GW that's always comes into play is that with all the constant revisions, changes, updates, and books nothing is ever absolute anywhere... except that the Emperor is God.

And not to say anything, but no where does it say that the Space Marines practice sex and **** either. But it does say, in a GW approved book, that they are chem-gelds. So I'm more inclined to believe that in the lack of any other canon, that the books are correct on this one.

Chemical castration removes nothing it just reduces the libido. God-Emperor bless the internet for that bit of info.

Aureus said:

Another aspect to consider is the fact that women cant be transformed into space marines. It has something to do with the gene seed needing high amounts of testosterone in order to merge with the host body. And where does testosterone primarily secrete in male bodies?

Castrating them would in that perspective make no sense at all. If I have understood the transforming process (along with chem-geld treatments and the like) the biologis simply negates the possibility of space marines giving outlet for their testosterone induced behaviour in sexual acts. Rather they use the high levels of testosterone to promote aggressiveness and a will to fight. Space marines are noted for feeling joy when they engage in combat, so an interpretation is that in a psychological sense, warfare is like sex for space marines (that being taken to an extremel level with the Emperors Children when the legion was corrupted by Fabius Bile's experiments and Slaaneshi mutations alike).

Not to mention the fact that every space marine ever described in litterature have always had an almost inhumanly deep voice (most likely a side-effect for their extreme testosterone levels during the transforming process). Space Marine voice = castrato? I dont think so...

From the creation of a space marine article, it is clear that marines are under constant chemical treatment. This is for many things, amongst them immunosuppression to prevent rejection of their organs.

The text says that the marine organs only work in association with male TISSUES. This does not require testosterone, but the presence of a Y chromosome and any proteins produced from it within the cells (testosterone not being native to tissues in general).

My OPINION is that marines are not only castrated but have undergone a complete penilectomy. Their testosterone levels are thus monitored through the drug and chem therapies. This dehumanises them more and reinforces the living weapon mentality that went into making them. It's an ancilliary organ that is unnecessary and provides an area of vulnerability.

Also, it makes the marine fanbois squirm when they think that their superhero idols have no mandangles. It's much harder to aspire to be a marine if it also requires the loss of very symbolically important male components. But that's an ancilliary reason as to why my OPINION is that. The main one is above.

As I said, it's my opinion and thus not required to conform to the background.

On another note, following a similar premise my opinion is that Adepta Sororitas have all had hysterectomies. Their devotion to the emperor comes before their devotion to themselves.

It's funny the kind of reaction the above gets from people. You'd think in a world where death cults sanctioned by the government eat the dead and siphon off their blood, where human bodies are reprocessed into food for the next generation, where adepts become more machine than man replacing more and more organs with mechanical equivalents, where lobotomised servitors exist, where flesh molding exists in general, that ritualised castration, penilectomy, and hysterectomy (ever wonder where the root word for Hysteria came from?) would be mundane. Yet people squirm mightily when it is suggested. c'iest la vie.

hellebore

It's kind of like in Cannibal: The Musical. The surviving characters are discussing the possibility that they may have to eat their fallen comrade to survive, and Humphries is all for it, leading to the following exchange:

"What do you mean? You want to eat him? You wouldn't even eat your shoes!"

To which Humphries replies,"Yeah, but you put your feet in shoes."

Hellebore said:

Now this is what I prefer. Someone who states their position on something as a position with reasoning and support for why that is their preference. But not trying to shove their preference as absolute gospel down the throats of others.

Xathess Wolfe said:

As I see it it's kind of like legal precedents. Some things are controlling precedent (prior decisions of a higher court for example). Other are merely supporting but not controlling (decisions of a parallel court or lower court).

When it comes to accepting BL and all those prettly little novels with the GW stamp on the cover as canonical, the problem comes in deciding which ones to accept and which ones not. Technically they all are novels approved by GW. On that basis you have to accept all, accept none, or somehow pick and choose. What criteria then should be used to distinguish between the canonical value of one novel or another?

The novels vary wildly on everything from the power level of space marines and daemons to whether lasguns make a sound to how physics functions in space. Also the origins and make up of the inquisition, the nature of chaos and/or the emperor and so on. Even little stupid details like can a guy run around carrying and firing a multi-laser from the hip? (never read the source for this myself just hear it often cited as one of the dumbest things to pop in 40k literature)

The official GW position "everything is canon, nothing is true" leaves us with no solid basis for making these distinctions. As a result; particularly when combined with the fact that it appears that many of the BL authors do not consult one another, read one another's work or make any attempt to govern what they include by anything other "oh, I think that would be cool for my story"; the novels are at best supporting precedent whose actual probative value must be decided by each reader/player/gaming group.

For Dark Heresy, offical DH game sourcebooks are the strongest canon available. After that 40K game supplements (but even these regularly contradict/retcon/swap stuff around at the drop of a hat). The game supplements are at least done with the oversight of the main 40k design staff. Finally you have BL novels, weak argument for controlling canon as each represents merely one author's view of the setting, with apparently little central oversight/cohesiveness. To be honest, based on the wild variations in quality from excellent to toliet paper substitute, it seems like BL will publish just about anything that reaches the required word count.

Basically its the Star Wars Expanded Universe problem with even less oversight. George Lucas may have lost all creative talent in the years between the first trilogy and the recent steaming pile, but he has come out and stated: only the films are canon. Good/bad or downright nuts, at least thats clear.

In 40k we have no such clear statement and must navigate the murk and mess as best we can. To some extent that's a good thing as it allows players to pick and choose their own 40k universe. On the other hand it can be frustrating when people clash on what is true and canon and what is not. (And in some cases both sides can be equally correct.)

Sorry for the off topic rant. This thread may now return to the scheduled program already in progress.

That would really be funny! But doesn't a high-pitched voice come along with castration? I can't imagine anyone listening to a highly effeminate sounding man as he asks you to drop your weapons or die. Even if he is pointing a bolter at you and is 3 times your size. That kind of takes a bit of the authority away if you sound like Mickey Mouse. Most enemies would die of laughter before comlpying to the Marines demands. I suppose they could go with a voice modulator to change that, but who knows.

From what I've ready of the Adeptas Sororitas, they are chaste, but it's mainly through teachings of the Ecclesiarchy. My understanding is the Adeptas Sororitas do not go through surgical modification like marines. Their training starts as a youngster and is ingrained in them as they grow up.

High pitched voices only come with castration if done before puberty, which prevents the castrati's voice from changing from the boyish high pitch. Back in the day numerous choirs did this to select boys so they could sing as castrati for their entire lives.

DocIII said:

20 years here, and I've never seen any where it said they were chem-gelded. HOWEVER, it did say in the Horus Heresy that Astartes used **** as a means of quelling civilian populations. So they are capable of sex (which you wouldn't be if chem-gelded) and under certain circumstances feel lust.

Astartes are chemo-psyko conditioned, but that's not the same as chem gelded.

Aureus said:

Uninterested? Sure. I'll agree. 100%

Incapable? No . Incapable of reproduction ...yes. Certainly.

It was explicitly stated in the Horus Heresy novels (as I mentioned before) that Space Marines use **** as a weapon.

Being STERILE is not the same as being incapable. I, have been "snipped", yet I still get it on at least once a month, as required by my marriage contract.

FACT: Eunuchs, while lacking desire, can get it up. They just can't get it off. It's in the Bible even.

Crimsonsphinx said: