|
Post by Philip on Oct 5, 2004 21:20:16 GMT -5
The ideas I put forward are my way of describing how I see Marines/ Power Armour functioning, and are carefully tailored to fit in with the background of 40K. The Power Armour I described conforms to how it is in 40K and marines I described are the same shape and size as in 40K.
Though you ideas on Power Armour have merit, and similar concepts have been used in other sci-fi settings; they do mesh with the background or character of 40K.
As for the size and power of Marines: I have looked at the official armour template and designed an anatomically workable body that will actually fit into that armour and yet retain a heroic character. Taking that 'body' and comparing it to various animals, I would say it weighs in excess of 600lbs and 7' (guestimate).
Looking at skeleton design, the Marine's arms would be shorter than a gorillas, but the Marine's shoulders and chest area are about two and a half times wider and twice as deep as a gorilla's. The Marines scapula are exceptionally broad and his rib cage is almost spherical, which would make it very strong. Looking at the leverage points/ thickness of the muscles, the marine is well designed as a wrestler.
Taking this marine body shape and matching it to a gorilla, and considering their respective strong points, I would say that a marine would stand a good chance on purely a physical level in a head to head fist fight.
However if the marine used martial arts (especially intercepting types), or even basic Cumberland wrestling techniques he would win. Given the assumption that marines are highly trained combat exponents, and gorillas do not have the option of learning a martial art (or even understanding the concept) a marine would win against a gorilla in 40K.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Oct 6, 2004 6:09:27 GMT -5
For some reason I'm getting the same feeling that I did from Treva on Portent... You seem to think that I'm arguing for something other the other... The ideas I put forward are my way of describing how I see Marines/ Power Armour functioning, and are carefully tailored to fit in with the background of 40K. <grin> Just not the 'fluff'... you are forever going to be doomed from your conceptualisation of eldar with the same BMI as humans, just with 'backward' legs! (If you hadn't guessed, I'm taking the michael a bit here... ) The Power Armour I described conforms to how it is in 40K and marines I described are the same shape and size as in 40K. 1,500 lb Marines!? Are you kidding... What you're arguing for isn't necessarily found in the 'fluff' though it can be interpreted from some of the newer 'fluff'... Though you ideas on Power Armour have merit... Can you get any more patronising, I wonder!? I'm not arguing for anything other than the fact that the idea that PA is a 'lever' proportionate to the strength of the individual has no merit. Yes, it's consistent with the 'fluff' from Inquisitor but invalidates the entire purpose of the thing in the first place. ... that will actually fit into that armour and yet retain a heroic character. First off, I would like to see this template. Secondly, you said it all... 'heroic character'. You're already shading and biasing things towards what I would presume is your interpretation of what is 'heroic'. Taking that 'body' and comparing it to various animals, I would say it weighs in excess of 600lbs and 7' (guestimate). I'd still increase the height to make it consistent with the (lying!) artwork but, yes, I see some merit in increasing the 'mass' of the Marine. My own standard version was hopelessly 'optimistic'. I'll go with 450lbs... The Marines scapula are exceptionally broad and his rib cage is almost spherical, which would make it very strong. This is part of the problem in itself... the disproportionate changes to the human musculoskeletal system. Very anime. Looking at the leverage points/ thickness of the muscles, the marine is well designed as a wrestler. I'm not even going to go there! <grin> Taking this marine body shape and matching it to a gorilla, and considering their respective strong points, I would say that a marine would stand a good chance on purely a physical level in a head to head fist fight. Round, round, baby... Erm, I forget the lyrics of that annoyingly catchy song. Thankfully. I'm sorry... you redesign Marine physiology, say that it is consistent with the 'fluff' (which it isn't, or rather may only be consistent with the "new" 'fluff'), then use this new proof to argue your original point, then say that it is consistent with the 'fluff'... ? That and the example of the 'gorilla scrap' is blown out of all proportions when it was more a reference to physical power and not the ability to apply that power. Edit: And, out of interest, "barrel-chesting" to the extent that you work upon, i.e. a near-spherical chest, is not required based upon the description of the Marine 'organs'. Only two organs are of any size: the Multi-lung (Implant 9), which may - just may - require expansion of the pleural cavity (and thorax), and the Oolotic Kidney (Implant 14). This is highly questionable since, ultimately, there's still a bit of space hanging around on the 'inside'. Part of the problem is that you're retro-fitting human physiology to what you see as correct. Medio-lateral broadening of the scapula is a part of that, one that would actually cause some quite significant problems with the operation of muscles originating/inserting onto that bone. Levator scapulae, for example, is going to be way out of whack... same with the rhomboids. Indeed, overall, the shoulder girdle is going to be horrendously weakened unless you've got significant and disportionate expansion of the clavicle... And therein lies the difference. You're retrofitting reality to fit into how you see 40k, while I'm preferring to make reality work with 40k.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Oct 6, 2004 7:17:23 GMT -5
I'm sorry... you redesign Marine physiology, say that it is consistent with the 'fluff' (which it isn't, or rather may only be consistent with the "new" 'fluff'), then use this new proof to argue your original point, then say that it is consistent with the 'fluff'... ? I have designed a marine physiology that will actually fit into Space Marine Power Armour. I thought the Oolitic kidney was implant 13 (WD166), has this been changed since then? Don’t forget the extra heart (Implant 1) and the Preomnor (pre-stomach, 7). Also the Biscpea (14) and Progenoids (17) are in the chest but they are quite small. The whole back is very broad, and the bones are very thick to compensate. There are problems with the design, mainly in the operation of the lats, but as a marine is designed to function with his armour as one (and their was a huge space in the lower back area of the armour once worked out) I figure this weakness is offset by the armour (extra NFBS). As for clavicle, they aren’t needed as people born without them (genetic ‘defect’) function just fine, though they are very flexible! I did put in clavicles, but they’re very curved and thick. As a design note: Marines can not shrug their shoulders while in Power Armour, so the clavicle could be bonded straight onto the rib cage, forming a thick bone ridge. This would be brought about by the Ossmodula organ. Edit: Added Preomnor, Biscpea and Progenoids to list of implants in the chest. A note on may speculation of marines weighing 1500lbs: I figured a marine of around 8’ would weight approximately 700-800lbs (using ‘normal’ muscle and bone densities of an animal of comparable size as ref). As the marines are ‘super human’ and have very dense bones and muscles I doubled this figure, and averaged it to 1500lbs.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Oct 8, 2004 8:08:33 GMT -5
I have designed a marine physiology that will actually fit into Space Marine Power Armour. That will be your problem then. I thought the Oolitic kidney was implant 13 (WD166), has this been changed since then? No, obviously WD166 changed the original article if this is correct information. I never saw WD166 since it was 'after my time'. Don’t forget the extra heart (Implant 1) and the Preomnor (pre-stomach, 7). Also the Biscpea (14) and Progenoids (17) are in the chest but they are quite small. Bugger, did forget the extra heart. <sigh> That chunks it up a big, but not by huge amounts. Preomnor, biscopea and progenoids aren't going to require 'rounding' the axial skeleton. The whole back is very broad, and the bones are very thick to compensate. To be able to function, they're going to have to be very thick. The suggestion here is that the design is incorrect. There are problems with the design, mainly in the operation of the lats, but as a marine is designed to function with his armour as one... Please, please remember the origin of the Marines. Marines were not designed to function with their armour... their armour was designed to function with the Marine. You're getting things arse about face, at least in some regards. As for clavicle, they aren’t needed as people born without them (genetic ‘defect’) function just fine... I'll withhold judgement on this one since it has never occurred in the palaeopathological literature that I'm aware of. Shall have to go to the medical literature. As a design note: Marines can not shrug their shoulders while in Power Armour, so the clavicle could be bonded straight onto the rib cage, forming a thick bone ridge. This would be brought about by the Ossmodula organ. Why? How? Delay of epiphyseal fusion might lengthen the clavicle but there is no real reason for it to 'fuse' to the thorax. While monkeying around with the intramembranous fusion of the ribs may cause expansion of the borders of the ribs, it is unlikely that you're going to get one fused mass. Furthermore, you'd also be monkeying around with the costochondral cartilage, manubrium/body of the sternium, etc. You have one dead Marine that cannot breathe very well... and please remember that breathing with the diaphragm is considered accessory to the normal function of intercostals, levator scapulae, etc. Again, I would suggest that your "working anatomy" is in error. It sounds that you've put a tad more thought into it than I had originally assumed, so my bad on that front. The real question is whether you're working from a poor premise to start off with, and I would suggest so. Getting the Marine to fit into the armour is less appropriate than getting the armour to fit around the Marine. So instead of creating a barrel-chested disporportionate 'mammal' with variations from the human form that create a non-functional and entirely non-human figure (thereby negating 'heroic proportions' concepts), go the other way? Why don't you get a reasonable variation to the musculoskeletal anatomy of a human with expanded thorax volume (but not circular, and also not fused together... Marines still need to breathe) and then work power armour around it? And, once again, also remember that Marine armour was designed around the Marine, not the Marine around the armour. A note on may speculation of marines weighing 1500lbs: I figured a marine of around 8’ would weight approximately 700-800lbs (using ‘normal’ muscle and bone densities of an animal of comparable size as ref). In my mind you are way off. The average gorilla is somewhere in the range of 1.7m (5'7") tall with an average mass of 150kg (331 lb). Assuming a proportionate increase in mass (remember the stated operation of the ossmudula; it should be proportionate increases, not disproportionate increases), then an increase of 36% gives a height that is consistent with an extrapolation of the artwork while also allowing for the 'thickness' of armour both underfoot and above the head, as it were. Call that 40%. Applying that linearly to mass, you get 210 kg or 462lb, close to the above suggested compromise and thankfully nowhere near the radical, and for my ludicrous, 1,500 lbs. The above is based upon the average muscle density of gorillas, obviously. How does that tie into humans? Well, average weight there (males, USA) is 76kg or ~168 lb... So male gorillas are already approximately twice the mass-density of humans with approximately similar heights. Thus, again, the more reasonable 462 (ish) lb figure, or 210 kg, seems more than reasonable as an average weight for Marines including all the extra gubbins. So the one OnT point here is that the 'pilot mass' used in the original calculation of a TL10 PA battlesuit (read: Marine armour) is horrendously inaccurate. This will be rectified... As to the other OffT discussion (which is only kinda OffT)? To reiterate, I would suggest that you're approach your "revisions" of Marine physiology from a fundamentally flawed premise, but one that is in a way a part of the flaws of GW itself. The "Rule of Cool" which gives rise to humans wielding swords that they would barely be able to lift, let alone operate with one hand! Instead of creating an entirely different Marine from the ether, why not take proportionate (and reasonable disproportionate) variations to Marine physiology and then see how that relates to the armour itself...
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Oct 8, 2004 8:25:49 GMT -5
With the above in mind, here's changes to the basic Marine PA template based upon the altered "pilot weight". Please also note that it subscribes to proportionate increases in Marine physiology over that of a human, but also taking into account increased muscle and bone density incorporating 'gorilla' aspects. Not only do I find that appropriate - now that it has been pointed out to me - but amusing when one considers the origins of the 'argubate' in question! Component | Description | Subassemblies | Turret (helmet), two arms, two legs, pod (backpack) | Drivetrain | 10kW motive power (leg drive train; legs) | Battlesuit Systems | Pilot weight 450lbs; pilot occupies body, turret arms and legs. Battlesuit Upgrades: Complexity 4 computer (body), limited lifesystem with 24 hours (pod), trauma maintenance system (body), "four days" provisions (body), NBC kit (body). Socket interface with interface lock. | Sensors | 3-mile PESA (turret, limited movement) | Comm-suite | TL10 basic comm-suite (body) | Power Plant | 11kW Nuclear Power Unit ("Stacked atomic chain") in Pod/backpack; 2 years endurance | Volumes | Turret (head) 1.19cf, Body 6.25cf, Arm (ea.) 1.01cf, Legs (ea.) 2.03cf, Pod (backpack) 2.2cf* | Structure & Hit Points | Medium frame with expensive materials. HP: Head 9, Body 26, Arm (ea.) 18, Leg (ea.) 15, Backpack 18 | Surface Features | Sealed, basic TL9+ stealth and IR cloaking | Armour | Laminate. PD4. Turret, legs and arms DR75. Body and backpack DR100. | Statistics | Loaded weight 1,306 lb (1,746 lbs including pilot), Empty weight 1,282 lb, Loaded Mass 0.65 tons, Volume 15.71 cf. Size Modifier: Head (0), Body (1), Arms (0), Pod (1), Total (2). | ST and Reach | Body ST 51, Arm ST 30 ea. (reach 1, damage thr 3d, sw 5d+2) | Dimensions | 8'0" | Ground Performance | Ground Speed 31.3 mph, gMR 2.75, gSR 1, Ground Move 16. |
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Oct 8, 2004 9:24:33 GMT -5
That will be your problem then. Not a problem. The designs used in the art I produce for BL, have to BL/GW compliant. I see my role as making the designs work, and in this respect they do. I will add that I have been given ‘artistic licence’ in modify the template. After your time? When did you stop reading GW stuff? Doesn’t require rounding, it only requires enlargement. I made it round because it has to work with the current design, and the shoulders are so broad. Yes it would have to be very thick, around twice (plus a bit) that of a gorilla. I do remember their origins, looking at what I wrote I can see what you are saying. My design by it nature is a retrofit, but I would say that in 40K marines where always designed with Power Armour in mind. Many of the medical Anatomy books are the same ones that artists have to study… The Male human body undergoes tremendous change during puberty and early teens, seeing as marine are very young when they start out, I would assume this is the time when the marine grows the most. As a side note: They are many genetic markers controlling many aspects of growth, there are many genetic defects that can give clues as to how marines are made. As an example, there is a defect that can cause flesh to be metabolised into bone, defects than cause bone to dissolve away. In 40K I assume they have mastered many of these processes and the chemicals/ hormones involved. They can remake a human body if need be (and they do). My design is restrained by the fact it has to comply with GW designs. Therefore they are the most correct they can be, but the may well not be perfect. I always put a lot of thought into my designs (remember the STC is just for ‘backgrounds’ in my artwork) and I do go way beyond what is ‘required’. This is one of the reasons I like the ASP, as I can discuss my ideas with people who are also ‘beyond what is required’. As I said before; I do not have total free reign. If I were designing for another setting then yes, I could design armour to fit a more ‘normal’ enlarged human, and could make it very realistic and practical. Though I think it would have more in common with a newt suit. The gorilla is not twice the density of a human, it is twice the volume. A marine is twice this again at around 8’, hence the may figure of around 700-800lbs. If I could post a picture comparison the size difference I would (but I can’t), as it would better illustrate what I am saying. Putting an (my design) unarmoured marine next to an outstretched gorilla; the difference in bulk is obvious. Its all reasonable… If you want it to match up to the artwork I would recommend around 8’ (artist only paint the most heroic marines) and go for the lower, undoubled figure of 700lbs. In short: because that would cause a fundamental change in the look of a Space Marine. The current armour design ‘requires’ the type of physiology I have outlined. In the end it’s all a matter of perspective, and anything can be explained. As an example: Big swords are usually wielded by heroes, so perhaps anti-grav could be built into the weapon, anti-gravs which can be turned off on the point of impact. So they are as light as a feather to swing but hit like a falling mountain. It is just a matter of how much you want something to work, and the imagination you are willing to invest.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Oct 8, 2004 10:44:45 GMT -5
I see my role as making the designs work, and in this respect they do. I will add that I have been given ‘artistic licence’ in modify the template. Oh dear. Well there goes a death knell for plausibility as I see it then if this is really what you're using to produce things... After your time? When did you stop reading GW stuff? The last WD that I purchased was WD144. I'm aware of the 'fluff' in subsequent literature but I also tend to view it in totality rather than by each revision. I therefore am not prone to revisionism ala GW standard policy. Doesn’t require rounding, it only requires enlargement. I made it round because it has to work with the current design, and the shoulders are so broad. If it doesn't require it and it is so much more difficult to incorporate it, why bother...? Yes it would have to be very thick, around twice (plus a bit) that of a gorilla. And at present unreasonably so, more so since it is not actually required. Again, proportionate changes... But I'm not going to change your mind, obviously. My design by it nature is a retrofit... And the reason for the flaw. You're attempting to fix one (which I laud), but only with the broken assumptions elsewhere. ...but I would say that in 40K marines where always designed with Power Armour in mind. Don't tell me that the Emperor foresaw that he was going to get the power armour and, so, decided to create an inefficient physiology that relied upon the future use of power armour? This is actually opposite to the assumption of continuos use of the Marine implants themselves... How's that for you turning things on their head! Many of the medical Anatomy books are the same ones that artists have to study… I wasn't talking about anatomy, I was kinda talking about congenital absence of the clavicle... I've never heard of it before and it is going to have a significant impact upon the physiology of an indiviudal. As your text books show, oodles of muscles insert and origin, many of which are involved in speech... The Male human body undergoes tremendous change during puberty and early teens... <snicker> Yes, I know. I would assume this is the time when the marine grows the most. Although there is contradiction in the later 'fluff', this is true. Otherwise the ossmodula wouldn't work since once the physis is obliterated no further endochondral ossification can occur. there are many genetic defects that can give clues as to how marines are made... They can only go so far, however. As an example, there is a defect that can cause flesh to be metabolised into bone, defects than cause bone to dissolve away. There are many such defects, but all with their limitations. Whether it is diffiuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis, myositins ossificans progressiva or traumatica... blah blah. They can remake a human body if need be (and they do). Remodel; there is a very important difference there. My design is restrained by the fact it has to comply with GW designs. Well, it's obviously not your fault. I feel that if they want you to conform to flawed designs then you cannot be held responsible for a flawed vision. It's just a shame since this might be introduced as canon, and it just doesn't work... Therefore they are the most correct they can be, but the may well not be perfect. <grin> Well, 30% isn't that bad. They've still bilaterally symmetric, etc., with head, two arms, two legs, central thorax, etc. It's just the rest that is the problem. The gorilla is not twice the density of a human, it is twice the volume. A marine is twice this again at around 8’, hence the may figure of around 700-800lbs. I was more concerned with the final mass, not really volume/density. If you want it to match up to the artwork I would recommend around 8’ (artist only paint the most heroic marines) and go for the lower, undoubled figure of 700lbs. I view most artwork as a lie at the moment... 450lbs is far more reasonable than this value or yours, doubled or not.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Oct 9, 2004 10:16:57 GMT -5
Oh dear. Well there goes a death knell for plausibility as I see it then if this is really what you're using to produce things... Actually the modifications made using artistic licence was reining in the more extreme aspects of the armour design. My final design is a cross of the official design (Jes Goodwin), Paul Dainton’s mods, David Gallagher mods’s and all the other artist’s depictions blended together and averaged out. It then required slight but careful crafting to retain the look, yet also to actually make it work (movement wise) and to fit a body inside that wasn’t too distorted (so that if I were to paint a marine out of armour, it would still look strong and powerful, not a disjointed freak). A lot of development has happened in the last 10 years, I think the modern 40K stuff is far superior in all respects to the old. I remember reading in one of your other posts that you do not buy any GW stuff anymore, do you mind if I ask you what turned you off to 40K (as GW portrays it)? Because it works better. I like the design of Marines in 40K (and their mythos), and enjoy depicting then in my artwork. Marines are one of the reasons I choose GW/BL to work for. It’s only a flaw to you in your interpretation/ redesign of 40K. The design of Marines is reasonable (as reasonable as sci-fi/ fantasy can be) and well supported by the fluff. Marines in 40K look fantastic and unlike any other sci-fi/ fantasy. Marines have always had power armour from the very beginning. It would require no foresight on the Emperors part as he had access to power armour when designing the marines. I’m sure if he can create Primarchs he could knock out a purpose built suit of Power Armour and Marines to match. It has minimum impact as most muscles that join to the clavicle as partial joins: Sternomastoid (partial) Traps (tiny bit) Subclavious (full), Pec (partial), Delts (partial). Removal of the Clavicle results in the muscles missing the bit that attaches to the clavicle. Muscles related to speech such as the Sternohyiod, instead attach to the first rib (the Sternothyroid already attaches to the posterior aspect of the first rib so there is room, and the Sternohyoid would normal bound to the first rib if the clavicle wasn’t ‘in the way). A person with this ‘defect’ can still speak and move normally and suffer no ill effects, the only different is they can touch shoulders together in fount of them. I see this as a choice because it is easier to do it this way, they could demineralize the bones reverting them to a cartilage state and then force ossification with drugs. I agree that it makes sense to change a marine when they are young; at it is the least traumatic and the marine has no down time in training. They can go as far as the writer wish them to go, its fiction. I think the Imperial scientists can handle it. Hmm, makes it sound so minor, like a plastic surgeon ‘remodels’ a nose with rhinoplasty. I think the extreme surgery that a marine goes through would be accurately described as a ‘rebuild’. I don’t see it as a flaw, and the marine design is cannon (hence the retrofit). 100% 40K. Volume/ density determine mass and I was explaining how I came to that figure. Lie? That’s an unusual turn of phrase. Shaq ia 7’1” and 325lbs, looking at the worlds tallest people Big Louie Moilanen was 8’1”, 400lbs and seems to match what you are saying. However, Louie is hardy ‘super human’ he’s just big, and had a shoulder width of 2 feet, whereas a marine has a shoulder width closer to 4 feet. If you are advocating a redesign of marines in the Anargo sector where they are just ‘large humans’ then 450lbs is a reasonable estimate (I guess the extra 50lbs is for joint strengthening as tall humans suffer from weak joints etc).
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Oct 9, 2004 19:10:30 GMT -5
;D Aaaaah... clash of the titans, really, though I'm sure you both disagree with me on that. Personally, I get the feeling I'm way out of my league when you use medical terms that I've never heard of. Though I agree with neither of you, I really, really applaud your thoroughness. That said, I'll try to contribute what little I can to this discussion, but first I'd just like to state the obvious and say that the two of you can never reach an agreement about this, because you're coming from two completely different places and you have two different goals. Personally, I must agree with Kage on the strength of Power armour users. I'm not sure I did the last time we argued about this, which is scary, but there you go. You could moan about it being a waste of time to augment Space Marine bodies with their 'super' strength, but then you would have to consider the following; 1) A Space Marine is not really supposed to take off his helmet in the middle of combat to look cool, so as long as he has a fancy helmet, he doesn't really need enhanced vision and hearing. 2) Even if a Space Marine should run out of ammo, removing the helmet to spit poison is rarely an option. This gives us two possible answers, depending on what we want to see. A) Space Marines are designed to be prepared for everything. If their armour's power supply is damaged, they have the strength to keep moving. If their helmet is damaged, they can remove it and still see and breathe well. If they are stripped of their equipment and taken as prisoners and put in shackles, they can still kill with their poisonous spit. B) Because of the wisdom and foresightfulness of the Emperor, Space Marines were designed to function with power armour that needed their special strength and senses to function. In other words, a normal human will not be able to benefit from power armour like a Space Marine. The helmet relies on 'superhuman' eyesight, the armour relies on 'superhuman' strength and the armour's internal atmosphere relies on the fantastic breathing organs of the Space Marine. In the Inquisitor game, power armour increases a character's strength by a fifth. This does not have any effect on bionic arms, however. Why would it not have an effect on bionic arms? (Note however, that there may be a great difference between Astartes power armour and normal power armour here) In Space Wolf (p. 195-196) we read about Ragnar's first experience with Power armour, when he discovers that he can crush a rock with his bare hands. It seems quite clear that it is only the power of the gauntlets themselves that generate the power to crush the rock. Ragnar does not use any of his own strength. I think that the question of Power armour is a matter of taste and interpretation, and that the ASP will only follow Kage's interpretation. A bit of a shame, since we don't agree on everything related to Space Marines... not very much at all actually Still, it's only a minor question for me, so I'm not too fuzzed. Erf... hope this was more helpful than I think it was.
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Oct 10, 2004 17:15:58 GMT -5
Right, edited and... changed, dramatically. I'm going to post some generic comments and then get into specifics in a double post. Yes, I know that double posts are generally not allowed by, heck, rank hath its privileges as is ironically obvious from this thread as well as being a bland statement that I can hand out for breaking my own 'rules'. It's strange, what this comes down to is what you see as my "revisionism" against what I see as yours, and indeed, GW's revision of the original material. It would be too easy to levvy the argument that I'm some form of "old codger" who is incapable of changing with the times, just as it is easy for me to suggest that the material forces are predicated purely upon mechanisms to increase profit by expanding into additional 'genre'/areas. Both kind of miss the point in many ways. I personally cannot help but be amused that what you see as the 'uniqueness' of the 40k material in terms of sci-fi/fantasy I see as gradually homogenising with that same material in an attempt to broaden the fan base. So, other than we're once again discussing in some ways disparate approaches to the 40k universe, what can be brought out of this? You argue that the 'fluff' is in some way superior in the modern incarnation than that of the past? I would agree in some aspects. Quite simply there is more of it, so in terms of sheer volume it is true: the new 'fluff' is superior to the 'old'. But the reason that it falls flat on its face in many regards is also a product of this and consistent approach to the 'fluff' which generates inconsistencies. I've termed this the "Rule of Cool" on various boards - which is fair enough to some degree - but which has been otherwised referred to as the premise of "Style over Substance". Obviously there is a difference here between 'quantity' and 'quality' of that substance, but it argues that the imagery overall dominates that 'substance'. The 'revisions' to power armour and, as a result the physiology of the Marines, is a perfect example of "Style over Substance". I cannot help but find it amusing that you direct 'revisionism' at me - though I cannot in all conscience dodge this particular assertion - when from many regards I'm actually arguing for consistency; continuity rather than disparity brought around by people numerously pointing out biological inconsistencies with the Marines. (Obviously from a modelling and marketting perspective it is far easier to 'cludge' Marine physiology with artwork than to change the form of Terminator or the less problematic PA.) There are, of course, lines to be drawn here. At what point should the assumptions of the wargame be given pre-eminence over the 'fluff' itself (e.g. the well documented assertation that wargame Marines are no way as puissant as the 'fluff' Marines), and at what point can the various source of 'fluff' - art vs. written material - given pre-eminence. And, indeed, at what point can the various editions of the 'fluff', themselves an historical act recording the ebb and flow of popular and material/marketting culture, be taken into consideration? These and others not mentioned are questions that shade any discussion. Perhaps it would also be appropriate to question "Just what's in it for me?" I questioned the consistent imagery with regards to the origins of armour and that of the Marines. There are errors in the argument on both side, some drawn out of a lack of knowledge, others out of mis-remembered "facts", and others yet out of interpretation. Regardless, Mk1 power armour was available to early Marines (my bad). Of course, the armour descriptions are themselves cludgey compared to the orignal information on 'artficial muscles' with continual reference to power cables, etc., but some might argue the evolution of Marine armour away from 'motors/power cables' to muscle fibres. Oh yes, and non-augmented humans were wearing these suits, but this would most likely in 'modern 'fluff'' be displaced by the anime-esque "First of the North Star"-type mutants, which I must admit is how your descriptions of your re-design as thus far described. Again, of course the development of the armour is "retro-tech", similar to "Storm of Iron" where the past is used as a model for armour development... Then again, if Marines were designed with armour in mind - and the requirement to work in space - why did they get some of the organs they did? I mean, Betcher's Gland!? If one were to take on a Watson-esque approach to the description of the operation of this gland one would quite readily go "Spit, Hiss, Whistle" replicating the function of the gland, the hiss of melting armour, etc., and then the rapid decompression. One can levvy similar arguments against the function of other organs. Of course, one can then argue residuality of design, i.e. it was important in the early years but not the later years... Many point to the "Adeptus Me-Can't-icus" argument, though once again one merely point out that this is not necessarily a valid assumption of the period (e.g. technological advancement, relatively speaking, marked this period and not the stagnation which is the primary image argued for the 'standard' 40k universe). Once again, "Style over Substance". The problem here is that there has also been a shift of terminology and the imprecise use of terminology that can be extremely misleading. Consider the fact that Marines are referred to as 'genetically engineered'. None of the implants require alteration to the genome, but subsequent material conflictingly refers to them as 'genetically engineered' (henceforth 'gengineered') or 'genetically re-engineered' ('regengineered'). Both are applicable depending on what you are arguing. Technically speaking Marines are gengineered from the original Primarch DNA, although again technically this was used to create the zygotes/geneseed. Also, some 'fluff' indicates some aspect of regengineering, i.e. the Cup of Wulfen in which rapid 'sport' genetic alterations are created based upon the 'essence/character' of the original Primarch. Furthermore, one can argue - as I have done - the point of eugenics. With an aperiodic selection process, selection criteria for Marine candidates combined with an integrated mythology of selection can pattern a society to create specific genotypes or physiognomies. All are gengineering of a form. I can see the arguments for extending the breadth of the shoulder girdle (I must presume that the pelvic girdle has been similarly modified and that Marines, quite literally, have the tighest sphincters in known space! ("...Let my Cameron go...!") ). Despite arguments that it is "100% 40k" - and I could very cynically agree with this - it is more a function of marketting than anything else. What is it cheaper to do? Change the 'hidden body' or change the moulds for the miniatures and the 'imagery' of Marines? (Once again, "Style over Substance".) For me? I don't bother with alloy miniatures, nor am I overtly determined to prove that the artwork is correct. (Again, if a picture paints a thousand words then you have a thousand possible different interpretations of those words, and each word has many variations and contexts within languages... blah blah. Ergo, each picture is a 'lie', more so because unlike 'description' it is very easy to create precise images in 'fluff' that are not present in the written material. Hence my assertion that artwork is the most inspiring, but also arguably the less 'true' in terms of 'fluff'.) Materially it makes a whole lot of sense. I cannot argue with that. If I worked for GW I would likely argue this myself on a purely financial sense. I would also do exactly what you're doing: argue that it was at the very core of the 40k universe. I'd know that this isn't true, but there we go. I'd more than likely do it. But I don't have anything invested in the 40k universe other than my imagination, and I do not have the necessity to conform to the dictates of GW. I do, however, maintain the ability to question the motivations and the specific assumptions. Ergo my questioning of the arguments that you're making here. Do not get me wrong in that I think that Marines are not powerful, strong or practically Atlantian or Herculean in physical proportions. One need only look at the "working" template of a Marine in RPG to see this. (To give you relation, in the system that I use a gorilla has a strength of 20-24. ) I just question the plasticity of the human body in specific areas to create a disproportionate anatomy in the way that is being suggested. That and it just jars with me... but then again your descriptions probably do not give justice to what you're describing. (Then again if you've once again 'fused' the ribs of a Marine then that means you've got this whole inconsistent application of assumptions and image 'thing' going on, unfortunately. Very GW, though!) Does it come down to who is right and who is wrong? That's irrelevant. You have the power to make your opinion - or rather image - canon. You've already stated that modern 'fluff' is superior to that of the past, something I question in terms of quality and consistency rather than quality, so it becomes moot from which era and stance you're going to argue. . ;D
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Oct 10, 2004 17:16:35 GMT -5
In application? For me it makes overtly little difference. I find the consistency offered by my representation is more valable and useful than your approach. But that depends on what you actually want to do with it, and pictures are ever more accessible than text. I would argue that mine approach is consistent with the 'fluff' though I would question the 'box' that the 'fluff' comes in. But getting back to this representation of power armour rather than just your opinion of Marines... well, our divergence of opinion on Marines anyway! You have, for the most part, taken the canonical stance whereby power armour acts as a magnifier to Marine strength. Again, I find this stance flawed. Why? I question the source of the 'power' to these muscles. You are, in essence, saying that the more muscle someone has, the more 'power' (electricity, in essence) to those 'muscle'. Do Marines have a horrendously strong bioelectric field, perhaps? Does this in some way influence the output of the 'stacked atomic chain' powerplant mentioned in the 'fluff' as powering the armour that they wear? Or are you suggesting that the power source is the Marine themselves? That the artificial muscle is directly spliced into the Marine and the greater the number of 'muscle fibres' the greater the strength? I would say a resounding 'no' to this. These arguments - or, rather, mechanics - are predicated on "Style over Substance" approaches, i.e. Marines are strong and, therefore, a Marine in armour must be stronger than a normal human in armour otherwise what is the point? As GW continues to a more fantasy-dominated image this is compounded: magic is technology (and vice versa) and it should in no way defeat the 'heroism' of an individual! This assumption is compounded by the (war) game mechanics themselves. A 'hero' has a greater strength than a 'trooper', a feature which has been present from the 1E days. It is 'game balance' and, generally, cool for the wargame. Does it make sense? Naaaah... Again we're back to the point where, somehow, this sense of heroism or muscle mass translates to increasing the power of the armour's power plant? So what's the problem? Quite simply the premise that a Marine in power armour is not stronger than a human in power armour. This doesn't sit well with the fantasy approach, of course. Marines are just more... heroic!... than other humans so they should be stronger! Dang it! The problem here is that the 'image' filters outside of the wargame and into the 'fluff'. Inquisitor is an example of this, unfortunately. (And of course only unfortunate because I disagree with it! ) Why should experience and ability (the measure of Marine 'capability') translate to strength? Well, obviously they have experience in dealing with certain situations, can exploit tactical advantages, weaknesses in armour, fighting styles or whatever, to more effectively employ their strength of course! Problem is that this is subsequently translated into a "Style over Substance" argument which then colours the mechanics and 'fluff' themselves. Question is whether people question. Perhaps a simplistic call-response approach can be taken? Am I saying that a human in Marine PA is as strong as a Marine in Marine PA? Yes. Am I saying that a human in Marine PA is as strong as a Marine outside of armour? Yes, and indeed much stronger. Am I saying that a human can wear marine PA? No, obviously not. Marine PA is for Marines. Am I saying that a non-Marine PA is as 'powerful' as Marine PA? No, not in the slighest. There are manifold reasons why this is not the case? Am I questioning the assumptions of the game mechanics? Yes! Why? Because the image obfuscates the 'appearance of truth', that whole verisimilitude gig I'm always getting on at. "Style over Substance". Why should a Marine in PA be stronger than a human in PA? Because Marines are stronger, of course! Do they put more powerful power plants in 'heroic' armour? Perhaps, but that is a separate issue! So what does this all mean? Unfortunately your descriptive ability falls short or your artwork and, indeed, my ability to imagine what you describe. (This is not a failure of my imagination, but more a result of categorisation and the association of specific 'things' to a given object which is not overtly influenced by the form of the object beyond questions of functionality, symbolism, etc., all of which add further 'categories' to consider!) If you wish to continue to discuss the fascinating subject of Marine physiology then you're going to have to send me the image that you've been working on... in private I of course presume. You probably have copyright issues working here, but still. I can then more appropriately direct my comments on the changes you've made. I doubt that this would happen for a number of reasons, but we all know those. In terms of this thread? Again, your arguments have little specific validity beyond physiognomy which you have yet to convince me of. (See above.) In terms of the representation and specific technological comments, they have yet to find a consistent representation... But "argubate" is ever continuing
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Oct 10, 2004 18:31:04 GMT -5
My connection is rubbish at the moment, for some reason. I'm rather tired of typing thousand word replies only to have them disappear... So what does it come down to? Simply, revision vs. holism. ASP is not strictly about my intreptation. Why the heck do you think I spend so much time in discussion over specific aspects of the universe? Why do I even allow the "concept" threads which self-evidently are individualised interpretation of the 40k universe? Because this is not just about me, but rather about what other people think and about the assumptions and limitations of what GW - the "bosses" - think. At this juncture I will not, however, accept the differentiation between "ASP Marines" and "40k Marines". That is GW revisionism at its worst. The above arguments are changing my opinion, though not to the 'shallow' extent of GW. Sure, it's great to argue congenital absence of the clavicle and assume that it has not great affect (yeah, right - they're all British with their bad teeth!) but it doesn't quite cut it... these are retroactive and not congenital abnormalities. Yes, but it is so easy to argue the magical transformation of developed osteoid into anlage and then back again. I mean, I'm sure that Imperial scientists can do it... If only they could figure out how to turn a tank into a tractor!
|
|
|
Post by RascalLeader on Oct 10, 2004 19:42:16 GMT -5
Considering the battleground I am entering I would properly be better by keeping my mouth shut. But I am often too stupid to back down, so here I boldly go anyway… I prefer (note that I prefer it; it does not automatically mean that’s the case) that power armour ‘amplifies’ someone’s strength rather then give everyone the exact same abilities. I do not have any speical knowledge on the subject only my views and what I think makes sense. The only background I have in these matters is the ridiculess amount of Sci-fi I read, and a mixture of knowledge of theoretics and acutal science. The reason why I have taken the 'increases strenght' side of the argument is that I beileve that the suit is not actully propelled by mechanical elements but the user of it. This would only make sense if Muscle fiber bundles (or electromuscles as I prefure) are used. Althought sevromotors and such might be used for some of the connection points between the armour I don't think they are used to power the suit. MFB would respond to the users movements much like it would be when they are outside the suit, since they will be set just high enoght so that they counter the weight of the PA. However the musles will also allow the user to extend their strenght profile by upto 'X' amount times their orignal capabilities, simply because any effort exerteded on these musle would force them to increase the ammount of strenght they were given. The Armours power core is used to power the muscles and this dramatically increases so that the strenght of the user more then the effort they are exerting. Put similpy the more effort the person put into the PA the bigger the effect they get out. Even discounting all my smoke an mirror guessing their are some more point I would like to make to dramatically increase the validity of my argument. Their would be a top level of what the armour could acchive, and then its up to the user to add whatever the extra muscle power it would require. What the difference would be to a marines and normal persons 'settings'in this case is that the safty limit would be higer. What I mean by this that on a normal person their would be a lower cut off point where they armour could add no more strenght because it would adversly effect the user. The MFB would end up crushing the person inside in order to give it that little bit extra. However a marine, who has hardened bones, skin and muscle would have a slight (only slightly) more tollerence to the MFB increase in presure on them. The same thing could be said on bones, althought the MFB would prevent too much crushing force being put on different areas of the human body it would only go upto a point; which is when the stronger bone come in handy.
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Oct 10, 2004 22:42:26 GMT -5
Aaaaah... clash of the titans, really, though I'm sure you both disagree with me on that. Personally, I get the feeling I'm way out of my league when you use medical terms that I've never heard of. Though I agree with neither of you, I really, really applaud your thoroughness. Clash of the Titians? And there’s me thinking it’s just a chat! As for the medical terms I try not use them when explaining my ideas as most people do not have clue what I’m talking about and it can really put people of from joining in and contributing to a thread. Kage knows his stuff so I slipped a bit. You have, for the most part, taken the canonical stance whereby power armour acts as a magnifier to Marine strength. I never said it acted as a magnifier. The above arguments are changing my opinion, though not to the 'shallow' extent of GW. Sure, it's great to argue congenital absence of the clavicle and assume that it has not great affect (yeah, right - they're all British with their bad teeth!) but it doesn't quite cut it... I didn’t assume, I saw people with the ‘defect’ on a program about genetic mutations. They moved about just fine and suffered no ill effects, but they were amazingly flexible, I’ve never seen a person touch their shoulder together in front of them. As it causes no ill effects, and increases flexibility I wouldn’t call it a defect myself. Considering the battleground I am entering I would properly be better by keeping my mouth shut. But I am often too stupid to back down, so here I boldly go anyway… You are more than welcome, and I’m glad you weren’t put off. =Power Armour=My concept of power actually shares many points in common with all the descriptions everyone has given in this thread. As everyone has given an overview of Power Armour, I thought I would post mine, please note that all figures are for illustration only; =Ordinary=Originally ‘ordinary’ Power Armour offsets its own weight. This means it does not affect strength in any way; a person is as strong wearing the armour as when they are not wearing the armour. Example: Let’s say for arguments sake that person A is ‘normal’ and can curl with one arm a weight of 20kg. If person A then put on a suit of ‘ordinary’ Power Armour they would then be able to curl: 20kg.
Marines are four times stronger than the strongest unenhanced soldier (because Marine are four time more massive), so let’s assume that Marine A can curl with one arm a weight of 200kg (50kg x4). If Marine A puts on a suit of ordinary Power Armour, he would then be able to curl 200kg.Ordinary Power Armour makes no difference to a person’s strength. The only armour to make a difference is the special armour of the Space Marines. =Space Marine Power Armour=. SMPA has extra Neuro-Fibre Bundles incorporated into it construction for the express purpose of increasing the amount of force the wearer can exert. Obviously there is no Space Marine Power Armour in the right size for a normal human, but in this example you’ll have to imagine there is. Example: Person A can normally curl with one hand 20kg. However if they put on a specially made mini suit of ‘Space Marine Power Armour’ they would then be able to curl with one hand 24kg. A full 20% increase thanks to the extra NFBs.
Marine A can curl 200kg, if he put on his full size Power Armour her would then be able to curl 240kg. A full 20% increase.Now at first glimpse, you may wonder why Person A can only curl an extra 4kg while wearing the same Armour as Marine A who can curl an extra 40kg? The simple answer is that the full size Space Marine Armour used by Marine A is much bigger then the mini sized suit used by Person A. The power of the suit scales with size, and the full size Space Marine Armour has far more NFBs than the mini suit. =Getting tricky=What if Person A could use the full size suit of Marine A? Well, because the suit is so much bigger, Person A would get the same bonus as Marine A. So Person A who can curl 20kgs, while wearing the full size suit would be able to curl 60kg (20kg + 40kg). Obviously this is impossible, because Person A’s arms aren’t long enough to reach all the way down to the glove of the full size Space Marine Armour. =Summary=Person A can; Curl 20kg. Curl 20kg while wearing ordinary Power Armour. Curl 24kg while wearing a special ‘mini’ suit of Space Marine Armour. Curl 60kg while wearing a full sized suit Space Marine Armour (impossible, its just way too big). Marine A can; Curl 200kg. Curl 200kg while wearing ordinary Power Armour. Curl 204kg if he could squeeze into Person A’s custom built mini suit of Amour (impossible, it’s just way too small). Curl 240kg while wearing his full sized suit of Power Armour. Note: All figures are for illustration purposes only. =Game Systems=In the Inquisitor Game: a suit of Power Armour Adds 20% to the wearer’s strength (I guess anyone can wear it then!). Though you could say that as Power Armour increases strength by 20% and therefore it is a ‘magnifier’ but this is wrong (for the reasons outlined above), it is a limitation of the game system that a ‘size’ stat is not used. A better way is to imagine that strength = size, as it is easy to understand why 20% extra NFBs on a larger suit of power armour would add more strength than the 20% extra NFBs on a smaller suit. Ooo, its half four…
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Oct 12, 2004 17:58:51 GMT -5
I had a really long response to this the other day, but it was a tad too long and the message was eaten when I hit 'Back'. Grrrr... But after all that long rambling I came to Phillip's reply, and it all boils down to a fundmanetal concept and what appears to be a misunderstanding of where exactly I'm coming from. So I'll re-state the concept and what I feel to be the misunderstanding rather than re-typing everything insce, ultimately, it is fairly redundant. The concept? Marine strength as represented in Inquisitor is predicated upon a rather simple (read: munchkin, for me) premise. That is that a Marine is stronger than a human and, in PA, must also be stronger than a human in their own version of PA because, well, it's particularly "heroic" for the Marine to maintain their gap. Otherwise what is the point? This misunderstanding? That I actually agree with this concept that Marines are four times stronger than a human. While I'm glad that Phillip isn't afraid to use numbers, I can both "do sums" and "read stuff". I am aware of the Inquisitor rules. I just disagree with them. As I see things, they are just plain wrong. One could point out arguments such as, "Well, a Marine in 40k is S4, a Guard S3 and a normal human S2. Since 4 divided by 2 is 2, a Marine must only be twice as strong as a human when wearing PA..." "Yes," would come the rather speedy reply, "but 40k does not properly replicate the strength or abilities of Marines in the 'fluff'!" "Well, true. But then again there really is no reason why just because someone is a veteran they must be stronger. Do Marines have weight-lifting competitions to define leadership...?" Etc. I could go on like that for a while. The 40k game, just like Inquisitor is canonical and an abstraction of 'reality' (or fictional reality anyway!). Which abstraction is 'more true'? Is a Marine in PA really only twice as strong as an unaugmented human? Are they only one-third as strong as a Guardsman? Perhaps each +1S is actually a double, thus a Marine in PA would be four times as strong as an unaugmented human... But why would a Guardsman be twice as strong? Perhaps the S statistic doesn't take into account the strength augmentation and each +1S is doubling. (Again, doesn't explain why Guardsmen are twice as strong as a human or indeed why eldar have a similar strength.) Or perhaps the scale isn't linear...? So is a Marine out of PA four times as strong as a human? I say not. You can point at 40k and say it's twice- or four-times as strong, either in or out of armour, or say that 40k isn't as "detailed" in terms of 'resolution' (or whatever) as Inquisitor... Basically whatever you want. So generating some obvious calculations from the assumptions made in Inquisitor isn't really doing that much! Again, though, I do not agree with the fact that Marines out of PA are four-times stronger than an unaugmented human or, ish, twice as strong as a gorilla. To give you some numbers that I work around in a nice simple table. It's all relative, but I can tell you how much each one could 'lift' on a single arm curl, two-handed curl, maximum carry without fatigue, etc., if it came to that. (Yes, RPGs are actually useful things when talking about fictitious universes!) Strength | Description | 10 | Average, unaugmented human | 19 | Brother-Sergeant Ulfr of the Frostbringers without armour | 20-24 | Gorilla | 30 | Currently assigned strength of power armour | 35-40 | Tiger | 51 | Maximum strength of current power armour | 200-250 | Elephant |
So, a Marine is on average roughly twice as strong as an unaugmented human, or somewhere around the strength of a gorilla. Three times as strong if he's in PA. Five times as strong if utilising the full capabilities of the PA, but even then they're only one-fifth as 'strong' as an elephant. (But most elephants are pretty hard to persuade into bench-pressing a set of weights, or doing single arm curls!) This creates a well-balanced Marine which is consistent with the ultimate "effect" and 'balance of the 'fluff'' between the various sources. In RPG terms Marines are horrendously expensive, with a "points cost" of around 400-500 points (normal 'adventurers', if you'll forgive the term, tend to get 100 points). Creating a "monster Marine" with a ST of 40 more than doubles this... There is ludicrous and there is ludicrous... And just in case, I do not agree with the premise that a Marine is four times stronger than a human...
|
|