Space Marines: They're becoming wimpier with each generation (Now with added ORK!)

[TheRightToArmBears]

Am I lone in thinking that Eldar are cooler?

No, not at all

What? No they're not cooler or No I'm not alone?

 

[Bulletinmybrain]

EDIT: Remember, most of these guys are 14 year old kids arguing about wether Master Chief could beat up a space marine, what do you expect?

Master Chief becoming a house *****, to clean the chapel.

 

[GloatingSwine]

I have to say that the background and rules do not seem to fit at all on Space Marines.

They ared described as almost unkillable and able to defeat hundreds of enemies before death. And yet they are easily beaten by other races even slightly elite units.

They've released "true to fluff" rules for Marines (in White Dwarf). You end up getting one squad for a 1500pt game.

(And for every thwack with the nerf bat Marines get between fluff and tabletop, the Eldar get two).

 

[BladesofReason]

What? No they're not cooler or No I'm not alone?

Sorry, hehe, I meant you're definitely not alone sir

 

[Wyatt]

first too scum, we arent arguing we are just talking about morality, one of my favorite subjects since next to love, morality is often the largest driving force in human affairs.

ohh and your most welcome to join in, views on morality is like an asshole, everyone has one and they are all different (and generaly stink)

See the contradiction there, Wyatt?

yes but not really. its those in between times when we are getting ready for our next war that we make those changes. certianly you can admit that human beings being what we are that we cant live and thrive without conflict. some of our worst moments as humans come from war, but also our best moments. just as an example the US constitution, arguable the most enlightened document and basis for a humain government to ever be written was only forged in the fires of war. Rome only stands out as a beacon of western civilization because of its constiant wars with the 'barbarians', same with the Greeks, and so on. its those wars that forge stablity in a society long enough too make changes for the good, but if those wars arent fought those societs are swarmed under and forgoten. the barbarians are ALLWAYS gunna be at the door alex and the only time we are ever gunna be able to make changes for the good is after we have beaten them back enough to give us some breathing room to MAKE those changes.

we wont become truly great though untill we can figure out how to accomplish truly great things without the need to kill each other first.

Well, there's killing the enemy and there's killing yourself. Letting war corrupt your culture isn't integral to winning. It does set you on the path of eventual decline, however.

People, technology, and strategy win wars. The Imperium enslaves all three to dogma. They just fucking throw their own people away left and right. They kill random alien species that they could just ignore because it's a matter of doctrine that they will somehow be a threat.

Would we have been more successful in Vietnam if US soldiers started shooting Vietnamese children instead of giving them Hershey bars? Would we have been more successful if we trained squads of suicide soldiers to carry out operations against the enemy? Would we have been more successful if JFK picked "total war" and launched nukes at Moscow?

Yes, being determined and smart can sometimes mean doing immoral, cruel things to win. Abject cruelty itself doesn't win wars, though. And abject cruelty glorified -- hell, in 40k it's deified -- makes your victory pointless. That's what the "crapsack world" setting is all about.

-- Alex

we could have won in vietnam by killing every ************ that looked at us sideways, men, women, or children. would that have changed our immage in the world? most certianly, we WE then be those 'barbarians' i spoke about? no doubt. but when your enemy is dead thats it , the wars over. dont over think this point, im talking about wining a war, you win a war by killing all your enemys, any OTHER way is just stupid. you dont win by spanking them with a few guided bombs and then offer them a seat at a peace conferance table, you win by killing them, you keep killing them untill either 1) everyone is dead or 2) those few who are left are so beaten moraly wise that they would willingly submit just to save their own lives, and even then you keep them under your bot for a few generations untill their children are true converts to your system.

its clear you dont agree with that opinion. i can understand that, you seem to be fixated on some vague line between being cruel to get the job done and being cruel because you enjoy it. cruel is cruel, if your killed by a blood drunk soldier who just wants to listen to you scream as you die, or your killed by a soldier setting in a bunker 5,000 miles away doing it by a remote controll drone, your still dead.

my main and only point is that the questions of living vrs dieing is more importiant than the question of HOW to live. if your facing death, you dont think about moral questions, you think about options to escape that death. in the 40K universe humanity is facing death, what ever moral problems there are can all be dealt with after they get out of that situation.


when the guns stop shooting then all the sheep, the 'thinkers', the pansys, that just keep their heads down and avoid the fighting , can come out and start picking the bones of what ever social structure is left hoping to change it to be a 'kinder' or more 'moral' society so THEY never again have to huddle in their holes scared of dieing and just as sacred of fighting, to actualy stand up and DO something to help get their views enforced. nothing but a coward with the stench of fear in his own nose to keep him company hoping that those with the will and power to impose that will if need be, can be subverted by their wispers after the true issue is resolved on the field of conflict by those willing to not just talk about whats right but are willing to BLEED for it.

and finaly, what you call 'pointless' i call the point itself. you have this most human need for a happy ending. you would much rather see some glimmer of hope peaking through in that 40K universe, something that you can smile and wink at and know that if everything goes well than eventualy this darkenss will pass. but 40k asks the uncomfortable question that we all would rather not face when it says ........

what if the darkness DOEST pass? remember that conversation i had with cheeze in that prop 8 thread about how you can only know good by knowing evil? 40k universe IS evil and you seem to be searching for that glimmer of good and very pissed off and upset that your not finding it. what i understand of your point is that you are offended that there is no good guys and when the war eventualy ends the winner will ALL be an equally horrible fait for the universe.

you dont want to accept that the darkness may not pass. i on the other hand see this and know it for what it is, that hope and kindness and good come from the actions of individual beings on an ongoing basis, you take such comfort as you can when you can and be ready to face the demon again at any moment, you take what joy you can when you can because tomorow you may be dead, or worse, alive and in battle. the glass for me is neither half empty nor half full its just a glass and the water level will rise and fall on its own. in the mean time just enjoy the swim as best you can.

in any event just because you dont value certian things doesnt mean others dont. you place no value on the warrior spirit, you place no value on fighting in a contest to the death for your ideals. pride, glory and honor obviously dont mean much to you, or perhaps i should say that other things mean more. you seen killbots, i see a bond of brothers united in a cause and willing to bleed and die for that cause, there is nobility in that. you see only stupidity. your not wrong, from your point of view, im not wrong from mine, we just place different values on certian ideals is all. a shallow peace made up of lies and deception is less appealing to me than a bold stand in blood for what you belive is right. even if it turns out too not be right at all in the end. its the MOMENT that counts, the stout heart and the bold spirit that i see when i look at the Space Marines. you see killers who spread misery i see saving angels that will atleast keep hope alive by keeping the species alive if nothing else.

do you agree?

 

[Alex_P]

we could have won in vietnam by killing every ************ that looked at us sideways, men, women, or children.

No, we couldn't have. Suddenly going "total war" in a proxy conflict between two nuclear powers means everyone dies.

its clear you dont agree with that opinion. i can understand that, you seem to be fixated on some vague line between being cruel to get the job done and being cruel because you enjoy it. cruel is cruel, if your killed by a blood drunk soldier who just wants to listen to you scream as you die, or your killed by a soldier setting in a bunker 5,000 miles away doing it by a remote controll drone, your still dead.

No, distance and technology aren't the answer (see Forever Peace -- written by a Vietnam veteran). There's no clear line between "right" and "wrong" here. But effective warfare is about an economy of violence. Violence costs you resources. Violence does bad shit to your own troops. There's a very good reason modern militaries try to teach soldiers precision and self-control.

my main and only point is that the questions of living vrs dieing is more importiant than the question of HOW to live. if your facing death, you dont think about moral questions, you think about options to escape that death. in the 40K universe humanity is facing death, what ever moral problems there are can all be dealt with after they get out of that situation.

1. They'll never "get out of that situation". The Warp will always be there.
2. And what happens when, once you're done, the thing that's left isn't a recognizably human humanity? Worse yet, what if you could've avoided that, too?

when the guns stop shooting then all the sheep, the 'thinkers', the pansys, that just keep their heads down and avoid the fighting , can come out and start picking the bones of what ever social structure is left hoping to change it to be a 'kinder' or more 'moral' society so THEY never again have to huddle in their holes scared of dieing and just as sacred of fighting, to actualy stand up and DO something to help get their views enforced. nothing but a coward with the stench of fear in his own nose to keep him company hoping that those with the will and power to impose that will if need be, can be subverted by their wispers after the true issue is resolved on the field of conflict by those willing to not just talk about whats right but are willing to BLEED for it.

This is a bullshit dichotomy. Real flesh-and-blood soldiers are quite capable of moral reasoning. They think just as much as they fear. In some ways, they have more moral agency than the common person -- they see the consequences of their actions firsthand, whereas the people going mad with bloodlust back home just have a steady diet of newsreels and patriotic music through which they understand war.

Heck, look at this whole "torture" debacle: a bunch of political weasels, armchair generals, and talkshow hosts talking up aimless brutality as "what must be done" while military intelligence experts kept trying to tell them "No, seriously, guys, we already know this doesn't work".

and finaly, what you call 'pointless' i call the point itself. you have this most human need for a happy ending. you would much rather see some glimmer of hope peaking through in that 40K universe, something that you can smile and wink at and know that if everything goes well than eventualy this darkenss will pass. but 40k asks the uncomfortable question that we all would rather not face when it says ........

I don't. I really, really don't. Hope and happy endings aren't a priority to me. I want to see a goddamn human reaction. People who have been culturally braindamaged into doing anything and everything "for the Emperor" are hardly even people anymore.

...

Fuck, the stuff they're doing, it's hardly even "war". That's what I hate about this obsession with Space Marines. War is a human phenomenon. War is defined by culture. War has an element of communication that's pretty much absent from Warhammer 40k's take on "war" -- that's part of the setup that makes the setting's "war" perpetual.

I hate that people celebrate Space Marines as the quintessential warrior because it means they're buying into some of the biggest, ugliest, most pernicious myths of war. War isn't an endless battle against aliens who are incapable of even understanding you. War isn't all bravery and machismo. War isn't won by throwing everything else away with reckless abandon.

Of course, that's true of people fanboying most video game characters as well.

-- Alex

 

[Alex_P]

Any RPG is what you make it. Why do you need rules for fancy inquisitor stuff. What difference does fighting at a higher level make? Sounds kinda Dungeon crawly to me. What? You need to roll a dice to see if your exterminatus hits and damages? Good pre written adventures are hard to find, make your own, with a good story, thats much more satisfying than rolling dice and pretending your are mowing down chaos terminators with your arm cannon.

What difference do any of the rules in an RPG make?

If you're going to have rules, they should provide structure to the game, give it focus. Why bother with pages of rules for gunplay and classes and random skills while leaving something as fundamental as "exterminatus" -- pretty much the most extreme action an Inquisitor can undertake -- out of it? (What kind of rules would you have for "exterminatus", for example? Well, calling it in requires quite a bit of resources, and getting things out of the Inquisition does involve some politicking. You'd think the game would at least have some guidelines about how an Inquisitor can actually marshal all those resources. But it doesn't even have much about playing an actual Inquisitor in any capacity -- just his retinue.)

You can't really get any more "dungeon-crawly" than an elaborate set of rules for shooting things and a big chart of weapons. And that was part of the let-down.

-- Alex

 

[Zykon TheLich]

If you're going to have rules, they should provide structure to the game, give it focus. Why bother with pages of rules for gunplay and classes and random skills while leaving something as fundamental as "exterminatus" -- pretty much the most extreme action an Inquisitor can undertake -- out of it? (What kind of rules would you have for "exterminatus", for example? Well, calling it in requires quite a bit of resources, and getting things out of the Inquisition does involve some politicking. You'd think the game would at least have some guidelines about how an Inquisitor can actually marshal all those resources. But it doesn't even have much about playing an actual Inquisitor in any capacity -- just his retinue.)

You can't really get any more "dungeon-crawly" than an elaborate set of rules for shooting things and a big chart of weapons. And that was part of the let-down.

-- Alex

It does, it's just not the structure and focus you wanted. I was suggesting that as someone who plays RPG's & knows the 40k universe (I assume) that you can do all the rest yourself. Dark Heresy is about playing an acolyte of the inquisition, not an inquisitor, maybe that would have come out later, but since BI has shut down and FFG doesn't seem to be doing much, we may never know.
Being acolytes, you don't get to call in an exterminatus, thats the Inquisitor's (GM NPC) perogative. If the GM can't make that stuff up, then he or she shouldn't be GMing.

Most games I've come across have combat rules (elaborate...please, ever seen phoenix command? *shudders* [I may have got the name wrong, I have tried to blot it from my memory]) and equipment lists and little in the way of explanation of the way politics and social interaction work from a rules perspective. I think primarily this is because people tend to have more experience of 'people and the way the world works' and can wing it quite easily, and in my case prefers to do so. A lasgun blast to the chest I'm not so sure of.

That said, 40k is kinda different to the way things work today, they do explain the basics but explaining in detail all the little foibles of the Imperium of man would take up a lot of space and the writers have to appeal to the 'dungeon crawl massive' (and seeing as a lot of the people who might buy this will be wargamers, it's a safe bet that a lot of them will be lookin to pop a cap in a heretic *****) as well as the people who like a bit of story. As I believe they say in the book, theres plenty of info out there already. When you're writing an RPG for a fictional universe that's 'existed' for 20 years you can take advantage of the fact that there are vast stacks background info and such already written for you. It also has the disadvantage that people are gonna complain because you haven't covered their favourite bit (As an aside, I was directed to this website by a guy on BI/FFG whos every post was pretty much MAXIMUM CAPSLOCK bitching about how 'goddamn retarded' it was that Dark Heresy wasn't all about marines).

Taldeer: They appeal to the core shooty shooty demographic and the rest were just gonna do their own thing anyway.



RE: 'The debate', I'm not completely sure what you guys are debating here. From what I can see Wyatt is saying that in the context of the 40K universe marines are doing the right thing given who they are and Alex seems to be saying that he prefers characters with a bit more depth. Other than that it seems to be real world morality you are discussing. Have I read it wrong?

 

[rossatdi]

What really gets to me is that in the "Best Space Marine ever" thread, Master Chief was omitted because technically he's in the navy and not a proper marine, even though the two organisations work very closely by definition. However, the moment we get a chance to dump on him he is included in the category so we can mock him. I don't mind people disliking Halo or the character, it's the lengths people will go to to deny them any kind of recognition.

Er, actually. Marines are normally part of the navy. In fact under bureaucratic organisation the US Marine Corps is part of the Department of the Navy, it however forms a separate military organisation is neither here nor there. The British Marines are part of the Royal Navy.

 

[kaiZie]

its a bit of a mockery really. Space Marines, from when i started tabletopping, were the end-all race. As soon as they got on the field the Imperial Guard ran away, they orks rushed in and got spalltered, and the tyranids masses in hordes only to get desimated by a 5 man squad of terminators.

Something, somewhere, went horribly wrong. I'm sure it's a balance thing, more than anything, but even still, chaos marines are still the don. In they pimp sporting heads of all races, spikes and all, ready to fight and win over anything.

Even in games such as Chaos Gate, one of the first, if not the first Warhammer40k PC game it was Space Marines doing to righteous thing and beating everything.

tis a sad day indeed.

 

[Saskwach]

Any RPG is what you make it. Why do you need rules for fancy inquisitor stuff. What difference does fighting at a higher level make? Sounds kinda Dungeon crawly to me. What? You need to roll a dice to see if your exterminatus hits and damages? Good pre written adventures are hard to find, make your own, with a good story, thats much more satisfying than rolling dice and pretending your are mowing down chaos terminators with your arm cannon.

What difference do any of the rules in an RPG make?

If you're going to have rules, they should provide structure to the game, give it focus. Why bother with pages of rules for gunplay and classes and random skills while leaving something as fundamental as "exterminatus" -- pretty much the most extreme action an Inquisitor can undertake -- out of it? (What kind of rules would you have for "exterminatus", for example? Well, calling it in requires quite a bit of resources, and getting things out of the Inquisition does involve some politicking. You'd think the game would at least have some guidelines about how an Inquisitor can actually marshal all those resources. But it doesn't even have much about playing an actual Inquisitor in any capacity -- just his retinue.)

You can't really get any more "dungeon-crawly" than an elaborate set of rules for shooting things and a big chart of weapons. And that was part of the let-down.

-- Alex

Dark Heresy has its problems by the dollop-worth, but I don't think that, assuming being an Inquisitor were dealt with in the rules, Exterminatus should have rules (if that's what you're suggesting?). Exterminatus is about whether you have a big-ass ship at your disposal, and that kind of stuff I would not accept rules for in my game. Either you (as the assumed Inquisitor) have taken command of such a ship, or called in a favour, or you haven't - for whatever reason. The ship is there - because it was nearby and you called it in - or it's not - because it wasn't nearby, or had orders from higher up, or a warp storm, or because the captain just hated you so much that he "didn't get the orders", etc. If I were handling Exterminatus in an RPG rules book it would be a few paragraphs on what it was, what it took, why it would be used, how a player might get one, and the possible consequences for abuse - but no rules. That stuffs for RP and GM (here it comes) fiat.
Of course, by "guidelines" it's possible you meant the exact same thing. In which case: *raspberry*

Personally, I think that Dark Heresy was hopelessly misconceived as a 40k RPG. All this emphasis on the Inquisition means that everything else gets pushed to the sidewalk for what is a bloody interesting, but still small, part of the setting. If I had a crack at it I'd basically do a 40k version of WFRP with 'expansions' (just right now I've forgotten the term for RPG 'expansion' books). Each of these books would hone in on each of the cool pieces of the setting - Inquisitors would be one, SM another (for the smurf players or those who, like me, just want to blow stuff up for a couple games), IG, Rogue Traders, each of the alien races (I'd pick up WH40kRP: Orks like a shot - and expect rules to play as them, too). Then ther'es the setting fluff books - adventure books, sector stuff) and you've got everything DH had - and more - but with the focus made available to those who wanted it, not those who really don't care for the broody stooges of a broody Inquisitor (not that I don't loves me the idea personally. I just love lots more that are made much harder to execute because the game didn't generalise.
Seriously, I went through Dark Heresy, counting all the explicitly 'Inquisitiony' stuff and found a good 70-80 pages. That's 70-80 pages that could have gone into more general stuff (and dare I say it, random generators) that would help newbies to the setting pick it up in all its sprawling...sprawl. And those 70-80 pages don't include the cutting and rejigging that could have been done if the overdone parts - such as classes - had been tightened up into a more WFRP style, broad-brush kinda thing. (Also: vehicles. Seriously, how do you get off making a 40k ANYTHING without vehicles?)
Yes, I can adapt Dark Heresy, the game of doing a powerful shadowy figure's dirty work, to say, Imperial Infiltrators, the game about a ragtag group of IG infiltrators caught behind enemy lines. But why should that be so hard just so Mr. Broody Role Player can be Ravenor's lapdog just a bit more easily?

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

What really gets to me is that in the "Best Space Marine ever" thread, Master Chief was omitted because technically he's in the navy and not a proper marine, even though the two organisations work very closely by definition. However, the moment we get a chance to dump on him he is included in the category so we can mock him. I don't mind people disliking Halo or the character, it's the lengths people will go to to deny them any kind of recognition.

Er, actually. Marines are normally part of the navy. In fact under bureaucratic organisation the US Marine Corps is part of the Department of the Navy, it however forms a separate military organisation is neither here nor there. The British Marines are part of the Royal Navy.

Exactly. That's why it annoyed me so much that he got seperated out just because of some relatively minor detail in the organisation of one country's military. In pretty much every other situation, Master Chief is blamed for starting the trend for the overuse of 'Space Marines' in games, but the one time it could earn him some kind of credit he's disqualified.

 

[rossatdi]

What really gets to me is that in the "Best Space Marine ever" thread, Master Chief was omitted because technically he's in the navy and not a proper marine, even though the two organisations work very closely by definition. However, the moment we get a chance to dump on him he is included in the category so we can mock him. I don't mind people disliking Halo or the character, it's the lengths people will go to to deny them any kind of recognition.

Er, actually. Marines are normally part of the navy. In fact under bureaucratic organisation the US Marine Corps is part of the Department of the Navy, it however forms a separate military organisation is neither here nor there. The British Marines are part of the Royal Navy.

Exactly. That's why it annoyed me so much that he got seperated out just because of some relatively minor detail in the organisation of one country's military. In pretty much every other situation, Master Chief is blamed for starting the trend for the overuse of 'Space Marines' in games, but the one time it could earn him some kind of credit he's disqualified.

Agreed. I didn't realise it was a thing that happened, well I guess people idiots.

Despite having a semi-apathetic relationship with the Halo series I did enjoy the opening of Halo 3 when he falls from the sky. That's badass all over.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

The reason space smurfs get a reputation for wiping out entire armies singlehanded is not because they are better in the fluff than they are in-game. Look at it this way- these are souped-up humans, but they are still humans. They would not be capable of wrestling a carnfiex to the ground, and a genestealer can peel them apart in seconds in the fluff, yet the fluff also describes stealers as being vulnerable to lasguns and so on.


The reason that marines kill hundreds of men is that they drop in, wipe out entire squads with bolterfire, kill the commander and then leave. They do not fight wars by themselves, and the 'fluff marine' rules are frankly absurd. They go well beyond the fluff descriptions of marines fighting.

 

[Alex_P]

Dark Heresy has its problems by the dollop-worth, but I don't think that, assuming being an Inquisitor were dealt with in the rules, Exterminatus should have rules (if that's what you're suggesting?). Exterminatus is about whether you have a big-ass ship at your disposal, and that kind of stuff I would not accept rules for in my game.

I've got absolutely no problem with representing favors as tokens or with rolling to see if you can requisition a piece of equipment, if it fits with the context of the game (in a game about members of the military and/or the weird 40k space-church, using some kind of specialized rules for getting gear from your organization -- whether through rolls or static numbers -- would make a lot more sense to me than buying stuff does).

Of course, by "guidelines" it's possible you meant the exact same thing. In which case: *raspberry*

The difference is somewhat irrelevant to me. Both constitute play procedures, one's just a bit more formalized than the other. Oftentimes you can do more damage to a game by breaking a certain "guideline" than you can by breaking most of the hard-and-fast rules.

-- Alex

 

[Wyatt]

RE: 'The debate', I'm not completely sure what you guys are debating here. From what I can see Wyatt is saying that in the context of the 40K universe marines are doing the right thing given who they are and Alex seems to be saying that he prefers characters with a bit more depth. Other than that it seems to be real world morality you are discussing. Have I read it wrong?

yeah more or less, alex is applying OUR moral situation and OUR societys to the 40k universe. im trying too point out that outside of a few very basic human examples our morals and our societys dont really apply.

No, we couldn't have. Suddenly going "total war" in a proxy conflict between two nuclear powers means everyone dies.

so be it, thats my whole point about resolve and determination. if we had the resolve the soviets (or the chinese) would certianly never have gone nuclear. it was our fear that that made it any kind of a real threat to begine with.

remember the cuban missle crisis?

No, distance and technology aren't the answer (see Forever Peace -- written by a Vietnam veteran). There's no clear line between "right" and "wrong" here. But effective warfare is about an economy of violence. Violence costs you resources. Violence does bad shit to your own troops. There's a very good reason modern militaries try to teach soldiers precision and self-control.

too quote another writer with millitary experiance 'the purpose of a millitary is to kill people and break things'

you do have a point though if your talking about 'limited war', but when your talking about all out death or glory war, especialy when it relates to an enemy like choas itself you dont try and save as many demons as you can, you must kill everything you see, and then kill anyone watching that isnt part of your army incase they were corrupted too, and then keep an eye on your millitary afterwords and kill THEM too if they were corrupted.

in 40k death is the ultimate answer to any equasion involving chaos. as ive said before when the very rules governing our societys change our societys HAVE to change, your applying current millitary thinking and how we should/would react to a roughly equil human enemy. your a bit wrong even then on somethings you say, but when its put into a 40k context your totaly out of the park.

1. They'll never "get out of that situation". The Warp will always be there.
2. And what happens when, once you're done, the thing that's left isn't a recognizably human humanity? Worse yet, what if you could've avoided that, too?

1) if they dont get out of that situation than their society will just have to continue along as it is. our societys are shaped by our enviroment. your views are formed due too a complex interaction between you and your enviroment, society, schooling, upbringing, cultural bias, friends, enemys, the whole shebang. your views on morality and etchics arent an instinct they are learned and taht learning is formed by your enviroment. you concider the 40K universe 'bad' because of your experiance with THIS universe. im telling you that if you were born and raised in THAT universe you would think and feel different.

you judge the 40K universe through the glasses of your current code of whats proper conduct and seem incapable of actualy understand that how we view the world is shaped by whats IN that world. put yourself in a universe with a living god, real demons (chaos is satan in the flesh so to speak) and the war your fighting isnt about oil in the middle east or 'containment' of a political system but armageddon, the ultimate war between good and evil. things will begine to take on their proper context then.

2) define human or humanity.

This is a bullshit dichotomy. Real flesh-and-blood soldiers are quite capable of moral reasoning. They think just as much as they fear. In some ways, they have more moral agency than the common person -- they see the consequences of their actions firsthand, whereas the people going mad with bloodlust back home just have a steady diet of newsreels and patriotic music through which they understand war.

Heck, look at this whole "torture" debacle: a bunch of political weasels, armchair generals, and talkshow hosts talking up aimless brutality as "what must be done" while military intelligence experts kept trying to tell them "No, seriously, guys, we already know this doesn't work".

real flesh and blood soldier arent fighting a religious war against satan himself. you point out western views of some generals in our millitary about an issue like torture and thats where you draw a line?

real flesh and blood soldiers also fly planes into the TWC, they also strap bombs to their ass and kill themselves in crouded market places, they also drops missles onto wedding partys, or bomb schools full of 'innocent' people.

take my word for it, what you watch on the news about what a political general thinks about torture in gitmo isnt what REAL flesh and blood soldiers think. those "millitary intelligence experts" (an oximoron if ever their was one) are just as much a part of those 'homefront' idiots you slandered in the very same paragraph.

truth is we cant know that the torture didnt work. we can KNOW anything about it in detail except that someone was tortured, we dont know what if anything they said, we dont know what if anything we DID with that information, we know nothing about it except the gbasic fact that their was torture sometime, and someplace.

fact is that if torture didnt serve SOME purpose we wouldnt have done it. since we dont know what taht purpose was we cant make any kind of a valid judgment about it except too say its wrong. but if the 6 o'clock news showed us twarting another 9/11 style attack and the guy in charge said we got the information about this attack by torture than people would think very differently about the issue.

I don't. I really, really don't. Hope and happy endings aren't a priority to me. I want to see a goddamn human reaction. People who have been culturally braindamaged into doing anything and everything "for the Emperor" are hardly even people anymore.

...

Fuck, the stuff they're doing, it's hardly even "war". That's what I hate about this obsession with Space Marines. War is a human phenomenon. War is defined by culture. War has an element of communication that's pretty much absent from Warhammer 40k's take on "war" -- that's part of the setup that makes the setting's "war" perpetual.

I hate that people celebrate Space Marines as the quintessential warrior because it means they're buying into some of the biggest, ugliest, most pernicious myths of war. War isn't an endless battle against aliens who are incapable of even understanding you. War isn't all bravery and machismo. War isn't won by throwing everything else away with reckless abandon.

Of course, that's true of people fanboying most video game characters as well.

-- Alex

i totaly see what your saying. i dont much care for the whole 'war is kewl' croud myself. but fiction is what we make it and even a broken clock is right twice a day just because their reason for admiring them is a poor one that doesnt mean that they dont diserve to be admired.

i admire the space marines as the 'perfect warrior' because i HAVE though beyond the obvious that they win battles. ive put some thouight into how their universe is composed and what the perfect warrior should be in that universe. and the 40K space marines have filled that bill perfectly. if i was to set out and create a universe of fiction i couldnt come up with a more compelling army than the 40K marines if i tryed. my 'benchmark' for an ultimate enemy to date has been the Borg. they take improvise , adapt, and overcome (the US Marines real world motto, or one of them) to an absurde extream. in short , a perfect enemy. an enemy so bad that your either become LIKE them or you die. id put the 40K marines up against the Borg. i wouldnt lay much odds on who would win but id certianly give the Marines better odds than a lucky starship captian.

this thing with the Borg is actualy driving my views ont he 40K marines to a certian extent, i was amazed that Star trek actualy tossed aside the 'play nice' nonsence and came up with a real enemy that was capable of truly crushing humanity, then the asshats went and totaly ruined it by making the Borg die because data put them to sleap? i mean common that whole lucky shot against the single scale on the dragon that wasnt armor saved the universe thing is pure cheese even in the original, dragons have no soft scales in the real world and the only way to kill one is to stand up, take your lumps, charge into the fight and swing your sword till either you die or it does.

the 40K marines do this. they dont spend time looking for a way to win without getting hurt, they understand that a victory is only accomplished by force of will and might, and that some enemys CANT be reasoned with and the only way to even continue to exist at all is if you kill those enemys first.

ultimatly if your choice is to either become your enemy or to die, ill take my chances with becoming my enemy, death is final. IF i live there is a chance that all can be set right afterwords. if i dont live than it no longer matters does it?

keep this point firmly in your head alex ......... death is final. as long as their is life there is hope and i think that is the ultimate point in the 40K universe.

 

[Lukeydoodly]

The massively genetically/mechanically enhanced Warhammer 40K space marines are awesome, not thse ordinary men in power armour.

 

[Doug]

Space marines existed before Warhammer you know.... They came up with all this stuff about insanely awesome space marines, the originals from Starship troopers were pretty bad ass though. Warhammer wasn't the original so don't compare shit to it.

Haha. Compared to the troopers in Starship Troopers the W40k-SM are wussies. So he can compare the 40k-ones to anything he likes. He can't compare the StarshipTroopers to anything, tho.

Erm, the Starship Troopers where alot less armoured, replied on purely kinetic energy bullets (the W40k Marines had explosive round ... well, shells virtually), and where not genetically enhanced. Also, they died. Alot. Several billion in the mid-point of the movie.

 

[Doug]

Quoting Yahtzee: "I thought we abandoned realism around the time Space Marines were stabbing dinosaurs on the planet Zog"

some Space Marines have rocket launchers

Yes! Although the Tyranid are, in fact, a monstrous hive mind with organic weaponry and a devoted urge to consume the whole Galaxy. So, yeah. Moreso than dinosaurs....

 

[Alex_P]

Erm, the Starship Troopers where alot less armoured, replied on purely kinetic energy bullets (the W40k Marines had explosive round ... well, shells virtually), and where not genetically enhanced. Also, they died. Alot. Several billion in the mid-point of the movie.

Forget the movie. It has next to nothing to do with the book.

-- Alex