Profession/Interests vs Suspension of Disbelief

[eldargal]

I've been thinking about this for some time, and something Cobra6 said about realism in the Ultramarine film review thread made me decide to create this thread.

Does your profession, or area(s) of expertise, make it difficult for you to suspen your disbelief when playing 40k/WFB? I am an archaeologist, if not a practising one, and when looking at battle reports, artowkr or even pieces of terrain people I often think "That makes no sense...'. The settlement wouldn't be laid out like that, that ruin makes no sense, where are the midden heaps? etc. As a historical reenactor I also find fault with some rules and weaponry (Two hand swords being more unwieldy than one handed, utter nonsense) but that is more a fantasy thing.


So, if you have something that hurts your suspension of disbelief, do share it. Are you an aeronautical engineer that can't look at a 40k flyer without wincing? Etc.

[Drew da Destroya]

Not so much my profession (since I'm an office schlub), but my background as an English major sometimes affects how I read the fluff/stories.

Sometimes, there's some really bad writing in the codexes (since, apparently, GW doesn't like the proper "codices")... I'm still pretty angry at the massively out-of-character blurb in the Blood Angels book, where Necron and Blood Angels team up to fight the Tyranid, then decide that they don't want to fight each other anymore. It was so incredibly out of character for both the Necron and the Angels that it almost physically hurt to read.

Other times, I enjoy picking up on the literary and cultural references that go into some of the characters, settings, and stories.

By the way, as soon as I read that you were an archeologist, I wanted to make an Indiana Jones joke. I'm showing some restraint, but I thought you should know.

[Connjurus]

I've never really had a problem with suspension of disbelief. It's really easy for me to immerse myself in my chosen escape's reality. Sometimes, yeah, the layout of the town I'm playing in doesn't make sense...but that's because neither I, no anyone else I know, has the time to create everything that is needed to make a town look like a real town, so I just tell myself it was destroyed/looted/burned to the ground, and that's all it takes.

[Pingwin]

Yeah I do, absolutely.

Militairy organisation in 40K often makes little sense, marines using rookies for recon work while every 'real' army uses high quality troops for recon. Imperial regiments are, based on the codex, focused on one arm (infantry, tanks, artillery, etc) so they do, on purpose, not make up self supporting combat units which is basicly what they should be. (As the IG doesnt use a division/corps structure and is when compared to historical developments pre-napoleon.)
Also the whole lay-out of a SM chapter split into companies and the details in the companies seems to make little sense and any explaination of a (obviously used) battlegroup (or kampfgruppe as our friends at FoW would call it) organisational structure is missing. The Tau book actually does this a lot better.

But it is a game of light hearted fiction that doesnt take itself too seriously, so I dont mind it that much. I dont think studying real world Orbats would make the GW design team do a more fun game.

[eldargal]

Yes, I should clarify at this point I don't consider this to be a problem, and if it were, it would be my problem not GWs. Just curious as to how many people experience it.:)

[BuFFo]

As an artist, suspension of disbelief is my job. I am able to fully appreciate playing with toys, and not taking ANY of it seriously.

[DarkLink]

I don't care enough to, well, care. It's almost like comic book heroes. Everything that goes on is so ridiculous for one reason or another that there's no reason to take it seriously. Just have fun playing.

[SotonShades]

You hit the nail on the head... Aerospace Engineer, and I get so annoyed with the 40k flyers. The Eldar ones could work maybe, but the Imperials? They are about as aerodynamic as a brick! Even with increadibly powerful engines they would barely be able to achieve flight speeds, let alone have enough power to manoeuvre properly.

That said, I still play Aeronautica Imperialis and can imagine the aircraft flying through the air, looping and jinking.

I do have a pretty good imagination though ;)

[Connjurus]

Yeah I do, absolutely.

Militairy organisation in 40K often makes little sense, marines using rookies for recon work while every 'real' army uses high quality troops for recon. Imperial regiments are, based on the codex, focused on one arm (infantry, tanks, artillery, etc) so they do, on purpose, not make up self supporting combat units which is basicly what they should be. (As the IG doesnt use a division/corps structure and is when compared to historical developments pre-napoleon.)
Also the whole lay-out of a SM chapter split into companies and the details in the companies seems to make little sense and any explaination of a (obviously used) battlegroup (or kampfgruppe as our friends at FoW would call it) organisational structure is missing. The Tau book actually does this a lot better.

But it is a game of light hearted fiction that doesnt take itself too seriously, so I dont mind it that much. I dont think studying real world Orbats would make the GW design team do a more fun game.

Just gonna bring up a few points here. :)

1) Every marine you field in an army cannot be classified as a "rookie" - they already have so much training literally hardwired into their skulls through technology we do not have that they're already as skilled as a Guardsmen without ever seeing combat. And some Chapters do put their most experienced soldiers as scouts - Space Wolves spring to mind.

2) I agree with you that it isn't the most tactically feasible thing for IG regiments to be organized the way they are, the reason behind it is simple: the Horus Heresy. The High Lords and everyone else in charge of the Imperium are far too paranoid to ever give one man command of so diversified a force, except for Lord Generals - there are only a few Lord Generals and Colonels, so the fact of the matter is, a Heavy Weapons regiment might go rogue, but they don't have any tanks, or a tank regiment might go rogue, but they don't have an infantry screen, etc etc.

3) As far as the way Space Marines are split into companies, it seems to make sense to me, considering once again the actions of the Horus Heresy. They maximize their strengths of hard-hitting, blitzkireg style forces, with each company able to respond, independently, on its own, while still able to function cohesively as large, multi-company forces.

[SierraFiveOne]

Well there is the whole thing about Space Marines running around all brightly colored. Does the Codex Astartes forbid practical camouflage or something? Even the scouts, who are supposed to be sneaky, carry color schemes more suited to race cars than military personnel. Some Imperial Guard Regiments, Vostroyans most notably have this problem too. Bright colors were okay back in the day when you'd be lucky to hit someone a hundred yards out with a line of muskets, but in an era when someone can reduce you to a red smear from orbit, you'd think it would pay to at least wear some neutral colors at least.

But that's just a small gripe. It's not like Games Workshop can look at your camouflage painted Marines and forbid you from playing.

[DarkLink]

1) Every marine you field in an army cannot be classified as a "rookie" - they already have so much training literally hardwired into their skulls through technology we do not have that they're already as skilled as a Guardsmen without ever seeing combat. And some Chapters do put their most experienced soldiers as scouts - Space Wolves spring to mind.

Regardless, in pretty much every actual military force in the history of mankind, recon was not the lower end of the spectrum. It has always been elite, specially trained and highly skilled individuals/small units that have handled green ops. Recon would certainly qualify as higher than tactical Marines if it was organized more realistically.

In fact, tactical Marines would probably be at the bottom of the pile. It's more realistic to take fresh recruits and put them in the more generalized role of a tactical Marine than to rely on them in a specialized role such as a devestator or assault Marine. You would wait until a Marine showed an aptitude for marksmanship or hand to hand combat, then transfer them for additional training. Then, eventually, they would work their way through different specializations until they came back out as a Veteran, with elite skills in each area of combat.

[Connjurus]

Regardless, in pretty much every actual military force in the history of mankind, recon was not the lower end of the spectrum. It has always been elite, specially trained and highly skilled individuals/small units that have handled green ops. Recon would certainly qualify as higher than tactical Marines if it was organized more realistically.

In fact, tactical Marines would probably be at the bottom of the pile. It's more realistic to take fresh recruits and put them in the more generalized role of a tactical Marine than to rely on them in a specialized role such as a devestator or assault Marine. You would wait until a Marine showed an aptitude for marksmanship or hand to hand combat, then transfer them for additional training. Then, eventually, they would work their way through different specializations until they came back out as a Veteran, with elite skills in each area of combat.

That's now. In the days of Auspex scans, psykers, and huge Strike Cruisers sitting in low orbit on active scan, can we honestly say that it would be the same? Seems to me recon wouldn't be as important for the troops when you've got a psyker sitting in HQ telling you where the enemy is, or when your tactical marines have auspex arrays showing you where the enemy is in this building, or multiple 3-dimensional images showing you exactly where your opponents are on the battlefield, how many tanks they have, etc.

[JamesP]

I'm a non-practising archaeologist too and do find it hard to suspend my disbelief about a few things as a result. I do get that to a degree with most types of fantasy though - especially when the book or game includes a timeline where there is absolutely no technological development or major cultural change in a human civilisation for thousands of years but that's a problem with most fantasy from Lord of the Rings onwards. You get battles and deaths of major leaders but that's about it.

I have far less of a problem with the same issue in the 40K timeline as I can imagine the endless bureaucracy of the Imperium slowing down any development to a very, very, very slow crawl and that's before you take into account superstition and shootings/ burnings/ purging of entire planets for heresy.

My other archaeological problem with fantasy is how a lot of people paint skeletons that have supposedly burst out of the ground/ grave only a little while ago. I mean, yes, you could argue that the animating magic gave them a buff and a polish as well as un-life but who would have thought that Nagash/ Kremmler/ the Von Carsteins were so anxious to have nice shiny troops?

I gave up worrying about suspension of disbelief in 40K when I read the preview stuff for 1st edition. Orks in space with machine guns. If you can allow that, you have no right to worry about brightly-coloured Marines and tank commanders shouting 'drive me closer I want to hit them with my sword' :)

Re. recon marines, I think that one of the very early Marine army lists for RT (in the Chapter Approved book or maybe an early one in WD?) did have an entry for an elite, non-novice recon squad but it predated the formal codification of assault/ dev./ tactical/ scout squads IIRC.

[Grailkeeper]

Criminal Lawyer/ Masters Law student.

A universe where people do bad things to each other? I can beleive that.

[Valkerie]

I find the size of IG units rather amusing. ;)

I've been in the military for 22 years. Below is a comparision of IG versus real world unit sizes.

A fully manned infantry platoon without conscripts will have 104 people in it. (Real world: Infantry company.)

An infantry company (six platoons/troop choices) will have 624 people plus two fully manned company command squads of ten each for 644. (Real world: Two Infantry battalions.)

An infantry battalion of five companies will have 3,220 people in it. (Real world: Infantry brigade.)

Thus, a regiment of three battalions will have 9,660 people in it. (Real world: Infantry division.)

That's not counting support personnel, vehicle crews etc.

It's not that I find this a problem, mind you, I just find it amusing. At the end of the day, this is just a game played with toy soldiers designed to keep us occupied for a few hours, (and seperate us from some of our hard earned money.:))

[Connjurus]

I find the size of IG units rather amusing. ;)

I've been in the military for 22 years. Below is a comparision of IG versus real world unit sizes.

A fully manned infantry platoon without conscripts will have 104 people in it. (Real world: Infantry company.)

An infantry company (six platoons/troop choices) will have 624 people plus two fully manned company command squads of ten each for 644. (Real world: Two Infantry battalions.)

An infantry battalion of five companies will have 3,220 people in it. (Real world: Infantry brigade.)

Thus, a regiment of three battalions will have 9,660 people in it. (Real world: Infantry division.)

That's not counting support personnel, vehicle crews etc.

It's not that I find this a problem, mind you, I just find it amusing. At the end of the day, this is just a game played with toy soldiers designed to keep us occupied for a few hours, (and seperate us from some of our hard earned money.:))

I'm pretty sure that's because of the Imperium's way of using their human troops, i.e. as disposable cannon fodder, since they raise countless regiments from countless worlds. ;)

[lowdog]

I agree about SM Scouts. If that ammo dump/fuel depo has to be blown up, or that officer assassinated, or that hostage rescued, you don't send recruits, you send the special forces. The fluff for the Scouts makes it sounds like they are just dropped out there to sow general chaos with no expectations, like any of that stuff they manage to do is just a bonus, not a vital tactical objective. But anyways...

Honestly the thing that bothers me the most, as a lawyer, is outside the fluff. It's the way some gamers toss around the phrase "rules lawyer". (A) Most of the time it's just a general insult meaning "someone whose interpretation differs from mine". (B) The rest of the time it seems to refer more to strict RAW adherents that aren't actually behaving like real lawyers. If you look at how most courts handle statutory interpretation, they all look beyond the pure letter of the law. The law as written, when unambiguous, is the most important thing they look at, but to think that judges and lawyers don't actually consider legislative intent or the practical impact of competing interpretations is demonstrably false.

[Renegade]

As a Bookkeeper I have no problem with suspension of belief most of the time. I probably come to dealing with incredibly dumb "smart" people, and clearing up the mess left by accountants (who really should not be allowed to do bookkeeping!) and the amount of time people will leave it before they get some one in to look at the books, or clear a back log and how fast they think those things can be done.

I can easily imagine much of the workings of Terra, and its structures, and though some things may seem off game wise, I put that down to the game being an approximation.

@Valkerie, um... and what size force would a Field Marshal command and whos armed forces? The RAF in WW2 thought that the Germans had far more aircraft than they really did due to the differences in organisation, which again were different in WW1.

[Nungunz]

You hit the nail on the head... Aerospace Engineer, and I get so annoyed with the 40k flyers. The Eldar ones could work maybe, but the Imperials? They are about as aerodynamic as a brick! Even with increadibly powerful engines they would barely be able to achieve flight speeds, let alone have enough power to manoeuvre properly.

That said, I still play Aeronautica Imperialis and can imagine the aircraft flying through the air, looping and jinking.

I do have a pretty good imagination though ;)

Amen to that, Aerospace/Astrophysics myself. The flyer designs are nuts. Hell pretty much all of them have a huge amount of anhedral for supposedly nimble craft, not to mention the lift surfaces make no sense in terms of placement.

Most of the craft would have such major control that they'd be manuevering like flying whales (think C5) provided that they're actually able to get off the ground.

Don't even get me started on the physics behind everything. Conservation of Energy and Moment are being violated at every freaking turn.




That being said I still don't really have a problem suspending disbelief because everything is so over the top and doesn't take itself seriously.

[Xas]

with physics as my profession it is not too hard to do since all the "science" in 40k is so beyond reality that you cannot compare the two anyways.

the only thing that bothers me a bit is the melta/plasma issue because the description of melta-weapons (superheated/pressuriced gas) is actually what I think real plasma weaponry would work like if we would develop it as a battlefield-weapon.

the 40k plasma is the usual "magic plasma" that can do many fance things (like powering reactors of the kind of nuclear fission).

[Connjurus]

I agree about SM Scouts. If that ammo dump/fuel depo has to be blown up, or that officer assassinated, or that hostage rescued, you don't send recruits, you send the special forces. The fluff for the Scouts makes it sounds like they are just dropped out there to sow general chaos with no expectations, like any of that stuff they manage to do is just a bonus, not a vital tactical objective. But anyways...


All Space Marines are Special Forces. ;)

[Renegade]

Amen to that, Aerospace/Astrophysics myself. The flyer designs are nuts. Hell pretty much all of them have a huge amount of anhedral for supposedly nimble craft, not to mention the lift surfaces make no sense in terms of placement.

Most of the craft would have such major control that they'd be manuevering like flying whales (think C5) provided that they're actually able to get off the ground.

Don't even get me started on the physics behind everything. Conservation of Energy and Moment are being violated at every freaking turn.




That being said I still don't really have a problem suspending disbelief because everything is so over the top and doesn't take itself seriously.

Now you see the only problem wit this is that without the massive amounts of hardware in them, the Stealth Fighter and Bomber would not be able to fly.

But then again... none of the vehicles really make sense.

[Nungunz]

Now you see the only problem wit this is that without the massive amounts of hardware in them, the Stealth Fighter and Bomber would not be able to fly.

Yep. These things are ridiculously unstable. Flying wings have huge inherent issues with no vertical stabilizers and required some really odd devices to compensate (I really don't have much expertise in this area) and a very, very good electronics package.

Though the same goes for all performance military craft as most of them are purposely designed to be unstable.

The issue I have with the 40k flyers is that if they were actually able to generate enough lift to get off the ground, they'd be too stable and have almost no maneuverability (I looking at the Valyries/Vendetta, Stormraven, Thunderhawk, Landspeeder, etc).

[DarkLink]

That's now. In the days of Auspex scans, psykers, and huge Strike Cruisers sitting in low orbit on active scan, can we honestly say that it would be the same? Seems to me recon wouldn't be as important for the troops when you've got a psyker sitting in HQ telling you where the enemy is, or when your tactical marines have auspex arrays showing you where the enemy is in this building, or multiple 3-dimensional images showing you exactly where your opponents are on the battlefield, how many tanks they have, etc.

Here's the thing: technology level doesn't really come into play a whole lot. It's a matter of training time and experience.

A specialist job, such as an assault marine, devastator, or scout, requires extensive experience in specific areas. Something that new recruits don't have.

Tactical Marines, however, would have a much less demanding skill set. New recruits would have time to develop their skills and build experience, until they reached a point where they were competent enough to go through the specialized training required for the various other roles.

This was true in the days of the Romans, it was true in WWI/WWII, it's true today, and I see no reason why it wouldn't be true thousands of years from now.

[Gir]

The issue I have with the 40k flyers is that if they were actually able to generate enough lift to get off the ground, they'd be too stable and have almost no maneuverability (I looking at the Valyries/Vendetta, Stormraven, Thunderhawk, Landspeeder, etc).

As someone said before, you can't really compare modern day aeronautics to that of technology 39000 years in the future. You have to take into account things like: Different materials, different engines, different atmospheric conditions, and gravplates. Hell, they probably also know how planes actually fly in the M41.

Anyway, as a Software Engineer I have no problem with suspension of disbelief in any medium for any reason. I guess I have a unique ability to completely separate fantasy worlds from reality.

[Albavar]

I find quite the opposite actually. I design brackets for tanks and other armored vehicles. It often surprises how many of GW's little details are accurate to our current vehicles.

[Sister Rosette Soulknyt]

Um, let see, im a waiter, ive trained in 5-star dinning for over 10 years and have about every credential in fine dinning there is to train in...and even crisis negotiation training if you believe that from ex-FBI (it helps with arguements).
That said i guess my job would'nt dislodge me from Suspension of Disbelief unless a few SM's got leave and walked into a restaurant, can you imagine the bill?

SM to the waiter: "id like the rack of beef, the whole rack, a slab of beer, 5 baskets of fries and a side salad..im cutting back".
Waiter: "ok thanks"
2nd SM: "wait id like the same, but without the salad"
Waiter: "ahh okay"
3rd SM: "bring me that and an extra fries, and beer thank"
Waiter: "um, thats going to be a 2 hour wait..is that ok?"
1st SM: "Sure, just make sure mine is well done" puts hand on Bolter pistol and glares at the waiter with his 8 foot frame.

[lowdog]

Here's the thing: technology level doesn't really come into play a whole lot. It's a matter of training time and experience.

A specialist job, such as an assault marine, devastator, or scout, requires extensive experience in specific areas. Something that new recruits don't have.

This was true in the days of the Romans, it was true in WWI/WWII, it's true today, and I see no reason why it wouldn't be true thousands of years from now.

It's also true in 40k of the Imperial Guard. Their infiltrators are veterans.

[scadugenga]

As a historical reenactor I also find fault with some rules and weaponry (Two hand swords being more unwieldy than one handed, utter nonsense) but that is more a fantasy thing.

As a trained swordsman in both western and eastern styles--I can certainly confirm two handed swords as being more unwieldy (read: slower) than your more traditional 1 handed blades. Unless you're talking about the katana, all bets are off there. It's all a matter of size and weight. The Claymore (the two-handed version, not the basket hilted broadsword) is certainly slower and less agile than your basic cut&thrust blade. The western small sword, or the chinese jian, for example, would be much faster than the rapier (before or after Elizabeth's proclamation dictating the legal maximum length of a rapier...)

But on to your original point--I work in insurance claims, so I argue with lawyers constantly. That deals less with fluff and more with rules-lawyering. :) However, I've got graduate level background in english and undergrad minor in anthropology--with archeology and cultural anthro as my areas of study. I've worked long and hard to suppress my english "let's-dissect-the-prose-until-you've-sucked-all-enjoyment-possiblity-out-of-it" training so that I can actually enjoy reading books again. So I have no problem being able to suspend the disbelief.

[DarkLink]

As someone said before, you can't really compare modern day aeronautics to that of technology 39000 years in the future. You have to take into account things like: Different materials, different engines, different atmospheric conditions, and gravplates. Hell, they probably also know how planes actually fly in the M41.


While gravplates would alleviate the need to produce lift, different engines, materials, atmospheres (presuming we're still talking about atmospheres that can support life), etc still don't make thunderhawks aerodynamic. The material/atmospheric properties would have to be crazy weird to justify an odd design.

Resistance of a fluid flowing past an object is primarily determined by the shape of the object. An aerodynamic shape will be more efficient than a non-aerodynamic shape, regardless of most the other variables involved. And even if you do make some magical material that improves the aerodynamics of the aircraft, then you should still use the more aerodynamic design as you will then have a super-aerodynamic aircraft, rather than just a normal aerodynamic aircraft.

[eldargal]

I have to disagree, even the heavier two handed swords were, say, 3.5 kilograms, and it doesn't take that much effort to move a well balanced blade of that weight through the air, especially with two hands. There probably is a small difference in speed, it is still twice as heavy as a one handed sword, but in my experience it is negligible. Not enough to warrant the 'strikes last' or at half the speed rules common in fantasy settings. I'll take a German zeihander over a Katana any day, I find Japanese blades to be the most overrated, over hyped rubbish there is. I am referring to historical blades too, don't get me started on modern reproductions. To be fair modern western reproductions are pretty awful too, poor balance and overweight.
Any (negligible) loss of speed is more than compensated for the extra hitting power and reach, though of course the downside is you can't grapple or carry a shield.

Anyway, back on topic, I must admit with 40k/WFB it isn't too bad, its much worse with MMOs, but every now and then I see a ruin which just makes no sense. But the damage to be suspension of disbelief lasts seconds if that. Good to know I'm not alone though.

Re archaeology and Indiana Jones, I tend to get Lara Croft jokes more.:rolleyes:



As a trained swordsman in both western and eastern styles--I can certainly confirm two handed swords as being more unwieldy (read: slower) than your more traditional 1 handed blades. Unless you're talking about the katana, all bets are off there. It's all a matter of size and weight. The Claymore (the two-handed version, not the basket hilted broadsword) is certainly slower and less agile than your basic cut&thrust blade. The western small sword, or the chinese jian, for example, would be much faster than the rapier (before or after Elizabeth's proclamation dictating the legal maximum length of a rapier...)

But on to your original point--I work in insurance claims, so I argue with lawyers constantly. That deals less with fluff and more with rules-lawyering. :) However, I've got graduate level background in english and undergrad minor in anthropology--with archeology and cultural anthro as my areas of study. I've worked long and hard to suppress my english "let's-dissect-the-prose-until-you've-sucked-all-enjoyment-possiblity-out-of-it" training so that I can actually enjoy reading books again. So I have no problem being able to suspend the disbelief.

[Valkerie]

@Valkerie, um... and what size force would a Field Marshal command and whos armed forces? The RAF in WW2 thought that the Germans had far more aircraft than they really did due to the differences in organisation, which again were different in WW1.

U.S. Army.

We don't actually have a Field Marshall rank, but if I recall correctly, a Field Marshall outranked a four star general. I believe that Montgomery was promoted to Field Marshall at least partly so he could outrank most U.S. Generals, and be equal in rank to Eisenhower, even though he was still under their command. (Rank structure doesn't always make a whole lot of sense.:))

At the least, a Field Marshall would command an army of several divisions, just like a four or five star general.

[Pingwin]

The imperial guard doesnt have a fixed organisation structure above regimental level, so they will not have fixed ranks that match the structure. This will all be done ad-hoc, situation based and probably look like a central HQ group that directly controls all regiments.

A terrible way to manage a 100.000+ man force, so very fitting for the fluff :)

Oh, and on the notion that space marine recruits equal IG veterans, their balistic skill proves otherwise. The scouts are troops not yet ready to serve as 'regular marine' and I totally agree the realistic way would be to start recruits in tactical squads and branch out from there.

[Drew da Destroya]

Re archaeology and Indiana Jones, I tend to get Lara Croft jokes more.:rolleyes:

Probably a bit more flattering! Honestly, I tend to forget that she's an archeologist... chalk it up to not really playing the games.

[JamesP]

Re archaeology and Indiana Jones, I tend to get Lara Croft jokes more.:rolleyes:

I miss the Indiana Jones jokes, all my friends and I seem to get these days are Time Team/ Baldrick ones :(

[scadugenga]

Anyway, back on topic, I must admit with 40k/WFB it isn't too bad, its much worse with MMOs, but every now and then I see a ruin which just makes no sense. But the damage to be suspension of disbelief lasts seconds if that. Good to know I'm not alone though.



Yeah, the sword debate really doesn't belong here, and truthfully is best debated in person (or group) of friends with tasty beverages handy.

Now, back to your on-topic point re: two handed weapons--they only ones that "go last" are the double str/power weapon options.

And that's pure game mechanics due to the ID rule. Have to have a drawback to compensate for the godawfull killy power.

[Connjurus]

Yeah, the sword debate really doesn't belong here, and truthfully is best debated in person (or group) of friends with tasty beverages handy.

Now, back to your on-topic point re: two handed weapons--they only ones that "go last" are the double str/power weapon options.

And that's pure game mechanics due to the ID rule. Have to have a drawback to compensate for the godawfull killy power.

I dunno...an Eviscerator would probably be pretty unwieldy once it bit into something.

[scadugenga]

I dunno...an Eviscerator would probably be pretty unwieldy once it bit into something.

Chain blades of any variety are so beyond-the-pale unrealistic that they shouldn't even count. ;)

[cobra6]

As the absentee father of this thread (waves at Eldargal) I guess I should stop being a deadbeat and weigh in!

I'm a US Army Infantry officer by trade, and I really don't have a hard time with SoDB when it comes to 40K, because as other have said, it's so over the top that it's easy to just go with it and have fun. Like my experience with war movies, I have an easier time suspending disbelief with downright unrealistic, cartoony military adventures as opposed to those that try to trade on their "realism."

If 40K billed itself as a highly realistic representation of platoon and company-level combat, then I would have alot more trouble with guns that only shoot the equivalent of about 25 meters, troops running around in bright red, blue, white, and pink carrying swords, and the fact that the best way to survive being shot at is to have the bullet bounce off your armor! (Although that is getting better with the increased importance of cover saves.) Also how the generals are all the best fighters and can all get shot several times and keep punching away with giant mechanical gloves, while they command-and-control planetary military campaigns in the middle of a swordfight.

And how battle for control of a planet usually involves campaigns on the scale of the Russian invasion of Chechnya. Planets are really, really big. It wouldn't matter how superhuman you are, 1000 (or 100, or 10!) of you will not be able to get to every nook and cranny and defeat all the enemies.

Or how every third planet seems to be named "Gehenna."

But... 40K makes no claims on realism, and so I actually have no problem with any of the above, although I am certainly aware of these apsects and many, many others. That's what makes the game we know and love, and I wouldn't have it any other way. Thats why I play 40K, and not FoW.

[Grailkeeper]

I should probably mention my friend dave is an unholy armoured demi god of terror, in whose name thousands nay tens of thousands of souls have been slaughtered.

He thinks the depiciton of abbadon as having a topknot hairstyle is totally unrealistic for someone in that position

[eldargal]

Its true, everyone knows that the mullet is the hairstyle of choice amongst galactic despoilers.

[Grailkeeper]

Works for fabius bile

[Connjurus]

Ah yes, the topknot...how I hate it. Which brings me to another point - helmet options for all helmetless characters, at least from the Space Marines.

"HERPDERP I'VE GOT SUM AWSUM ARMOR GAIZ HERPDERP GONNA TAKE OFF DA HELMET AND FIGHT"

[Faultie]

As a scientist and program coordinator, I find it quite easy to suspend disbelief. I play with my little toy army mans so that I don't have to think. When even the smallest details or "facts" don't make any sense, I find it hard to care about the much larger disparities.

As Buffo pointed out recently in a thread on how the Dark Eldar explode suns, it's easy: they press a button, and it explodes. Done.

[cobra6]

Which brings me to another point - helmet options for all helmetless characters, at least from the Space Marines.

Seriously. The one piece of armor that is so essential to your survival that it survived the advent of the machine gun, tank, jet, and nuke. Even a well-thrown rock can kill if it hits an unhelmeted head.

And where is the ammo for the Space Marines, especially? The banana clips on their boltguns hold what, 10-20 rounds, based on a boltgun's bore. Soldiers go into battle absolutely laden with extra ammo, and yet most SM's I see (including my own) have more purity seals than extra mags.

Although my outlook is essentially the same as Faultie's, this is too much fun.

[Faultie]

And where is the ammo for the Space Marines, especially? The banana clips on their boltguns hold what, 10-20 rounds, based on a boltgun's bore. Soldiers go into battle absolutely laden with extra ammo, and yet most SM's I see (including my own) have more purity seals than extra mags.

Although my outlook is essentially the same as Faultie's, this is too much fun.Exactly!
Person A: Where is all the Marine's ammo?
Me: In the gun.
Person A: But how many rounds do they even carry?!
Me: Plenty.

[DarkLink]

The banana clips on their boltguns hold what, 10-20 rounds, based on a boltgun's bore.

30, according to GW:rolleyes:. And they have some stupid thing about ammo being stored in their backpacks, so their squad mates can grab their ammo. What happens if one SM gets separated from the others, though? "Hey, guys, I need some help reaching my ammo stash... guys?"

[Grailkeeper]

I've a (real this time) friend who is a body builder. I think theres a few on this site as well so they can help me out. There's no way Catachans would get that buff without being SERIOUSLY juiced.

The fluff however is that they're supah muscley from coming from a death world. In real life people who come from jungles and seriously dangerous areas tend to be small and sinewy/wiry rather than muscley. They're still pretty strong and tough but tehir muscles aren't like balloons- look at the vietmenese for example or the thais.

Then again I'm talking about a game with undead robots, pyschic powers and a life support machine powered by souls so it may be a silly mistake to point out.

Also apothecaries don't seem to have all that much medical equipment on them. They can handle the dead no problem, stopping marines from becoming dead on the other hand...

Any medics out there know anything about this? Melissa?

[Connjurus]

Also apothecaries don't seem to have all that much medical equipment on them. They can handle the dead no problem, stopping marines from becoming dead on the other hand...

Any medics out there know anything about this? Melissa?

That's actually something that's not that hard for me to believe - a Space Marine's armor does most "standard" battlefield treatment for them. They just hand out better painkillers and administer the Emperor's Mercy as needed. I'd imagine the more srs bsns medical equipment to be held behind the line at a drop-site/base-camp. I do remember reading in the Space Wolves series...can't remember which book, whichever one where Ragnar's sergeant gets capped in the head, he's held in some weird prefab building filled with medical equipment.

[Mystery.Shadow]

...And where is the ammo for the Space Marines, especially? The banana clips on their boltguns hold what, 10-20 rounds, based on a boltgun's bore. Soldiers go into battle absolutely laden with extra ammo, and yet most SM's I see (including my own) have more purity seals than extra mags.

Well, let's see now.... The maximum rate of fire for a Boltgun is 'Rapid Fire' or two shots. The maximum game length is seven turns. So the most a Marine would ever have to shoot is 14 times. :P
:D:D:D

[Denzark]

I'm in the business of protecting the interests of good Queen Bess II - the sort of business that makes me go to sandy places now and again. So I'll tell you what grabs my goat:

Tanks.

1. No one would deliberately create a tank with a profile as high as a Land Raider or a Leman Russ. The technology might be supressed but common sense isn't.

2. Ergonomics. Your Leman Russ Barrel, esp demolisher, is massive. How far backwards is the breech going to go, how are you going to fit a man in there as well, with room to load it?

3. Vindicators. Their shells make big messes. So, I would hazard a guess that no one would go into battle with one hanging on a hook outside the vehicle. this would be profligate stupidity of the highest order.

4. Armoured Transports. Back in the day, IG got Land Raiders and Rhinos. Now they don't. OK - you cna retcon the fluff to say that they are restricted or limited tech. But on the flip side, the Chimaera clearly isn't. Why would the Marines not use the transport vehicle with higher capacity of carriage, equivalent speed, better armour, available in limitless numbers?

Having said that, what really annoys is scoring units. Because the reality of decent special forces and elite, light troops, is that they are often used to take, secure and hold an objective until follow on forces get there. Please don't come back on this unless you can categorically state you have been trained by the hereford hooligans and I have this wrong. Try wikipedia-ing 'Operation Market Garden'

Conversely, in defence, what can an infantry battalion use to best effect in defence (of an objective?) Its support Company - whilst I know IG heavy weapons are now in the Platoon,this principle applies equally to devastators, Dark Reapers, etc.

So having only troops as scoring units is dog plop.

[Valkerie]

I'm in the business of protecting the interests of good Queen Bess II - the sort of business that makes me go to sandy places now and again. So I'll tell you what grabs my goat:

Tanks.

1. No one would deliberately create a tank with a profile as high as a Land Raider or a Leman Russ. The technology might be supressed but common sense isn't.

2. Ergonomics. Your Leman Russ Barrel, esp demolisher, is massive. How far backwards is the breech going to go, how are you going to fit a man in there as well, with room to load it?

3. Vindicators. Their shells make big messes. So, I would hazard a guess that no one would go into battle with one hanging on a hook outside the vehicle. this would be profligate stupidity of the highest order.

4. Armoured Transports. Back in the day, IG got Land Raiders and Rhinos. Now they don't. OK - you cna retcon the fluff to say that they are restricted or limited tech. But on the flip side, the Chimaera clearly isn't. Why would the Marines not use the transport vehicle with higher capacity of carriage, equivalent speed, better armour, available in limitless numbers?

Having said that, what really annoys is scoring units. Because the reality of decent special forces and elite, light troops, is that they are often used to take, secure and hold an objective until follow on forces get there. Please don't come back on this unless you can categorically state you have been trained by the hereford hooligans and I have this wrong. Try wikipedia-ing 'Operation Market Garden'

Conversely, in defence, what can an infantry battalion use to best effect in defence (of an objective?) Its support Company - whilst I know IG heavy weapons are now in the Platoon,this principle applies equally to devastators, Dark Reapers, etc.

So having only troops as scoring units is dog plop.

I agree with you on the Leman Russ especially. I really feel sorry for the commander, he's either standing directly behind the breach, or straddling it, neither of which would be particularly comfortable when it fires. BTW, in one of the Gaunt's Ghosts novels, it's stated that the main gun on the Russ is 110 Centimeters wide.(Over a yard wide for us in the States.) Of course, that would make it easy to clean, you could just crawl inside and scrub it out.:)

The bit about the Chimeras I don't really understand either, better weapons and armor, and higher capacity. The only real world example I can think off is that the U.S. Marines were still using M113's long after the Army had switched to Bradleys. Of course, this was partially because it takes time to produce enough Bradleys, and partially because the Bradley didn't meet all of the Marines' tactical needs, (not being truly amphibious, for one.) The in-universe fluff would be a) the Marines are so tradition bound that they don't see the need for change, (after all, it's stated that not all chapters use the Razorback because the design is 'only' about 5,000 years old), and b) they don't want to look like the Guard, being all superhuman and such.:D

The bit about troops was put in to make people take troop choices more than anything else. I remember when pretty much everyone took only the mandatory two troop choices and maxed out on special characters and elites. But I do agree with you on the SF troops, nothing like trying to push some Rangers out of a position they're holding. It can definitely ruin your day.

Personally, I would add the airborne operations on D-Day to your example of Market-Garden. The paratroopers were scattered to hell and gone, lost most of their equipment, and had to form ad hoc units just to get to their objectives, and they still held and held well. (Full disclosure: 22 years in the Guard, and I have relatives that landed on Omaha Beach on 6 June 1944, so I might be just a tad bit prejudiced.;))

[DarkLink]

Having said that, what really annoys is scoring units. Because the reality of decent special forces and elite, light troops, is that they are often used to take, secure and hold an objective until follow on forces get there. Please don't come back on this unless you can categorically state you have been trained by the hereford hooligans and I have this wrong. Try wikipedia-ing 'Operation Market Garden'

Conversely, in defence, what can an infantry battalion use to best effect in defence (of an objective?) Its support Company - whilst I know IG heavy weapons are now in the Platoon,this principle applies equally to devastators, Dark Reapers, etc.

So having only troops as scoring units is dog plop.

Look at Pointe-Du-Hoc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointe_du_Hoc) on D-day. Or the Battle of Mogadishu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Mogadishu_(1993)). Or Hill 488 (http://www.hill488.com/). All perfect examples of how it doesn't matter who holds the hill, so long as someone does, particularly Hill 488.

18 Recon Marines and 2 Navy Corpsmen were trapped on top of a hill by a full Viet Cong battalion overnight. By the time the sun rose, every one of them was either dead or wounded, and there were 43 VC bodies within 20 yards of the Marine's lines, some of whom had been killed in hand to hand combat. That Recon platoon earned 18 Purple Hearts, 13 Silver Stars, 4 Navy Crosses and one Metal of Honor.

[Grailkeeper]

(Full disclosure: 22 years in the Guard .;))

Which regiment? serve with the cadians?- and unless you've served fought on another planet its safer to say you're PDF. I kid, I kid.

Someone pointed out to me that the first company on macragge needen't have bothered holding the polar station against the nid's they'd no scoring troops and so died for nothing.

Look again at Monte Cassino- the Fallschrimjager held that one for quite a while against eveything the allies could throw at them.

[Pingwin]

I agree the limitation to troops to see who can claim an objective is not realistic, but I do feel it is a very good rule for the game. 40K is not a simulator or a simulation game, it is a beer&pretzel 'warflavour' game and from that perspective I cant say I mind this rule. It forces positive dynamics into the game play, adding to the tactical complexity and for me making it more fun.

[DelphicFist]

Chain blades of any variety are so beyond-the-pale unrealistic that they shouldn't even count. ;)

Yes chain blades are down right silly and would not work how they work in the fluff. Cool though.

[Denzark]

I agree the limitation to troops to see who can claim an objective is not realistic, but I do feel it is a very good rule for the game. 40K is not a simulator or a simulation game, it is a beer&pretzel 'warflavour' game and from that perspective I cant say I mind this rule. It forces positive dynamics into the game play, adding to the tactical complexity and for me making it more fun.

Adopting the sensible approach of 'kill all the enemy's scoring units first' in 2/3 of standard missions is hardly complex - its lifted straight out of 'assassinate the warcaster' aka warmachine.

If it was to stop min mxed 4th ed army selections, they could have been tighter in the lists - ie one elite per 2 troops - or something similar.

But, as I think has been discussed before, troops and their importance is just an excuse to make them more widely used = more widely sold.

[DarkLink]

I
The only real world example I can think off is that the U.S. Marines were still using M113's long after the Army had switched to Bradleys.

This might also have to do with the Marine Corp's minuscule budget. We spend all our money on the Army, Navy and Airforce, and give the Marines the leftovers.

[Drew da Destroya]

But, as I think has been discussed before, troops and their importance is just an excuse to make them more widely used = more widely sold.

I think this argument is a little specious... troops are often one of the less expensive units you can buy, in comparison to the Heavy, Elite, and Fast slots. A full Tac squad is $37.50 retail, while 5 terminators are $50, 3 Bikes are $45, and heavy support is dominated by tanks that cost upwards of $45 (with the Raider clocking in at $62)

If their entire goal was to make a unit more widely sold, why not make Elites 1-4 slots (one required, 3 optional)? Or something similar in the Heavy slot?

[Denzark]

I think this argument is a little specious... troops are often one of the less expensive units you can buy, in comparison to the Heavy, Elite, and Fast slots. A full Tac squad is $37.50 retail, while 5 terminators are $50, 3 Bikes are $45, and heavy support is dominated by tanks that cost upwards of $45 (with the Raider clocking in at $62)

If their entire goal was to make a unit more widely sold, why not make Elites 1-4 slots (one required, 3 optional)? Or something similar in the Heavy slot?

Its the fact that the points cost is so low for something that is key and weak - back in the day you would get 2 x 5 man tac squads for the force org - that was it. You would then fill up with gucci murderour hyper killy units of doom.

Whereas now you must spam troops, and their mech which makes them uber-effective, is low points - but high cost. Quite simpler, armies are less specialised, therefore bigger (in figure and vehicle content) and therefore more expensive.

[DarkLink]

They should have just made troops good enough to compete with the elite units (read: make them cheaper). No one took troops because they sucked.

For example, you could either have a fudge-ton of average tactical Marines, or a handful of Terminators, Veterans, etc. It would maintain the power disparity between tactical Marines and Veterans, eliminate the silly only-troops-score, and avoid the min-maxing from 4th ed.

[Cherub]

Yes chain blades are down right silly and would not work how they work in the fluff. Cool though.

after working in the forest industry in British Columbia for many years I have seen first hand what happens when you slip holding a chainsaw and your finger is on the trigger. They go through a Human body like a hot knife through butter. Its quite disturbing really, the blood spatter ends up being quite a bit further than you would think.......

That being said if you use lighter than steel metals and a micro electic motor it would be possible to make a weapon out of it. Just look at some of the unwieldy weapons used in the medivel ages. Possible yes practicla, well made with say titanium parts and some sort of super battery it would be possible to make one. Regular sword would probally kick its *** though. Id test it for you but i really dont want to wreck one of my swords or the bar on my saw. Not to mention if i broke the chain hitting it would be totally unpleasent.

[DarkLink]

Just look at some of the unwieldy weapons used in the medivel ages.

Actually this is one of the biggest misconceptions about medieval weaponry. Though books and movies portray longswords, maces and the like as being heavy and clumsy, they were quite the opposite. Swords and warhammers only weight a few pounds, and the martial arts developed around them were as developed as anything you would find from the far East.


As for chainsaw weapons, they'd work well enough on unarmored targets. But ever try taking a chainsaw to a metal plate? Yeah, I wouldn't want to try that either.

[Connjurus]

Actually this is one of the biggest misconceptions about medieval weaponry. Though books and movies portray longswords, maces and the like as being heavy and clumsy, they were quite the opposite. Swords and warhammers only weight a few pounds, and the martial arts developed around them were as developed as anything you would find from the far East.


Thank you.

[Porty1119]

I'm a student, with some military and piloting experience. I have to say, none of the cockpits of Imperial aircraft other than the Marauder are anything I would want to fly from. They're all extremely narrow, opposed to the (by comparison) spacious cockpits of modern aircraft. Instrumentation (see the Valkyrie) is also extremely limited. I have a bit of experience flying CAP Cessna 172/182 light aircraft, and these *light simple civilian aircraft* have more avionics than a Valkyrie. I also have basic knowledge of the B767, so don't even get me started there. And the Valk/Vulture get the cockpit order wrong. They have the gunner in the upper cockpit, although he has been in the forward/lower cockpit for a wide view for decades. The pilot is mounted in the forward/lower cockpit, while he should be in the aft/upper cockpit for a commanding view.

[DarkLink]

Thank you.

Right. For example, Hollywood thinks warhammers look like this:

http://www.relmisles.co.uk/OTa_Thumbs/War_Hammers/WarHammer2.gif





When they really look like this:

http://www.medieval-weaponry.co.uk/acatalog/AW5730-medieval-war-hammer.jpg


Just a little bit of a difference in useability:rolleyes:.

[Connjurus]

Right. For example, Hollywood thinks warhammers look like this:

http://www.medieval-weaponry.co.uk/acatalog/AW5730-medieval-war-hammer.jpg




That is one sexy piece of death right there.

[harrybuttwhisker]

I'm a barman, drinking helps lmao

[Unzuul the Lascivious]

So I've read these posts with interest - I have to say I prefer the look of the Hollywood Hammer (as it shall from now on be known!). I'd say that obviously in some cases things in the 40K universe will defy what we know today due to enhanced technology - one can make up what one likes to justify the chainsword (incidentally I've always viewed chainswords as being aimed at armour joints, but when it does hit armour, SCREEEEEEE!), make flying blocks fly etc etc. You only have to contemplate the Dark Eldar weaponry to realise that we're talking seriously fantastical technology here. Think how rapidly humankind has discovered and developed its technology thus far! And imagine how advanced we could be in 38 thousand years, apocalyptic wars or no! We could discover entirely new fuels, new ways of applying the forces and power that we discover. Humans could evolve further to utilise the parts of our brain that we thus far think is redundant, developing psychic abilities. Genome engineering could pave the way for the types of superhumans we read about and battle with, in that space of time I think the possibilities are endless. What we know of science now is just that - what we know. There is an immense universe out there full of discoveries waiting to be made, and our knowledge must be miniscule compared to what is possible. I would say, as an amateur philosopher (:D) that everything we read about and re-enact on the table top could be possible.

Having said that....if your guns range can only reach the first man/woman in a unit, how the jeffin hell can they kill the other members of the unit? "We're being fired on Sarge, I think they're only just in range though, Jenkins has fallen. Orders?" "PRESS ON!"....pft

Yep, bolters firing the equivalent of 25 metres? Absolute tripe of a gun then!

Any sentient combatant should be able to hold objectives. Everyone should just ignore that rule entirely.

And if you ask me, there is a distinct lack of black, Asian and other types of human depicted by Games Workshop! As a white male, this doesn't really bother me so much, but surely it annoys the crap out of other people!!!

[Connjurus]

And if you ask me, there is a distinct lack of black, Asian and other types of human depicted by Games Workshop! As a white male, this doesn't really bother me so much, but surely it annoys the crap out of other people!!!

Not so much a distinct lack, I'd say.

The White Scars are Mongol/Hun/Native Americanish.

The Salamanders are usually depicted as being black, as was one of the Remembrancers from the Horus Heresy books, and an Inquisitor's Interrogator from the Space Wolf series.

The Tallarn are definitely Middle-Eastern and Indian.

I don't think this comes from GW not wanting to put it in so much as it springs from most GW writers as being white males. As the issue is not a prevalent thought in their own minds, it doesn't come up in their fiction, although Dan Abnett is usually pretty good about it.

[Melissia]

I've been thinking about this for some time, and something Cobra6 said about realism in the Ultramarine film review thread made me decide to create this thread.

Does your profession, or area(s) of expertise, make it difficult for you to suspen your disbelief when playing 40k/WFB? I am an archaeologist, if not a practising one, and when looking at battle reports, artowkr or even pieces of terrain people I often think "That makes no sense...'. The settlement wouldn't be laid out like that, that ruin makes no sense, where are the midden heaps? etc. As a historical reenactor I also find fault with some rules and weaponry (Two hand swords being more unwieldy than one handed, utter nonsense) but that is more a fantasy thing.


So, if you have something that hurts your suspension of disbelief, do share it. Are you an aeronautical engineer that can't look at a 40k flyer without wincing? Etc.Yes, my major makes the geneseed sound ludicrous, and the exception to females even more so.

No reason given for it makes any sense given what I know about chemistry and genetics. But meh, it's how ti is. As dumb as it is, that's how the fiction works.

[Melissia]

guns that only shoot the equivalent of about 25 metersNot that this is that much of an improvement, but bolters have a purported range of 100 meters (~330 feet) as "long" range (Anything beyond that being "extreme" range). At least according to Dark Heresy.

Which makes... some sense I guess? As they CAN be fired at targets past "long" range... But there you go.

[miteyheroes]

As a librarian, I find 40k very realistic.

*zzaps readers with overdue books with mind bolt*

[Duke]

As a librarian, I find 40k very realistic.

*zzaps readers with overdue books with mind bolt*

This actually made me laugh out loud.

As a finance professional I would actually like to know more about how you run a galactic currency... Also I remember hearing somewhere that some planets and sectors have their own currencies... All in all my profession doesn't make 40k more or least "realostic." though I do think that if humankind ever madd it to a galaxy spanning empire it would be more like the xenophobic 40k than it would be like the all incisive federation.

Duke

[Melissia]

This actually made me laugh out loud.

As a finance professional I would actually like to know more about how you run a galactic currency... Also I remember hearing somewhere that some planets and sectors have their own currencies... All in all my profession doesn't make 40k more or least "realostic." though I do think that if humankind ever madd it to a galaxy spanning empire it would be more like the xenophobic 40k than it would be like the all incisive federation.

Duke

"Thrones" are the galactic coinage, they're the standard by which all other coinage is compared to and are accepted all throughout the Imperium.

[Lockark]

"Thrones" are the galactic coinage, they're the standard by which all other coinage is compared to and are accepted all throughout the Imperium.

That accualy surprised me in all honesty.....


With the whole "Gothic Europe in space" deal there were going for. I assumed the Currency would be Commodity backed.

Not the modern system of money trading that we have today, were currency being traded gives us the value of our currencies. (Not to mentioned the standard Currency equals the space euro.)

Dose this means some wear in 40k there is a Space Wall Street?

O.o


Screw Chaos gods, Eldric Races, and Space Fascists! The Imperium's economy is the space EU!

[Connjurus]

That accualy surprised me in all honesty.....


With the whole "Gothic Europe in space" deal there were going for. I assumed the Currency would be Commodity backed.

Not the modern system of money trading that we have today, were currency being traded gives us the value of our currencies. (Not to mentioned the standard Currency equals the space euro.)

Dose this means some wear in 40k there is a Space Wall Street?

O.o


Screw Chaos gods, Eldric Races, and Space Fascists! The Imperium's economy is the space EU!

In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war, an eternity of bloodshed and carnage, and the laughter of greedy stock brokers.

[Duke]

"Thrones" are the galactic coinage, they're the standard by which all other coinage is compared to and are accepted all throughout the Imperium.

Right, but don't some planets have their own currincies which are indexed to the throne...


In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only war, an eternity of bloodshed and carnage, and the laughter of greedy stock brokers.

Except a "bailout," is when they do an extemonatus on your planet for squandering the emperors holy taxes.

Duke

[Grailkeeper]

On Necromunda the currency is credits or creds.

I think Thrones may be the same currency however and thrones is just slang like bucks or quid is in real life slang for money, so called because of the throne that appears on it.

Am I the only one who loves this thread because it lets me learn a bit more about my fellow posters?

[Porty1119]

I can definitely sympathize with that. Agreed.

[Melissia]

On Necromunda the currency is credits or creds.

I think Thrones may be the same currency however and thrones is just slang like bucks or quid is in real life slang for money, so called because of the throne that appears on it.

Am I the only one who loves this thread because it lets me learn a bit more about my fellow posters?

No, Thrones is the official term for it, in reference of course to the Golden Throne.

It's "creds" that's the slang :P

Sounds backwards I know, but that's 40k for ya.

[Renegade]

The Imperium's economy is the space EU! This is annoying... The default for the IMF is USD and the majority of Commonwealth currencies are underwritten in Sterling. Its been used by Imperial establishments in the past.

In 40K what commodity would you back a currency with... souls?

[Gotthammer]

Space Marines, 'cause they're as stable and reliable a commodity as you can get in 40k (though the inflation on them is getting a bit rough).

[Lockark]

This is annoying... The default for the IMF is USD and the majority of Commonwealth currencies are underwritten in Sterling. Its been used by Imperial establishments in the past.

In 40K what commodity would you back a currency with... souls?


On the topic of real money? I don't really care. This is a message board about plastic men, and I was poking fun at there little made up world.
:D

As for the commodity they would back the currency with? In all honesty I just figured gold/silver/ect. Like I said, I figured Gothic Europe in space. I accualy always had a image of imperials running around with huge bags of gold coins. lol

[Renegade]

In all honesty I just figured gold/silver/ect. Like I said, I figured Gothic Europe in space.Well thats all well and good, till you discover a world/s where they are very common metals.

Life is said to be the emperors currency. :cool:

[Bean]

Well thats all well and good, till you discover a world/s where they are very common metals.

Life is said to be the emperors currency. :cool:

In countries where gold and silver were used as a standard, people still loved finding gold mines.

The Imperium wouldn't be hurt by a planet where gold and silver are extremely common. That planet would be very rich, initially, but, of course, that just means it would pay more taxes to the Imperial Bureaucracy, which the Bureaucracy would appreciate.

One gold-rich planet out of the billions of planets the Empire controls wouldn't throw their currency base off significantly.

[Connjurus]

In countries where gold and silver were used as a standard, people still loved finding gold mines.

The Imperium wouldn't be hurt by a planet where gold and silver are extremely common. That planet would be very rich, initially, but, of course, that just means it would pay more taxes to the Imperial Bureaucracy, which the Bureaucracy would appreciate.

One gold-rich planet out of the billions of planets the Empire controls wouldn't throw their currency base off significantly.

I'm going to hazard a guess and say that gold, silver, etc, are too...for lack of a better word, corporeal base to the Imperium's Currency. In the days of warp-travel, where it can take you two days or two centuries to get to your destination, any physical cargo is never "guaranteed in 30 days or free." The Imperium's Currency, if it's backed at all, is most likely backed by something common enough that ALL of the Imperium's worlds, orbital colonies, etc, would have access to them...


...and the only resource I can think of that every single world and orbital would have is human life. ;)

[Unzuul the Lascivious]

The Salamanders are usually depicted as being black, as was one of the Remembrancers from the Horus Heresy books, and an Inquisitor's Interrogator from the Space Wolf series.

Come on...the Salamanders are hardly of Afro-Caribbean decent...they're LITERALLY black!!!

Still, they're trying I guess. Maybe not a lot of black dudes play 40K

[Connjurus]

The Salamanders are usually depicted as being black, as was one of the Remembrancers from the Horus Heresy books, and an Inquisitor's Interrogator from the Space Wolf series.

Come on...the Salamanders are hardly of Afro-Caribbean decent...they're LITERALLY black!!!



Don't quibble with me.

[Bean]

I'm going to hazard a guess and say that gold, silver, etc, are too...for lack of a better word, corporeal base to the Imperium's Currency. In the days of warp-travel, where it can take you two days or two centuries to get to your destination, any physical cargo is never "guaranteed in 30 days or free." The Imperium's Currency, if it's backed at all, is most likely backed by something common enough that ALL of the Imperium's worlds, orbital colonies, etc, would have access to them...


...and the only resource I can think of that every single world and orbital would have is human life. ;)

On the other hand, the people running the Imperium don't seem to be all that smart.

Either way, I like your human-based currency better--it fits in so many ways.

Kudos.

[Lockark]

It's people! Thrones are made out of people!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sp-VFBbjpE