Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 31, 2024, 12:43:24 AM

Quote from: Darrin Kelley on May 30, 2024, 09:18:47 PMNobody has seemed to have complained that there are male units in the Adepta Sororitas. The Preacher for example.

The Adepta Sororitas is an all women militant wing of the Ecclesiarchy. The Ecclesiarchy does not enforce one sex membership. The Preacher, for example, is a unit that does not have the Sisters of Battle keywords and does not benefit from abilities that use that Keyword.
You can include a Preacher in a Sister of Battle army, but they are not Sisters of Battle.

It's almost as if the tourist doesn't play.

I'm new to 40k. That's one thing I should have made clear. It's something I'm exploring getting into.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley on May 31, 2024, 02:52:43 AMI'm new to 40k. That's one thing I should have made clear. It's something I'm exploring getting into.

Tourist confirmed, you're not playing, you're not even "exploring getting into 40K", you're just an activist.

It does bring up the question as to why there isn't this kind of agitation to include males in Sisters of Battle or Sisters of Silence.

The answer, of course, is that this isn't about any kind of diversity and or inclusion. There are already women characters and models in 40k. It's about breaking up the boy's clubs out of hostility to men and males.
Hell, they did it in real life to the Boy Scouts, while leaving the Girl Scouts alone.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley on May 31, 2024, 02:52:43 AMI'm new to 40k. That's one thing I should have made clear. It's something I'm exploring getting into.

If so, I reccomend sticking with old 40k stuff bought 2nd hand.

Modern day Games Workshop is focused on raising prices and shrinkflation of their existing products, while churning editions at an ever accelerating pace while raising prices on rule books and source books.

Their terrible "progressive" leanings just make them extra-unpalatable.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 31, 2024, 03:38:36 AMIf so, I reccomend sticking with old 40k stuff bought 2nd hand.

Modern day Games Workshop is focused on raising prices and shrinkflation of their existing products, while churning editions at an ever accelerating pace while raising prices on rule books and source books.

Their terrible "progressive" leanings just make them extra-unpalatable.

Yeah, well I think people calling me a tourist don't get it or me. I have a Tyranids Codex from 6th Edition. With a sheet of rules updating it to 7th Edition.

This is not my first exploration of 40k. This is, however, an expansion of my interest in the game. Going beyond the Tyranids into something else. That something else being the Adepta Sororitas.

I'm ready to plunk down some major money to build my first 40K playable army. With an army whose themes I connect with.

As for the creeping progressivism? The factions I am most attracted to don't have a sign of it. It's still the 40k I remember. All grimdark and everything.

Tyranids I chose originally because I like giant monsters. I'm a fan of kaiju films and creature features. So the Tyranids already play into a pre-existing interest.

The Adepta Sororitas are a new interest. I like their theme. Flaming angels of wrath. And the tactics of them have a lot in common with my now obsolete Warmachine army. So I get some of the experience back. But under 40K. And the similarities are enough to be satisfying to me.

The current plan for now is to get an Adepta Sororitas army that is competantly playable. I've done the research on the lore. And watched some youtube videos on tactics. I currently feel I'm in a good place to start out. So over the next few months, I'll be buying rulebooks and accessories to get ready for when the new Adepta Sororitas Combat Patrol becomes available.

Tyranids come next after I get my footing with the first army.

My introduction to 40k was through a local game store a few years ago. The players I met made the game seem fun. And that impression has never left me. It just took some time and misadventures to bring me back to my roots in 40k.

Everybody starts as a tourist. Until they decide to commit. I think I have become ready to commit in a serious way.

Nobody gets to police my interests for me.

I'm an old school wargamer. I started out in the mid-80's with Star Fleet Battles. Went on and played in Battletech tournaments before the rise of the Clans, and played the first edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battle.

As for the second hand stuff, I'll check it out.

I feel the female Custodes thing is just something blown way out of proportion. GW is always retconning things for 40k. What makes this any different than their other retcons? I don't get it. It seems to be a whole lot of controversy about nothing.

  I think this falls into a cycle I have seen going around lately....1)Why are you complaining...there is no problem happening.  2)Okay there is a thing happening, but it has always happened.  3)So the thing is happening and it is a great and wonderful thing.  4) The thing you are complaining about is so wonderful you are a terrible person to complain about it.

  I think most gamers realize the stage 1 of the infestation has begun and are clamoring loudly to prevent the later stages.  If it was a change made in vacuum it might mean nothing.  Given the GW BLM stance...it looks more like another harbinger rather than a simple retcon.

I don't see why there would not be female Custodes. Custodes are not Space Marines. Unlike the Astartes, which are mass-produced from self-replicating gene samples that have been specified to be dependent upon male psysiology, each Custodes is a bespoke creation and there is little reason that such individualized modifications could not be applied to a human female. As far as the lore goes, the Custodes have far less of it than the Astartes, and I do not recall any Custodes lore that stated they were exclusively male.

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 31, 2024, 12:56:07 PMI don't see why there would not be female Custodes. Custodes are not Space Marines. Unlike the Astartes, which are mass-produced from self-replicating gene samples that have been specified to be dependent upon male psysiology, each Custodes is a bespoke creation and there is little reason that such individualized modifications could not be applied to a human female. As far as the lore goes, the Custodes have far less of it than the Astartes, and I do not recall any Custodes lore that stated they were exclusively male.

Except for the part where the lore states the Custodes ARE THE SONS...

If you disregard that, and are a disingenuous twat you don't see ANY reason in the lore itself ergo pushing race marxism is totally fine.

Insert more appeals to irrelevance by the tourist.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley on May 31, 2024, 06:19:15 AMI feel the female Custodes thing is just something blown way out of proportion. GW is always retconning things for 40k. What makes this any different than their other retcons? I don't get it. It seems to be a whole lot of controversy about nothing.

The major complaints is that this change is politically driven, and GW are gaslighting the fans over it.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 31, 2024, 04:14:07 PMThe major complaints is that this change is politically driven, and GW are gaslighting the fans over it.

Then why didn't anyone complain when male units were put in Adepta Sororitas? The Penitent Engines and Preachers are male models.

It seems that there is some hypocrisy at play here.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on May 31, 2024, 01:33:39 PM

Quote from: HappyDaze on May 31, 2024, 12:56:07 PMI don't see why there would not be female Custodes. Custodes are not Space Marines. Unlike the Astartes, which are mass-produced from self-replicating gene samples that have been specified to be dependent upon male psysiology, each Custodes is a bespoke creation and there is little reason that such individualized modifications could not be applied to a human female. As far as the lore goes, the Custodes have far less of it than the Astartes, and I do not recall any Custodes lore that stated they were exclusively male.

Except for the part where the lore states the Custodes ARE THE SONS...

If you disregard that, and are a disingenuous twat you don't see ANY reason in the lore itself ergo pushing race marxism is totally fine.

Insert more appeals to irrelevance by the tourist.

I don't recall that title for the Custodes (and they have a lot of titles). Sons of the Emperor is typically the description of the Primarchs, not the Custodes.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley on May 31, 2024, 07:08:06 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 31, 2024, 04:14:07 PMThe major complaints is that this change is politically driven, and GW are gaslighting the fans over it.

Then why didn't anyone complain when male units were put in Adepta Sororitas? The Penitent Engines and Preachers are male models.

It seems that there is some hypocrisy at play here.

Ecclesiarchy models. They've always been a part of the SoB army. They just aren't male SoB.

Quote from: Darrin Kelley on May 31, 2024, 07:08:06 PMThen why didn't anyone complain when male units were put in Adepta Sororitas? The Penitent Engines and Preachers are male models.

The first time you tried to use this as an argument can be explained by ignorance of the lore.  Since then, someone has explained that these male models are not part of the Adepta Sororitas.  Now you're just being disingenuous.

Those models are not Adepta Sororitas.  The Sororitas is a specific organization that is part of the Ecclesiarchy.  They exist because the Ecclesiarchy is forbidden yo have "men under arms".  They got around this by having an all female militant arm.  There are no male Sororitas models.  There can't be.  If GW actually added any male Sororitas, which they haven't, people would be up in arms about that too.