PDA

View Full Version : How Tall Is A Primarch?



Typharius
05-10-2008, 21:46
They are described as "A True Giant" in the HH books, obviously much taller than an Astartes who average 8ft? but there is nothing to scale them against, just how tall is a Primarch? I read somewhere that Constantin Valdor of the Adeptus Custodes was as tall as Alpharius, but I am guessing he wasn't the tallest of the Primarchs having a twin and all. Just something that popped into my head whilst bored in work ^^

Fire Harte
05-10-2008, 21:47
As a marine to a human, compared to a marine.

Typharius
05-10-2008, 21:51
So about 12 feet then you think? as average human 6ft to an average Astartes 8ft? I wonder if when conquering the imperium the Emperor had to rebuild every city in every planet to make sure every Astartes and Primarch could fit through a door haha wouldn't be very dignified would it:

"We welcome the grand Primarch Rogal dorn to the palace, bringer of the emperors light and saviour of our planet"

*minutes go by and an aid approaches the king and whispers in his ear*

"err well it seems the Mighty Rogal dorn cannot umm fit through....the door but he sends his regards!"

Fire Harte
05-10-2008, 21:58
Haha, he just walks into sign-posts, the emperor had that in mind. So he made them utterly flawless! Well, almost! :evilgrin:

Dr.Mercury
05-10-2008, 22:04
I think a lot of it depends on the Primarch.
Personally I do not think they were much taller than a standard marine, and marines average 7 feet not 8.
I think the phrases about the primarchs being "giants among a legion of giants", and "bigger than life" are figures of speech due to the charisma of the primarchs.

Now, the surviving chaos primarchs such as Angron, Mortarion, Fulgrim, and Magnus, are now daemon princes, so they have mutated into something more than a primarch

Maidel
05-10-2008, 22:05
I depends. Magnus was alwasy described as a monsterously tall pimarch, so for him, you might be right with the 12'

However others, and especially primarches like Russ (Who was described as being small for a primarch iirc) i dont think would have been much more than 8-10' tall.

Maidel
05-10-2008, 22:08
Also, sorry for double post.

Sanginious was said to have 'broken a bloodthirster across his knee'

Hes gotta be a bit larger than a normal marine in order to have been able to do this, otherwise you are looking at one ridiculous situation of a squat trying to snap a mans back across his knee. It just couldnt happen.

Caelnaethon
05-10-2008, 22:22
It's certainly a tricky one. We get to hear about things like Sanguinius and the bloodthirster, yet one way or another the Primarchs functioned in human society and - in some cases at least - passed for human. The way Caliban is usually described, it's hard to imagine a monstrously tall humanoid getting a warm welcome (insert obligatory burning-at-the-stake pun here).

Then again, the story of Sanguinius breaking a bloodthirster's back raises the very good question of whether daemons have a spine, or any other actual internal organs. Seeing as they're made from the raw energy of Chaos or somesuch, one imagines not.

Maidel
05-10-2008, 22:26
They arent two mutually incompatable things because some primarches might (And are described) as being bigger than others. Therefore The lion might have been smaller than the rest.

However I think that the sanquinous story is another one of these 'rule of cool' things.

I susspect that bloodthirsters have as many spine bones as necrons have an ability to be poisoned :)

Dr.Mercury
05-10-2008, 22:28
Imagine the stories of the primarchs to be more like future fables.

Just like Jonny Appleseed, and Paul Bunyun.

Was Paul Bunyon 20 feet tall, and did her really have a big blue ox named babe?

BrainFireBob
05-10-2008, 22:29
How much wood would a Primarch chuck if a Primarch could chuck wood?

Unamed Consript
05-10-2008, 22:33
Well, Fulgrim was able to kill a wraitlord by punching it through the face plate. And iirc, in The Flight Of The Eisenstien Mortarion was described as being huge. "The ornamental skull and star device of the Death Guard grimaced out from his breastplate and at his waist, level with the chest of a file Astartes......" page 30

theunwantedbeing
05-10-2008, 22:36
A Primarch has the ability to change his size depending on how he wishes to be seen and/or how the guy writing the story he is involved in wishes him to be seen. So a primarch will easily stand on the head of a pin as well as tower over a space marine depending on whether or not the situation requires it.

Sanguinius breaking the thrister on his knee is merely a stroy made for entertaining 13 year old boys who have a slightly too great facination with wrestling. Scale isnt something that person will ever consider, so is irrelevant.

Maidel
05-10-2008, 22:40
A Primarch has the ability to change his size depending on how he wishes to be seen and/or how the guy writing the story he is involved in wishes him to be seen. So a primarch will easily stand on the head of a pin as well as tower over a space marine depending on whether or not the situation requires it.


Cynic :D

....

Argastes
05-10-2008, 23:45
Personally I do not think they were much taller than a standard marine, and marines average 7 feet not 8.
I think the phrases about the primarchs being "giants among a legion of giants", and "bigger than life" are figures of speech due to the charisma of the primarchs.

I agree with this (with the exception perhaps of Magnus, who apparently really was quite a big guy). I could see them being slightly larger than a normal Marine, but not hugely so; and yeah, a Marine is about seven feet tall, not eight or nine. I think the BL novel authors just described them as huge because they have this infantile "bigger = awesomer" view, and don't seem to really think through the implications of what they write a lot of the time.

As has already bee pointed out, the Primarchs lived in human societies for many years, passing for human in some cases (and they presumably didn't stay outside all the time because they couldn't fit through the doors). And we know of at least two Primarchs--Russ and Horus--whose wargear is still being used by normal-sized Space Marines today (Ulrik wears the helm of Russ, Abbadon uses the Talon of Horus), which shouldn't be possible if they were twelve-foot gigantos.


Sanguinius breaking the thrister on his knee is merely a stroy made for entertaining 13 year old boys who have a slightly too great facination with wrestling. Scale isnt something that person will ever consider, so is irrelevant.

I always thought it was a cool image despite the fact that I'm a grown man and have never had any interest in wrestling... the description of this fight in the 2nd Edition books is actually really compelling and well-written, unlike some of GW's more recent fluff. I agree that scale wasn't really considered when writing that, but why so derisive? Besides, that story was actually written back in the RT days, the early 1990s, at a time when GW's customer base was still mainly adult hobbyists and very few kids, so I doubt it was an attempt to cater to the kiddy crowd. In fact, come to think of it, back when that story was written, the Bloodthirster models weren't NEARLY as big as they are now, so it may be that our sense of a Bloodthirster's size is out of line with what the author was imagining.

Rabid Bunny 666
06-10-2008, 00:09
Varies from Primarch to Primarch to be honest. Magnus was 'effin huge whilst Alpharius could easily be confused for a slightly large marine.

Victomorga
06-10-2008, 00:14
marines average 7 ft., primarchs are about a head taller than them at 8 ft.

these are, of course, averages; some run taller and some run shorter, though I doubt over-all deviation would be too drastic. all the primarchs had their own custom armor, too, which was would only have made them even more hulking.

I think a "giant" primarch might be 6"-8" taller than an average-sized primarch, not whole feet taller.

the point made above about the size of bloodthirsters when the sanguinius story was written is a good one. greater demons have gotten much larger over time, and it wouldn't have been so preposterous an idea at the time. it seems legit to me that some blood thirsters would be larger than others, just like the FW one towers over the regular one.

and in regard to primarchs being too tall to walk through doorways, the emperor himself was taller than all of them, so when he built the imperium from the ground up he and all his countless followers would certainly have had his massive proportions in mind.

DarkMatter2
06-10-2008, 01:17
IIRC, there is art of Lion EL'Johnson standing in front of an assembled row of Dark Angels and he doesn't look much bigger than the Marines at all, even with the fact that he is standing in the foreground.

PondaNagura
06-10-2008, 01:19
HH artbooks has a picture of magnus, whose like as big as a dreadnought. that's a bit more than 6-8" taller than other primarchs.
in most artwork humans come up about mid-chest level to marines. marines are the same with most primarchs. Alpharius/Magnus being exceptions

ThunderShrike.
06-10-2008, 02:04
usually around 8-9 feet.

Argastes
06-10-2008, 02:13
and in regard to primarchs being too tall to walk through doorways, the emperor himself was taller than all of them, so when he built the imperium from the ground up he and all his countless followers would certainly have had his massive proportions in mind.

I don't think this makes much sense.... the Emperor was really tall, so throughout the Great Crusade, whenever Imperial armies claimed a world, they would tear down all it's cities and buildings, and reconstruct them to accommodate nine-foot-tall dudes? As far as I know, there is nothing to support that idea. In fact it strikes me as quite absurd. The "building" of the Imperium didn't include the construction of all it's actual buildings.

Plus, was the Emperor even that tall? The Emperor spent tens of thousands of years living in human society, masquerading as a long series of mortal humans and manipulating events, sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly. Given this, I am somewhat skeptical that he was so freakishly tall. I always thought the Emperor was of normal human height; do you have any source for the claim that he was taller than all his Primarchs? Even Magnus?? I think that would be a bit absurd as well.

PondaNagura
06-10-2008, 02:15
the emperor was kind of tall, maybe not as tall as the primarchs but certainly of larger build...granted he was an alpha+psyker with probably an ability to warp perception of the minds around him, making him appear either more inline with the people he lived with over the millenia, or in opposite effect could appear larger to some.

Argastes
06-10-2008, 02:42
the emperor was kind of tall, maybe not as tall as the primarchs but certainly of larger build...

I would have no problem believing that he was, say, well over six feet tall. Maybe even closer to seven, but that's about it. Where do we have any info about his height?

Wraith
06-10-2008, 06:58
Fulgrim is quoted as dwarfing even Ancient Rylanor (a dreadnought).

Horus knelt in front of a marine sitting on a chair and his head still was on the same level as the marine's.

Born Again
06-10-2008, 07:02
marines average 7 feet not 8.


Thank you!

I think the transition from Marines being 7 foot not 8 must have happened in my few years away from the hobby. Back in the day, they were 7, they might be 8 in power armour...

As for the question, I don't imagine a primarch to be too much bigger, but it would depend on each one. Probably between 8 and ten foot, unarmoured.

Wraith
06-10-2008, 07:05
Thank you!

I think the transition from Marines being 7 foot not 8 must have happened in my few years away from the hobby. Back in the day, they were 7, they might be 8 in power armour...

As for the question, I don't imagine a primarch to be too much bigger, but it would depend on each one. Probably between 8 and ten foot, unarmoured.

That was an opinion presented as a definitive statement.

My opinion is marines are closer to 8ft than 7ft and that Primarchs are close to 10ft.

Iuris
06-10-2008, 07:33
All the sources from GW tend to nicely agree: marines are huge, and the primarchs are even bigger, and the emperor is the biggest of them all.

But then, I also completely reject this concept, since it's ludicrous. They should try driving a car made for average people while being among the bigger people, and they'd see. Or maybe take a tour of a few castles, build for people s foot or two shorter than today.

All you'd need to completely prevent marines from boarding a vessel would be keeping the corridors small enough that a human would be just comfortable - the marines would jam their shoulders between the walls as soon as they exited the boarding torpedo.

So, what I do is alter things until they made sense. A marine is about a head above the average human, and a primarch a head above that, perhaps (the big ones, that is. Some would be short, perhaps even shorter than their marines), but their psychically enhanced charisma makes them appear enormous - everyone feels really small in their company, and the focus on the primarch makes him stand out.


Of course, that's just one of my little heresies that make the 40k universe work, but would likely get me the BLUE chair if GW ever got to me :)

Allen
06-10-2008, 07:56
They are described as "A True Giant" in the HH books, obviously much taller than an Astartes who average 8ft? but there is nothing to scale them against, just how tall is a Primarch? I read somewhere that Constantin Valdor of the Adeptus Custodes was as tall as Alpharius, but I am guessing he wasn't the tallest of the Primarchs having a twin and all. Just something that popped into my head whilst bored in work ^^

It depends.
Alpharius (and/or Omegon) was the shortes of the Primarchs, only a little taller than the tallest Space Marine. Konrad Kurze was not short, but was hunched...there are no accounts on his real physical stature, however. Horus and Mortarion were described as "imposing", Magnus as "a giant"...the Horus Heresy art concepts show two "medium" sized primarchs (Fulgrim and Ferrus Manus) battling on the background of a firefight in the Drop Site Massacre, and those two Primarchs are probably three times bigger than a standard Space Marine.

Probably they're shrouded in the mythical Rule of Cool, so if the author think that's cool having a superhuman primarch tall as a full dreadnought and half he will be described in that way (see Fulgrim and Ancient Rylanor).

Born Again
06-10-2008, 10:10
That was an opinion presented as a definitive statement.

My opinion is marines are closer to 8ft than 7ft and that Primarchs are close to 10ft.

No, I don't have a source at hand as my old books are all boxed up somewhere, but I'm pretty sure in 2nd edition Marines were canonically described as 7ft tall. These days everyone seems to refer to them as being 8ft tall, just saying I'm not sure when this came about, is all.

Rockerfella
06-10-2008, 11:30
Not sure if this has been stated already, but it quite clearly says in Descent Of Angels that the Lion was a 'touch under three metres tall'.

Hope that helps.

Thanatos_elNyx
06-10-2008, 14:53
Well it definately says that Space Marines are 7ft in the current Chaos Space Marine Codex, I will try get a page number for yeese tomorrow.

If the Lion is Under 3 metres tall that puts him around the 9.5ft mark. Though he isn't described as particularly tall either.

Supremearchmarshal
06-10-2008, 16:38
Well it definately says that Space Marines are 7ft in the current Chaos Space Marine Codex, I will try get a page number for yeese tomorrow.

No need, here's Gav Thorpe's post on this (I keep having to dig this up!):


Space Marines are, on average, about seven feet tall. As mentioned, Jes mislabelled his outline so that it starts at 1' rather than 0, and that's caused no end of problems since! Some Space Marines have been known to grow bigger (there's a legendary Wolf Guard Marine whose name escapes me at the moment, for example).

They are tall, but the remarkable thing, standing next to that full-size drawing, was how broad a Space Marine would be. It's that sheer mass that is imposing as much as their height. Having met a 6' 10" professional wrestler a couple of years ago, I can tell you that he was huge and intimidating enough, so the size of a Space Marine isn't that much of a stretch for me after that!

Cheers,

GAV


As for Primarchs, IMO they should be around 9-10 ft.

Rockerfella
06-10-2008, 17:03
Well it definately says that Space Marines are 7ft in the current Chaos Space Marine Codex, I will try get a page number for yeese tomorrow.

If the Lion is Under 3 metres tall that puts him around the 9.5ft mark. Though he isn't described as particularly tall either.

I think its fair to put tLion at three metres though. Since, a touch under could literally mean '2.98' metres. So, that being the case, I think its alright to be cheeky here, and round the old lad up a touch.

;)

Argastes
06-10-2008, 18:20
Ugh. The BL novel's claims that the Primarchs were ten-foot giants is one of the (many) things that makes them such awful books. The GW fluff has never included such nonsense; it is purely an invention of the BL authors, who apparently decided on the incredibly stupid, childish, and unimaginitive principle that "bigger = awesomer" and that the more powerful someone is, the taller they should be. What crap. I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who thinks this is just completely idiotic.


All the sources from GW tend to nicely agree: marines are huge, and the primarchs are even bigger, and the emperor is the biggest of them all.

Actually, sources from GW do not say this, to the best of my knowledge. All that stuff about the Primarchs being huge and the Emperor being even more huge was entirely made up by BL authors, NOT by GW. GW says that some Primarchs were of "titanic proportions" (Magnus, probably, and a few others), but others "resembled normal humans" (source: 2nd Edition Space Wolf Codex). They have also hinted that some of them were about the same size as normal Marines.... and as Supremearchmarshal points out, they HAVE clearly stated that Marines are 7 feet tall, so your "personal" interpretation is actually pretty close to GW's official line!

Idaan
06-10-2008, 19:43
If the Lion is Under 3 metres tall that puts him around the 9.5ft mark. Though he isn't described as particularly tall either. Every, and I mean EVERY Primarch is described as being taller than most others, just as their Legions are described as being one of the best of all Legions. Should make people wonder on the objectivity of BL books.

And although these books say they are awesome and 10" tall (just like in that SoaD song), it doesn't mention what's the reason for that. I mean, you don't make your genetically enhanced supermen ridiculously big just because it looks cool. The strength bonus is probably negligible when compared with their enlarged profile and reduced agility, and given the fact that they should be commanding, not slaughtering the enemy themselves.
Somehow it is my only gripe with the Horus Heresy. I can't get myself to be moved by the tragedy and greatness of it if the main characters are 10" oaves. It just doesn't feel epic for me, imagining them struggling with betrayal when they should struggle with door embrasures.

Supremearchmarshal
06-10-2008, 20:52
Actually, sources from GW do not say this, to the best of my knowledge. All that stuff about the Primarchs being huge and the Emperor being even more huge was entirely made up by BL authors, NOT by GW. GW says that some Primarchs were of "titanic proportions" (Magnus, probably, and a few others), but others "resembled normal humans" (source: 2nd Edition Space Wolf Codex). They have also hinted that some of them were about the same size as normal Marines.... and as Supremearchmarshal points out, they HAVE clearly stated that Marines are 7 feet tall, so your "personal" interpretation is actually pretty close to GW's official line!

While I agree that it's silly, the bit about Sanguinius breaking the back of a Bloodthirster on his knee is official GW fluff, not BL. And you just can't do that if you're 7ft tall...

There was also a bit stating something like although the marines are huge compared to ordinary men, the Primarchs still dwarf them in stature (can't recall exactly where this is from, but it's certainly 1st or 2nd edition fluff).

Typharius
06-10-2008, 22:29
Just remembered in the first HH book Horus Rising, in the first battle against the false emperor. It describes the enemies the Space marines are fighting as big men heavy set in the chest but none of them came up to the shortest space marines chin. Well a big man in my book is over 6ft and that not coming up to the smallest marines chin would make the average marine around 8ft to me, although I guess canon does seem to change from book to book and at authors will haha.

Argastes
06-10-2008, 22:49
While I agree that it's silly, the bit about Sanguinius breaking the back of a Bloodthirster on his knee is official GW fluff, not BL. And you just can't do that if you're 7ft tall...

Why? Because going by the models, Bloodthirsters are huge? Frankly, I don't think it's valid to look at the size of the bloodthirster model and then try to use that to guess how big Sanguinius would have had to be to break one's back over his knee. Consider these points:

Firstly, as I pointed out in an earlier post, the current bloodthirster models (both the GW and FW ones) did not exist at the time that fluff was written back in the early 1990s; and the bloodthirster model that DID exist was much smaller. The models have undergone major "scale creep" since then, so our idea of the size of a bloodthirster is quite different from what the author probably had in mind when he wrote that.

Secondly, as we probably all know (and as is clearly demonstrated by the size difference between the current GW and FW bloodthirster models), there can be a quite of bit of variation between individual daemons of the same type. Perhaps the Bloodthirster that Sanguinius fought was at the smaller end of the spectrum, maybe "only" 11 feet tall (this would still make it quite enormous from a human perspective, and no less powerful than any other bloodthirster--being warp entities, the power of a daemon is not related to it's physical size or shape). This actually makes some sense, because as I said above, the old bloodthirster model was much smaller, and if the author who originally wrote that fluff was indeed basing his mental image of a bloodthirster on the model that existed back then, his bloodthirster would in fact be about 11 or 12 feet tall. If it was, say, 11 feet tall and Sanguinius was, say, 8 feet tall, the idea of the latter. manhandling the former doesn't seem so absurd.

Thirdly, if you really insist on going by the size of the current models even though they probably aren't what the author was thinking of when he wrote that fluff, think of how absurdly gigantic you are saying Sanguinius must have been: Going by the current models, a Bloodthirster is about 25 feet tall with a 40 foot wingspan. Even bigger if you look at the FW model (to scale, that thing is at least 35 feet tall!). So if we go by the current models, then breaking one's back over your knee would probably be just as impossible for a 10 or 12 feet tall person as it would be for a 7 foot tall person. You'd have to be getting into the 20-foot-tall range, or even bigger, for it to be plausible. Are we really prepared to go there? To say that Sanguinius's head was level with the roof of a two-story house? I don't think so.


There was also a bit stating something like although the marines are huge compared to ordinary men, the Primarchs still dwarf them in stature (can't recall exactly where this is from, but it's certainly 1st or 2nd edition fluff).

But this could still refer to a height of not more than 8 feet or so... If a 7-foot Marine "dwarfs" a 6-foot man (and believe me, standing next to a 7-foot-tall guy with a muscular build, you would definitely feel dwarfed), then an 8-foot Primarch would just as well "dwarf" a 7-foot Marine. At any rate, I would have to see a source for the claim that there is 1st/2nd Edition fluff which categorically describes the Primarchs as bigger than Marines. Because it directly contradicts what I KNOW is said in the 2nd Edition fluff, in materials that I have sitting on my desk right now (SW codex and other books).


Just remembered in the first HH book Horus Rising, in the first battle against the false emperor. It describes the enemies the Space marines are fighting as big men heavy set in the chest but none of them came up to the shortest space marines chin. Well a big man in my book is over 6ft and that not coming up to the smallest marines chin would make the average marine around 8ft to me, although I guess canon does seem to change from book to book and at authors will haha.

Yep, sure does.... fortunately, we have a more reliable source than the incredibly inconsistent BL authors. We have the statements of GW design team members, including the guy who basically designed Marines. And they say, average Marine is 7 feet tall. End of story, as far as I can see.

DapperAnarchist
06-10-2008, 22:52
The Emperor almost certainly was really what ever height he wished to be - being an Alpha Plus psyker with total control allows for a lot of biomancic and telekenetic reshaping.

Maidel
06-10-2008, 23:17
Because it directly contradicts what I KNOW is said in the 2nd Edition fluff, in materials that I have sitting on my desk right now (SW codex and other books).

Quote? IF you have them sitting there.

Argastes
07-10-2008, 00:02
Quote? IF you have them sitting there.

With pleasure. From the 2nd Edition Space Wolf Codex, page 7, first column, third paragraph: "Some of the Primarchs were made so as to resemble ordinary humans, but many were of titanic proportions or strange appearance." And in the 2nd Edition Angels of Death Codex, at the bottom of page 11, Luther reaches out and brushes the hair back from Lion El'Jonson's face and says "Look, he is a man" (so clearly, once you got the hair out of his face, the Lion was indistinguishable from a normal human being).

EDIT: Plus, we have the fact that there at least two Primarchs--Horus and Leman Russ--whose wargear is still in use today by normal Space Marines. There is the Wolf Helm of Russ that Ulrik wears, and the Talon of Horus that Abaddon wields. Obviously, these two Primarchs are not significantly larger than a normal Space Marine, if their helmets and gauntlets can be worn by normal Space Marines (either that or they had tiny heads and hands?). This isn't just from 2nd Edition fluff; materials in every edition have reiterated that Abaddon wears the Talon of Horus, for instance.

Supremearchmarshal
07-10-2008, 00:12
Why? Because going by the models, Bloodthirsters are huge? Frankly, I don't think it's valid to look at the size of the bloodthirster model and then try to use that to guess how big Sanguinius would have had to be to break one's back over his knee. Consider these points:

Firstly, as I pointed out in an earlier post, the current bloodthirster models (both the GW and FW ones) did not exist at the time that fluff was written back in the early 1990s; and the bloodthirster model that DID exist was much smaller. The models have undergone major "scale creep" since then, so our idea of the size of a bloodthirster is quite different from what the author probably had in mind when he wrote that.

Secondly, as we probably all know (and as is clearly demonstrated by the size difference between the current GW and FW bloodthirster models), there can be a quite of bit of variation between individual daemons of the same type. Perhaps the Bloodthirster that Sanguinius fought was at the smaller end of the spectrum, maybe "only" 11 feet tall (this would still make it quite enormous from a human perspective, and no less powerful than any other bloodthirster--being warp entities, the power of a daemon is not related to it's physical size or shape). This actually makes some sense, because as I said above, the old bloodthirster model was much smaller, and if the author who originally wrote that fluff was indeed basing his mental image of a bloodthirster on the model that existed back then, his bloodthirster would in fact be about 11 or 12 feet tall. If it was, say, 11 feet tall and Sanguinius was, say, 8 feet tall, the idea of the latter. manhandling the former doesn't seem so absurd.

As I recall, back then Greater Daemons were stated to be "over 10 foot tall" (from WFRP rulebook) - in comparison Ogres were "about 10 foot tall".

But the Bloodthirster in question was later retconned to be the captain of the Bloodthirsters or some such - making him more likely to be larger than normal.

I also remember the Epic models for GD's - around the size of a Super-heavy tank. And the Chaos Primarch models were the same size - though, granted they were warped by Chaos. But on the other hand the Chaos Primarchs are described as already having their monstrous forms during the siege of Terra.

So basically it's a mess. They *could* have intended the Primarchs to be roughly the same size as Daemon Princes or Greater Daemons. However, what I think is most likely is that they simply never bothered to be consistent about scale at all. After all, the loyalist Primarchs are dead or long-gone and the Chaos primarchs have the "Chaos did it!" excuse. There weren't any plans for a Horus Heresy series back then...

If you insist, here's a rational explanation: Sanguinius was 10 foot tall, and the Bloodthirster had the "Shrink" mutation :p (still exists in modern fluff - Tome of Corruption)


But this could still refer to a height of not more than 8 feet or so... If a 7-foot Marine "dwarfs" a 6-foot man (and believe me, standing next to a 7-foot-tall guy with a muscular build, you would definitely feel dwarfed), then an 8-foot Primarch would just as well "dwarf" a 7-foot Marine. At any rate, I would have to see a source for the claim that there is 1st/2nd Edition fluff which categorically describes the Primarchs as bigger than Marines. Because it directly contradicts what I KNOW is said in the 2nd Edition fluff, in materials that I have sitting on my desk right now (SW codex and other books).

Still, they're at least taller than a Space Marine as a SM is taller than a human - meaning 8ft minimum. I think it was from 1st edition, but I can't recall where and seriously I have no desire to read thousands of pages of fluff to find out.

Supremearchmarshal
07-10-2008, 00:23
With pleasure. From the 2nd Edition Space Wolf Codex, page 7, first column, third paragraph: "Some of the Primarchs were made so as to resemble ordinary humans, but many were of titanic proportions or strange appearance." And in the 2nd Edition Angels of Death Codex, at the bottom of page 11, Luther reaches out and brushes the hair back from Lion El'Jonson's face and says "Look, he is a man" (so clearly, once you got the hair out of his face, the Lion was indistinguishable from a normal human being).

Again, they most likely just didn't care. Plus I'm not sure if Lion has fully grown by this point.


EDIT: Plus, we have the fact that there at least two Primarchs--Horus and Leman Russ--whose wargear is still in use today by normal Space Marines. There is the Wolf Helm of Russ that Ulrik wears, and the Talon of Horus that Abaddon wields. Obviously, these two Primarchs are not significantly larger than a normal Space Marine, if their helmets and gauntlets can be worn by normal Space Marines (either that or they had tiny heads and hands?). This isn't just from 2nd Edition fluff; materials in every edition have reiterated that Abaddon wears the Talon of Horus, for instance.

The Talon is quite a bit bigger than the normal Chaos Lightning Claw, though (remember to compare to the old Chaos models), and there's the whole Abbadon/clone of Horus question.

As for the helm, it immediately reminded me of a certain barbarian... was Russ a long-lost relative?

Argastes
07-10-2008, 00:31
As I recall, back then Greater Daemons were stated to be "over 10 foot tall" (from WFRP rulebook) - in comparison Ogres were "about 10 foot tall".

Right... like I said, I don't think it would unreasonable for, say, an 8-foot Sanguinius to break the back of a 12-foot daemon. Not that the WFRP fluff has any bearing on 40K fluff anyhow. Different settings, remember?


But the Bloodthirster in question was later retconned to be the captain of the Bloodthirsters or some such - making him more likely to be larger than normal.

I don't think there's any support for this assumption; where has it ever been stated that higher rank always equals greater size in the daemonic hierarchy?


I also remember the Epic models for GD's - around the size of a Super-heavy tank. And the Chaos Primarch models were the same size - though, granted they were warped by Chaos. But on the other hand the Chaos Primarchs are described as already having their monstrous forms during the siege of Terra. So basically it's a mess. They *could* have intended the Primarchs to be roughly the same size as Daemon Princes or Greater Daemons. However, what I think is most likely is that they simply never bothered to be consistent about scale at all. After all, the loyalist Primarchs are dead or long-gone and the Chaos primarchs have the "Chaos did it!" excuse. There weren't any plans for a Horus Heresy series back then...

Yeah, I agree with this; best not to take that stuff too literally, because as you say, they probably never bothered to maintain scale consistency in the first place. They just wrote what sounded cool, which I have no problem with. But I do still think that the size of the 40K daemon models (which were much smaller back then), rather than the Epic daemon models or the daemon primarchs or anything else, was probably what the author had in mind when he wrote that.


If you insist, here's a rational explanation: Sanguinius was 10 foot tall, and the Bloodthirster had the "Shrink" mutation :p (still exists in modern fluff - Tome of Corruption)

Hahah.... a ten-foot-tall Sanguinius is pretty absurd, I think. I think that an 8 foot Sanguinius and a 10 or 12-foot Bloodthirster is the most rational explanation. We don't need a "Shrink" mutation to explain a Bloodthirster of that size, either. It was supported by the models of the time.



Still, they're at least taller than a Space Marine as a SM is taller than a human - meaning 8ft minimum. I think it was from 1st edition, but I can't recall where and seriously I have no desire to read thousands of pages of fluff to find out.

I sympathize, and I don't necessarily disbelieve you, but until we see a source on this--not just someone claiming to remember it--I can't really speak to it.

Even if it is true that RT fluff said that, it is in direct contradiction to the 2nd Edition fluff that I cited above, which states that some of the Primarchs were indistinguishable from normal humans and thus actually SMALLER than their Marines.

DarkMatter2
07-10-2008, 00:32
I would have no problem believing that he was, say, well over six feet tall. Maybe even closer to seven, but that's about it. Where do we have any info about his height?

The Emperor and the Primarchs are of the same make, "The Lightning Tower" clearly states that the Emperor, like the Primarchs, is a "genetically advantaged post-human."

Granted, there is variation in height between the Primarchs, but it isn't really safe to make any assumption about the Emperor's height, as Horus, a giant himself, calls the Emperor a "golden giant" in one of the Horus Heresy novels.

Supremearchmarshal
07-10-2008, 00:42
Right... like I said, I don't think it would unreasonable for, say, an 8-foot Sanguinius to break the back of a 12-foot daemon. Not that the WFRP fluff has any bearing on 40K fluff anyhow. Different settings, remember?

At the time, they were the same - the Warhammer fantasy was a world permanently cut-off by Warpstorms. Plus fantasy and 40k Daemons are as far as I know identical in terms of appearance and abilities in the current fluff.



I don't think there's any support for this assumption; where has it ever been stated that higher rank always equals greater size in the daemonic hierarchy?

In Warhammer Big=Boss. Check out the character models - they're almost uniformly larger than the troops. And let's not get started on the BL novel; Commissar Gaunt is 8 foot tall or something like that...


EDIT: It's not that I don't think the heights are silly, but then again: why is a 10ft primarch any more absurd than 7ft troops who specialise in boarding actions? (either they're too tall or all spaceships have unnecessarily high corridors)

Argastes
07-10-2008, 00:58
Again, they most likely just didn't care. Plus I'm not sure if Lion has fully grown by this point.

They may not have cared, that's true. But they DID say that the Lion appeared to be a human being. That's a fact, irrespective of what the writer did or didn't consider. And to me, that rules out his being ten feet tall. And although the fluff writer may not have consciously considered scale while writing that, what does that show you about how GW fluff writers view the Primarchs? It shows you that the fluff writer's automatic assumption when writing about the Primarchs (or at least the Lion specifically) is that they resembled normal humans, rather than having notable superhuman or inhuman characteristics. If GW really had consistently established that one of the basic facts about the Primarchs is that they are huge (as Iuris claimed earlier in the thread), then this fact would probably not be neglected by fluff writers describing them.

Interesting point about him being not fully grown. Although the Primarchs are generally depicting as growing to maturity with incredible speed (as in, infant to grown man within a couple of years or less), and this event was explicitly stated to have occurred many years after the Lion came to Caliban. Can't say for sure, though, maybe the Lion grew more slowly.


The Talon is quite a bit bigger than the normal Chaos Lightning Claw, though (remember to compare to the old Chaos models), and there's the whole Abbadon/clone of Horus question.

I pulled out my bits box and my old models to check this, and in fact, although the Talon has longer fingers and (obviously) a stormbolter on the back, it's actual "body" is only very marginally larger than the metal Terminator Champion lightning claw from the same period.

And if Abaddon really is the clone son of Horus, and is therefore the same size as him, then that's actually an argument for Horus NOT being much bigger than a normal Space Marine, because according to the models and artwork, Abaddon isn't that much bigger than one either (he's big, but not too big to be a normal Marine near the largish end of the spectrum). And the fluff has never said anything about him being
abnormally large for a Space Marine either.


The Emperor and the Primarchs are of the same make, "The Lightning Tower" clearly states that the Emperor, like the Primarchs, is a "genetically advantaged post-human."

Whooaaa there. Both the Emperor and the Primarchs may have had genetic advantages, and they might have all been post-human, but that does NOT mean that they were "of the same make." Especially when the fluff CLEARLY tells us that the Primarchs came to exist in one way, and the Emperor came to exist in a completely different way! The Primarchs were genetically engineered superbeings created in a laboratory by futuristic science. The Emperor is some sort of immortal reincarnation of a bunch of psykers, who came to be because of some fictitious principle governing the behavior of the souls of psykers, rather than any scientific effort. Fundamentally different origins and natures.

The term "genetically advantaged post-human" could refer to ANY being which has superior genetics, and abilities transcending those of normal humanity. It doesn't imply a single bit of commonality beyond that. Definitely nothing about how tall they are. A person who is 5'8" tall and physically indistinguishable from a normal human being could just as easily be a "genetically advantaged post-human" as could a twelve-foot-tall giant.


Granted, there is variation in height between the Primarchs, but it isn't really safe to make any assumption about the Emperor's height, as Horus, a giant himself, calls the Emperor a "golden giant" in one of the Horus Heresy novels.

Could easily have been speaking figuratively, especially given the use of the adjective "golden". The use of a term like "giant" to metaphorically describe someone of great importance, charisma, etc. is quite common. Google the phrase "he was a giant" and you'll see what I mean; it is used all the time to say that someone was tremendously influential, significant, or powerful. Or simply that they have a powerful "presence".


At the time, they were the same - the Warhammer fantasy was a world permanently cut-off by Warpstorms.

No, this is incorrect. Some old materials hinted--never actually stated--that the worlds were linked. But GW has since come out and said that this is not, and never has been, the actual case; and that those hints were never anything more than a poorly-considered inside joke. This was said in real-life statements to the gaming public.


In Warhammer Big=Boss. Check out the character models - they're almost uniformly larger than the troops.

I dunno... This doesn't actually seem to be really true except in the case of totally inhuman races in which there is a biological fluff explanation for the leaders being larger organisms (Orks, Tyranids, etc.). For Space Marines, IG and other humans, Eldar, etc., as well as humans/elves/dwarves in Fantasy, character models tend to be quite similar in size to the normal rank-and-file troopers. More blinged out, but similar in size. Ragnar, Ulrik, Tycho, Corbulo, Dante, Azrael, Sicarius, Kantor, Asmodai, Ezekiel, Tigurius, Cassius, Shrike, Helbrecht, the Eldar phoenix lords and Autarchs, the IG special character models... all are not significantly larger than a normal trooper of their race.


And let's not get started on the BL novel; Commissar Gaunt is 8 foot tall or something like that...

The scale-related stupidity in the BL books is exactly what I've arguing against for the past two pages, so I don't think that the absurd heights given in BL books are a very good example if you're trying to convince me that leaders are always taller in Warhammer! In fact, it would be a circular argument. That said, I believe the Gaunt's Ghosts novels actually describe Gaunt as being "two meters twenty", which is well under eight feet; it's seven feet and two inches, which is still freakishly tall, but within the range of natural human variation. Gaunt wouldn't place on a list of the fifty tallest basketball players, for instance (even if he did play basketball :p).


EDIT: It's not that I don't think the heights are silly, but then again: why is a 10ft primarch any more absurd than 7ft troops who specialise in boarding actions? (either they're too tall or all spaceships have unnecessarily high corridors)

It's not that I find the idea of a 10-foot Primarch inherently ridiculous; you're right, a giant superhuman would not be at all out of place amidst the various absurdities of the 40K setting. What I find ridiculous is when people insist that the Primarchs were taller than any of their Marines, when in fact GW has told us this was not so in many of their cases.

Also, I DO actually think that there is a noticeable difference in absurdity between "Here are enhanced supersoldiers who are taller than normal men", and "here are enhanced supersoldiers who are taller than normal men, and here are their leaders who are even taller than the supersoldiers, and here is the top leader who is even taller than the other leaders..." and so on. Like I said, I think that a systematic "bigger = awesomer" mentality reveals a childish and unimaginative mind. The idea of bigger-than-normal supersoldiers, on it's own, might not make much sense from a practical standpoint, but it's not as bad (in my opinion, of course) as consistently equating increasingly greater rank with increasingly greater height.

DarkMatter2
07-10-2008, 01:47
Whooaaa there. Both the Emperor and the Primarchs may have had genetic advantages, and they might have all been post-human, but that does NOT mean that they were "of the same make."

You kind of took the "of the same make" phrase and ran with it WAYYY too far. Granted it was poor wording, and I realized it may have been taken in the wrong way, but the phrase is used in such as way as to establish commonality between the Primarchs and the Emperor. The exact wording is, IIRC, "The Emperor, like the Primarchs, was a genetically advantaged post human." It does imply commonality. It seems if they really were genetically advantaged in some dramatically different way, that would be the time to point it out.

The reasons I stated this was not to necessarily prove that they had to be of the same height, but to get rid of the common assumption that the Emperor is a "normal human with uber psychic powers" and thus can't be as tall or as strong as a Space Marine.



Could easily have been speaking figuratively, especially given the use of the adjective "golden". The use of a term like "giant" to metaphorically describe someone of great importance, charisma, etc. is quite common. Google the phrase "he was a giant" and you'll see what I mean; it is used all the time to say that someone was tremendously influential, significant, or powerful. Or simply that they have a powerful "presence".

Wow. That is some seriously weak stretching. No, it was in context of his height. You're trying way too hard.


The idea of bigger-than-normal supersoldiers, on it's own, might not make much sense from a practical standpoint

Are you familiar with military history? There are several examples in history of soldiers being recruited based on height in order to frighten their enemies. The Space Marines rely on morale and quick strikes to succeed.

Argastes
07-10-2008, 03:28
You kind of took the "of the same make" phrase and ran with it WAYYY too far. Granted it was poor wording, and I realized it may have been taken in the wrong way, but the phrase is used in such as way as to establish commonality between the Primarchs and the Emperor. The exact wording is, IIRC, "The Emperor, like the Primarchs, was a genetically advantaged post human." It does imply commonality. It seems if they really were genetically advantaged in some dramatically different way, that would be the time to point it out.

The reasons I stated this was not to necessarily prove that they had to be of the same height, but to get rid of the common assumption that the Emperor is a "normal human with uber psychic powers" and thus can't be as tall or as strong as a Space Marine.

Right, I never said the Emperor was just a normal human with psychic powers; I recognize that he is an immortal super-creature who is totally different from normal human beings. I apologize if I misinterpreted you, but yes, I did think you were trying to say that the were "cast from the same mold", so to speak; that is what your word choice implied. If you aren't necessarily saying the Emperor was as tall as his Primarchs, and I'm not saying he was a normal human with psychic powers, then it sounds like we actually aren't in disagreement here.

But no, the statement that they both had genetic advantages and were post-human does not, in and of itself, imply any commonality beyond the commonality it explicitly describes. All it says is that they both had: A). Genetic advantages over a normal human, and B). Post-human capabilities (meaning their abilities exceeded those of a normal person by such a wide margin that they couldn't be considered humans). Maybe the differences between the advantages/abilities of the Emperor and his Primarchs were slight, or maybe they were significant; we just don't know. Certainly we know from other sources that there were some commonalities (all had incredibly physical strength and fighting skills, all were highly intelligent, all had some degree of psychic powers), but those sources also tell of significant differences (some were precognitive and some weren't, there was significant variation in the strength of their psychic powers, some resembled normal humans while others were obviously inhuman in size or appearance, some could fly, the Emperor is actually immortal whilst the Primarchs are just very long-lived, and so forth). And nothing--including the passage you cited--tell us, in overall terms, whether the similarities between the Emperor and the Primarchs outweighed the differences, or vice versa. Nothing tells us whether they were fundamentally similar because they were all genetically advantaged post-humans, or whether they were fundamentally dissimilar despite that fact. Exactly what overarching commonality do you think is implied by the passage you cite, and why?


Wow. That is some seriously weak stretching. No, it was in context of his height. You're trying way too hard.

Are you that dead-set on the idea that the Emperor was taller than all his Primarchs? I don't think it's a stretch. It's a common usage of the word. It's not like I dug up some obscure meaning that's no longer in use. Do you also think that the Emperor was shiny and yellow, since Horus said he was "golden"? And if you could demonstrate to us that it was "in context of his height" by quoting the relevant passage, that would make your case a bit stronger; what exactly is it that establishes that context?

And there is plenty of GW artwork which shows the Emperor being no larger than Horus, or even being of normal size. Frankly, I think YOU are trying way too hard to advance this notion that the Emperor was twelve feet tall or whatever.


Are you familiar with military history? There are several examples in history of soldiers being recruited based on height in order to frighten their enemies. The Space Marines rely on morale and quick strikes to succeed.

Yes, I'm quite familiar with military history; it was my minor, in fact. To the best of my knowledge, Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia's famous Potsdam Grenadiers were the only military unit ever assembled on the basis of height. If you know of others, I'd love to hear about them. The reality of the matter is the main reason for assembling the "Potsdam Giants" had to do with Friedrich Wilhem's obsession with tall men, not with any real military advantage of tallness. In fact, they never actually saw battle, and may have been combat-ineffective if they had, because their great height was often a result of growth disorders that have various deletrious physical effects. They certainly never got to use their height to frighten the enemies. As I said, if you can cite any other historical examples of "tall soldiers", perhaps ones who actually fought rather than being a parade-ground oddity, I would be interested to hear about them.

As for Space Marines, I don't discount that their large size is intimidating to some of their foes (most of the aliens and Chaos entities they fight probably aren't frightened, but human foes such as rebels and renegades might be). But what Supremearchmarshal pointed out, quite rightly, was that it would pose a serious problem when they have to enter buildings, and especially vehicles and spacecraft designed for normal people; and spacecraft boarding actions are supposed to be one of their specialties. That is what I was agreeing with when I said that their size is somewhat impractical. It is, of course, an open question whether the "fear factor" created their size would be enough of an advantage in combat to outweigh the fact that they can't fit through many doors and hallways.

And how does being seven feet tall and four feet across the shoulders aid in "quick strikes"?

abasio
07-10-2008, 03:35
In the Warhammer 40,000 universe, how tall is a normal human?
Just hundreds of years ago (like 1600s or something) humans were much shorter than we are now. Have you ever been to an ancient temple & had to stoop to go through the doorways? Safe to say that in the next 28,000 - 38,000 years normal humans would be quite a bit taller than we are now.

So if we average 5'9" now but martial classes probably average around 6' so in the far future humans could average 7 or 8 foot tall. Marines standing head and shoulders above normal humans could then be 9 foot tall & so a primarch could be 11 foot tall.

Something I've never heard in fluff is just how tall regular humans are!

Does anyone know?

Firaxin
07-10-2008, 03:59
Something I've never heard in fluff is just how tall regular humans are!

Does anyone know?

It varies from planet to planet. Compare Ogryns to Ratlings.

Unamed Consript
07-10-2008, 04:09
In the Warhammer 40,000 universe, how tall is a normal human?
Just hundreds of years ago (like 1600s or something) humans were much shorter than we are now. Have you ever been to an ancient temple & had to stoop to go through the doorways? Safe to say that in the next 28,000 - 38,000 years normal humans would be quite a bit taller than we are now.

So if we average 5'9" now but martial classes probably average around 6' so in the far future humans could average 7 or 8 foot tall. Marines standing head and shoulders above normal humans could then be 9 foot tall & so a primarch could be 11 foot tall.

Something I've never heard in fluff is just how tall regular humans are!

Does anyone know?

Your post makes the most sense out of any ive seen here. You guys are always talking about model sizes and height comparisons, but have you ever placed a space marine next to an imperial guardsmen? They are the SAME HEIGHT so obviously you cannot use the models to see sizes.

Do you know the world record for the tallest human being? it like 9 feet tall. This is a regular human, and the emperor, i can guarentee, is very gifted and able to make his sons large. Very large.

My question is, what makes a primarch being 10 feet tall absurd? I cant possibly think of any reason why not.

DarkMatter2
07-10-2008, 04:19
Exactly what overarching commonality do you think is implied by the passage you cite, and why?

Stronger, longer lived, taller (the Primarchs are the genetic descendents of the Emperor, as are the SM), greater resistance to injury.

Why? I think it just makes sense given that the Primarchs aren't merely test tube babies - they are created scientifically using the genes of the Emperor, which he presumably knew were superior.



Are you that dead-set on the idea that the Emperor was taller than all his Primarchs?

I'm not dead set on it. I actually think it would be cooler if the Emperor was the size of a slightly tall human, rather than being OMFG! SUPER GIANT!11!!. He is after all the Emperor of Humanity, not the Emperor of the Space Marines. The Astartes are a tool to use to protect humanity not his primary constituents, and not who he has to relate to.


Do you also think that the Emperor was shiny and yellow, since Horus said he was "golden"?

The "golden" would refer to his golden armor (always shown in any artwork) and his glowing "aura".


And if you could demonstrate to us that it was "in context of his height" by quoting the relevant passage, that would make your case a bit stronger; what exactly is it that establishes that context?

I would, honestly, if I had the book. I am not trying to be evasive here - the book is literally at my home several hundred miles from here. If someone could quote the relevant passage from False Gods?


And there is plenty of GW artwork which shows the Emperor being no larger than Horus, or even being of normal size.

Granted. I have seen the artwork too. I always assumed that Horus was so large because "Chaos did it", or because he is explicitly stated (IIRC) to be the largest of the Primarchs.



Yes, I'm quite familiar with military history; it was my minor, in fact. To the best of my knowledge, Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia's famous Potsdam Grenadiers were the only military unit ever assembled on the basis of height. If you know of others, I'd love to hear about them. The reality of the matter is the main reason for assembling the "Potsdam Giants" had to do with Friedrich Wilhem's obsession with tall men, not with any real military advantage of tallness. In fact, they never actually saw battle, and may have been combat-ineffective if they had, because their great height was often a result of growth disorders that have various deletrious physical effects. They certainly never got to use their height to frighten the enemies. As I said, if you can cite any other historical examples of "tall soldiers", perhaps ones who actually fought rather than being a parade-ground oddity, I would be interested to hear about them.

I can think of a couple of examples:

1. The Russian Guard during the Napoleonic Wars was required to be ~20 cm taller at minimum to their regular army compatriots. Which was significant at the time.

2. The British Guard, up to the Second World War, needed to be at least 5'10'' (which is still to this day above average height).

3. Same thing with the Napoleonic Imperial Guard - grenadiers had to be at least 5'10'' (about half a foot above average at the time)

All of this was to make them seem more impressive in parade and more frightening on the battlefield to enemies.

Nowadays it isn't important to be tall, for the same reason that people don't wear bright colors and fight with swords. However, neither of those two things are true in 40k.




It is, of course, an open question whether the "fear factor" created their size would be enough of an advantage in combat to outweigh the fact that they can't fit through many doors and hallways.

I can say that nearly any spaceship that Astartes were expected to be on would have been either built with them specifically in mind, or built to the possibility that they might possibly be there.


And how does being seven feet tall and four feet across the shoulders aid in "quick strikes"?


Have you read the Ultramarines books? In the first one it describes a lightning assault on a defending PDF force. The impressive nature of the Ultramarines themselves destroys enemy morale to such an extent that even a gunline is only able to compose itself for a few shots, which do relatively little damage, before getting run down.

Argastes
07-10-2008, 05:43
Stronger, longer lived, taller (the Primarchs are the genetic descendents of the Emperor, as are the SM), greater resistance to injury.

Right, I cited all these things as similarities between the Emperor and the Primarchs in my previous post. There are also significant differences, which I also cited. The fact remains that the degree of commonality between the Emperor and the Primarchs, relative to the degree of difference, remains unclear. And CERTAINLY their shared identity as "genetically advantaged post-humans" does not suggest any commonality in size, which seems to have been your original reason for pointing it out; you cited that shared identity in direct response to my question about whether we have any evidence that the Emperor was similar to the Primarchs in size.


Why? I think it just makes sense given that the Primarchs aren't merely test tube babies - they are created scientifically using the genes of the Emperor, which he presumably knew were superior.

Well, just as I never said that the Emperor is merely a human with psychic powers, I certainly never said that the Primarchs are merely "test tube babies". I don't see how skepticism of the idea that they were "just test tube babies" leads you to believe in this fundamental Emperor-Primarch commonality you claim stems from the fact that they were all genetically advantaged post-humans. No-one ever said the Primarchs are "mere test-tube babies", and there is no reason to believe that even if their nature is fundamentally different from that of the Emperor.


I'm not dead set on it. I actually think it would be cooler if the Emperor was the size of a slightly tall human, rather than being OMFG! SUPER GIANT!11!!. He is after all the Emperor of Humanity, not the Emperor of the Space Marines. The Astartes are a tool to use to protect humanity not his primary constituents, and not who he has to relate to.

Yes, I think that is cooler too. And fortunately, I've never seen any actual GW fluff to debunk that theory. And plenty of GW material actually supports the idea that he was normal-sized. The only stuff that seems to support him being a "giant" comes out of BL's crappy fanfic (and even then, I still haven't heard anything concrete and undoubtable). So I have absolutely no problem believing the cooler theory, which is that he was human-sized.

If you think that the Emperor being human-sized makes sense, then believe it! Join us! There's no reason not to, and the GW material actually supports it!


The "golden" would refer to his golden armor (always shown in any artwork) and his glowing "aura".

That's another example of what I would call a serious stretch. Especially since it's actually untrue that his armor is always depicted as gold; that is a trend that basically originated with the HH art and cardgame. He wore white armor in some older artwork, for instance, and in an old 'Eavy Metal diorama of the Emperor vs. Horus that was based on some of that artwork. But anyhow, until someone can quote the relevant passage and it can be proven that Horus' "golden giant" remark was a literal reference to the Emperor's immense physical size, I suppose we can't go any further on this point.


I can think of a couple of examples:

1. The Russian Guard during the Napoleonic Wars was required to be ~20 cm taller at minimum to their regular army compatriots. Which was significant at the time.

2. The British Guard, up to the Second World War, needed to be at least 5'10'' (which is still to this day above average height).

3. Same thing with the Napoleonic Imperial Guard - grenadiers had to be at least 5'10'' (about half a foot above average at the time)

All of this was to make them seem more impressive in parade and more frightening on the battlefield to enemies.

Nowadays it isn't important to be tall, for the same reason that people don't wear bright colors and fight with swords. However, neither of those two things are true in 40k.

But grenadiers (and the height requirements for units such as the British Foot Guard regiments do come from their origins as grenadier-heavy units) had to be tall because big men could throw their grenades a farther distance, not actually because it made them more frightening on the battlefield. So recruiting tall soldiers into elite units is related specifically to the need to hurl heavy iron balls over long distances, not to the general nature of warfare in the era of sword-fighting and bright uniforms. And in fact, the Russian Imperial Guard had eliminated height requirements in their grenadiers units by as early as 1815; even then, they were recognizing that height doesn't necessarily make a good soldier, even a good grenadier (since a strong man can through a grenade a good distance even if he's shorter than 5'10"), and that it is more practical to recruit elite soldiers on the basis of their abilities rather than size.

And anyhow, when I expressed skepticism about the practicality of seven-foot Space Marines, your initial response was "There are several examples in history of soldiers being recruited based on height in order to frighten their enemies." You are correct that there have always been units with certain physical requirements based on the physical demands of the weapons they use--even today, the US military has certain height minimums for the pilots of certain aircraft, which are higher than the general height minimums for recruitment. But I don't think these examples really establish the practicality of seven-foot soldiers, especially on the grounds that you were originally claiming (soldiers being deliberately recruited for their great height because it would frighten the enemy).


I can say that nearly any spaceship that Astartes were expected to be on would have been either built with them specifically in mind, or built to the possibility that they might possibly be there.

What?? How can you possibly say that? That's utterly absurd. The only ships that are going to be built to accommodate Space Marines would be Space Marine warships. Even Imperial Navy warships probably aren't built for them, since they are not expected to transport them or be crewed by them. To say nothing of all the countless civilian and alien spacecraft in the galaxy. Remember, we are talking about conducting boarding actions against ENEMY vessels; why on Earth would such vessels--the vessels of enemies of the Imperium--be built to accommodate Space Marines? There is absolutely no reason for it.


Have you read the Ultramarines books? In the first one it describes a lightning assault on a defending PDF force. The impressive nature of the Ultramarines themselves destroys enemy morale to such an extent that even a gunline is only able to compose itself for a few shots, which do relatively little damage, before getting run down.

I don't see how this is particularly pertinent to "quick strikes", but I do see your point. I did acknowledge that point in my previous post as well; but as I said in that previous post, the question is whether this fear effect (which would arguably still exist if the Space Marines weren't so enormous, since it is based on much more than just their size) outweighs the disadvantages of their hugeness in urban combat, vehicle and building interiors, boarding actions, and so on.


EDIT:

Do you know the world record for the tallest human being? it like 9 feet tall. This is a regular human, and the emperor, i can guarentee, is very gifted and able to make his sons large. Very large.

Right, no-one is saying it would be beyond the Emperor's abilities to create giants, if he wanted to (and in fact, he did create some of the Primarchs as giants; the GW fluff makes that clear). The question is whether that was the norm.


My question is, what makes a primarch being 10 feet tall absurd? I cant possibly think of any reason why not.

As has already been said in this thread, it's not necessarily more inherently absurd than anything else in the setting; the question is whether it's supported in the fluff. Obviously it's supported in the BL fluff, which seems to be obsessed with physical bigness as a badge of rank and power (and, I think, as an unfortunate substitute for more compelling characterization and description), but the actual GW fluff seems to say something totally different.

Wraith
07-10-2008, 06:54
The Emperor's appearance is due to a glamour -- a psychic projection -- read Legion for more.

Supremearchmarshal
07-10-2008, 09:49
They may not have cared, that's true. But they DID say that the Lion appeared to be a human being. That's a fact, irrespective of what the writer did or didn't consider. And to me, that rules out his being ten feet tall. And although the fluff writer may not have consciously considered scale while writing that, what does that show you about how GW fluff writers view the Primarchs? It shows you that the fluff writer's automatic assumption when writing about the Primarchs (or at least the Lion specifically) is that they resembled normal humans, rather than having notable superhuman or inhuman characteristics. If GW really had consistently established that one of the basic facts about the Primarchs is that they are huge (as Iuris claimed earlier in the thread), then this fact would probably not be neglected by fluff writers describing them.

True, but larger inconsistencies have happened before (Istvaan V massacre - check out how no 2 pieces of fluff mention the same Chaos legions), and established fluff can be changed at the drop of a hat: Ultramarines become a Legion overnight. Night Lords don't worship Khorne anymore. Orks become fungi etc.

Another thing I just remembered is in the old Space Marine novel, Rogal Dorn's skeleton is much larger than a normal marine (the exact size isn't given). Now I know that this is not strictly GW fluff, but on the other hand in those days the novels were much more correct regarding the fluff (i.e. unlike today the authors actually knew that a Needle Pistol doesn't blow holes in people and that Terminators can't do flying kicks...). Plus this (and the Sanguinius story) shows either that not all writers had the same assumptions, or that Primarchs significantly differed in regard to height.


No, this is incorrect. Some old materials hinted--never actually stated--that the worlds were linked. But GW has since come out and said that this is not, and never has been, the actual case; and that those hints were never anything more than a poorly-considered inside joke. This was said in real-life statements to the gaming public.

This is OT, but the "hints" about the connection are pretty heavy. And in the very much current Liber Chaotica the narrator (who's from the Warhammer world) has visions of the future, which is quite clearly the 40k universe.

The real reason why GW deny the connection are of an economic nature. You see, if the worlds were connected, giving someone the rights to use 40k imagery (like the producers of DoW) would automatically give them the license to fantasy. Back in the days of RT, 40k was not GW's flagship game, so they also used it to sell WH Fantasy models.


The scale-related stupidity in the BL books is exactly what I've arguing against for the past two pages, so I don't think that the absurd heights given in BL books are a very good example if you're trying to convince me that leaders are always taller in Warhammer! In fact, it would be a circular argument. That said, I believe the Gaunt's Ghosts novels actually describe Gaunt as being "two meters twenty", which is well under eight feet; it's seven feet and two inches, which is still freakishly tall, but within the range of natural human variation. Gaunt wouldn't place on a list of the fifty tallest basketball players, for instance (even if he did play basketball :p).

No, that's one of the other major characters. Gaunt is something impossible like 2,70 meters or something like that - though I believe Abnett corrected it in his later books.


What I find ridiculous is when people insist that the Primarchs were taller than any of their Marines, when in fact GW has told us this was not so in many of their cases.

I dunno, as I've said long before the HH books my mental image of them was as significantly taller than their marines. What was the cause of this belief I don't really recall, but I certainly didn't just conjure up the number.


Also, I DO actually think that there is a noticeable difference in absurdity between "Here are enhanced supersoldiers who are taller than normal men", and "here are enhanced supersoldiers who are taller than normal men, and here are their leaders who are even taller than the supersoldiers, and here is the top leader who is even taller than the other leaders..." and so on. Like I said, I think that a systematic "bigger = awesomer" mentality reveals a childish and unimaginative mind. The idea of bigger-than-normal supersoldiers, on it's own, might not make much sense from a practical standpoint, but it's not as bad (in my opinion, of course) as consistently equating increasingly greater rank with increasingly greater height.

You are correct, and the size creep has been with us for quite some time now. And not just for Primarchs - take a look at the Orks and especially their weaponry. 50kg Choppa? That would mean they're something like 15-20 times stronger than a human, which is bull.

And the awesomeness creep is well spotted. And it's not just about height. Take this example:
Before the marines were humanity's finest warriors. Now we have:
Marines
Super Marines (Deathwatch, commando-like marines)
Super-Super Marines (Grey Knights, incorruptible psyker marines)
Super-Super-Super Marines (Custodes - who were normal humans in RT)
Super-Super-Super-Super Marines (Primarchs)
and finally the biggest Marine of them all: the Emperor (yeah, technically not a marine, but Custode's geneseed is supposedly from him, so it makes you wonder...)

Born Again
07-10-2008, 09:56
Well it definately says that Space Marines are 7ft in the current Chaos Space Marine Codex, I will try get a page number for yeese tomorrow.

If the Lion is Under 3 metres tall that puts him around the 9.5ft mark. Though he isn't described as particularly tall either.

Aha! Thanks, I knew I wasn't going crazy (actually I might be, but it's not interfering with my 40k yet).

DarkMatter2
07-10-2008, 11:29
If you think that the Emperor being human-sized makes sense, then believe it! Join us! There's no reason not to, and the GW material actually supports it!


Its obviously because I am not convinced. Trying to give vague metaphorical meanings to BL authors' words and referencing pictures from 1989 does not a credible argument make.

Its just one of those things. You have the right to believe what you want, but the 40k universe says another. Could I, if I really desperately wanted to, play semantics and try to make words and phrases say what I wanted? Maybe. Would that change that he meant what he meant and he said what he said and that is how it is? No.

DarkMatter2
07-10-2008, 11:55
I would say look at this picture for example.

If I am interpreting it right, that is a Sister of Silence who doesn't even come up to the Emperor's chest, an Adeptus Custodes who comes up to roughly the Emperor's shoulders, and the Emperor himself is as broad as both of them put together.

the_raptor
07-10-2008, 13:56
Your post makes the most sense out of any ive seen here. You guys are always talking about model sizes and height comparisons, but have you ever placed a space marine next to an imperial guardsmen? They are the SAME HEIGHT so obviously you cannot use the models to see sizes.

You obviously haven't done it yourself, or didn't look very hard. The models eye heights do line up, but the marine is in a significant (so significant that it must hurt like anything to hold for a whole battle) crouch, whiles the current Cadian models are mostly at full extension on at least one leg. If you compare a Cadian to a marine with full leg extension (eg khorne bezerker) the marine is easily half a foot to just under a foot taller (hard to get very accurate measurements with the equipment I had). Go look at some of the true scale marines that have had nothing done but leg straightening, they look much taller.


Like I said, I think that a systematic "bigger = awesomer" mentality reveals a childish and unimaginative mind.

It works for Orks!

On a more serious note, you see this same mentality in many other places. For example human sized creatures in World of Warcraft that swell to titanic proportions after becoming boss encounters.

Argastes
07-10-2008, 14:06
Its obviously because I am not convinced. Trying to give vague metaphorical meanings to BL authors' words and referencing pictures from 1989 does not a credible argument make.

Its just one of those things. You have the right to believe what you want, but the 40k universe says another. Could I, if I really desperately wanted to, play semantics and try to make words and phrases say what I wanted? Maybe. Would that change that he meant what he meant and he said what he said and that is how it is? No.

You're still missing my point. What I'm saying is that you shouldn't be letting the BL authors define the 40K universe for you at all. You don't have to try to twist their words or play semantics, you just have to recognize that their words shouldn't be taken as definitive in the first place (although interpreting a phrase figuratively is not "trying to make the words say what you want"... I still don't understand why you think that not taking everything literally is somehow a desperate game of semantics). The BL authors are notorious for their inconsistency, they are notorious for not bothering to make sure their work lines up with the actual GW fluff, and frankly, their books are just plain bad. GW has basically allowed the BL authors to run wild with the 40K setting, and the BL authors haven't even bothered to comply with the pre-existing background of the universe they are supposed to be writing in. Just because a BL author says something doesn't mean "the 40K universe" says that same thing.

Answer me this: Can you cite even a single point of evidence, just one solitary point, in support of the "giant Emperor" theory that DOESN'T come from a BL novel? The lack of non-BL evidence for this theory is why I am so skeptical of it. And it's why I think it's ludicrous for you to make statements like "you can believe what you want but the 40K universe says otherwise"--as if the BL novels are the factual foundation of the setting and whatever they say becomes a statement of truth from the 40K universe itself! If we could see something from an actual Games Workshop publication (a rulebook, codex, WD, sourcebook, etc.) I'd take it more seriously. But it seems like all you have is BL, and you are just going to insist that whatever BL tells you is the defining truth of 40K, and anyone who doesn't accept BL's inconsistent crapfest as the defining truth of 40K is sticking their head in the sand or something. I'm asking you to step away from that attitude and recognize the BL novels for what they are: They are constantly and flagrantly inconsistent with GW's pre-established background, and so anything they say shouldn't be taken as hard-and-fast "40K fact". Especially if it has no basis in the pre-existing 40K background, which the "giant emperor" theory certainly does not.

I sympathize with your sentiment that ignoring what's written doesn't unwrite it. In background discussion/debate threads, I'm normally the one trying to tell other people the same thing--that just arbitrarily insisting that certain pieces of fluff "don't count" just because you don't like them is silly and wrongheaded. But in this case, the fluff in question is supported NOWHERE in GW materials, it comes purely from the BL's authors, whose most defining literary characteristic is their willingness to throw away consistency and continuity, and respect for the established background of the setting they are writing in, in order to jot down whatever blather sounds cool to them at the moment.

And why are you more willing to trust the art from recent years than the art from the 2nd Edition and RT era)? Especially when GW has made it clear that old fluff is just as valid as new fluff even when they contradict each other? And especially when a lot of the art you're referencing was made by non-GW artists, working for a non-GW company, to produce a collectible card game based on the licensed rights to the 40K setting....


I would say look at this picture for example.

If I am interpreting it right, that is a Sister of Silence who doesn't even come up to the Emperor's chest, an Adeptus Custodes who comes up to roughly the Emperor's shoulders, and the Emperor himself is as broad as both of them put together.

Yeah, that's from the Sabretooth collectible card game art, not anything GW published. It wasn't done by a GW artist, it was done by some Sabretooth artist. It's practically fan art, to be brutally honest (it's well done, but it no more defines the "reality" of GW's setting than does a piece of fan art). I would say it's just as meaningless as the crap BL churns out.

Thanatos_elNyx
07-10-2008, 15:40
No need, here's Gav Thorpe's post on this (I keep having to dig this up!):

Cool, ftr though it was page 26, the second line of the Bestiary section on Chaos Space Marines.



As an aside, do we have a canon level system in 40k?
i.e.
'A' Level Canon which is any GW published fluff,
'B' Level Canon which is any secondary published fluff (e.g. BL books etc),
'C' Level Canon which is any tertiary published fluff (e.g. licenced games such as DoW, WAR, etc).

A level always beat B and C level canon when there is contradiction etc.

Supremearchmarshal
07-10-2008, 15:45
AFAIK GW's official line is something like: "It's up to the reader to decide which sources of info can be trusted."
Nice way of covering their back, eh?

Argastes
07-10-2008, 16:54
As an aside, do we have a canon level system in 40k?
i.e.
'A' Level Canon which is any GW published fluff,
'B' Level Canon which is any secondary published fluff (e.g. BL books etc),
'C' Level Canon which is any tertiary published fluff (e.g. licenced games such as DoW, WAR, etc).

A level always beat B and C level canon when there is contradiction etc.

No, nothing official like that. As supremearchmarshal says, they have saved themselves the hassle of dealing with that issue by saying something to the effect that none of the fluff can be assumed to be necessarily true or false, and it's all up for interpretation. Basically they are dodging around the massive consistency problems which are created partially by the changing fluff from one edition to the next, but largely by the BL authors' total irresponsibility and willingness to write whatever pops into their head without regard for whether it clashes with what's already been said.

So I'm not saying that people should ignore the BL stuff because it is "officially" less canon than GW material; I'm saying that whatever the official line may be, BL material should be treated as de facto less meaningful than GW material because it's just such a horrible mess that it's impossible to take seriously.

DarkMatter2
07-10-2008, 17:36
You're still missing my point. What I'm saying is that you shouldn't be letting the BL authors define the 40K universe for you at all. You don't have to try to twist their words or play semantics, you just have to recognize that their words shouldn't be taken as definitive in the first place (although interpreting a phrase figuratively is not "trying to make the words say what you want"... I still don't understand why you think that not taking everything literally is somehow a desperate game of semantics.)

This is where I get off. BL is canon. It is. Everything is canon actually.

You're essentially doing the same damn thing you were criticizing everyone else for. "You have to take what is written as what is written...unless you don't like it and are me."

Beyond this I refuse to get into a petty canon debate. I'm not desperate enough to prove any of my points to delve into those incredibly silly waters.


And why are you more willing to trust the art from recent years than the art from the 2nd Edition and RT era

Because most of it is shoddy, looks horrible, and is inconsistent with the 40k universe as it has developed through the years.

If they cannot be reconciled, it only makes sense to go with the latter, as it represents the current train of thought of the game developers.


Yeah, that's from the Sabretooth collectible card game art, not anything GW published. It wasn't done by a GW artist, it was done by some Sabretooth artist.

It still reflects a design choice and a trend. GW is notorious for being watchdoggish when it comes to other companies using their universe.

If the Emperor is in fact a regular sized joe, I doubt very seriously they would have allowed Sabretooth to make him into a freaking giant. Would they have allowed, say, a depiction of Leman Russ and a Guardsman standing head to head at the same height?

Anyway, I'm done with this convo. As I've stated frequently in the past, the BL is canon. End of story. I don't even find most of it to be that poor - except for CS Goto. Yes, I take what it says as the truth in the 40k universe.

Unamed Consript
07-10-2008, 19:47
this is all up for opinion. you have yours, i have mine.
I choose to believe that primarchs are 10+ feet tall, and thats fine. I dont care if you found one quote that destroys my perception of these guys. They are supposed to be mighty warriors who inspire even the best soldiers. When you look across the battlefield at astartes head level, i want to see this great and powerful being who is many feet taller and bigger than everyone else reaking havoc in the enemy. Thats what i want to see and hear, so thats what im gonna see and hear.

Im not saying that you are wrong, but i am saying that everyone is right.

The primarchs are one of the highlights of 40k imo, and its going to remain that way.

Argastes
07-10-2008, 20:30
This is where I get off. BL is canon. It is. Everything is canon actually.

Well, DarkMatter, you totally missed the point yet again. I know BL is officially canon. I explicitly said that in my last post. I explicitly said that I realize that ALL material published by any division or subsidiary of GW PLC--be it Black Library or whatever else--is officially canon because GW has said so. I never claimed BL wasn't canon.

The point I'm making is that despite BL material being officially canon, you don't have to take it seriously if you don't want to. And reasonable people can find plenty of reasons not to. "Canon" is not the same thing as "true". In fact, GW has come right out and said that not all canon materials are actually true or accurate; they have said that where canon materials contradict each other, it may be that one is correct while the other is incorrect, and it's up to the reader to make up their mind about which to believe. So where BL canon materials contradict GW canon materials (as they do on the issue of the size of the Emperor and the Primarchs), I'm saying I think it's more reasonable to accept the GW materials. And you have said that you think the GW take on the Emperor's size is more appealing than the BL take, for instance. You don't have to say "Well BL says this and BL is canon so that's what I've got to believe!" when there are other, equally canon, materials that contradict BL.


You're essentially doing the same damn thing you were criticizing everyone else for. "You have to take what is written as what is written...unless you don't like it and are me."

No, not at all. I'm saying that where two different canon materials contradict each other, you should go with the one you like more. Which is exactly what GW has told us to do.


Because most of it is shoddy, looks horrible, and is inconsistent with the 40k universe as it has developed through the years.

If they cannot be reconciled, it only makes sense to go with the latter, as it represents the current train of thought of the game developers.

Shoddy and horrible? We must be thinking of different art. In any case, no, it does not necessarily make sense to "go with the latter as it represents the current train of thought of the game developers". Why? Because GW has explicitly told us that this line of reasoning, of assuming the more recent fluff is more valid or overrides the old stuff, IS NOT CORRECT. They have told us that RT materials are just as valid a reflection of the universe as 5th Edition materials, and the the age of the materials IS NOT to be taken as an indication of which are meant to be considered correct. I'm a little surprised that you are so aware of the fact that they've said BL is canon, but seem completely ignorant of the fact that they've also said old art/fluff is still canon.


It still reflects a design choice and a trend. GW is notorious for being watchdoggish when it comes to other companies using their universe.

If the Emperor is in fact a regular sized joe, I doubt very seriously they would have allowed Sabretooth to make him into a freaking giant. Would they have allowed, say, a depiction of Leman Russ and a Guardsman standing head to head at the same height?

GW can't even keep their own fluff and artwork consistent in many cases, and they obviously don't give a damn if the BL authors make up whatever they please no matter how contradictory it is, so do you really think that they would have put the nix on playing card's picture of the Emperor that shows him as too tall?

You are making the totally unwarranted assumption that the GW employee who looked over the Sabretooth CCG art was knowledgeable and concerned enough about the obscure details of the established background (and the height of the Emperor is a fairly obscure detail, with little attention ever focused on it) that he would have considered each piece of art in the light of every one of those obscure details, and rejected any piece of art that contradicted any of them. It's entirely plausible that the guy responsible for looking over that art might have not remembered the old fluff suggestions that the Emperor is human-sized, and might have just seen that artwork and gone "Oh cool, a picture of the emperor, that's fine... next picture, please."

And the fact of the matter is that many pieces of the Sabretooth art DO actually contradict the established fluff, and yet GW allowed them to be used anyhow. What about the picture of the Emperor confronting Horus on his battle barge, a confrontation to which there were supposed to be no witnesses.... and the CCG art shows a crowd of Sons of Horus marines watching from the sidelines? If GW was as strict as you claim about only allowing Sabretooth to use art that matches the pre-existing fluff, why did they let stuff like that slide? Obviously you are mistaken, and GW was not particularly "watchdoggish" about the artistic licenses taken by Sabretooth.


Anyway, I'm done with this convo. As I've stated frequently in the past, the BL is canon. End of story.

If you had perhaps read more carefully, you might have realized that no-one ever claimed otherwise.


Yes, I take what it says as the truth in the 40k universe.

And that's where you go wrong... by not understanding the difference between "canon" and "definitive truth".

Rockerfella
07-10-2008, 21:43
Bottom line guys, if someone of the likes of Gav Thorpe specifically says a marine is seven foot average, then, what the hell, thats good enough for me.

If its not tall enough for some folk, then thats cool too!

Personally, I don't think there's anything wrong with a 9.5 foot tall Primarch. I'm not saying taller is 'arder', because I don't believe that for one minute (see Mike Tyson, Smokin Joe frazier and Rocky Marciano, for example) but I do feel it fits well with their legend and mystique.

I personally think the Emperor was of average height, but was able to manipulate your perception of him. So, i'm happy with a 5'10 Emperor!

Anyways, i'll let you guys carry on with your serious debate!

MadDoc
08-10-2008, 00:50
Aww, and you were doing so well (well not really, but you hadn't shot yourself in the foot yet), and then you go and say this...


Yeah, that's from the Sabretooth collectible card game art, not anything GW published.

Point 1) Its GW published because its from Sabretooth, did the card game have the 40K logo on it? Don't tax yourself, it did, and so its therefore GW official. Not to mention it was published by GW in the Horus Heresy Visions series, so very much GW published.


It wasn't done by a GW artist, it was done by some Sabretooth artist. It's practically fan art, to be brutally honest (it's well done, but it no more defines the "reality" of GW's setting than does a piece of fan art).

Point 2) Funny you should say that as the "supposedly" Sabretooth artist who drew this seems to have produced a bucket load of work for GW (for someone who isn't a GW artist), but lets not let facts interfere with the point you were trying to make... :rolleyes:


I would say it's just as meaningless as the crap BL churns out.

:wtf: I don 't even know where to start with that remark... *shakes head*

You're entitled to your opinion but don't try to use your opinion as evidence to strengthen your argument. It doesn't work...

Now to a more On Topic point the official line is, and has been for a while, that "Primarchs are to Space Marines as Marines are to mortal men" and the artwork (all official GW stuff regardless of some peoples ill-informed misconceptions) has been portraying them as larger than normal Marines for sometime now. (It should also be noted that the (limited at best) artwork portraying the Primarchs as mortal sized predates the Primarchs being engineered beings made by the Emperor.)

Argastes
08-10-2008, 04:33
Wow, your obnoxious tone and attitude certainly don't leave many doubts about what ax you're here to grind.


Aww, and you were doing so well (well not really, but you hadn't shot yourself in the foot yet), and then you go and say this...

Point 1) Its GW published because its from Sabretooth, did the card game have the 40K logo on it? Don't tax yourself, it did, and so its therefore GW official. Not to mention it was published by GW in the Horus Heresy Visions series, so very much GW published.

Despite how pleased with yourself you seem to be over this, you have misunderstood my point and ignored my earlier statements. AND you don't seem to actually understand the business relationship between GW and Sabertooth, or be aware of the fact that there are two different business entities that may be called "Games Workshop", and that each of the two has a different relationship with Sabertooth.

Firstly, having the 40K logo on the packaging doesn't make it GW-published; it means it's GW licensed. That said, yes, Sabertooth is a subsidiary of the Games Workshop Group, PLC. So if you mean to use the name "Games Workshop" as a shorthand for the umbrella company that includes the actual company that's just called "Games Workshop", along with BL, FW, Sabertooth, etc., then you can say that whatever Sabertooth puts out is "GW published". However, I was not using "GW" as shorthand for "GWG PLC"; I was using it to mean exactly what it says, the Games Workshop company. The company that produces the Warhammer 40,000 game, and which is NOT the same company as Sabertooth or BL or FW. And therefore NOT the same company that publishes the CCG (that was Sabertooth), or the HH Visions artbooks in which the CCG art was collected (those were BL). What I was saying was that I am more inclined to value the actual GW-published fluff over the fluff published by other companies that are owned by GWG PLC, such as BL and Sabertooth.

Secondly, I am well aware that it's all official canon, whether it was published by GW or Sabertooth or BL, and I never disputed this; like DarkMatter, perhaps you would have noticed this if you had read the thread more carefully. To repeat myself: My reluctance to accept Sabertooth, BL, and other non-GW sources as definitive does not come from some belief that they aren't as canon as GW stuff. I have already said that I realize they are officially canon. I have already explained why I think there are grounds for a reasonable person to take those sources less seriously despite their being officially canon. GW themselves have told us that "canon" does not mean "true". And an intelligent and thoughtful person is capable of ascribing more characteristics to a body of material than just "canon" or "not canon", and evaluating it accordingly; the official line isn't the only consideration here, unless, frankly, you are a ***** with no ability to think for yourself. Like DarkMatter, you seem to completely ignore this fact and try to tell everyone else that if it's canon, that's the end of the story and they have no place casting aspersions on it.


Point 2) Funny you should say that as the "supposedly" Sabretooth artist who drew this seems to have produced a bucket load of work for GW (for someone who isn't a GW artist), but lets not let facts interfere with the point you were trying to make... :rolleyes:

Again, while I can tell you are taking an immense amount of pleasure in your own overwrought sarcasm here... could you stop hamming it up for a moment and please tell us the name of that artist, and/or cite some examples of artwork he has done for GW? His style doesn't resemble anything that I've seen in my many years as a WD subscriber and a habitual buyer of GW codices and rulebooks. If you can, I'll gladly concede this point and say that you're right, that artist does actually work for GW.


:wtf: I don 't even know where to start with that remark... *shakes head*

You're entitled to your opinion but don't try to use your opinion as evidence to strengthen your argument. It doesn't work...

Ahh, now we're starting to see the descriptions of your real-life body language thrown in too, just so everyone will know what you're doing as you type... this performance keeps getting more and more compelling.

So what's to start with? Take it at face value: I view the BL books as unreliable sources despite their official canonicity, for several reasons that I have already explained. And in light of GW's explicit statement that not all canon materials are true and that readers are at liberty to decide for themselves, I elect to view the BL books as less meaningful than GW materials. And I was trying to convince DarkMatter that he should feel free to take a similar view, if he wanted to, since he seemed to be under the mistaken impression that he HAD to believe it just because it was canon. I wasn't trying to use my opinion to support my argument about the height of the Primarchs; I wasn't saying "I don't like the BL materials so they aren't true". I was trying to explain my opinion to someone, in the hopes that they would adopt a similar one. I was saying "I don't like the BL materials so I elect to disregard them, which GW has told us is perfectly legitimate, and I think you should do the same if you want to."


Now to a more On Topic point the official line is, and has been for a while, that "Primarchs are to Space Marines as Marines are to mortal men" and the artwork (all official GW stuff regardless of some peoples ill-informed misconceptions) has been portraying them as larger than normal Marines for sometime now.

Again, you are completely misunderstanding the basis for my earlier points about why I view the BL stuff with skepticism. It's not about whether they are official; I know they are official.

And again, you are misunderstanding what I meant by "GW fluff" or "GW artwork". I'm talking about stuff that actually comes from the Games Workshop company, not from one of the other companies under the GWG umbrella. GW itself has, in recent years, put out very little or no artwork that actually depicts the Primarchs. Sabertooth and BL have put out such art, but they are not the same thing as GW despite being under the GWG umbrella and therefore being officially canon.


(It should also be noted that the (limited at best) artwork portraying the Primarchs as mortal sized predates the Primarchs being engineered beings made by the Emperor.)

Firstly, my argument about the sizes of the Primarchs does not rest on any portrayals of the Primarchs in artwork. It rests on written statements about them. Again, if you had read the thread more carefully, you might know this.

Secondly, I have never even claimed that the Primarchs, as a group, were the size of mortal men. In fact I have clearly stated that at least some of them were quite gigantic, and most of them were probably significantly bigger than normal men. This is another thing you might know if you had actually read the thread.

Thirdly, the fluff material which supports the idea that *some* of the Primarchs were not superhuman in size does NOT pre-date the idea of the Primarchs as being engineered beings created by the Emperor. It comes from 2nd Edition codices, and the nature of the Primarchs as artificially-created superhumans was solidly established by the time 2nd Edition was released. It is clearly stated in the books which came with the 2nd Edition boxed set, for example, and in the various 2nd Edition codices (including the same codices which speak of human-sized Primarchs). Looks like this is yet ANOTHER point you might have picked up on if you had actually read what I've said!

MadDoc
08-10-2008, 06:19
Wow, your obnoxious tone and attitude certainly don't leave many doubts about what ax you're here to grind.

Obnoxious tone and attitude? Ok...

And that ax would be? Trying to refute somebody calling GW artwork no better than fan art? Or do you know something I don't about my motivations?

SNIP Patronising (and unnecessary) Lecture on GW PLC and It's Subsidiaries


Secondly, I am well aware that it's all official canon, whether it was published by GW or Sabertooth or BL, and I never disputed this; like DarkMatter, perhaps you would have noticed this if you had read the thread more carefully. To repeat myself: My reluctance to accept Sabertooth, BL, and other non-GW sources as definitive does not come from some belief that they aren't as canon as GW stuff. I have already said that I realize they are officially canon. I have already explained why I think there are grounds for a reasonable person to take those sources less seriously despite their being officially canon. GW themselves have told us that "canon" does not mean "true". And an intelligent and thoughtful person is capable of ascribing more characteristics to a body of material than just "canon" or "not canon", and evaluating it accordingly; the official line isn't the only consideration here, unless, frankly, you are a ***** with no ability to think for yourself. Like DarkMatter, you seem to completely ignore this fact and try to tell everyone else that if it's canon, that's the end of the story and they have no place casting aspersions on it.

The Horus Heresy books are the definitive sources (from GW inspite of your suggestion that BL stuff is second party material (odd how alot of it finds its way in the background sections of Codices)) for information on the Primarchs. If you choose to discard them as sources thats your choice, but since I was only actually addressing your comments about the artwork and didn't actually mention the fluff (as, inspite of what you seem to be suggesting, I've already seen your opinions on that in your previous posts, hence my not wanting to go over old ground) then lumping me in with DarkMatter as a "BL is canon and therefore true" banner waver is alittle off the mark.


Again, while I can tell you are taking an immense amount of pleasure in your own overwrought sarcasm here...

Actually I was trying to avoid you taking the personal offence, you've clearly taken, by keeping things light and playful... apparently you've read that as obnoxious and condescending though...

So clearly that worked a treat. :skull:


could you stop hamming it up for a moment and please tell us the name of that artist, and/or cite some examples of artwork he has done for GW? His style doesn't resemble anything that I've seen in my many years as a WD subscriber and a habitual buyer of GW codices and rulebooks. If you can, I'll gladly concede this point and say that you're right, that artist does actually work for GW.

That would be Sam Wood, who has done quite abit of work for GW including alot of Guard stuff which you've probably seen in WD (he has more than one style, although I've seen his stuff in the same style in WD before), he's freelance (as are many of those currently producing art for GW). There's also the fact that any artwork has to be signed off on by Alan Merrett (GW's IP guru).


Ahh, now we're starting to see the descriptions of your real-life body language thrown in too, just so everyone will know what you're doing as you type... this performance keeps getting more and more compelling.

If there was a head shaking smiley I would've used that, but there isn't, so I couldn't. As to what I was doing as I typed, I was actually trying not to throw up (Chemo has the unfortunate side effect of wave after wave of sweeping nausea), but carry on...


So what's to start with? Take it at face value: I view the BL books as unreliable sources despite their official canonicity, for several reasons that I have already explained. And in light of GW's explicit statement that not all canon materials are true and that readers are at liberty to decide for themselves, I elect to view the BL books as less meaningful than GW materials. And I was trying to convince DarkMatter that he should feel free to take a similar view, if he wanted to, since he seemed to be under the mistaken impression that he HAD to believe it just because it was canon. I wasn't trying to use my opinion to support my argument about the height of the Primarchs; I wasn't saying "I don't like the BL materials so they aren't true". I was trying to explain my opinion to someone, in the hopes that they would adopt a similar one. I was saying "I don't like the BL materials so I elect to disregard them, which GW has told us is perfectly legitimate, and I think you should do the same if you want to."

You were saying all those things and that the BL/Sabretooth/GW (all used universally within GW's various branches including WD) artwork was little better than Fan art. And it was specifically that which prompted me to reply, and is why I directly addressed your comments about the artwork. I didn't actually refer to the background, which I'm kind of surprised you seem to have missed.


And again, you are misunderstanding what I meant by "GW fluff" or "GW artwork". I'm talking about stuff that actually comes from the Games Workshop company, not from one of the other companies under the GWG umbrella.

The artwork is produced by GW though, and its stable of artists, including John Blanche.


GW itself has, in recent years, put out very little or no artwork that actually depicts the Primarchs. Sabertooth and BL have put out such art, but they are not the same thing as GW despite being under the GWG umbrella and therefore being officially canon.

Interesting, so the picture of Horus facing off against the Emperor in the Rulebook would be what? GW or non-GW? I'm curious as by the reasoning you've used it'd be non-GW as it was initially published by BL, inspite the fact that Adrian Smith created the picture and is one of GWs stable of regular artists.

I really am curious as to your answer, as this not only shows Horus to be much larger than his marines but also shows the Emperor to be equally as large (and he's in the foreground and wearing artificer armour, not even a suit of Terminator armour like Horus is wearing and yet he's still almost as big as him).


Firstly, my argument about the sizes of the Primarchs does not rest on any portrayals of the Primarchs in artwork. It rests on written statements about them. Again, if you had read the thread more carefully, you might know this.

Yes but I was specifically addressing your remarks dismissing the artwork as "Sabretooth artwork" and in your words therefore "practically fan art". I find it hard to believe you could even suggest that.


Secondly, I have never even claimed that the Primarchs, as a group, were the size of mortal men. In fact I have clearly stated that at least some of them were quite gigantic, and most of them were probably significantly bigger than normal men. This is another thing you might know if you had actually read the thread.

Ok, I'm curious as to what in my reply makes you think I was even suggesting that you'd said that all the Primarchs were all the size of mortal men. Seriously, I have no idea what part of what I typed could be taken that way.


Thirdly, the fluff material which supports the idea that *some* of the Primarchs were not superhuman in size does NOT pre-date the idea of the Primarchs as being engineered beings created by the Emperor. It comes from 2nd Edition codices, and the nature of the Primarchs as artificially-created superhumans was solidly established by the time 2nd Edition was released. It is clearly stated in the books which came with the 2nd Edition boxed set, for example, and in the various 2nd Edition codices (including the same codices which speak of human-sized Primarchs). Looks like this is yet ANOTHER point you might have picked up on if you had actually read what I've said!

Now to a more On Topic point the official line is, and has been for a while, that "Primarchs are to Space Marines as Marines are to mortal men" and the artwork (all official GW stuff regardless of some peoples ill-informed misconceptions) has been portraying them as larger than normal Marines for sometime now. (It should also be noted that the (limited at best) artwork portraying the Primarchs as mortal sized predates the Primarchs being engineered beings made by the Emperor.)

Ok, now I'm sure theres a very good reason that you ignored the piece I've highlighted (bolded, italicised and in red) above, but where was I talking about fluff? I was specifically addressing the artwork, as contrary to what you seem to be suggesting I have read your posts and so are familiar with your opinion and how certain parts of the background have influenced it, and so ad no intention of belabouring you by rehashing it all again.

Anyway, you seem to have missed the point of what I was trying to say, so perhaps I shouldn't have bothered wasting my time...

Argastes
08-10-2008, 07:04
Interesting, so the picture of Horus facing off against the Emperor in the Rulebook would be what? GW or non-GW? I'm curious as by the reasoning you've used it'd be non-GW as it was initially published by BL, inspite the fact that Adrian Smith created the picture and is one of GWs stable of regular artists.

Yes, now that it appears in a publication from the Games Workshop company, I'd view it as GW-published art. Up until the publication of the current rulebook, I would have described it as non-GW, for the simple reason that it did not appear in any publication from the Games Workshop company; it appeared in publications by other companies under the GWG umbrella (and thus was officially canon), but those companies are not GW, so I still would have viewed it as non-GW and taken it less seriously than artwork from GW publications. And the fact that it was painted by an artist who also regularly paints for GW would not have changed that view; up until the publication of the current rulebook, that painting was non-GW even if Andy Chambers himself had painted it. Just because an artist regularly paints for a given company doesn't mean that any works he does for other companies are somehow more closely connected to the company he regularly works for.


I really am curious as to your answer, as this not only shows Horus to be much larger than his marines but also shows the Emperor to be equally as large (and he's in the foreground and wearing artificer armour, not even a suit of Terminator armour like Horus is wearing and yet he's still almost as big as him).

The fact that it shows Horus being much larger than his Marines is no issue for me, since as I've been saying throughout this thread, I believe that several of the Primarchs were inhumanly huge on the basis of the GW fluff which says exactly that. It seems likely that Horus would be one of the huge ones. And yes, the relative size of the Emperor in that pic is a point in favor of a "big emperor". However, there are still other points of evidence, also from GW sources, that cast doubt on that theory, so I don't think that the picture in question can be taken as any sort of final word on the issue. It's just one more piece in GW's jigsaw puzzle of inconsistency (and remember, the official GW line in relation to that inconsistency is that where the canon contradicts itself, interpret for yourself).


Ok, I'm curious as to what in my reply makes you think I was even suggesting that you'd said that all the Primarchs were all the size of mortal men. Seriously, I have no idea what part of what I typed could be taken that way.

It was this:

"It should also be noted that the (limited at best) artwork portraying the Primarchs as mortal sized predates the Primarchs being engineered beings made by the Emperor."

The fact that you thought it was appropriate to point this out to me makes it seem as though you were under the impression that I was arguing for human-sized Primarchs on the basis of old artwork. If that was not your impression, then I'm glad to hear it.


Ok, now I'm sure theres a very good reason that you ignored the piece I've highlighted (bolded, italicised and in red) above, but where was I talking about fluff? I was specifically addressing the artwork, as contrary to what you seem to be suggesting I have read your posts and so are familiar with your opinion and how certain parts of the background have influenced it, and so ad no intention of belabouring you by rehashing it all again.

I didn't ignore the piece you've highlighted; I addressed it in the sentence beginning with "firstly...". As I said above, it seemed as though you were under the impression that I was claiming that old artwork proved that all Primarchs were human-sized. So I clarified that this wasn't my argument.

The reason that I wrote the passage beginning with "thirdly..." is that I thought it possible that you might have gotten this mistaken impression from my earlier mention of the fact that there is fluff stating that some Primarchs were man-sized. So I went on to clarify that it was written fluff, not artwork, that made mention of man-sized Primarchs; and that it only said that some of them were man-sized, not all. So no, I didn't ignore what you said. I addressed what seemed to be your misunderstanding of my point, and then went on to reiterate what I had actually been claiming, which seemed relevant because that claim seemed to be what had led to your misunderstanding in the first place. As I said above, I'm glad that you never actually thought that I was saying that old artwork proves the Primarchs were man-sized.

I have to get some sleep, I'll see if I can't address the rest of your points sometime tomorrow.

Helsing
08-10-2008, 07:05
As tall as he thinks he is.

Typharius
09-10-2008, 01:02
Haha God's I regret asking this question now ^^ I expected about 2 replies and a simple straight forward answer! I think I will just carry on in my beliefs I had before I asked =]

Dr.Mercury
09-10-2008, 01:11
This topic seems to be generating more heat than light

Col. Tartleton
09-10-2008, 02:39
Well imo the emperor is a regular human. Just an Alpha psyker who commands a quadrillion man army :)

So I second the idea of plain average 5'10" Deus Imperator.

It doesn't make him less grandiose, and it makes more sense as to his influence of history. Hes a regular body with enough psychic mojo to be declared a god.

Now Primarchs I think are huge. I'm in the borderline 8 foot tall marine category anyhow, I like to think of marines as adequately hulking man-tanks. Based on the Horus/ Loken scale a marine would be say 90" tall or 52" sitting which would make Horus (Joe Primarch)52" while kneeling, which puts him standing at 107" or roughly 9 feet. So the commonly assumed head taller (foot and a half) is held accurate by that.

So In conclusion a marine is about a foot and a half larger than the emperor/normal man, and the Primarchs a foot and a half larger than them. Probably putting a marine at weighing about 350 lbs with no significant body fat. A Primarch would be around 410 pounds with no real fat.

That's pretty scary. Since that's out of armor and all... that's well over twice the weight of a normal man in highly athletic shape.

MvS
09-10-2008, 13:31
I'm amongst the first to point out the periodic inconsistencies in GW imagery and how annoying it can be. That said, Alan Merret is in charge of Intellectual Property and he is the chap who wrote the Horus Heresy art/background books. The pictures and references in there are indeed wholly 'canon' insofar as that means anything with GW imagery.

Likewise though, Graham McNiel (sp?) and Dan Abnett at the very least meet with Alan to discuss the content of their Horus Heresy books and we have to assume that they are approved by IP people.

All the Primarchs have been described as 'giants' or 'a full head taller' than other Marines in different publications in the HH series and the Merret artbooks. The only real contradiction to this, it seems to me, is Alpharius, who seems almost indistinguishable to other Alpha Legion Marines - hence the 'many heads of the hydra' idea. Perhaps he is the tallest of his Legion, but only slightly and therefore the shortest Primarch. Who knows. I don't think it matters greatly.

To normal humans the Primarchs are massive, glorious and terrifying, more so than any of their Marines. I think we can make of that as we will. The only Primarch that is described as being a giant even amongst the Primarchs is Magnus, but we'll have to see whether that remains the case in the two books being released that will reference him - the novels dealing with the destruction of Prospero.

As for the Emperor's height, well he supposedly existed hidden within the masses of humanity for tens of thousands of years, so he couldn't have stuck out that much. Mind you, all that really proves is that he could disguise himself as he pleased. For what it matters he was born to normal human parents and so wasn't a giant at birth. There's little reason I can see why he could not alter his size if he chose to match and even surpass his Primarchs. Just look at the 'Biomancy' described in the Inquisitor imagery.

Supremearchmarshal
09-10-2008, 13:49
Thanks for your posting that, MvS. It is both informative and concise.

Idaan
09-10-2008, 15:02
The only Primarch that is described as being a giant even amongst the Primarchs is MagnusIn every HH book I've read, either from a BL excerpt or in full version, the Primarch that is a main character is described as giant even among Primarch. So: Horus in Horus trilogy is one of the tallest Primarchs, and so is Fulgrim in "Fulgrim", Jonson in "Descent" and Mortarion in "Flight". So a question arises, which Primarch isn't one of the tallest. Except Alpharius that is.


There's little reason I can see why he could not alter his size if he chose to match and even surpass his Primarchs.There is just as little reason why he would do that. He was (or could at his wish become) already super-strong, mega-tough, and awesomely inspiring without that. Besides GW's scale creep. :rolleyes:

The Broasted
09-10-2008, 16:17
I'm not sure how helpful this is, considering the veracity of the artwork is debatable, but there is the portrait of the Emperor squaring off against Horus in the 4th edition rulebook; Sanguinius lies dead on the floor and several marines mill about in the background. This picture does provide some degree of prospective. The Emperor is shorter not only than Horus (who is in terminator armor and demonically-enhanced), but also appears to be shorter (though bulkier) than Sanguinius. The marines in the picture are shorter, but not by the magnitude suggested in Flight of the Eisenstein (however, since Primarch sizes are obviously variable, Mortarion might be in the 'big boy' section of the family).

I would say that Primarchs could range in size from 7.5 (Alpharius/ Russ) to 10 (Mortarion/Magnus); everyone else would fall somewhere in the spectrum.

Disciple of Caliban
09-10-2008, 21:54
While this seems to have gone way off topic, i'll point this bit out, Rogal Dorn stood shorter than a very tall human. Now given that he had several generations of selective breeding, a really tall human could stand around 8ft (that puts him a few inches taller than the tallest living male, which doesnt seem unreasonable to me). Thus making Dorn (who stands alongside Gulliman as a perfectly 'average' primarch) stand somewhere a little under 8 ft.

This seems reasonable enough for me, and still leaves room for Alpharius and Russ to be the 'short' members of the family at 7'6".

Magnus is cited as a giant even among the primarchs, so i have no trouble accepting that he may have been pushing close to 10'.

Mortarion stood very tall also, though still shorter than Magnus (since we're told he was the tallest primarch).

The rest fall somewhere in the middle, though 3 hold particular interest for me, so i'll discuss them a little further.

The Lion is discussed as being taller than the average human (on a world of big buff knights), but doesnt seem to stand much taller than the average marine (he must have been a little taller, based on the comment made by the diplomat towards the end of Angels of Darkness. This would seem to put him around the same height as Russ/Alpharius/Omegon etc

The Warmaster. He was the greatest Primarch (i know Gulliman/Fulgrim fans dont like this, but it is true), a warrior without peer, the 2nd greatest diplomat the Human race has ever known, and just an all around super hero. He's described on more than one occasion as a giant. On one knee his head is level with that of a seated Astartes. The difficult part when it comes to scaling Horus is the books dont actually give us much of a comparison when they compare him to the other Primarchs. Personally i'm incline to make Horus stand well over 8', as well as being as broad as all but 2 of his brothers (Russ and Angron)

Angron is described as being 'squat' not an adjective usually associated with an 8 ft tall killing machine, so he must have been incredibly broad. Even so, as broad as he must have been Angron simply cannot have been as tall as several other Primarchs. Personally, i'm inclined to have him as pretty much a mirror image of Russ. 'Short' with shoulders wider than a small car, and arms thicker than most marines chest, not to mention thighs that make terminators seem skinny


EDIT: for people that really want to debate the height of the emperor then the space wolves index astartes has some info you might want to check, read the part when he fights Russ

MvS
09-10-2008, 23:27
In every HH book I've read, either from a BL excerpt or in full version, the Primarch that is a main character is described as giant even among Primarch.
There's some truth in that, although before the HH books Magnus was still described as the tallest of a big bunch. It was also in the Index Astartes and Merret stuck with it in the artbooks. So I guess it's worth looking at.


Except Alpharius that is.
True. :D


There is just as little reason why he would do that. He was (or could at his wish become) already super-strong, mega-tough, and awesomely inspiring without that.
Hey, size matters!

Didn't you get the memo...?

Suicide Messiah
09-10-2008, 23:35
First off this gaming universe was created by sci fi and fantasy geeks. I'd imagine that when designing space maines they wouldnt reference some obscure battle and recall how height won them the day, but rather how some massive bloke in a bar scared the crap out of them once.

Its also a gaming universe made by artists of various types and so they use size to express certain things about the characters. Think about how often a sm's height is actually brought up in the fluff. Its only pulled out when they want them to look awesome compared to somthing else. The Horus kneeling is a good one. Some may say its lame but ive never read the book and i already have a strong mental image of it. I know that marine is either bricking it or feeling like a god. Either way it highlights Horus's own greatness.

Whats this about specializing in boarding actions? Space marines do everything. Anyway, what crafts are they going to be boarding? Orks are pretty huge and i doubt theyll bother having uniform corridors, so just make em massive. Tyranids? Well, speaks for itself really. Maybe theyll be plowing through a Necron ship. which going by their 'we are gods' imagery should be rlly cramped and not at all grandiose and awe inspiring. Or some human rebels? Probably using imperial guard ships that were designed to fit two maybe three men abrest not to mention their valuable, power armoured allies.

Sorry for rambling but its late and im tired (as you can probably tell rom my spelling and grammar). Night all.

Rockerfella
10-10-2008, 01:04
The Lion is discussed as being taller than the average human (on a world of big buff knights), but doesnt seem to stand much taller than the average marine (he must have been a little taller, based on the comment made by the diplomat towards the end of Angels of Darkness. This would seem to put him around the same height as Russ/Alpharius/Omegon etc Except, of course, in Descent Of Angels, he's very specifically described as standing 'a touch under three metres', as stated earlier in the thread. That puts him at over nine feet in height, at least.

Son of Sanguinius
10-10-2008, 01:18
I have two questions.

Many people have justifiably pointed out that the Emperor could have been simply the size of any other normal man but had incredible psychic powers with which he could manipulate people into seeing what they want to see in him (most often a mythical leviathan of a man). But when the Emperor meets many of the Primarchs, as described in some of the Index Astartes articles, he is described as a powerful but otherwise ordinary man who casts off his appearance in order to reveal himself to his son. Could he actually be the giant we've seen in the Adrian Smith art work, and simply maintaining his appearance as a "regular" sized human being throughout the years he spent behind the scenes? I'm not arguing for one or the other, but simply pointing out that the logic, because of the strength of the Emperor's abilities, could apply either way. Note that I do acknowledge that in throwing off his disguise and revealing himself to the new discovered Primarch, the Emperor could be deceiving everyone about his deception, but now we're getting into Alpharius-level misdirection, which would take all year to sort out. :)

Also, can some one give me a reference to something saying that Russ was short?

Argastes
10-10-2008, 02:04
Whats this about specializing in boarding actions? Space marines do everything. Anyway, what crafts are they going to be boarding? Orks are pretty huge and i doubt theyll bother having uniform corridors, so just make em massive. Tyranids? Well, speaks for itself really. Maybe theyll be plowing through a Necron ship. which going by their 'we are gods' imagery should be rlly cramped and not at all grandiose and awe inspiring. Or some human rebels? Probably using imperial guard ships that were designed to fit two maybe three men abrest not to mention their valuable, power armoured allies.

I wouldn't say they "specialize" in boarding actions, since the term "specialize" implies a narrow and at least somewhat exclusive emphasis. But they do have certain specific missions that they are geared towards more than others: Orbit-to-surface assault is the most obvious one, and yes, conducting boarding actions is another. Remember that the roles of the Space Marines were originally modeled after those of current and historical Marines in real life.

As for what sort of ships they would most commonly be boarding? Well, I think human-built ships would make up the majority. Boarding actions against Tyranid and Necron ships seems to be fairly uncommon; they do happen, but are probably far outnumbered by boarding actions against other vessels. Boarding actions against Orks are most likely to be against a space hulk, not an Ork-built warship; and remember that hulks are made up of lots of other ships glommed together, rather than being built by the race that's using them at the moment, so the many of the corridors of an Ork-infested hulk are not actually going to be Ork-scaled. There are also Eldar ships, which you seem to have forgotten to mention; they would probably not have corridors that could accommodate a Marine, although like Tyranid and Necron ships, SM boarding actions against them are probably comparatively uncommon. There are also the Tau, and a bunch of other less important alien races, but let's leave them aside for now.

So, we're left with human-built ships. Firstly, what do you mean by "IG ships"? The IG doesn't operate interstellar spacecraft; the Imperial Navy does. I'll assume you mean Navy troop transports intended to accommodate IG troops. Now, why would the corridors of such a ship (or any other Navy vessel) be two and three men abreast? They would probably be just like the corridors on real-life ships and spacecraft: As small as possible while still allowing two people to squeeze past each other, because big roomy corridors waste internal space, and internal space is at a premium on such craft. And even in corridors that are wider for some reason, the deckheads (ceilings) will still be quite low, just like on real ships; a seven-foot Space Marine would certainly still have trouble. And Imperial Navy ships CERTAINLY would not be deliberately built to accommodate Space Marines; because while Space Marines may be the allies of the IG, they have their own ships and always use them. The fluff never, or almost never, mentions Space Marines being hauled around by Imperial Navy troopships (let alone ships other than troop transports); it just doesn't happen. Certainly not often enough that Imperial shipbuilders would waste a good bit of internal space--which is an incredibly precious commodity in a spacecraft, especially a military one--making the corridors able to fit a Space Marine.

And no matter what the crew spaces on Imperial Navy ships would look like, I think you are wrong to assume that human rebels, renegades, pirates, etc. would "probably" be using Imperial ships. Let's not forget that Imperial Navy vessels make up only a small percentage of the total number of human-built spacecraft in the galaxy. The majority are civilian ships of various types, as well as the intra-system defense ships that planetary governors may use to patrol the system in which their planet is located. Human rebels/renegades/pirates are probably far more likely to make use of these ships rather than captured Imperial Navy vessels; and these ships are even more unlikely than Navy vessels to be designed to accommodate Marines.

So yes, Space Marines would probably have trouble fitting inside a significant number of the ships they are supposed to board.

Suicide Messiah
10-10-2008, 13:11
Fair enough. I did also completely forgot Eldar but i was nackerd. Thats my story and im sticking to it.

If im honest i agree with you. The size of a space marine is a bit silly when considering anything practical. That said, we have already seen authors play around with their size. I imagine that they would have no problem shrinking them somewhat in order to get them on a ship and wipe the floor with its crew. Space marines are rule of cool incarnate and theyll always be just as big as they need to be.

I dont really agree with you on the size of ships though. However, i dont read 40k BL novels so there may be a ton of background supporting you. I can only go by my preception of the 40k universe. The way i understand it is everything is huge. Battle lines are miles long, they assault entire planets and have monolithic cathedrals on tracks. I can imagine troop transports fitting men three abreast just because it looks cool to see an entire regiment disembark that way.

Rockerfella
10-10-2008, 14:25
Having said that, of course, the Eldar are very tall. In one of the Dawn of War books, an Eldar warlock *without his helmet on* stands eye to eye with a Marine capitain, also without his battle helmet on, but still in full power armour (they are talking, not fighting too, if that makes any difference)

So, Eldar corridors are probably high enough for marines, but possible not 'wide' enough for marines.

I guess we'll never know!

Apologist
10-10-2008, 15:03
To give people an idea of the heights we're talking about:
Average human height is about 5 foot 7in. Obviously there's a lot of variance.
The average Guatemalan male is 157.5 cm (5' 2"), while the average German is 180.3 cm (5' 11").

Brook and Robin Lopez are each 7'1" tall
http://www.take2.cc/Stuff/sevenfoot.jpg
...but they're very thin!

The Big Show is 7' tall, and has a Space Marine type build:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/66/202341720_ab66c3e58b.jpg?v=0

Robert Pershing Wadlow was 8"11" (272cm) when he died.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5c/Robert_Wadlow.jpg/350px-Robert_Wadlow.jpg

I've tried to get pictures with 'normal' sized people in, and it's pretty clear that six inches in height is enough to 'tower over' other people so I have no problem accepting Astartes being absolutely terrifying even if at the extreme of 'normal' human height. Similarly, seven-and-a-half foot tall Primarchs would tower over normal Astartes and nine foot tall (three yards, which is roughly three metres) would be extremely tall but crucially, not outside human variance.

Given 'space magic', I haven't got a problem with Lion El Jonson being the same height as Robert Wadlow, with a similar build to The Big Show. Magnus would presumably be a literal ogre if he's towering over Jonson!

Thanatos_elNyx
10-10-2008, 15:43
To give people an idea of the heights we're talking about:
Average human height is about 5 foot 7in. Obviously there's a lot of variance.
The average Guatemalan male is 157.5 cm (5' 2"), while the average German is 180.3 cm (5' 11").

Brook and Robin Lopez are each 7'1" tall
http://www.take2.cc/Stuff/sevenfoot.jpg
...but they're very thin!

The Big Show is 7' tall, and has a Space Marine type build:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/66/202341720_ab66c3e58b.jpg?v=0

Robert Pershing Wadlow was 8"11" (272cm) when he died.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5c/Robert_Wadlow.jpg/350px-Robert_Wadlow.jpg

I've tried to get pictures with 'normal' sized people in, and it's pretty clear that six inches in height is enough to 'tower over' other people so I have no problem accepting Astartes being absolutely terrifying even if at the extreme of 'normal' human height. Similarly, seven-and-a-half foot tall Primarchs would tower over normal Astartes and nine foot tall (three yards, which is roughly three metres) would be extremely tall but crucially, not outside human variance.

Given 'space magic', I haven't got a problem with Lion El Jonson being the same height as Robert Wadlow, with a similar build to The Big Show. Magnus would presumably be a literal ogre if he's towering over Jonson!

Yeah, pictures really make it clear that 7" tall marines are plenty sufficient to scare the bejebus outta people. 8" tall marines are stupid tall.
I think people underestimate how tall you have to be to 'tower' over someone.

Rockerfella
10-10-2008, 15:53
Yeah, I think 7ft is plenty enough for the average marine. Seven and a half is fine, and of yours, there's always going to be the odd exception to the rule, such as Abaddon, and specifically Torgaddon, who described as being taller even than Abaddon.

So... yeah. I think some folk simply want Marines to be as big as possible because they percieve that to mean they are 'arder', as it were. Which is fine. Personally, i'm not with that argument and think a man as tall as the big show but stronger, wider, heavier, meaner and much, much harder to kill is scary enough!

MvS
10-10-2008, 16:57
I too would throw in behind an average of 7-foot tall Marines. I'm two Metres tall, somewhere just over 6'5" and many friends who are around 5'11" already find me a touch on the 'too tall' scale - although personally I think the population is getting taller slowly.

I imagine Marines a similar muscle-mass to Big Show but without any fat whatsoever and no muscles-for-muscles sake. Body builders often have massive muscles that are completely ripped, but they aren't aerobically fit and tend to waddle around. Marines would have to be massively muscled but not in a way that it out of whack with their skeletal frames. They have to be aerobically fit with exceptionally high stamina.

A Primarch being 6 to 12 inches taller than a Marine (so 15 to 30 centimetres) would still be very noticeable, because they would also be proportionately more muscled - remember, these chaps have been genetically engineered to be Super Warlords (tm), so they aren't likely to be too lanky or stocky or any other shape that may alter their combat effectiveness, however slightly.

Supremearchmarshal
11-10-2008, 14:10
Having said that, of course, the Eldar are very tall. In one of the Dawn of War books, an Eldar warlock *without his helmet on* stands eye to eye with a Marine capitain, also without his battle helmet on, but still in full power armour (they are talking, not fighting too, if that makes any difference)

There was a height comparison chart for all the races (the famous one that started at 1' and thus started the whole SM are 8' tall thing), but I can't find it now. The Eldar were shorter than SM - I think it was around 6'6 but I'm not sure.


Yeah, pictures really make it clear that 7" tall marines are plenty sufficient to scare the bejebus outta people. 8" tall marines are stupid tall.

Scary only to those who aren't used to fighting something larger than themselves. Sure, they'd have no trouble scaring some Conscripts witless, but experienced soldiers are another matter. Orks, Tyranids, Daemons and the like wouldn't really fall for it, either.
Don't forget our distant ancestors hunted bears and mammoths using only crude stone spears and bows. Besides - however big a Marine is, a battle tank is still a lot bigger.

So yeah, an Marine certainly looks scary, but there's never a lot of them around and their size can always be used against them.

Rockerfella
11-10-2008, 14:16
There was a height comparison chart for all the races (the famous one that started at 1' and thus started the whole SM are 8' tall thing), but I can't find it now. The Eldar were shorter than SM - I think it was around 6'6 but I'm not sure. How old is that chart mate? Just curious.

Anyways, I guess its canon as is the Warlok being the same height as the marine captain. It was either a tall warlock, a short marine, or the Eldar are roughly as tall as marines.

Either or works for me, as I don't work on the premise that 'taller, is arder'. :)

MvS
11-10-2008, 14:21
I agree with Supremearchmarshal pretty much, but it isn't the size alone that is the intimidating factor about the Marines. It's what that size implies (the super fit genetically engineered body that can do things and survive things that absolutely no normal human body could) and also what the Marines can do (the most experienced, well equipped, well trained, utterly lethal and completely merciless soldiers in the human galaxy).

A Mammoth was a considerable bulk of muscle that could kill any human, but it wasn't out to kill humans with a particular prejudice. Same with Sabretooth Tigers - incredibly dangerous killers, but at the end of the day they are looking to surivive so you could drive them away. If a Marine wants to kill you his entire reason for being and purpose in life is focussed onto that one task - kill the enemy as soon as possible. He's as close to a Arnie-Terminator as you can get without actually being a cyborg. He won't stop until the mission is a success or until something pretty massive comes along to convince him that his skills are needed more urgently elsewhere.

There's also all the legends and religious connotations about the Marines that normal humans have to deal with. The Marines are, after all, the Emperor's Angels of Death. By itself, just the idea that they might be after you would be enough to terrify the vast, vast majority of all humans considering apostasy...

EDIT

I too seem to remember references to the Eldar being of a similar height to Marines, albeit much more fragile looking.

Supremearchmarshal
11-10-2008, 14:43
How old is that chart mate? Just curious.

Anyways, I guess its canon as is the Warlok being the same height as the marine captain. It was either a tall warlock, a short marine, or the Eldar are roughly as tall as marines.

Either or works for me, as I don't work on the premise that 'taller, is arder'. :)

Don't remember exactly, but the 8' tall thing started during 3rd edition plus the chart had the new-style Orks (e.g. the less comical ones), so it has to be sometime during that edition.

I think the Eldar would also look taller because they're so thin. At any rate they're taller than Humans but not quite as tall as the Marines (minus the helmets).

On a side note, maybe Eldar wear really tall helmets so they can look taller than the Marines? ;)


I agree with Supremearchmarshal pretty much, but it isn't the size alone that is the intimidating factor about the Marines. It's what that size implies (the super fit genetically engineered body that can do things and survive things that absolutely no normal human body could) and also what the Marines can do (the most experienced, well equipped, well trained, utterly lethal and completely merciless soldiers in the human galaxy).

A Mammoth was a considerable bulk of muscle that could kill any human, but it wasn't out to kill humans with a particular prejudice. Same with Sabretooth Tigers - incredibly dangerous killers, but at the end of the day they are looking to surivive so you could drive them away. If a Marine wants to kill you his entire reason for being and purpose in life is focussed onto that one task - kill the enemy as soon as possible. He's as close to a Arnie-Terminator as you can get without actually being a cyborg. He won't stop until the mission is a success or until something pretty massive comes along to convince him that his skills are needed more urgently elsewhere.

There's also all the legends and religious connotations about the Marines that normal humans have to deal with. The Marines are, after all, the Emperor's Angels of Death. By itself, just the idea that they might be after you would be enough to terrify the vast, vast majority of all humans considering apostasy...

Aye, that makes sense. Also there's their technology, which is superior to probably 99% of PDF and IG forces. Let's not forget the reaction the Native Americans to first encountering firearms and steel weapons.

Still, all this is a lot less effective against many aliens - Tyranids don't care, Necrons are almost as strong and essentially fearless, most Chaos Marines are meaner (though admittedly more concerned for their own safety), Ork Nobz are almost as tall and even broader and Daemons are more likely to scare the Marines.

abasio
11-10-2008, 16:11
To give people an idea of the heights we're talking about:
Average human height is about 5 foot 7in. Obviously there's a lot of variance.
The average Guatemalan male is 157.5 cm (5' 2"), while the average German is 180.3 cm (5' 11").

Brook and Robin Lopez are each 7'1" tall
http://www.take2.cc/Stuff/sevenfoot.jpg
...but they're very thin!

The Big Show is 7' tall, and has a Space Marine type build:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/66/202341720_ab66c3e58b.jpg?v=0

Robert Pershing Wadlow was 8"11" (272cm) when he died.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/5c/Robert_Wadlow.jpg/350px-Robert_Wadlow.jpg

I've tried to get pictures with 'normal' sized people in, and it's pretty clear that six inches in height is enough to 'tower over' other people so I have no problem accepting Astartes being absolutely terrifying even if at the extreme of 'normal' human height. Similarly, seven-and-a-half foot tall Primarchs would tower over normal Astartes and nine foot tall (three yards, which is roughly three metres) would be extremely tall but crucially, not outside human variance.

Given 'space magic', I haven't got a problem with Lion El Jonson being the same height as Robert Wadlow, with a similar build to The Big Show. Magnus would presumably be a literal ogre if he's towering over Jonson!

& these people are/were around in this age. Imagine how tall we will have grown as a race in the next 30,000 years. I think the average human would be about 10 foot putting space marines around 12 foot & a primarch 14 feet tall. Putting the usual heights stated as far too short. But then GW never addressed the growing status of humans, which is pretty dumb. Humans will definitely change over the next 40,000 years and the most obvious change will be size. You can't imagine all humans are 5'7" in 40,000 when in 1800 we were 5'0" and in 2000 were are close to 6'0" on average.

Rockerfella
11-10-2008, 16:30
Yeah, but thats assuming we'll just carry on growing. I mean, we'll only do that if there is an evolutionary need for us to do so. Won't we?

Maidel
11-10-2008, 16:32
& these people are/were around in this age. Imagine how tall we will have grown as a race in the next 30,000 years. I think the average human would be about 10 foot putting space marines around 12 foot & a primarch 14 feet tall. Putting the usual heights stated as far too short. But then GW never addressed the growing status of humans, which is pretty dumb. Humans will definitely change over the next 40,000 years and the most obvious change will be size. You can't imagine all humans are 5'7" in 40,000 when in 1800 we were 5'0" and in 2000 were are close to 6'0" on average.


Something you havent taken into account is that size varies throughout time, not always increasing.

Before man became a farming society and static, they were hunter gatherers. Hunter gatherers had a similar diety to modern day (variation of meats and vegitables with seasons) whereas farming society had a very static diet (fish if near the coast, or one or two animals fixed crops etc)

What this all infact meant was that humans were taller as 'cavemen' than they were during the middle period (romans to 1800) since then our diet has become better (Well until Macdonalds opened at least :D) and we have been getting taller.

The fact that we are taller now is NOT an indication that we will continue to grow, far from it. In fact we only over took the historical size average somewhere in the middle of this century (neanderthals reached between 1.5and 1.8 m averaging more than a medievial man. Ancient homo sapien was TALLLER than neanderthal, but I cant find the historial size data at the moment.)

Supremearchmarshal
12-10-2008, 13:29
Maidel speaks true, it's mostly a question of diet.

And in 40k it would also be a question of gravity. On a low gravity world people would be taller but weaker, while the opposite is true for high gravity worlds. And yes, this does mean that Ogryns couldn't develop simply due to the effects of gravity.

Apologist
13-10-2008, 08:19
As mentioned, a trend towards ever-increasing height is almost certainly down to improved diet in 'modern day' humans, rather than some evolutionary step. To give a reductio ad absurdem; my new puppy has roughly doubled in size in four weeks in a few years time, if she wags her tail, tower blocks will come down! ;)

Personally, I like to think that the average human height (though of course this would vary from world to world) in 40k is roughly 5 foot 4 inches something similar to a Roman citizen, since that's the atmosphere that's implied in the literature.

Drachenfell
13-10-2008, 19:51
Don't know if this helps but Primarches have always been described in the second edition books as dwarfing their rank and file astartes. I would have put a Primarch at standing at around 12 feet. But that's just my thought on the matter.

Also the Emperor isn't an Alpha+ psyker. :P

Rockerfella
13-10-2008, 22:11
Although, for the third time in this thread, the Lion is quite clearly described as being 'a touch under three metres tall' in DOS.

Thats nowhere near 12 feet i'm afraid. Its more like nine and a half. Ish. WHich, for me, is seriously tall enough. Really, it is. Its, really, really tall. I mean, think of the big show at seven foot, and then add another two and a half, and stand him next to a mortal man.

Thats just, colossal.

:)

abasio
14-10-2008, 04:01
As mentioned, a trend towards ever-increasing height is almost certainly down to improved diet in 'modern day' humans, rather than some evolutionary step. To give a reductio ad absurdem; my new puppy has roughly doubled in size in four weeks in a few years time, if she wags her tail, tower blocks will come down! ;)


Not improved diet but changed diet. The diet in Japan has changed to more Junk food & the new generation of Japanese kids have just shot up in height.

I wonder what crap the poor people in the imperium eat.

MvS
14-10-2008, 09:14
Thats nowhere near 12 feet i'm afraid. Its more like nine and a half. Ish. WHich, for me, is seriously tall enough. Really, it is. Its, really, really tall. I mean, think of the big show at seven foot, and then add another two and a half, and stand him next to a mortal man.

Thats just, colossal.
Exactly!

Add to the fact that he wouldn't look either too lanky or squat but instead like a perfectly proportionate but heavily muscled Greek/Renaissance statue, El'Jonson would cut a truly spectacular and intimiating figure - like his brothers.

Stick him in maginificent Artificer Armounr or a Tactical Dreadnaught suit and the picture is only magnified...

Rockerfella
14-10-2008, 19:16
Exactly!

At to the fact that he wouldn't look either too lanky or squat but instead like a perfectly proportionate but heavily muscled Greek/Renaissance statue, El'Jonson would cut a truly spectacular and intimiating figure - like his brothers.

Stick him in maginificent Artificer Armounr or a Tactical Dreadnaught suit and the picture is only magnified...

Indeed! Very much so. I think sometimes people may just simply want too much, and possibly (and this isn't a criticism) don't understand just how tall a nine and a half foot behemoth actually is, and what they would look like. I mean, I don't, because I struggle to imagine what that woudl look like stood in front of me. However, i've met a man who was 6'10, and he was silly tall. So, i can kinda guestimate in my own mind just how imposing a primarch would really be.

I'm happy with the Lions three metres. ;)

Also, I think it important to remember that the Primarchs were more like Superheroes. Only the Emperor knew anything of their physiology. If a marine is ill, an apothecary can just wobble up and sort him, having a solid, sound understanding of marine physiology. Marines are hard because of the added organs and glands, etc. Primarchs are hard because they are creatures of the warp, really, who's powers I believe to be more akin to enigmatic superhero's, if that makes sense at all. *lol*

Lisiecki
15-10-2008, 05:13
They are described as "A True Giant" in the HH books, obviously much taller than an Astartes who average 8ft? but there is nothing to scale them against, just how tall is a Primarch? I read somewhere that Constantin Valdor of the Adeptus Custodes was as tall as Alpharius, but I am guessing he wasn't the tallest of the Primarchs having a twin and all. Just something that popped into my head whilst bored in work ^^

This is just me, but i would say a head higher than the SM.

Aside for Russ, i see Russ as having shoulders that are like 5 feet apart
before his lungs were damaged breathing in a toxic atmosphere...

Argastes
15-10-2008, 06:48
They are described as "A True Giant" in the HH books, obviously much taller than an Astartes who average 8ft?

The average height of a Space Marine is seven feet, not eight.


Don't know if this helps but Primarches have always been described in the second edition books as dwarfing their rank and file astartes. I would have put a Primarch at standing at around 12 feet. But that's just my thought on the matter.

What 2nd Edition books are you talking about, exactly? Because when I was posting earlier in this thread, I looked through all my old 2nd Edition books (all the core books, plus Dark Millennium and all the codices except C:SOB) and the only thing that is said about the heights of the Primarchs is that some were no larger than normal human beings (thus SHORTER than a Space Marine), while others were of "titanic" proportions. This is said on page 7 of the 2nd Edition Space Wolf Codex.


Not improved diet but changed diet. The diet in Japan has changed to more Junk food & the new generation of Japanese kids have just shot up in height.

I wonder what crap the poor people in the imperium eat.

Modern diets, including the modern Japanese diet, have changed AND improved. Yes, they include more junk food, but that's not the only change. There is also more protein and other important nutrients, and just a generally adequate caloric intake which was lacking in earlier periods. Those are definite improvements even if the increase in junky food brings new health problems at the same time.

I remember the Necromunda sourcebook saying that the down-hive working classes subsist mainly on a diet of vat-grown algae gunk, cultured protein slime, and nutrients recycled from the bodies of the dead. Yum! I would imagine it varies widely from planet to planet, but on hive worlds, the lower classes probably get something like this. We know that hive worlds import a lot of food from agri-worlds, but I would think that most of this actually goes to the ruling class, since importing food to support the entirety of a population that numbers into the hundreds of billions would require millions, or tens of millions, of tons of food being shuttled down to the surface every HOUR. It strikes me as more likely that only the rich get the luxury of real food from off-world, while the poor masses have to eat whatever slop gets reprocessed through the rusty guts of the hive life-support system.

Supremearchmarshal
15-10-2008, 16:15
We know that hive worlds import a lot of food from agri-worlds, but I would think that most of this actually goes to the ruling class, since importing food to support the entirety of a population that numbers into the hundreds of billions would require millions, or tens of millions, of tons of food being shuttled down to the surface every HOUR. It strikes me as more likely that only the rich get the luxury of real food from off-world, while the poor masses have to eat whatever slop gets reprocessed through the rusty guts of the hive life-support system.

Indeed, this is confirmed in the Necromunda rulebook (or maybe one of the articles on the SG website, can't exactly remember). Only the ones at the very top get luxury food. The lesser nobility get "normal" food (probably pretty bland by our own standards), while all others eat recycled gunk.*

*Ok, not exactly - the guys deep in the Underhive eat almost anything, including each other.