Power Armour Fluff - Where Does The Helmet Come?

[Polaria]

After reading Deliverance Lost I've been thinking about the power armour types and the fluff attached to them. Marks II to IV seem to be pretty straightforward as they are all Imperial mass-production equipment, but then it becomes a bit harder:

In Deliverance Lost we are told that Mark V "Heresy" -pattern was actually never produced as such. After Isstvan the Raven Guard techmarines basically build new suits out of Mark II, III and IV remains, stapling the pieces together with special rivets they had invented. After coming back into contact with loyal Mechanicum and Imperial Fists this "quick-fix" style spreads further and Mechanicum decides to give designation Mk V to all stopgap and custom power armour designs. At the same time Mechanicum has actually started producing a new power armour model, Mark VI "Corvus", which is named in honour of Raven Guard and their primarch and the first batch is given to the new Raven Guard recruits, the "Raptors".

Okay, now the question is: If Mark V is basically just putting together old armour pieces with new rivets, then where does the distinctive Mark V helmet come from?

[ctsteel]

The main 'head' part of the helmet appears the same as the Mk 4 (see ref pics here)
The breathing grille is different however and more in line with mk 7 - could that perhaps be originally a grille that was underneath the mk4 extended nose (and similarly under the mk6)? And in mk7 the grille was strengthened and left exposed from then on?

[AndrewGPaul]

The mark 5 helmet was originally described as a spinoff from the Terminator development program. The Forge World miniatures reflect that. The pictures in the link ctsteel provides look like mark 7 prototypes.

[Polaria]

The mark 5 helmet was originally described as a spinoff from the Terminator development program. The Forge World miniatures reflect that. The pictures in the link ctsteel provides look like mark 7 prototypes.

Ummm... What?

The Forge World minis look exactly like Mk 7 protos, not anything like Terminators.

[The bearded one]

I think he's talking about only the helmets, which have a bit of the silhouette of the terminator helmets. Certainly not the same, but definately has more of the terminator characteristics when compared to mark IV power armour, which looks nothing alike whatsoever. Wasn't terminator armour radically different back then though?

[Sai-Lauren]

Older fluff had the Mk IV armour as the first with a separate helmet (which was a TDA spinoff technology). It was heavily produced, but most of the production went to the legions that eventually turned traitor, assigned there by Horus.

Mk V (and subsequently Mk VI) was a stop gap by the AM and loyalists, using what parts of Mk IV production processes they could.

[AndrewGPaul]

I think he's talking about only the helmets, which have a bit of the silhouette of the terminator helmets. Certainly not the same, but definately has more of the terminator characteristics when compared to mark IV power armour, which looks nothing alike whatsoever. Wasn't terminator armour radically different back then though?

Not when the fluff about the armour marks was written. Even now, there's plenty of artwork of heresy-era troops in modern-style terminator armour. Chaos Space Marines, for one thing.

Also, look at the images you posted, Polaria. The Ultramarine image is basically wearing a mk7 helmet with studs, while the Forge World miniatures have the flaring shape from the "muzzle" of the helmet to those two protrusions either side of the grille. Obviously Terminator armour has the hoze that connects to the front of the helmet in place of the grille, and the helmet around the eyes and top of the head is different, but then, I did say "spinoff of development".

[baphomael]

Not when the fluff about the armour marks was written. Even now, there's plenty of artwork of heresy-era troops in modern-style terminator armour. Chaos Space Marines, for one thing.

Also, look at the images you posted, Polaria. The Ultramarine image is basically wearing a mk7 helmet with studs, while the Forge World miniatures have the flaring shape from the "muzzle" of the helmet to those two protrusions either side of the grille. Obviously Terminator armour has the hoze that connects to the front of the helmet in place of the grille, and the helmet around the eyes and top of the head is different, but then, I did say "spinoff of development".

Further, its worth checking out Tyberos the Red Wake's terminator armour. Has quite a lot in common with mk V Heresy armour.

[Inquisitor Engel]

Further, its worth checking out Tyberos the Red Wake's terminator armour. Has quite a lot in common with mk V Heresy armour.

Indeed. The helmet is ALMOST interchangeable. I also wish FW would product some basic terminator bodies based on his design... Perhaps for the FW HH stuff. The studs ROCK on Terminator armour.

Perhaps with the Forge World IA books and HH novels, we'll finall get a concrete timeline of both power and terminator armour. MKVI appears to have been present in the traitor legions, for example, even before Isstvan, according to illustrations in the Index Astartes articles. Night Lords IA has both a pre-heresy 'diagram' as MKVI and an illustration that appears to occur during pacification of a world. I suppose being another 'stealthy' legion means they also got to test it out?

[totgeboren]

I don't like the fluff of the mk.V in Deliverance Lost (though I must admit I have not read it, only seen that people who do have read it says that it says that mk.V wasn't even a real mark anymore, and being primarily associated with the loyalist side of the AdMec. Please tell me I'm wrong if I am).
It's imo a stupid and unnecessary retcon. It was always a stop-gap design, but before Deliverance Lost, it was a proper mark which was used heavily during the Heresy, primarily associated with the traitor side. That's why you get I think two mk.V torsos in the CSM box, and many of the old CSM models have mk.V armours (minus the rivets, though note the similar grille of a lot of CSM heads and the FW mk.V, the only mark to sport such a grille). The visible presence of lots of cables have been a part of the design ethos of CSM for a very long time. Proper fluff for the 'mk.V' was sort of made up to explain why the traitor marine models have lots of cables and such, whilst the loyalists don't.

Now the fluff would indicate that CSM models should come in mainly mk.IV armour (and mk.VII), though I can't remember a single CSM model produced by GW in mk.IV, or even using parts of mk.IV.

[AndrewGPaul]

According to The Gothic and the Eldritch, the Thousand Sons marine in the Traitors of Chaos set is in mark 4. The World Eater is in mark 5, the Emperor's Children marine in mark 6 and the Plague Marine in mark 2. Going by that, one can assume that a lot of the plastic Chaos Space Marine parts - especially those legs which don't match anything on the Imperial marines - are likely to be mark 5. Or cobbled together field repairs, which is basically the same thing.

[totgeboren]

The odd thing about saying the mk.V is just random stuff cobbled together is that, even if we ignore the rivets, the design of the knees don't match any of the earlier marks, nor of the following mk.6 armour (which is the leg design most plastic chaos marine legs seems based on). The legs in particular are just mk.VII with rivets and cables on the outside, and don't match up with any earlier mark, nor the mk.6.
I really like it that the mk.V looks like a predecessor to the mk.VII, and it doesn't look like any of the earlier marks. I mean, just look at the helmet design of the mk.2-6, none look remotely like the mk.V, but mk.VII and mk.V look really similar, in many ways. Mk.V armour without the rivets and with the cables placed on the inside look more or less the same as the mk.VII, so therefore the fluff from Deliverance Lost just doesn't make any sense, and I simply choose to ignore it.

[Inquisitor Engel]

According to The Gothic and the Eldritch, the Thousand Sons marine in the Traitors of Chaos set is in mark 4. The World Eater is in mark 5, the Emperor's Children marine in mark 6 and the Plague Marine in mark 2. Going by that, one can assume that a lot of the plastic Chaos Space Marine parts - especially those legs which don't match anything on the Imperial marines - are likely to be mark 5. Or cobbled together field repairs, which is basically the same thing.

Looking at them, I'd actually say the Death Guard was MKII or III based on the helmet.
The Thousand Sons knees definitely call it out as a MKIV with a special helmet (which the Thousand Sons had anyway)
The World Eater is... Well it could be a MKVI based on the knees?
The Emperor's Children looks like a MKV overall, though the lack of knee pads picks it out as MKVI...

Bear in mind all those models are from long before the armour marks were codified like they are today. Probably the only one in his original armour is the Death Guard - It's likely they were stuck in their MKII/III due to being trapped in the warp for a while succumbing to Nurgle post-Isstvan, cut off from from the resupplies that brought the other traitors up to MKIV, V and VI as supplies were siphoned off from captured/turned forge worlds.

Speaking of different power armour marks - in "Know No Fear" one of the Ultramarine Captains is noted as wear a MK of power armour not adopted or recognized by the mechanicum, highly advanced and super awesome.

[Leftenant Gashrog]

Bear in mind all those models are from long before the armour marks were codified like they are today.

Er, not really no. Those minis are clearly late-RT, a brief googling puts them in 1990 which is the year the definitive armour fluff article - which even the modern Forge World is just a para-phrasal of - was published. The fact that these minis are wearing anything even remotely recognizable as an actual mark of armour (unlike the utterly 'chaotic' 1988 renegades) would mean they must have been designed at least with the armour fluff article in mind even if it hadn't been published yet.

Oh and 'codified like they are today' means: its firmly established in a decent and comprehensive fluff article, but GW refuses to make its authors & artists read it.

The Death Guard is clearly MkIII since the armour is solid plates rather than bands, Realms of Chaos: The Lost & The Damned had the Death Guard not being trapped in the warp until the very end of the Heresy, they should have had plenty of MkIV & V - so its possible they simply preferred MkIII.

[Yodhrin]

Er, not really no. Those minis are clearly late-RT, a brief googling puts them in 1990 which is the year the definitive armour fluff article - which even the modern Forge World is just a para-phrasal of - was published. The fact that these minis are wearing anything even remotely recognizable as an actual mark of armour (unlike the utterly 'chaotic' 1988 renegades) would mean they must have been designed at least with the armour fluff article in mind even if it hadn't been published yet.

Oh and 'codified like they are today' means: its firmly established in a decent and comprehensive fluff article, but GW refuses to make its authors & artists read it.

The Death Guard is clearly MkIII since the armour is solid plates rather than bands, Realms of Chaos: The Lost & The Damned had the Death Guard not being trapped in the warp until the very end of the Heresy, they should have had plenty of MkIV & V - so its possible they simply preferred MkIII.

That would be the Realm of Chaos book that's over twenty years out of date, and has evidently been superseded by the complete and detailed account given in Flight of the Eisenstein? I'm not defending the fluff in Deliverance Lost, it was one of the worst HH novels to date, and one of the few which were truly bad as opposed to simply not as good, but the RoC books are nothing more than a curiosity these days.

[Polaria]

Actually the Mk V fluff does make sense once you start to think on it in military terms. So okay, at the time Mk V came to be most legions were in Mk III and Mk IV armours. What Mk V was, at start, was an ad-hoc assemblage of different parts, including non-standard ones. But the catch is that while Mk V was ad-hoc and not standardized it was still developed after Isstvan and developed with the thought of fighting against other Astartes. At the same time as Mk V was born, Mk IV production was stopped and new Mk VI plans came to circulation... Now think about this for a moment:

If you were a traitor force commander at this time your Astartes had Mk III or Mk IV stuff. You had capacity to start producing Mk IVs but no plans for the new Mk VIs which had just started to appear in loyalist forces. Then again, you would have probably already met Mk Vs on the field. What would you do? Would you:

a) Continue producing Mk IVs even if you know they are inferior to what your loyalist enemies are using?
b) Adopt the modifications specifically made to fight astartes and start to produce your own version of Mk Vs to get into even footing with your loyalist enemies?

Same question would actually be valid for every Forge World on loyalist side who had not, due to war and chaos, received Mk VI prints and parts yet. So basically I think several "standardized" versions of Mk V were produced by both sides of the conflict.

[Inquisitor Engel]

Oh and 'codified like they are today' means: its firmly established in a decent and comprehensive fluff article, but GW refuses to make its authors & artists read it.

I meant more within a timeline, as previous stuff made the Heresy seem like a lot of buildup and then a few months of actual fighting, whereas now we're at several years of warfare. (I believe seven was stated, and while the fact may be older, it wasn't brought to the fore for some time)

[totgeboren]

Actually the Mk V fluff does make sense once you start to think on it in military terms. So okay, at the time Mk V came to be most legions were in Mk III and Mk IV armours. What Mk V was, at start, was an ad-hoc assemblage of different parts, including non-standard ones. But the catch is that while Mk V was ad-hoc and not standardized it was still developed after Isstvan and developed with the thought of fighting against other Astartes. At the same time as Mk V was born, Mk IV production was stopped and new Mk VI plans came to circulation... Now think about this for a moment:

If you were a traitor force commander at this time your Astartes had Mk III or Mk IV stuff. You had capacity to start producing Mk IVs but no plans for the new Mk VIs which had just started to appear in loyalist forces. Then again, you would have probably already met Mk Vs on the field. What would you do? Would you:

a) Continue producing Mk IVs even if you know they are inferior to what your loyalist enemies are using?
b) Adopt the modifications specifically made to fight astartes and start to produce your own version of Mk Vs to get into even footing with your loyalist enemies?

Same question would actually be valid for every Forge World on loyalist side who had not, due to war and chaos, received Mk VI prints and parts yet. So basically I think several "standardized" versions of Mk V were produced by both sides of the conflict.

Of course it can be rationalised to sort of work, but would you not agree that the mk.V, with the hard angles on the grille and the heavy cables on the outside is sort of iconic for CSM models and rarely seen on loyalist models, whilst the mk.6 'Beaky' is something you only really associate with the loyalists? The beaky helmet even looks somewhat odd in a CSM force, whilst it just looks cool in a loyalist force.

That's the way the design has been since late RT era. Why change the fluff now so that it doesn't match the models anymore? When FW released their mk.V armour, I was really happy and bought me a bunch, saying: "I can finally make my CSM look like they were supposed to since 2ed!" But now people say: "Nah, mk.V is more of a loyalist thing now. It says so in Deliverance Lost."

So I'm like "Gah, right in the childhood!"

P.S. What I have never understood is why most CSM models come with mk.6 legs though? Did the traitors steal all the loyalists pants before they left Terra or something?

[AndrewGPaul]

The Death Guard is clearly MkIII since the armour is solid plates rather than bands

Could be; I didn't actually go back and look at the book to check Jes' annotations. As for their provenance, regardless of the exact timings of their release and the publication of White Dwarf 129, the notes about the marks of armour come from Jes Goodwin's concept art - that makes them definitive, as far as I'm concerned.

I wouldn't base any general comments about the use of different armour variants based on one miniature. After all, there's plenty of miniatures of Imperial marines in old armour (the Space Wolf Long Fang sergeant from 1993 is clearly in mark 3), so why shouldn't the Death Guard have a few guys still in "old" armour, especially since mark 3 was a specialist suit, not something directly superceded my mark 4 and later designs.

[Polaria]

That's the way the design has been since late RT era. Why change the fluff now so that it doesn't match the models anymore? When FW released their mk.V armour, I was really happy and bought me a bunch, saying: "I can finally make my CSM look like they were supposed to since 2ed!" But now people say: "Nah, mk.V is more of a loyalist thing now. It says so in Deliverance Lost."

Well, I don't think Deliverance Lost says Mk V is a loyalist thing. What it really says is simply two things:
1) It was a loyalist tech-marine, specifically Raven Guard one, that invented the molecular bonding stud that is used in Mk V and Mk VI armour.
2) All unregular, mixed and stopgap design were retroactively given the Mk V designation to diffrentiate them from Mk IV and Mk VI designs.

It still makes very much sense that traitors, who were busy charging towards Terra and not-so-busy consolidating their holdings and production capacity, would have to rely more and more on adhoc "Mk V" armour as their stockpiles of Mk IV ran out and as they did not have blueprints for Mk VI. Now if the traitor forge worlds started to produce some sort of "standardized Mk V" construction it would also make sense that later on the loyalists would be hesitant to use such armour. Besides, they had their own forge worlds pushing out Mk VI and Mk VII already by that time. So it makes very much sense that in later years of Heresy after Mks VI and VII came out the traitors would be mostly in Mk Vs and loyalists mostly in Mk VIs and VIIs.

Still, my original question about the helmet is there? I think the Mk V helmet looks a bit suspiciously like Mk VII one and not so much like IV or VI ones.