PDA

View Full Version : Marine Physiology



Firaxin
24-05-2009, 07:55
Okay, I know marines are nerfed when it comes to the table top anyways. But assuming for a minute that their stats actually represent the way they're portrayed in the fluff...

a) Would it not make more sense for a marine to be T3, Feel No Pain?

I mean, as far as I can tell, a marine with his armor off in the fluff is just as vulnerable to wounds as a regular human, but his enhanced physiology allows him to ignore wounds that would incapacitate a human (like the loss of an arm) but would nevertheless render him useless in combat?

So, marine takes a bolter to the chest, even a las shot, he's as dead as a normal human; or a sword cuts removes his arm as easily as it would a regular human's. Thus: T3. However, because his enhanced physiology (extra vital organs, rapid staunching of blood loss, psychological resistance to pain, etc) allows him to easily ignore wounds that aren't instantly fatal. Thus: Feel No Pain.

b) Could the T4 be rationalized by Astartes-grade power armor's natural resilience (which also explains away why Inquisitors/SoB/etc don't get the boon, as it's not Astartes-grade) that grants the T4? That doesn't make sense because Scouts have T4 too. I suppose the Black Carapace could warrant the Toughness increase, but Scouts don't have it either. Hmm...

MetalGecko23
24-05-2009, 08:03
So, marine takes a bolter to the chest, even a las shot, he's as dead as a normal human; or a sword cuts removes his arm as easily as it would a regular human's. Thus: T3. However, because his enhanced physiology (extra vital organs, rapid staunching of blood loss, psychological resistance to pain, etc) allows him to easily ignore wounds that aren't instantly fatal. Thus: Feel No Pain.

Marines have the black carapace which I imagine is actually tough, like carapace armor. Plus for the most part considering fluff marines constantly like to remind us that they are tougher than us regular humans.
Agruably they should be T4 natural and FNP because of the armor. They should be S5 too because of the armor.
Though I have always add stat values that don't exist in 40K. Namely the .0. So a marine is T4.5 and an ork is T4.0 and they are S4.5 and an ork is S3.5. Its all completely bull but its how I rationalize the basic number system used in 40k.

imperial90
24-05-2009, 11:39
Your forgetting about a number of other enhancements marines get, firstly they have far more muscle then any human could possibly have, second, like metal said they have the black carapace, and third the the Ossmodula implant, increasing the strength or their bones many fold, and causing the rib cage to fuse together into a protective shell to protect the marines organs. Then failing all those, a marine has 2 hearts, 3 lungs, and 3 kidneys making it even harder to put down a marine. Then after ALL that has been gone through, then the marines enhanced physiology repairs anything unless the arms been like blown off or something. And thats all assuming your managed to get through a marines APC thick armor. GW made marines tough SOB's to put down

Nakor
24-05-2009, 12:20
yah, t3 would be fine if they were just guardsmen in power armor. e.g. inquisitors and sisters. however they are actually giant brutal killing machines. think about how many hits a heavy weight boxer like david tua takes compared to how many hits your or me could take.

Cythus
24-05-2009, 15:37
the only thing that is impossible for marines to have is that fused ribcage.

You need gaps in the ribcage for the intercostal muscles to move the ribs.

I'd say fluffwise, marines are t4.5 w2 (still instant deathed by s8 weapons but tougher than t4)

this means that yes if a marine is hit by a krak missle he's dead, but he can survive a hell of a lot of small wounds

imperial90
24-05-2009, 16:03
sorry made a mistake about the ribcage, its not that it actually fuses, its more that the ribcage forms interlocking plates, so it can still move, theres just no holes in it for anything to slip through;

quoting lexicanim
"Phase 2 - Ossmodula - A small, tubular and complex organ, the ossmodula secretes hormones that both affect the ossification of the skeleton and encourage the forming bone growths to absorb ceramic-based chemicals that are laced into the Marine's diet.2 This heavily alters the way the Space Marine's bones grow and develop. Two years after this implant is first put in the subject's long bones will have increased in size (along with most other bones) and the rib cage will have been fused into a solid mass of bulletproof, interlocking plates. "

Jimbobjeff
24-05-2009, 18:07
I'd argue the marines best defence against small arms fire (lasgun shots to the chest to use the op's example) is the built in redundancy they have, they have 2 hearts, 3 lungs etc, this means that a single lasgun shot is unlikely to kill them as even if it hits something vital they have a spare.

Goruax
24-05-2009, 21:11
Bet they had fun testing out the Ossmodula.
Prototype Marines couldn't bend down...awesome :p

Firaxin
25-05-2009, 04:43
think about how many hits a heavy weight boxer like david tua takes compared to how many hits your or me could take.
But the number of punches a guy can take doesn't really matter when someone pulls out a gun and shoots them. > muscles will not significantly stop a bullet.


I'd argue the marines best defence against small arms fire (lasgun shots to the chest to use the op's example) is the built in redundancy they have, they have 2 hearts, 3 lungs etc, this means that a single lasgun shot is unlikely to kill them as even if it hits something vital they have a spare.
Which was my point. The shot would take out the first heart or lung or whatever just as easily, but because there's a spare, it's FNP.

I would agree that the black carapace increases their toughness, however scouts have the toughness boost but not the black carapace, so it's not all that.

Kozbot
25-05-2009, 04:52
But the number of punches a guy can take doesn't really matter when someone pulls out a gun and shoots them. > muscles will not significantly stop a bullet.

Not so, a bullet of sufficient caliber to drop a human is going to have much less effect on a gorilla. A shot that will drop a deer will have much less effect on a buffalo. When you're adding the volume of muscle mass that a space marine has over a regular human it is going to matter.

El Haroldo
25-05-2009, 05:16
"to absorb ceramic-based chemicals that are laced into the Marine's diet."

Spess Muhreenz. So hardcore they eat ground-up bathroom tiles.

Hellebore
25-05-2009, 07:53
The black carapace is a thin film that appears like plastic. It's not stated exactly what it is, but it's not thick sheets of plasteel.

As for muscles blocking bullets, mythbusters says no:

http://mythbustersresults.com/

The thickest human muscles on record, 3" thick pecks and 11" wide biceps were stacked to see if a 9mm handgun bullet would go through. It did.

So over 1 foot of muscle tissue was unable to stop a relatively slow moving 9mm handgun bullet.

Hellebore

imperial90
25-05-2009, 09:06
Well in that case id say the enhanced ceramite laced bones might have something to do with that extra toughness, yah know the same stuff space marine armors made of

Marshal2Crusaders
25-05-2009, 09:07
The thickest human muscles on record, 3" thick pecks and 11" wide biceps were stacked to see if a 9mm handgun bullet would go through. It did.


Hellebore

I would hope so. LOL. Otherwise those munitions makers suck.

mrln68
25-05-2009, 09:25
While the Mythbusters are fun to watch, there ballistic and physiological knowledge is really lacking...

Dead cow muscle is mush. I can poke my finger through it. Try doing that to a freshly killed animal and you get entirely different results. Living muscle is even stronger. The comparison that they make doesn't really work well for determining actual results. They would be better off to buy a few pigs and shoot them while they are still running around...but that would really get the Animal Rights groups up in arms - though the data would actually be usable. If muscle mass wasn't a factor, you wouldn't have the different classes of hunting ammo, hotter loads are needed to get through all the extra muscle involved...different bullets are used to avoid mushrooming before it gets to the good bits. It would be good for them to get a consult from Duncan MacPherson on the merits of understanding the differences between hollow points, full metal jackets and the various metals used in making the bullets in regards to the penetrating power (penetration does not equal stopping though).

In the world of sci-fi...thicker muscle would likely survive energy blasts better as well. It sure takes a good bit longer to defrost a 16 oz steak in the Microwave than it does an 8 oz steak (yes lasers are not microwave...but I don't happen to have experience with shooting people with lasers).

To the point though - everything is nerfed...or overpowered...or both depending on who you ask. Farseers are supposed to do a heck of a lot more stuff with their brains than they do. Necrons...well they nearly beat the Eldar once upon a time. Just a matter of perspective. Since GW fails to quantify how strong strong is, how fast fast is and how tough tough is - it is difficult to attempt to draw any actual conclusions, since their standard fluff cop out makes any fluff irrelevant ("Oh, they just misinterpreted what they saw - you know like a fish story").

Hellebore
25-05-2009, 15:09
Frozen meat is definitely weaker as the ice crystals within the cells tear them and cause the meat to lose cohesion. But unfrozen meat is fine until it starts to rot.

I don't know if the mythbusters used thawed meat or not, but assuming it was and lost some of its cohesion (not enough for it to fall apart though because the ligament and internal membranes don't split from ice build up) then the meat they fired against would perhaps have lost 1/2 its resistence (that's being generous).

So that bullet could have penetrated 7" of muscle without a problem. The bullet they fired at the meat still had plenty of velocity after it left the meat.

Through and through hits occur when a bullet passes straight through tissue. The only time bullets stop inside bodies is if they hit bones.

Hellebore

Lothlanathorian
25-05-2009, 15:45
Sorry, but I have watched enough Mythbusters to know that those guys are so flawed that I wouldn't believe them if they told me the Earth revolved around the sun.

Hellebore
25-05-2009, 15:48
And? A mentally retarded 3 year old can still correctly answer a question. Ad hominems add nothing to the discussion.

Go shoot some slabs of cow meat if you won't accept the experiment (that's what science is all about, reproduceability).

Bullets only stop inside humans if they are designed to fragment on impact or they hit bones. soft tissue is too soft for it to stop it any other way.

Hellebore

mrln68
25-05-2009, 16:28
No, bullets stop when they loose inertia - why they loose inertia will depend on the dozens of factors...many of which are not present in dead meat. Check out the book "Bullet Penetration: Modeling the Dynamics and the Incapacitation Resulting From Wound Trauma." It gets into all the factors involved when selecting the correct rounds for use for home defense/law enforcement. Even FMJ ammunition will stop within a target without hitting bone if the load is correct. More to the point, FMJ is not as useful for stopping a target as a hollow point in terms of trauma - so just because it penetrates doesn't mean the target will care much. I've had a piece of #4 rebar go through my calf - it hurt...but it didn't do much damage. A hollow point from a .22 would have shredded the muscle but not passed through, and while not fatal - I wouldn't have done much more walking for a year or two.

Kozbot
25-05-2009, 17:44
And? A mentally retarded 3 year old can still correctly answer a question. Ad hominems add nothing to the discussion.

Go shoot some slabs of cow meat if you won't accept the experiment (that's what science is all about, reproduceability).

Bullets only stop inside humans if they are designed to fragment on impact or they hit bones. soft tissue is too soft for it to stop it any other way.

Hellebore

You're assuming that a space marine is functionally just an overly muscled person. There's a reason that you don't try to kill a buffalo with a 9mm. Hell my 30.06 goes clean through a deer but when I went elk hunting I needed to use a larger caliber so I could be sure of killing it. If muscle mass is utterly irrelevant why won't a 9mm hand gun kill a rhino or an elephant?

Firaxin
25-05-2009, 20:47
I don't think Astartes muscles are anywhere near as dense or as thick as a Rhino/Elephant's.

imperial90
25-05-2009, 21:00
Maybe not, but do u really think the Emporer would put ALL that stuff into a marine, and not try to make its muscles denser? He came up with acid spit, ribcage becoming scales, ability to take a creatures memories by just eating it, and didnt think to make his muscles denser to make him more durable then your average joe?

Firaxin
25-05-2009, 21:11
I didn't say they weren't denser. Just not as dense as an elephant's or a rhino's (which would have to be considerably dense to let them run around with all that weight).

We know marines can swim without their armor from the Iron Snakes book, but a human with muscles as dense as either of those animals would not be able to swim as the weight/power ratio would be abysmal.

Lothlanathorian
25-05-2009, 22:54
No, we just assume that Dan Abnett is always right :p

I, personally, don't believe a Space Marine would be able to swim, in his armor or out (but especially not if he were in it).

Demon Druss
25-05-2009, 23:12
True he couldn't swim in his armor he'd just walk along the bottom providing the pressure doesn't crush him. I'm fairly sure a marine could swim out of armor he does have 3 lungs so that would provide extra bouyency and marines should be less dense than the same volume of water because even Andre the Giant ( I've always thought he'd be about marine size) could swim without any problems. As for muscle density it probably is the same as average Joe's its just a marine has a lot more of said muscle and blood that allows better respiration and probably neutralise's lactic acid.

Kozbot
25-05-2009, 23:48
I don't think Astartes muscles are anywhere near as dense or as thick as a Rhino/Elephant's.

I don't believe they are either, I'm just refuting the idea that muscle mass is irrelevant when it comes to getting shot. I do believe that a marine is significantly denser than a human, sufficiently so that it would make them more resistant to bullets. Not bullet proof by any means, but on the original topic enough so that they would be tough enough to qualify for toughness 4 rather than 3 with feel no pain.

Hellebore
26-05-2009, 01:15
A 9mm bullet would kill a rhino if it entered its heart. That there are few rhinos killed by 9mm rounds isn't necessarily corelatory with their muscles stopping the bullets, they may just not have been shot in the right place. A rhino's skull is thick enough to deflect bullets, so you are unlikely to put one through its head.

And as I said, humans are not going to be able to stop bullets with muscle. A space marine won't have biceps 11" thick nor pecks 3" thick. They are densely muscled, not heavily muscled. However that density is relative. Muscle tissue has a density of ~1.1gcm3 whilst fat has a density of ~0.9gcm3. An increase in actin and myosin doesn't appreciably increase the density weight of muscle.

Here is the original GW creation of a space marine article:
http://web.archive.org/web/20071227215341rn_1/uk.games-workshop.com/spacemarines/initiation/2/

In it it says:

Phase 3 – Biscopea. This organ is implanted into the chest cavity. It is small, approximately spherical and, like the Ossmodula, its primary action is hormonal. The presence of the biscopea stimulates muscle growth throughout the body.

So it stimulates a humans muscles to grow. No special stuff added, just increased muscle growth. Unlike the ossmodula that says they are fed a ceramic material in their diet that is absorbed into their bones.


Hellebore

Lothlanathorian
26-05-2009, 02:54
True he couldn't swim in his armor he'd just walk along the bottom providing the pressure doesn't crush him. I'm fairly sure a marine could swim out of armor he does have 3 lungs so that would provide extra bouyency and marines should be less dense than the same volume of water because even Andre the Giant ( I've always thought he'd be about marine size) could swim without any problems. As for muscle density it probably is the same as average Joe's its just a marine has a lot more of said muscle and blood that allows better respiration and probably neutralise's lactic acid.

The third lung allows them to breath poisonous gasses and, according to Dan Abnett, water.

And Andre was still a human. Apes can't swim because of their muscles being so dense they sink. I prefer to believe that Space Marines wouldn't just have big, sexy, man muscles, they would also have dense, strong, ape muscles.

Even if Hellebore chooses to post GW's own facts on this and ruin my fantasy world. Damn Hellebore. Damn him and his damnable rightness.

NightrawenII
26-05-2009, 10:54
The third lung allows them to breath poisonous gasses and, according to Dan Abnett, water.

And Andre was still a human. Apes can't swim because of their muscles being so dense they sink. I prefer to believe that Space Marines wouldn't just have big, sexy, man muscles, they would also have dense, strong, ape muscles.

Even if Hellebore chooses to post GW's own facts on this and ruin my fantasy world. Damn Hellebore. Damn him and his damnable rightness.

Im pretty sure the orangutans can swim.

Marshal2Crusaders
26-05-2009, 11:22
A space marine might eb able to swim, but he might not be able to swim far. The big guys I know who swim can do about 250 before they are smoked. I'm able to do around 500 before I'm worthless, and those skinny mother's who make up the rest of the world seem to be able to go for years before stopping.

StefDa
26-05-2009, 11:32
Being a somewhat amateur bodybuilder (somewhat referring to bodybuilder, not amateur), I can relay my impartial knowledge about muscles through my own experience and research through my time of working out. And I have done a lot of research!

There are basically two different types of muscle growth, the names of which I cannon for my life remember right now. One is about the muscles being filled with fluid (not exclusively). The muscles absorb a sort of fluid. This ensures fancy results faster, but doesn't add anything special to muscle performance. The second is where the muscles gain mass, of relative sort. This takes longer time, but produces more dense muscle tissue.

There are also different types of strength. Muscle strength and sinew strength*. Muscle strength relies heavily (almost solely) on the relative power created by the muscles themselves, and require a large muscle physiological cross section*. A large cross section means just that; the muscle is physically large, and larger muscles can exert more power. I belong to this category.

Sinew strength is something which comes along almost by itself. It requires long time of working out, and yields better results than muscle strength. To give an example:

My direct superior at my work is also a powerlifter. He curls 54 kgs, while I curl 30-32,5 kgs (barbell curl, a biceps exercise). My arms measure 41 cms (which is quite a lot), and his arms measure not much more than an average adult man who is physically active (not necessarily doing weight lifting).

My point is, one can be incredibly strong without being physically big, and vice versa indeed. I definately believe the Marines' muscles would offer some sort of protection (at the very least slow projectiles down some), since all the fluff points to them being incredibly strong. If they are indeed average of size (relatively), more like large adults than actual bodybuilders, I very much suppose their muscles would have an incredibly density! I would love to examine a Marine body and observe its performance.

*= I have never discussed bodybuilding in any other language than my native, so I apologise for any misunderstandings, and please correct my specific terms if you find any errors.

SimonL
26-05-2009, 15:51
Im pretty sure the orangutans can swim.

Absolutley not, biologists have determined they can't. Never can, never will...until recently when someone photographed some doing it ;)

Good ole science....

Lothlanathorian
26-05-2009, 16:16
Also, I would like to damn orangutans.

And I did not know that about the two different types of muscle and such. Thank you, StefDa.

Decius
26-05-2009, 17:35
Phase 3 Biscopea. This organ is implanted into the chest cavity. It is small, approximately spherical and, like the Ossmodula, its primary action is hormonal. The presence of the biscopea stimulates muscle growth throughout the body.

So it stimulates a humans muscles to grow. No special stuff added, just increased muscle growth.

Maybe this is just me, but just because it doesn't mention any "special stuff added" doesn't mean that there isn't. Maybe it's some "special stuff" that stimulates the muscle growth? I think the statement is left intentionally vague to let the reader fill in the blanks with super science.

As for a marine's toughness, think a lot of it has to do with the fact that they have ridiculously strong bones, blood that can clot in less a than minute, and an extra of almost every major organ. Muscle density probably adds to that, at least a little. Like a cherry on top.

End result: Toughness +1 instead of "Feel no Pain". Besides, "Feel no Pain" is just a nice sounding phrase for a rule. On the table, I think maybe half the models that have this rule have it a reason other than being unable to feel pain. Medics, painboys, Sicarius, and other examples that prove my point but I can't remember.

Firaxin
26-05-2009, 21:54
Didn't say it was about the marine ignoring pain. I'm asking because I think it makes more sense for the marine to be easily wounded, but then get back up after a second because the heart he just lost wasn't vital/his blood coagulated etc. Thus: FNP.

Lothlanathorian
26-05-2009, 22:07
I think Feel No Pain has more to do with 'Your arms off!' 'No it isn't' and less with healing rapidly from a minor wound.

SinCollector
26-05-2009, 22:37
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS VARYING MUSCLE DENSITY.

Not on Earth anyway. Muscle is muscle is muscle whether it's on a gorilla, a cheetah, or Jessica Biel. There are very, very slight variations between individuals but it's essentially the same stuff no matter what it's found on. The differences you see in strength and abilities come from the way that muscle fits into the design of that particular organism. Gorillas and chimps are stronger because their bodies give their muscles far more leverage effectively multiplying the force generated. Search google for "why are gorillas strong" or something along those lines for more information.

EDIT: Mammalian muscle density is all the same.

Hellebore
27-05-2009, 03:52
Maybe this is just me, but just because it doesn't mention any "special stuff added" doesn't mean that there isn't. Maybe it's some "special stuff" that stimulates the muscle growth? I think the statement is left intentionally vague to let the reader fill in the blanks with super science.


Unfortunately appeal to ignorance isn't a viable argument.
http://www.fallacyfiles.org/ignorant.html

Otherwise I'd be able to say that space marines are hollow because it doesn't say they aren't. Or their muscles are made of cherry ripe because it clearly doesn't say they aren't.

These ad absurdums are the reason you cannot use appeal to ignorance as evidence, the argument becomes meaningless as everyone then supports their own position with things that AREN'T said.

For example, it doesn't say I'm wrong about space marines, therefore I am right is a pointless argument.

Hellebore

mrln68
27-05-2009, 05:55
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS VARYING MUSCLE DENSITY.

Half right. All mammalian muscle is the same density - however not all mammalian muscles have the same density. Consider a nicely marbled cut of Kobe beef when compared to a lean venison steak. The venison steak will be more dense for the same size cut since it has less adipose tissue distributed throughout. That is why comparing beef to human isn't a good example.

Through a few thousand years of careful breeding, we have developed beef cattle which have more intramuscular fat in order to help make it more tender when we eat it. A human body builder (or even normal human for that matter) has less fat in the muscle tissue itself - so their muscles will be more dense. Same holds true with wild animals - less fat...tougher meat - cooked or raw.

But yes, the muscle tissue will have the same density...as long as you discount anything that isn't muscle.

Back in the 3rd Edition Space Marine Codex, it describes the effects of the Biscopea as causing Muscular Hyperthrophics (page 45). While this doesn't need to be an actual change in the muscle makeup - it does change things quite a bit. Since it is a real world genetic mutation - we can get a rough idea of what it might mean for a Space Marine:

Normal (http://www.remingtoncattle.com/waf/images/Stevenson.JPG)

Hyperthrophic (http://www.bio.miami.edu/~cmallery/150/neuro/belgian.blue.jpg)

Decius
27-05-2009, 06:35
Unfortunately appeal to ignorance isn't a viable argument.

Well, when you get right down to it, since Space Marines are make believe are any arguments valid? :p

Marshal2Crusaders
27-05-2009, 07:24
Adeptus Cowstartes

Lothlanathorian
27-05-2009, 09:41
I would not fight cow #2.

StefDa
27-05-2009, 11:58
mrln68, kind of what I wanted to say, but speaking outside of my area of expertise, and simply from my knowledge, I was unsure as to how to put it. After all, I have only studied this particular subject a single time.


And I did not know that about the two different types of muscle and such. Thank you, StefDa.

It is a bit more complicated than that, but it definately gives you the gist of it :) hehe.


Adeptus Cowstartes

Hahahhaha lol! Priceless.


I would not fight cow #2.

+1.

StefDa
27-05-2009, 12:00
Double post.