D&D General Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, and Canon: Stare Decisis in D&D

[Henadic Theologian]

No, Custodes are just a more refined genetically modified human. Not clones of the Emperor in any capacity.

I've said for almost half a decade that 40K wouldnt survive the glare of the wider social media market, just too much stuff that is a bridge too far.

Then why couldn't female Custodes have been introduced as a new thing, perhaps for a specific purpose, why retcon it?

 

[Staffan]

Because in the 80's there would be some obvious call outs to make sure you could tell from a 3 feet top down view, it was a female model.

Just look at the metal Sisters of Battle, even the new line though not as obvious. People can tell.

I mean, I can't tell the sex of this person. I can't tell if they have boobs or not, or what's between their legs.

For that, you'd need to change the armor to something like this:

Now, in some cases you can tell, or at least hint, even with medium/heavy armor. The Metroid Dread version of Samus Aran definitely looks female, through emphasis on the waist/hips:

But with the kind of armor space marines wear, you'd have to go out of your way to show what sex the wearer is.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Female clones of a male are conceptually quite doable, minor gene editing to twin the X and eliminate the Y, or suppress the testosterone wash in development.

But what purpose would it have served?

 

[Scribe]

Then why couldn't female Custodes have been introduced as a new thing, perhaps for a specific purpose, why retcon it?

How familiar are you with the reception of Primaris and Cawl?

It would be rightly called out for the obvious change it is.

 

[Scribe]

I mean, I can't tell the sex of this person. I can't tell if they have boobs or not, or what's between their legs.

GW bread and butter is a visual medium.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

How familiar are you with the reception of Primaris and Cawl?

It would be rightly called out for the obvious change it is.

Most of what I know is from Wikis and internet debates and Warhammer MtG decks. I eventually do plan on getting Rogue Trader from Owlcat.

 

[Scribe]

Most of what I know is from Wikis and internet debates and Warhammer MtG decks. I eventually do plan on getting Rogue Trader from Owlcat.

OK well there is a large portion of the playerbase that at saw this lore development as a betrayal at best.

Better for GW to gaslight than add new.

 

[Parmandur]

But what purpose would it have served?

Thar seems neither here nor there, it would definitely be doable.

 

[MGibster]

When wearing bulky full armor of the type Space Marines wear, how could you tell? I mean, this is a different franchise, but:

You're not wrong. This is one of those proto-marines sold in 1987. (Not my minature.)

As far as 40k goes, this was the wild, wild west era of Rogue Trader and the setting really didn't solidfy until 40k 2nd edition was released in 1993. Allegedly these female models didn't sell very well and this is likely the reason why there are no women in the Adeptus Astartes. A few years back, an author working on book of fiction (as opposed to the rule books) included a female Custodes character but was told no because GW didn't sell any female Custodes models.

They were clones of the Emperor of a sort aren't they? Female Clones of a Male Emperor doesn't make sense. Women had their own Imperium Soldiers so it was fine.

Strictly speaking Space Marines aren't clones of the Emperor but I think they use some of his genetic material. Custodes use more of the Emperor's genetic material and it's why they're tougher than Space Marines. I'd have to do a deep dive into the lore and I'm not really the right person for that. But basically, for whatever in fiction reason, the geneseeds used by the Space Marines don't work on girls. Whatever geneseed they used for Custodes didn't work on girls either until GW suddenly decided it did.

I mean, I can't tell the sex of this person. I can't tell if they have boobs or not, or what's between their legs.

Death to heretics. That's what's between their legs.

GW bread and butter is a visual medium.

And that's the thing. You've got to be able to look at a 28-32mm scale model from three feet away and be able to tell what it's all about. If I'm painting a woman I want it to be obvious from three feet away that it's supposed to be a woman. If it's not obvious then what's the point?

 

[Zeromaru X]

As for the canon topic, I've always wondered, when talking about canon in the context of D&D (or any fictional franchise), and people mentions "this is/is not canon": is "canon for what?". Because canon is only useful when you trying to "study" something ("I'm reading this series of novels; is this novel relevant/canon to my reading order, or can I skip it?"), or when you're doing a professional or semi-professional research on something (like, writing an article for a wiki).

When you are worldbuilding, canon become less useful. The only use for canon in this context (for me, at least) is when you want to be as faithful to the source material and, as someone mentioned before, for some settings it may be impossible to be really faithful to canon (good luck trying to be faithful to canon in the Forgotten Realms). And as soon as your players interact with the game world, you've already deviated from canon.

I see canon more as a tool for understanding/researching something than a holy scripture.

Is anyone really going to be upset if dragonborn are suddenly in Greyhawk?

I think it depends. If you say to me that dragonborn have always lived in the Flanaess, then yes, I'm going to be upset. Not because I'm a "canon-lawyer", but because I don't like being gaslighted.

But if you say to me that yes, they've always lived in Greyhawk, but in one of the unexplored regions of the world, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. It would be a new development for the world, and I would like to see how they introduce it into the established lore.