"Space Marines: The Legacy" Topic

Writing in White Dwarf #385, Aly Morrison recalls:

…Yes, I'm proud to say that I, along with Jes Goodwin and Bob Naismith, created the very first Space Marine plastic kit that came to be known as RTB01 (or Rogue Trader Box 1).

From a miniatures point of view what we added was a sense of timeless design, that these things – whether Eldar, Orks or Space Marines – had always been about. That was important because sci-fi wargames before that were, frankly, dull. You played with generic models that could represent any time or place. What we did was the opposite, there was no mistaking them as anything else than 40K, so why would you want to play in any other setting?

Do you agree?

No can't agree with a marketing ploy, I'm not that narrow minded and although I loved the oldschool vibe (attitude) in the original incarnation which did allow some cross pollination of different scifiverses the newer attitude and culture to gaming 40k leaves me cold and indifferent plus the pricing nowadays, wow eye watering. Finally I do enjoy their fluffyverse but find other scifi better as they don't scream TM only at you all the time.

Wow… Morrison's strikes me as being an incredibly arrogant statement. Don't get me wrong, I loved 40K when it first came out, and I agree that the models were very distinctive, but games like Traveller/Striker and 2300 AD were far from generic and dull.

…why would you want to play in any other setting?

Because your fecal matter actually is odorous?

At this point, I hate the overdone, over-busy look of 40K models. While there is certainly no mistaking them as anything other than 40K, that is no longer a selling point -- it's a reason not to buy them.

I have to agree that Morrison's statement is somewhat arrogant. While yes the models were iconic they drew their form from much of what was already out there. My first thought at seeing them way back then was, "Wow! Figures I can use for Star Ship Troopers." I took the plunge into 40K and yes for a while it and GW's fantasy line Warhammer were what I wanted to do. I grew up and found that I did not have to pay an arm and leg for minis and that there were other games and this thing called historical miniatures that attracted me more.

While I have fond memories of those first games of 40K I have attempted to go back to it on several occasions and it just does not do it for me anymore.

How is it arrogant to say sci-fi minis will look out of place in any other setting than a sci-fi one? Take the comments as a whole, not cut apart.

I loved Rogue Trader and the 40K setting. I detested what the game morphed into over time.

I think you've missed the point in the article Pythagoras. Morrison is saying why would you want to play any other sci fi universe than 40K because their figures are just for 40K. To me that is arrogant when there were plenty of other universes out there based on any number of books, films or TV shows. Can't say that I ever liked the figures. Yes they were distinctive, but that doesn't mean that they were better than anything else available. What GW were always good at was providing a background for those too lazy or unimaginative to do it themselves.

One word: No!

I would add an adjective but I prefer not to use that word unless it is important and GW is anything but…

I love it when anti-GW blinders cause people to misconstrue a statement. Aly Morrison was merely (and correctly) pointing out that, before 40K RT was first introduced back in 1987, there were no tabletop sci-fi miniature games with supporting miniature lines and any miniatures available were generic ones that can be used for any sci-fi game (probably RPG's, since RT was the first tabletop sci-fi skirmish game using multiple figures).

40K changed all that. Now we are spoiled for choice when it comes to sci-fi miniature games and game-specific miniature lines for them. Some gamers do use 40K figures for other sci-fi game systems, but they are not going to be mistaken as anything other than 40K figures in its dark sci-fi/fantasy setting.

This is about toy soldiers isn't it?

I call BS on just about every statement Morrison makes there.

In particular, the idea that – pre-RT – people were playing some kind of generic sci fi with generic figures.
That's a total straw man proposition.

The figure ranges I remember from that era (at least those available locally) were "Traveller" in 15mm, Alternative Armies' 'Retained Knights', and GW's own 'Judge Dredd' range.
All purpose-made, setting-specific figure ranges. All predating RT.

And far from being the bold innovation AM describes, RTs introduction was sheepish, hesitant, and included several 'false starts'.
IIRC, GW had a set of starship rules in one of their compendiums, and carried the "Stardrive" range for a while, before dropping it.
Then they introduced a proto-RT ruleset in another compendium… and let it wither on the vine for lack of support.
In the meantime, they kept dabbling with just one or two individual sci-fi figure releases.
Then they finally jumped in the deep end with the coffee-table edition of RT.
Which was a botch-job compromise between conventional mass-battle (40k) and the original small-unit, anything-goes, D100 scenario-generated "Abdul Goldberg stole your Tribbles" skirmish/adventuring brief.
Which they quickly dropped, concentrated on the mass battle aspect, and subsequently retconned everything else into oblivion.

That's how I remember it…. GW turned up late to the party after years of half-hearted flirtation with sci-fi culminating in a compromise release which was quickly halted, overhauled, and taken in a different direction entirely.

As to Aly's definition of "timeless"… the Traveller 15mm range is still available, and the Traveller setting is still actively supported.
AA's 'Retained Knights' are still available and their game setting is enjoying a renaissance.
While its beyond argument that RT & RTB01's grandchildren are doing very well… they themselves are long gone.

Y'all are just jealous because I have a box of beakies still on the sprues.

I love it when anti-GW blinders cause people to misconstrue a statement.

Considering that the aforementioned opinions came from posters who appreciate the RT vibe, I don't think they would necessarily pile on Morrison for such a statement. It is you who are reactionary here.

Also a fan of the Oldhammer40k aesthetic, I somewhat agree with the Morrison's sentiment, but take issue with how it is stated. It DOES come off as more than a touch arrogant.

Y'all are just jealous because I have a box of beakies still on the sprues.

I stil have a battered box, and a few "whole" beige, green and blue sprues.

Starguard had figure lines, histories, rules back in the seventies.

Which was a botch-job compromise between conventional mass-battle (40k)

That's what Space Marine / Epic was for.

…and the original small-unit, anything-goes, D100 scenario-generated "Abdul Goldberg stole your Tribbles" skirmish/adventuring brief.

Wa'nit great!

Well, since I have never actually used GW Space Marines to play 40K, I guess I can't actually see them as that. Good models. I like them.

They're really no more or less generic than any other models, including models at the time. The whole idea of an iconography or a look being specific or generic depends on what you know, not the content. If you don't know the Russian, Polish, and Hungaro-Austrian imperial crests, then the set is just a bunch of generic bird emblems.

Well, Actually he is sort of right.

The first Beaky were great miniatures that got a lot of individuals into miniature Wargaming.

They are far more interesting and to me better than what GW is putting out today.

"…there were no tabletop sci-fi miniature games with supporting miniature lines and any miniatures available were generic ones that can be used for any sci-fi game (probably RPG's, since RT was the first tabletop sci-fi skirmish game using multiple figures)".

Wrong.

The Traveller rules, including Snapshot were out for a while, and there were 15mm minis to go with them.

I have one word for Mr. Morrison – a word he should have picked up from his former colleague Mr. Ansell:

Laserburn.

Boltgun, Imperial Marines, Power Armour, Dreadnought Armour, Force Axe, Chaos Warriors – these all appeared in Laserburn and Imperial Commander before 40K. It had a rich background and a full supporting line of miniatures (still sold today).

40K was by no means the first, or even second, set of SF wargames rules.

if you were reading tmp you'd think 40k was a rare indie game that nobody plays

Not to mention "Space Marine" from fgu for space opera

I think I will grant that the Beakies are iconic (at least now). But that didn't stop me from playing them in other settings!

So the rest of the statement smells strongly of "Marketing." If you're wondering what exactly marketing smells like, it smells rather like the south end of a north-facing steer.

Those beakie Space Marines always reminded me of the Brancusi sculpture of the aero-dynamics of a man walking.

There is nothing new under the sun; or under 40,000 suns.

White Dwarf. Target audience.

It's advertising – how many advertisers do you know that admit another company's products actually exist?

So, no, I don't think it's arrogant, just a company selling it's wares.

As mentioned, Traveler. GDW made Imperial Marines which in essence is the same as a Space Marine. And those GDW models were awesome.
Stryker rules (again by GDW) was out by 1979. As mentioned there was supporting mini's.

I thought Sun Gun was a much better name than multi melta.
Is there any love for the Minifigs Sci Fi range -that was pretty early and still a favourite of mine.

I agree with those who say the facts get in the way. There may have been some generic sci-fi figures on the market, but the following games had rules and dedicated miniatures:

Starguard (1977) – dedicated miniatures produced by MacEwan.

Space Marines (1977) – there were miniatures representing the specific races, but I am not sure when they were produced.

Strike Team Alpha (1978) – Ral Partha produced the miniatures for this game.

Galacta (1980) – rules and dedicated miniatures produced by Heritage.

Laserburn (1980) – 15mm miniatures, and the 25mm miniatures produced by pre-GW Citadel matched the artwork in Laserburn.

Star Rovers (1981) – rules and dedicated miniatures produced by Archive.

WH40K Rogue Trader was published in 1987.

In regard to this question: "… why would you want to play in any other setting?" Just counting my painted Space Marines, I have about 200 who have never been in a WH40K game.

DOn't forget GW's own "Spacefarers" rules & range, from around the time of Laserburn.

I thought Sun Gun was a much better name than multi melta.

Wasn't that the plasma gun?

A lot of 40K was a sci-fi version of LotR. I have a HUGE collection of Epic/6mm, all forces. Plus a number of other than GW 6mm sci-fi.

I'm not a real fan of their fluff all the time, generally I like most of the Epic models. Now saying that, I'd think the Mk.VI "beaky" helm would be hard to operate in. That "nose" would get in a way ! But … OK … it is sci-fi …

"Wasn't that the plasma gun?"
I wondered about that too but I didn't dig out the rules to check tbh but I think there were plasma weapons as well -still a great name whatever it was.

> why would you want to play in any other setting?

Because they exist and are interesting.

On the same note, people use other manufacturers minis to play in the universe of 40k.

Diversity is good.

Battle Tech anyone?

Ooh, good call.

According to the damage transfer arrows, Mr Morrison's pants are on fire.

Starguard (1977) – dedicated miniatures produced by MacEwan. They had humans, robots, tanks, spaceships, and many non-human races including bears, fish, cats, insects, reptiles, and lots of others. They were a full range, with extra weapons and separate arms on many figures. They had all sorts of rule books and are still being supported.

Mike Bunkermeister Creek
Bunker Talk blog

Would you guys be so pissed off if someone at FFG questioned why anyone would want to use Xwing ships in a non Star Wars setting?

That was important because sci-fi wargames before that were, frankly, dull. You played with generic models that could represent any time or place.

An absolute, patent falsehood. Either Mr. Morrison had no awareness of the existence of sci-fi miniature wargaming and sci-fi RPGs prior to Citadel/Games Workshop opening their doors, or he is simply being disingenuous to put it kindly.

Starguard! first published in 1974. The game is now on its 7th edition, and the figures are still in production, with over 200 different subjects and poses to choose from all in 1/72 scale: tin-soldier.com

Space Marines 1st ed. published in 1977, 2nd ed. published in 1980. Official 25mm figures produced by Stan Johansen Miniatures.

Strike Team Alpha published in 1978. Official 25mm and later 15mm figures produced by Ral Partha.

Traveller RPG first published in 1977. Official figures followed from several manufacturers, starting with Martian Metals, then later Grenadier Miniatures and Citadel Miniatures in the UK under license.

Warhammer 40,000 Rogue Trader first published in 1987.

So. Again, "boring?" a subjective opinion from a source that is hardly unbiased. As for the author's assertion, "…there was no mistaking them as anything else than 40K, so why would you want to play in any other setting?" Seriously? You even need to ask that question?

Leland R. Erickson
Metal Express
metal-express.net

Would you guys be so pissed off if someone at FFG questioned why anyone would want to use Xwing ships in a non Star Wars setting?

As one who has used Star Wars models for Starguard! and other settings for over 30 years now, no, I wouldn't be pissed off, but I would be equally *amused* by such an unimaginative question as I am now…

Leland R. Erickson
Metal Express
metal-express.net

I agree with those who say the facts get in the way. There may have been some generic sci-fi figures on the market, but the following games had rules and dedicated miniatures:

Starguard (1977) – dedicated miniatures produced by MacEwan.

Space Marines (1977) – there were miniatures representing the specific races, but I am not sure when they were produced.

Strike Team Alpha (1978) – Ral Partha produced the miniatures for this game.

Galacta (1980) – rules and dedicated miniatures produced by Heritage.

Laserburn (1980) – 15mm miniatures, and the 25mm miniatures produced by pre-GW Citadel matched the artwork in Laserburn.

Star Rovers (1981) – rules and dedicated miniatures produced by Archive.

WH40K Rogue Trader was published in 1987.

In regard to this question: "… why would you want to play in any other setting?" Just counting my painted Space Marines, I have about 200 who have never been in a WH40K game.

HELLLOOOO!!!! Just one friendly correction, Starguard! 1st edition was originally published in *1974.* You are otherwise correct, and thank you for reminding me of Galacta and Star Rovers (I have copies of both sets of rules).

I am seriously thinking of dusting off my old WH40KRT figures and using them to playtest our new skirmish system… we wouldn't publish any photos for obvious reasons, but it would be amusing to be able to mention our use of them in the designer's notes section…

Leland R. Erickson
Metal Express
metal-express.net

Would you guys be so pissed off if someone at FFG questioned why anyone would want to use Xwing ships in a non Star Wars setting?

Maybe it's the UK/US language difference, but that's not how I read Morrison's statement. I read it to mean, why would anyone want to play any game in any other setting at all, when 40K was so freaking awesome. That's the part that set me off.

And, frankly, today's 40K models are simply detestable, for the most part. I'd prefer them to take a page from Copplestone's book and revert to figs that have cleaner lines without all the clutter and iconography.