Matoran:Toa Scale? How Big do you Like Matoran?

[Banana Gunz]

Is there some sort of definite scale of matoran : toa? It seems like the matoran have changed sizes over the years.

 

And what is your favorite size of matoran in comparison to toa, regardless of what the actual scale is.

 

I think all matoran are slightly different sizes (like Onu-Matoran would probably be hunched and shorter) but they all are generally the same relative size. (except for Voya-Nui matoran...) Right?

[~Shockwave~]

I'm going to assume that the sets are accurate in this sense. I think there may have been accurate measurements given somewhere but I don't remember exactly.

[Taipu1]

I've always taken the official stance on Matoran:Toa size to be the Metruan and Toa Metru.  Thats the only situation where Matoran haven't been altered for some reason, and the most standard way of Toa being created.  There are a few cases that don't fit the rule such as Mazeka, Krakua and Lesovikk, but in general thats put down to artistic license or fitting with a current years set range. 

[The Lorax]

In general, matoran are about a bio tall, with toa at 1.6. There are, of course, exceptions to this, such as the enlarged matoran of Karda Nui and the rebuilt matoran of Karzhani.

[LordofBionicles]

Yes there must be an official size for them the same way there's one for the Toa (7 ft/2 mts) but I don't recall it correctly.

[Aanchir]

For my drawings I've always been fond of the proportions of the 2004 sets, where a Matoran is roughly two-thirds the height of a Toa (a bit ironic, since the 2004 Matoran were perhaps my least favorite designs in terms of construction). This is consistent with what The Lorax mentioned above: Matoran would be about 1 bio tall, and Toa about 1.6 bio tall.

 

But to be honest I'm not very particular about Matoran proportions. Most of the designs had their own unique charm. I was not too fond of the 2008 designs, but that was more because their longer legs meant less of the traditional dwarfish look, not because of their height relative to a Toa.

[Banana Gunz]

*snip*

 

But to be honest I'm not very particular about Matoran proportions. Most of the designs had their own unique charm. I was not too fond of the 2008 designs, but that was more because their longer legs meant less of the traditional dwarfish look, not because of their height relative to a Toa.

 

That's very true; the Tohunga had very silly and short proportions yet that made them cute and nostalgic to many fans. The 2008 Av-Matoran tried to be large and have long limbs but that's what took away their charm and just made them look strange. The style is probably to most important part. Like you said, the Metru matoran build isn't great for its own style purposes, but they actually look better as matoran because of the short limbs which gave the feel of them being dwarfish and unable to defend themselves, while still keeping them in proportion to the toa. 

[boston100]

i didnt care much for 04 or 08. 05 was definatly mmy favourite with the mctoran comming a close second

[Takhamavahu]

I beleive it was confirmed that the 2004 design is the default for all matoran. Even if that isn't confirmed, every matoran that isn't the 2004 Metru design has a story reason for why they are different.
The tohunga are shrunk. The 2006 matoran were rebuilt. The Mahri Nui matoran were rebuild and then mutated back to "very close" to their original form.
Av-Matoran were enlarged in the core (and presumably their mechanical parts adjusted as well, the same way they did on Takanuva.)
Mazeka rebuild himself, and Vican and Vultraz were altered physically when they transformed into shadow matoran.

 

personally, I would compare any matoran set to the toa metru for the scale of that particular matoran to an average toa.

[Aanchir]

I beleive it was confirmed that the 2004 design is the default for all matoran. Even if that isn't confirmed, every matoran that isn't the 2004 Metru design has a story reason for why they are different.

The tohunga are shrunk. The 2006 matoran were rebuilt. The Mahri Nui matoran were rebuild and then mutated back to "very close" to their original form.

Av-Matoran were enlarged in the core (and presumably their mechanical parts adjusted as well, the same way they did on Takanuva.)

Mazeka rebuild himself, and Vican and Vultraz were altered physically when they transformed into shadow matoran.

 

personally, I would compare any matoran set to the toa metru for the scale of that particular matoran to an average toa.

Even if the 2004 design is the default, that doesn't perfectly answer the question of how tall Matoran should be relative to Toa, since sets are not always to scale with one another even within a single story year. Krekka and Axonn were ostensibly supposed to be huge, but the Krekka set was exactly the same height as Toa Nokama, Nuju, and Lhikan, and the Axonn set was exactly the same height as a Toa Inika.

 

With that said, I believe the official height of a typical Matoran is about 4.5 feet (1 bio). In that case, a typical Matoran is 5/8 the height of a typical Toa, which is fairly close to the relative heights of the 2004 Matoran and Toa sets (Matoran being about 16.5 modules tall with their legs fully extended and Toa ranging from 24 to 26 modules tall with their legs fully extended). I am not interested in digging around for the original source or Greg quote.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Aanchir

[Akavakaku]

Actually, Vican and Vultraz were mutated after being corrupted, which is why they are larger and have claws.

[Sharnak the Bohrok Lord]

My general thought is that matoran are the hobbits of MU, being around half the height of a toa. Though like the real world, their height could naturally vary across location.

 

I personally do not remember how big matoran were compared to toa set-wise. I do know that over the years set sizes increased, so if you want to use the sets as an indicator of their height, you would need to compare them to the canister sets of that year, not throughout BIONICLE's whole run.

[Boidoh]

Actually, Vican and Vultraz were mutated after being corrupted, which is why they are larger and have claws.

 

Mazeka, a Ko-Matoran, has no excuse.

[Takhamavahu]

Mazeka rebuilt himself during his pursuit of Vultraz. He is explicitly described as larger than most matoran.

Edited September 5, 2014 by Takhamavahu

[Boidoh]

Ah, I didn't know that...

 

I see it in BS01, but in what story does it say that? Brothers in Arms? I CTRL+F but I cannot see the word rebuild used anywhere...

[Aanchir]

Another thing I should mention: I feel like a typical Matoran should generally be around the same height as a typical Turaga. This is consistent with the 2003 and 2004 Matoran sets (which were roughly the same size as the 2001 Turaga sets and Turaga Dume, respectively), as well as their appearances in the BIONICLE movies. Of course, there's plenty of room for variation in Matoran and Turaga height, just as there's room for variation in Toa height. In the original 2001 sets, the Turaga had a wide range of sizes — Onewa was the tallest, at about 13 modules in height, and Whenua was the shortest, at about eight modules in height. The average height for all six Turaga was eleven modules.

Edited September 5, 2014 by Aanchir

[Kopekemaster]

I guess I like to think of them in the McToran:Mata size ratio. I liked the Matoran being almost child-sized compared to the Toa.

[Takhamavahu]

I wouldn't know where to find it in-story. probably Brothers in Arms or else Destiny War.
It might also have been an out-of-story Greg quote.

Edited September 6, 2014 by Takhamavahu

[Sharnak the Bohrok Lord]

I don't recall where, but I do remember reading that turaga were only slightly taller than matoran.

[Lielac]

I've always thought of Matoran as averaging a little less than half the height of Toa, or about 3'6". Not coincidentally at all, this is the average height of a hobbit. And it's movie-accurate, and I've always leaned towards the first three movies' designs when crafting mental images of characters.

 

Turaga, though, my mental image tends to fluctuate on. Vakama's a bit taller than Jaller in MoL (and he's slouching; bad Turaga, worst posture!), but I remember way back when I was 11 or 12 I took the average of Matoran's heights and Toa's and decided that was the height of Turaga: 1.2 bio, or a little less than 5'5". But now I think that's silly, and have revised my opinion to thinking they're somewhere between 0.8 and 1 bio.

[The Hip Historian Iaredios]

Ever seen Lord of the Rings (movies, not character)? Watch those and see the varied heights of the Hobbits in comparison to the various heights of Humans. The same can be said about most matoran in their size relative to Toa.

[Nidhiki of the Shadows]

I did actually like how it was in 2003 with the Matoran redesigns compared to the Toa Nuva, or the Av-Matoran compared to the Mistika/Phantoka. That seemed like a fair size difference. 

 

-NotS

[25K Now!]

I saw it as around a half the height of a Toa as well. It made sense to my mind.

[Master Inika]

i didnt care much for 04 or 08. 05 was definatly mmy favourite with the mctoran comming a close second

'05 had Rahaga, is that what you meant to write?

 

I consider 2004 the default in-universe template for Matoran and Turaga, although it's impossible to pin sizes down 100%. As mentioned before, sets like Axonn and Krekka were supposed to be huge, but were no taller than that year's Toa. I also consider the 2007 Matoran body type to be the default for areas other than Metru Nui, since the Pit Mutagen just undid Karzahni's alterations. They're roughly the same size as a Metru Nui Matoran anyway.

 

I also agree that 2004 was the worst year before 2008 in terms of Matoran design, ironically.