New GK Codex anytime soon?

[revnow]

I got called a powergamer this weekend for playing pure Daemonhunters, it was awesome. Some of our stuff doesn't work in 5E, but in general a solid knowledge of the rules means almost any Daemonhunter player can field a competetive list. There are even different varients that can be run, not a lot, and not nearly as many as most of the newer dexes, but there are multiple competetive DH armies (which is more than some dexes have right now).

[Skyhawk]

And they didn't help themselves with the new SW codex having the "old" capacities for land raiders and drop pods.

 

That's because the Wolves need a stash of dog food and puppy toys in every raider, and this limits the capacity.

That makes them stay focused during transit instead of jumping at each other to bite their ears off...

:)

 

As for the DH codex... For me it's the later the better. I'm really on a roll, reveling in the current Inquisitors, henchmen retinue modelling and Grey Knights with kick-ass rules.

[Inquisitor Gabriel Lupus]

I can kind of agree with Skyhawks sentiments, and also extend them to the Witch Hunters. After rereading the codicies and comparing them to other codicies/the main rules, I can see some really rather good builds - both fluffy and competitive. I used to find my Inquisitor very frustrating because, although I love the fluff and the background for my Inquisitor, on the table he really underperformed. With 5th ed however, this no longer seems to be the case, and my Inquisitor is seeing a return to the battlefield.

[Inquisitor Fox]

I concur the motion that the later the better. I haven't ran into any major difficulties playing my Witch Hunters, besides the confusion of my hellguns versus Imperial Guard Stormtroopers. Later gives me time to collect more Sisters of Battle, work on getting a squad or two of power armored Grey Knights, customize a second and third Inquisitor, perhaps even a fourth, buying arco-flagellants...

 

Yeah.. all the fringe stuff that I want to add to my collection needs time, especially as a father with three children time and money are harder to come by. :yes:

[Inquisitor Gabriel Lupus]

Hey, Inquisitor NicolePyykkonen - you're a Father with three children? Congratulations! (I'm a father with 5 kids and another due imminently! :lol: )

 

I would say though, an FAQ regarding some equipment (ie hellguns) would be nice just for a little standardisation within the Imperium. No big issue though is it? and after all, when you ally with/induct Imperial Guard, you can end up with a really quite up to date "Codex". I've been having lots of fun recently running an Inquisitor Lord and retinue as allies to my Imperial Guard - they act as kind of his personal army/requisitioned force.

[Inquisitor Fox]

@Inquisitor Gabriel: Thanks! This is the first one I've been present for the whole duration (the other two are technically stepchildren, but it makes no difference to me), and it's definately a different experience (though no less satisfying!). Good luck with your incoming!

 

Ironic that we all have an outdated army codex but there seems to be a decent number of us that don't care as we're not done playing with modeling opportunities yet ;) Interesting... I wonder if this is a trend for lots of armies, or just those of us enjoying the story opportunities of the Inquisition.

[Inquisitor Gabriel Lupus]

I certainly think it's the sign of a good codex that although the codex is "outdated", there is so much fluff, background and suggested modelling potential, that we are indeed so happy to stay with it. I think partly it may be due to the whole background of 40k in general, and the grim darkness of its gothic nature that is so inspiring - and the Inquisitors/Inquisition codicies allows you to really explore this. But regardless of the background etc, I think the rules still stand up relatively well. Ok some may need some sensible interpretation, but that's not a problem for the (generally) more mature people who collect/game with WH/DH.

 

@Inquisitor NicolePyykkonen - I also have a couple of stepchildren mixed in with the 5 - the eldest and 4th eldest are my wife's. They're all a blessing though... honestly ;) Small world isn't it!

[ArmouredWing]

I'd have to say that the best way to please everyone would be to run an annual update for the system which could include FAQ's, Errata and rules/points updates for the different codecies. Either that or include this in reprints of the codecies so that everyone has the opportunity of singing from the same hymsheet (like the old 'Chapter Approved' annuals)

 

I can see the rationale of GW's current policy however where it fails is to support the more dedicated gamers/customers who are left way, way behind the running pack using rules that were written by, in many cases, ex development staff. The consequence of this is that there is no longer an opportunity to clarify certain issues with the author and so we get conflicts where a rule has been left to be interpretted by someone who may not be familiar with that particular codex.

 

The other thing is if you take account of the fact that nids ARE next where is the commercial sense in banging out a new codex for these when there are several other armies that could do with (if not need) a little something for 5th ed. GW has often stated that their target audience is the 'youth' market. WD is a particularly good example of this since it's often been said that it's produced primarily for new players. If this is the general policy for GW then why spend the time and effort updating the codex and adding in new models/units when, by all accounts, the ground work (design) has been done by Jes Goodwin for DE? After all brand new players will tend to choose an army on the theme and look as appossed to the rules (a bit of a generalisation I know but from my experience also generally true).

[Gentlemanloser]

Well, I could have kind of swallowed the "We don't want people to have to go to our ite for a FAQ to use the Codex" line.

 

If I hadn't have opened up the new SW Codex and seen on the bottom of the first page a little gem about;

 

"Visit our web site for updates, FAQs, and atricles on the Space wolves. WWW.GW.Com"

 

(Paraphrased a little)

 

Seriosuly, they include the information to go to thier website for articles and updates in the Codexes themselves. It's absoultly no hardship to keep an up to date FAQ running. Which as mentioned above, you currently *need* anyway...

[morcus]

I do understand where there coming from as to dates on codexs, They learnt this with the third ed where chapter approved cntained official updates to the rules which meant there was alot of change to the rules that were hard to find and meant you could meet up for a game with someone and find you were both using slightly different rules.

 

anyone else think they should do a second magazine aimed at older players?

[templargdt]

No, I doubt that they make money on the magazine they have now. I've never actually seen one purchased at my LGS, and the owner his a full rack of them sitting there gathering dust. I think if GW really wanted a solid magazine they would have to provide content you can't get anywhere else.

 

Rumors? Every hint printed is on the internet instantly

Battle reports? There are a lot of 40K websites with batreps, youtube, people's blogs...

Modeling tips? This site has a great modeling section, I'm sure others do as well. All you need is a search engine to find one.

 

The only content that would actually get people to buy the magazine would be something like rules or a model, I think.

 

Good idea: use WD to update the codices yearly, make it offical IP so websites can't lift it. "March is Inquisition month: here's the official ruling on your GK force weapon..."

[The Holy Heretic]

Good idea: use WD to update the codices yearly, make it offical IP so websites can't lift it. "March is Inquisition month: here's the official ruling on your GK force weapon..."

 

Bad idea. Why?

 

Buy Codex A and then be forced to scour the web to find an obscure OOP magazine :P

 

Also, there is no satisfaction in buying a Codex only to find out that in order to play it, you need to download and print a bunch of errata to go with it. You want to be given a complete product in return for your money when you fork them over :P

[Hackbar]

I would love to White Dwarf conatin a major and regular FAQ/errata element, but I imagine it would be disappointing.

 

Having read the oficial FAQs and various codices, etc, I really get the feeling that, whether its being used as an excuse or is really their true feeling, GW tend to stick close to the 'you go and play however you want as long as your opponent consents' and 'always use the rules in your codex, regardless of what other codices or BRB say' lines. Their FAQs are posed entirely as 'these are house rules the developers use to settle vaguely written/conflicting rules, but feel free to ignore them and do it your way," and are sometimes written in 'soft' language when a more 'hard and fast' choice of words would have left less room for the disruptive kind of rules lawyering. Actual errata to the material written in the codices seem rare, especially in cases where rules in a codex are made completely meaningless by a new BRB or blatant and bizarre differences exist between what should be identical units or wargear across codices. (the second mostly affects imperial players, prime example being 5e SM storm shields vs the 4th and 3rd ed storm shields used by all the other codices except the new Space Wolves)

 

I have this sinking feeling that if enough people requested regular rules updates through WD, all we would get is more of the same, but delivered in the back pages if WD in addition to being posted to the website. Waste of GW's money, hence why I don't expect them do to it.

 

Now I think about it, though, they probably are afraid to mess up the internal balance of an existing codex just to bring some things in line with another codex. If they do that, they assume they might as well just re-do the whole codex for all the little adjustments they'll have to make, so they're better off waiting until they want to do a whole new codex anyway. (which will make them a lot more money for a similar amount of work.) Not sure I agree, but I imagine that's an argument that appeals to the bottom line.

[Gentlemanloser]

If they could do it for a 6 page spread (or how small it was) for the BA codex, they could do it for every Codex.

 

A NEw codex release would involve new/expanded fluff, new units and new minis.

 

Updating older codexes with 2+ pages of printed extra content is a lot less work. it's not like (if recent Codexes are anything to go by) GW uses stringent playtesting anyway.

 

No one I know buys WD anymore (it's a shame, My dad still has all his old issues, and they are by far a more interesting read), unless it's for the free snap fit mini. Add this stuff to a WD, and then to stop the obscurity problem, add it to the Webiste after.

 

Job done, and everyone satisfied.

[FM Ninja 048]

I SUBSCRIBE TO WHITE DWARF!!*

 

But seriously nobody want to have to buy a £4.50 magazine just to play their army correctly also GK need a new codex but it will be a while away, I'm GUESSING spring 2011 at the earliest but i would personally like to see a mixed =][= codex

 

 

*only for mini+pictures

[The Holy Heretic]

You're right about WD. When I first got into the whole 40K thing back in the Rogue Trader days, the magazine was filled with lots of funky stuff, like the prototype rules for Necromunda (they were horrid but fun), a funky card game for duelling with brettonian knights, WFRPG scenarios and lots of other fringe stuff to expand upon the universe - and of course army lists (which was needed, as they hadn't come up with the idea of the codices). Buying one now and its just a catalogue of toy soldiers and I don't need that, I need ideas on how to play with them ;)

 

One thing I'd love for GW to consider, was to give up on trying to make money on their rules - which is a subpar product - and focus on the minis - which are great :) Have the rules for individual armies available online, print an annual reference books for the armies and a separate for the core rules. Then focus their creative (and money-making) efforts on minis and the fluff - cause thats what they're good at. The current approach of releasing the game rules in small chunks (codices) is what frustrates their fanbase and unbalances the game.

[Chengar Qordath]

One thing I'd love for GW to consider, was to give up on trying to make money on their rules - which is a subpar product - and focus on the minis - which are great ;) Have the rules for individual armies available online, print an annual reference books for the armies and a separate for the core rules. Then focus their creative (and money-making) efforts on minis and the fluff - cause thats what they're good at. The current approach of releasing the game rules in small chunks (codices) is what frustrates their fanbase and unbalances the game.

I've thought the same thing more than once; GW makes far, far more money from the minis than they do from their codices after all, and keeping everyone's rules accessible and up to date would probably help their sales of minis by not leaving half of the armies weakened by codex creep.

[morcus]

WD has really been on the down for at least the last 5 years, they used to have alot more fluff, short stories and that kind of stuff and they used to a lot more articles about individuals models and armies.

 

I don't think you need content that can't be got anywhere else, and I also think they are capable of getting that kind of content anyway. TopGear Magazine was earlier this year (And probably still is) the UK's best selling mens mag and yet there is nothing in there you can't get anywhere else. On the other side of this, GW could quite easilly print alot more stuff from its own creative teams, its game designers, its authers it's sculptors, people they could prevent from doing stuff in other places.

 

Personally, I think WD needs to cover specialist games again, feature more fiction and fluff and have more regular articles following army builds and campaigns.

 

I don't think they should publish official rules changes in WD, for the reasons I gave before. A good example of problems this could cause are when the Terminator armour rules were changed in Chapter approved to give them an invunerable save, If you came in after that and thus didn't have that WD you wouldn't know and other players would have an unfair advantage.

[jakehunter52]

I can see the rationale of GW's current policy however where it fails is to support the more dedicated gamers/customers who are left way, way behind the running pack using rules that were written by, in many cases, ex development staff. The consequence of this is that there is no longer an opportunity to clarify certain issues with the author and so we get conflicts where a rule has been left to be interpretted by someone who may not be familiar with that particular codex.

 

Ok, first on the regular update thing. Impossible and totally unreasonable for several reasons. First and foremost is that the GW staff doesn't want to work on the same stuff forever. They are just as ADD as us with never being able to solely dedicate ourselves to one thing but consistently need new input. Give them a break for wanting to take one. Second, Phil Kelly had a point, albeit lame one. Imagine if you have to buy chapter approved every year in case they do change your storm shields? Then you would complain about the inverse, that codexes should be absolutely playable when bought, not needing consistent changes. And the financial implications of it too! Imagine the staff increases, the consistent editing and cross checks needed when any new book comes out. Inevitabily, when any changes to the status quo come, someone is going to win and someone will lose. GW does try to help out. I remember when choppas only gave you a 4+ save. And now look at orks. Almost a second flagship. And they have stated, "We are really bad with updating our FAQs. Sorry." Ultimately, it comes down to just getting the codex redone. But that is also a little harder than said as I explain below....

 

The other thing is if you take account of the fact that nids ARE next where is the commercial sense in banging out a new codex for these when there are several other armies that could do with (if not need) a little something for 5th ed. GW has often stated that their target audience is the 'youth' market. WD is a particularly good example of this since it's often been said that it's produced primarily for new players. If this is the general policy for GW then why spend the time and effort updating the codex and adding in new models/units when, by all accounts, the ground work (design) has been done by Jes Goodwin for DE? After all brand new players will tend to choose an army on the theme and look as appossed to the rules (a bit of a generalisation I know but from my experience also generally true).

 

Because horde armies sell lots of models. Seriously. Look at the recut sprue for basic guard troopers. An effective increase of $11. All so they will sell more Battleforce boxes (one of GW's lower blows to be sure). And I like WD now. Right about march or so, they have seriously gotten their act together. Sure, there are a lot of advirtisements but when it is 110+ pgs long, I think that's ok. And I think they do provide lots of additional fluff for armies (the Empire segment in US WD 353), provide some very different rules and ways to do games (Planetstrike US WD 355) and have amazing painting articles which made me buy the mag just for that (GD model US WD 352). You guys who say, "Yeah, cause back in the RT days....(insert random nostalgia here)" need to understand that GW is a different company now. It changed probably when they took LoTR on. They are bigger. They have shareholders. They come out with AMAZING PLASTICS (and compare that with 10 years ago) and supplements. They have well written rules that make sense and aren't so intimating to dissuade all but the most hardcore players. GW is no longer a bunch of guys doing crazy stuff for kicks. It is an organized business that provides products and services. You give and you take. And that is why you should be going to your FLGS or player group because THEY provide that. GW does not and will not. Best example I can give is BoLS, an excellent game group that has fun and can also be serious when it comes to rules. And while we play our homebrew, we can wait until the superior product gets it's finishing gild.

[Gentlemanloser]

But seriously nobody want to have to buy a £4.50 magazine just to play their army correctly

 

That's why you let the guys who purchase (or subscribe) to WD get it slightly early. Then you put it up on your website for free for everyone else.

[Inquisitor Gabriel Lupus]

I've enjoyed being in the GW hobby since the rogue trader days (and still do thoroughly enjoy it). I have to agree with Jakehunter52 completely - Games Workshop HAS alterred since the days of rogue trader - some things for the better (ALOT better) and some things (in my opinion) for the worse. But the fact is, They are a brilliant company, doing some incredible things, and producing some inspiring and amazing products. We may not agree with how they go about things, or even complain when they don't update or do something that we "want" them to update or do, but they have reasons they do things the way they do, and I for one am not going to criticise them for it - quite the converse, I applaud what they do.

 

Consider that, over the years, Games Workshop has provided us with incredible background, fluff, concepts, miniatures and tools. Add in to this the way they have inspired 3rd party groups to create amazing products (Dawn of War etc) - and on top of all this, they have provided us all with years (already or to come) of gaming/hobby fun - and there's still more years of this greatness to come.

 

Well done Games Workshop! Well done!!

[SamaNagol]

Codexes are more than rule books for me. They are sources of fantastic artowrk and background information which inspires me creatively.

 

I put it to Phil Kelly at Games Day that maybe a model of releasing an army book initially with a 'cd key' inside of it, and also making the full army book available online as a pdf with a key as well. You can therefor buy the hard copy book for £15 or the digital version for £8 and the key acts as a digital license which allows you to download the FAQed and Erratad update codex. These would be released on the same date every year for every army. That way people would know that day was 'army update day'. All they would have to do is put up some posters in store and banners on their website and in WD once a year. Drives people to the site. And it counts as the start of the new 'Season'.

 

That's really a very easily workable business model to achieve and it remains flexible between still selling physical copies and moving towards a more up to date digital format.

 

But Phil said they would never do that and 'people may as well just play computer games'. I was a bit disappointed at the lack of vision there, but never mind.

[morcus]

What they should of done is made a small book of updates and bundled it with the rule book with a little note that they were temperary rules until the new codexes were out.

 

I agree with the above about codexes being more than rule books, out of date codexes are still vary usefull for fluff and atwork and modelling.

[Justicar Valius]

And they didn't help themselves with the new SW codex having the "old" capacities for land raiders and drop pods.

 

That's because the Wolves need a stash of dog food and puppy toys in every raider, and this limits the capacity.

That makes them stay focused during transit instead of jumping at each other to bite their ears off...

:lol:

 

As for the DH codex... For me it's the later the better. I'm really on a roll, reveling in the current Inquisitors, henchmen retinue modelling and Grey Knights with kick-ass rules.

 

Well on the transport skyhawk is right. GK need holy shrines to the emperor in every raider as big as 2 power armoured guys so they feel comfortable...

 

duh! :o

[Morgan0775]

i think we are not in "need" of a new codex just plastic minis