Jump to content

Codex cover - spelling mistake?


Slinky

Recommended Posts

Odd that marine is dropping the White Dwarf in which the blood angels PDF was released.

Not really, because that's when and why the model was made.

 

You are correct, it is someone named David Gallagher.

Or as he's known to his friends, Daivicl "Thinhead" Galalageher.

this was the last nail of the coffin that just shut down my love of the codex.... (fluff part of it anyway) if even the cover art is defiled with such obscene stupidity then whats left of this codex? how can ANYONE take this pile of rubbish seriously?
I'm having real trouble understanding how a dodgy cover could be the turning point your opinion of the codex hinges upon. Surely if you dislike the rest of it- and I'm getting that impression- then even if the cover was a genuine Da Vinci then it wouldn't be salvagable; and conversely, if you liked the rest of it- and you don't- then Captain String Bean and his Sangiunininy cloak wouldn't disgust you that much. What am I missing?
Odd that marine is dropping the White Dwarf in which the blood angels PDF was released.

Not really, because that's when and why the model was made.

 

That was my point. Someone just changed the caption. Laziness. If someone really hates the new 'dex that much they should make a proper model for it.

 

No one talks about it, but the real reason that marine is sad is because his player took his jump pack away and put him in razorback. ^_^

I'm having real trouble understanding how a dodgy cover could be the turning point your opinion of the codex hinges upon. Surely if you dislike the rest of it- and I'm getting that impression- then even if the cover was a genuine Da Vinci then it wouldn't be salvagable; and conversely, if you liked the rest of it- and you don't- then Captain String Bean and his Sangiunininy cloak wouldn't disgust you that much. What am I missing?

well when stuff like marines hugging necrons and the like is in the codex, the sudden implement of a 10000 year old part of the chapter that "was always there" and the like kinda irked me. then the people who made the cover art show that they cant even ****ing spell Sanguinius right? what went through GW's mind when they set these people on our codex?

 

every codex gets new dodgy new units that "were always there" so il give them that. but some of the fluff is just downright weird and the cover art looks like a 10 year old did it....the mispelling of our primarch's name just proves just further :)

When he walked into GW headquarters to turn in this cover artwork, they should have done what all adults do when presented with artwork drawn by a 10 year old. They should have taken a magnet and placed it on the fridge in the GW employee breakroom.

 

"We're so proud of you David! Way to go son!"

I'm having real trouble understanding how a dodgy cover could be the turning point your opinion of the codex hinges upon. Surely if you dislike the rest of it- and I'm getting that impression- then even if the cover was a genuine Da Vinci then it wouldn't be salvagable; and conversely, if you liked the rest of it- and you don't- then Captain String Bean and his Sangiunininy cloak wouldn't disgust you that much. What am I missing?

well when stuff like marines hugging necrons and the like is in the codex, the sudden implement of a 10000 year old part of the chapter that "was always there" and the like kinda irked me. then the people who made the cover art show that they cant even ****ing spell Sanguinius right? what went through GW's mind when they set these people on our codex?

 

every codex gets new dodgy new units that "were always there" so il give them that. but some of the fluff is just downright weird and the cover art looks like a 10 year old did it....the mispelling of our primarch's name just proves just further ;)

 

I can agrre with you about the necron love....that sounds wrong! And I agree that the background in the recent warhammer codexi has been pretty childish and "my supermen are better than you're supermen" (oh how I long to the grim dark decay of 3rd ed) but disliking the inclussion of sanguinary guard is kinda odd, I think I would prefer the retcon inclussion of a order within the BA's over the "never quite reaching M42 but keep discovering/coming up with new stuff" style fluff.

Fun Fact:

 

Sanguinnes was his real name and true legion colors were black and white.

 

Perhaps this is true but it would be a whole lot better if you could back this up with some type of evidence. ie. Codex, BBB, White Dwarf, Index Astartes etc. As is this remains a bit suspect and totally unsupported. Please be kind enough to supply details.

Fun Fact:

 

Sanguinnes was his real name and true legion colors were black and white.

 

Perhaps this is true but it would be a whole lot better if you could back this up with some type of evidence. ie. Codex, BBB, White Dwarf, Index Astartes etc. As is this remains a bit suspect and totally unsupported. Please be kind enough to supply details.

 

I, too, would be interested in seeing a reference. I've been playing Blood Angels since the closing days of Rogue Trader (back when the paint scheme for BAs used terracotta as the base color) and I have never heard of this... :D

Bwahaha taking the piss.. SanGuinnes.. black and white.. Awesome.

 

Tho I suspect some would be to young to get it. Like some are to involved in everything to understand that my "mat ward" post was a joke and nothing more. I KNOW he has nothing to do with the art but he gets blamed for everything else why not the art as well?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.