PDA

View Full Version : Who is your favorite GW codex writer?



40kdhs
29-03-2009, 23:19
Some of you have owned many codexes in the last few years and I would like to know who is your favorite codex writer in term of writing a good codex. I don't have a favorite one because I only own a DH codex. Of course, i'm not happy about the quality of this codex.

Thank you for sharing.

SimonL
29-03-2009, 23:35
DH and WH are two of my favorites, tons of flavour.

Khornies & milk
29-03-2009, 23:51
Some of you have owned many codexes in the last few years and I would like to know who is your favorite codex writer in term of writing a good codex. I don't have a favorite one because I only own a DH codex. Of course, i'm not happy about the quality of this codex.

Thank you for sharing.

The DH Codex, when it was released, was very well done. Sure it's aged
( and not well) but that's not the fault of the Writer. It was written by 3 of the GW Heavyweights, and some of them also did the WH one as well. Plenty of Fluff in both.

I don't have a favourite really but I'm sure they all tried to do their best.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
30-03-2009, 00:30
Codex: Orks is fun. Rest ... not really ...

Hellebore
30-03-2009, 01:22
Rick Priestley. Hence why 2nd ed codicies are so awesome.

Hellebore

TimLeeson
30-03-2009, 01:52
I've bought every single one since 2nd ed and I find them all pretty boring and dull tbh, except for the Necron and Daemons dexes.

starlight
30-03-2009, 01:59
Owning most since the start of 3rd Ed and many 2nd Ed (and many WFB from the same period), I'll have to say no specific favourite. Until the recent Marine book, I was thinking they were headed in the right direction... The Ork book was the best in some time, but then... :(


Sadly I don't even think GW knows which direction it's headed in any more...:(

SimonL
30-03-2009, 02:06
I've bought every single one since 2nd ed and I find them all pretty boring and dull tbh, except for the Necron and Daemons dexes.


Ironic, considering those are the most one-dimensional races ('cept maybe Tyranids) :D

Dexter099
30-03-2009, 02:15
Phil Kelly, maybe. Not really sure, though.

Alessander
30-03-2009, 02:33
Rick Priestly.

Xandros
30-03-2009, 05:01
They're all pretty good.

Ianos
30-03-2009, 06:31
Phill is my man!

Solar_Eclipse
30-03-2009, 06:47
Right now...Robin Cruddace :P :D

Industrial Propaganda
30-03-2009, 08:36
Andy Chambers and Rick Priestly.

PaddyF
30-03-2009, 08:53
Rick Priestley. Hence why 2nd ed codicies are so awesome.

2nd Edition Chaos Codex mmmmmm fluffly

Ganymene
30-03-2009, 09:03
The Xenos specialist, Phil Kelly.

Neilza
30-03-2009, 09:07
rick priestley

Colonial Rifle
30-03-2009, 09:24
Andy Chambers, Andy Hoare & Rick Priestley I have few complaints with.

Phil Kelly - great on fluff, but his books always have 1 or 2 outrageously broken units. Overall, good.

Graham McNeil - once you get past the blatant IW favouritism, he wasn't *that* bad. His lists at least tried to match-up with the fluff. I actually miss him now!

Robin Cruddance - who knows, although 40pt Ogryns & 16pt ST don't bode well.

Matt Ward - Well C:SM is ok. Stuff is a bit too cheap, but nowhere near the disaster of his Fantasy deamon list.

Jervis - In Epic, he's great. WH40K - just ok. Bland books & lists.

Alessio - oh dear.....

Gav - oh dear x 1000

The_Outsider
30-03-2009, 13:48
Without Phil Kelly 40k would be either marines versus marines ALL DAY EVERYDAY or just gimped xenos versus marines (who are duelling other marines at the time ALL DAY EVERYDAY).

Insane Psychopath
30-03-2009, 14:05
For me I like

Phil Kelly (current codex Ork I found he done a great job, no bad unit it all about what you want to take & how it work overall with your army, also it because of his WFB Chaos (mortal) I sort of got back into WFB also the new plastic models help a bit haha)
Andy Chamber
Pete Haines
Graham McNeill (good friend of mine)

The new Imperial Guard codex shape up to be really nice.. For the new games dev (sorry forgot his name doh!!!) I really like the codex guard from what I have read so far. Can't wait to convert up Penal Legion & bring my Guard force back out I bought last year when I use to be a staffer :D

I also like a lot of the 2nd Ed codex purely for the background & in term of the Chaos once it had a lot of nice conversion & the John Blanch drawing (background comment mainly because I never really played 2nd Ed, 3rd Ed came out a few month after I started the hobby & I was mainly a WFB player back then).
Somthing the current codex chaos miss out on with the conversion & John Blanch art work. As you have a lot of cool converted armies in Nottingham HQ like Christain Bryn Black Legion for exsample, these would have been good to include in the current codex chaos much like they did in the 2nd ed/3rd Ed chaos codexies.
It because of the cool 2nd Ed codex chaos that I became a solid chaos player (Iron Warriors) as I like the convertsion mainly & still to this day enjoy useing the in games.


IP

Lord Damocles
30-03-2009, 14:38
Anyone who's not Pete Haines (Iron Warrios -shudder-), or Jervis Johnson (gimped Marines).

the1stpip
30-03-2009, 15:32
Definitely (I spelt it right) Phil Kelly.

He did a great job with Orks (ok maybe Nob Bikrs fell through the hole) and Eldar were solid (again, maybe one or two power units), and now he's writing Dark Eldar, so I am expecting great things.

Gorgrim
30-03-2009, 15:34
None, as they all have problems, but Jervis would be the best of the lot.

Grazzy
30-03-2009, 16:35
Probably Phil Kelly, as Orks is my idea of what a great codex is (although without nob bikers).

I do like my DH codex too.

Lord Damocles
30-03-2009, 16:38
Jervis would be the best of the lot.
Would that be the same Jervis who wrote Codex: Dark Eldar, and ommitted to include vehicle upgrades?

Or is it the Jervis who wrote Codex: Blood Angels and didn't include stats for all of the weapons?


Yeah, I don't think very highly of Jervis Johnson -wanders off muttering something about Standard Bearer-

Thud
30-03-2009, 16:55
Phil Kelly and Andy Chambers.

40kdhs
30-03-2009, 17:45
Definitely (I spelt it right) Phil Kelly.

He did a great job with Orks (ok maybe Nob Bikrs fell through the hole) and Eldar were solid (again, maybe one or two power units), and now he's writing Dark Eldar, so I am expecting great things.

Is he also writing DH/GK codex?

souljaking09
30-03-2009, 17:56
Dr. Seuss ;)

Captain Micha
30-03-2009, 17:59
Phil Kelly. Every army he touches is very strong and flexible. I wish he was writing the Guard Codex.

Though he messed up something terrible with Orks. I'm not sure how to bring them down -at all- with my Guard at this point. I just can't kill enough of them. And that's with Two Demolishers pouring Ordnance into a 30 boy squad.

Seriously.. Fearless? WTF. Couple that with Turn 2 Assault GG Army.

Sttucker13
30-03-2009, 18:07
Phil Kelly. Every army he touches is very strong and flexible. I wish he was writing the Guard Codex.

Though he messed up something terrible with Orks. I'm not sure how to bring them down -at all- with my Guard at this point. I just can't kill enough of them. And that's with Two Demolishers pouring Ordnance into a 30 boy squad.

Seriously.. Fearless? WTF. Couple that with Turn 2 Assault GG Army.

Build a longer table and include a solid band of impassible terrain in the middle.

sabreu
30-03-2009, 18:12
Seriously.. Fearless? WTF. Couple that with Turn 2 Assault GG Army.

How is fearless that much different from the old rules where they would never run anyway (and could potentially mob up with other units instead of booking it)? :eyebrows:

Not trying to be snarky, to clarify, just curious!

Captain Micha
30-03-2009, 18:12
got impassable terrain.. all that does is keep me from having the ability to draw a bead on them so they get to come around safe from most of my army's wrath on two sides.

We play on the standard game table size.

in the old rules Orks had nothing else going for them. Now they have so much other good stuff.

Also there isn't the thing I hate the most. Run wasn't in the old 4e rules.

Run.... I freaking hate Run. Run is probably what really puts them over the top. I don't know what Gw was thinking when they put it in the game. Other than "HUR HUR HUR KILL GUARD HUR HUR HUR HUR"

sabreu
30-03-2009, 18:17
There definitely is a problem when infantry can move as fast as tanks in my book.

Captain Micha
30-03-2009, 18:23
I honestly think thanks to Run being in the game Shooting should follow a similar morale system to CC. Fearless units make a LD test or take extra wounds = to how many wounds they were dealt in the shooting phase.

You shouldn't be sitting there with an army infamous for not having any CC ability what so ever going "Why did I ever field today". If they want the game to be CC heavy so much they should have just removed the Shooting phase and be done with it.

sabreu
30-03-2009, 18:31
There should be some sort of modifiers. It just doesn't seem right as is, that's for sure. In fact, I kinda agree to your idea micha!

Awilla the Hun
30-03-2009, 18:38
Whoever wrote the last Imperial Guard Codex, of course. DOCTRINES! It wasn't their (I just found out it was a group of many, many people) fault that they decided to upgrade everything else all those months and years later.

I don't like McNeill (who said that Ultramarines are the heart and soul of the 40k universe-I quite like them myself, as long as they weren't overblown. Which they now are. And his Empire Army Book...)

And anyone who is so incompetent as to forget to put rules into books deserves a good kicking.

infernus31
30-03-2009, 19:13
Gotta say Mr Kelly is probably my favourite, I enjoyed Nids, Eldar and Orks, theres fun lists and competitive lists in all three books, and all are quite fun and made 40K not be so MEQ meta gaming as it was .

I hope Mr cruddace does well with the Guard book though.

Starchild
30-03-2009, 19:21
In the rules + balance category, I vote Phil Kelly.

In the background + fluff category, I vote Gav Thorpe (despite his flaying of Rick Priestley's brilliant Eldar background, he did write the best 40k fluff IMO: Codex Sisters of Battle.)

PapaDoc
30-03-2009, 19:38
I honestly think thanks to Run being in the game Shooting should follow a similar morale system to CC. Fearless units make a LD test or take extra wounds = to how many wounds they were dealt in the shooting phase.

You shouldn't be sitting there with an army infamous for not having any CC ability what so ever going "Why did I ever field today". If they want the game to be CC heavy so much they should have just removed the Shooting phase and be done with it.

Ah, the age old 40k whine. shooty players want to be able to kill the enemy before they get close. Melee players want to be able to assault first turn.

Oh yeah and Phil Kelly. In his codex most units are playable.

Doomseer
30-03-2009, 19:40
It's definitely not Jervis Johnson!!:mad:

I would say Phil Kelly, I like his approach.

Captain Micha
30-03-2009, 19:41
Ah, the age old 40k whine. shooty players want to be able to kill the enemy before they get close. Melee players want to be able to assault first turn.

It should be -turn three- before assault happens. There's a reason you can't Assault with Termies after you DS them. It's called Balance.

Even as an Assault Army Player (I play Double Wraith and Scarabs with my Crons), I think this is cheap and broken getting turn 2 assaults, guaranteed. (Turn 1 depending on the board set up)

GeneralDisaster
30-03-2009, 19:44
Rick Priestly. He was in charge of RT and therefore he is the ultimate crafter of fluff.

Argument over.

starlight
30-03-2009, 20:44
Yeah...riiiiiiight.... :rolleyes:


The background has changed so much since RT that most of what Priestly wrote has been replaced...or are Marines still convicts, and Ultramarines still Second Founding, Eldar all still pirates, and what about those Squats...? :eyebrows:

Insane Psychopath
30-03-2009, 21:44
Yeah...riiiiiiight.... :rolleyes:


The background has changed so much since RT that most of what Priestly wrote has been replaced...or are Marines still convicts, and Ultramarines still Second Founding, Eldar all still pirates, and what about those Squats...? :eyebrows:

Let not forget about Ultramarine Chief Librarian Tigurius being half eldar from the RT days ;)

Still got to read my RT book I got for free a while ago.

IP

The_Outsider
30-03-2009, 22:09
It should be -turn three- before assault happens. There's a reason you can't Assault with Termies after you DS them. It's called Balance.

Even as an Assault Army Player (I play Double Wraith and Scarabs with my Crons), I think this is cheap and broken getting turn 2 assaults, guaranteed. (Turn 1 depending on the board set up)

So you enjoy letting T3 4+ (or 5+ models) like eldar that do not come in the numbers of orks or nids walk into a gunline?

starlight
30-03-2009, 22:17
Let's keep this On Topic - Codex Writers. :)

Discussion of various races, rules, etc can take place in their own Forums...

starlight

LonelyPath
30-03-2009, 22:24
Andy Chambers and Rick Priestly.

Seconded, though I must also add Phill Kelly to the mix.

Toe Cutter
31-03-2009, 00:22
Would that be the same Jervis who wrote Codex: Dark Eldar, and ommitted to include vehicle upgrades?

Or is it the Jervis who wrote Codex: Blood Angels and didn't include stats for all of the weapons?


Yeah, I don't think very highly of Jervis Johnson -wanders off muttering something about Standard Bearer-

As a general rule I despise acronyms but QFT.

Wanders off to start a thread about standard bearer.

Dio´Ra
31-03-2009, 00:59
Will go with Phil Kelly, Andy Chambers....and the first to say I liked one army book of Alessio Cavatore...being skaven...but I agree he doesn't belongs in writing codexes for 40k...

Rick Priestly is great overall just for being the old guy of the bunch :D

Don't like Mcneill or Jervis Johnson....I could say that I despise Jervis Johnson....but thats mostly these days because of the standard bearer in WD and that WD is crap nowadays....miss so much Chapter approved by Andy! and Index Astartes were always great fluff articles *sigh*...

MasterPuppets
31-03-2009, 04:42
The bloke who wrote the previous edition of Empire, can't remember, was it Priestly, as well as Gav Thorpe for his Dark elves army book.

On a side note who did the front cover art for the 2009 edition for the IG Codex, it is the same style as the newish edition of Empire and the bloke is dead set bollux.
Kopinski did the greatest Codex cover, the Cadian box set painting.

chrismp_123
31-03-2009, 06:49
My vote is for the DH and for some reason I do enjoy the Tau codex.

the1stpip
31-03-2009, 07:28
Jervis tends to write nice, fluffy books, but which don't stand up to the rigours of gaming.

Alessio says screw balance, I'm a tournie player (he got into GW by winning the Italian GT).

Phil tends to write fun codexes that can have that tournie edge if you so desire.

Colonial Rifle
31-03-2009, 14:02
Alessio books in fantasy tended to over compensate for the armies weaknesses (i.e Skaven with access to high leadership and brettonians that can't be shot). This left a lot of his books broken. In 40k, he has (unfortunately) taken over Gav's mantle of packing in redundant units (i.e beasts of nurgle in the daemon list).

Jervis has now gone mad. His standard bearer columns are proof enough.

Captain Micha
31-03-2009, 14:13
So you enjoy letting T3 4+ (or 5+ models) like eldar that do not come in the numbers of orks or nids walk into a gunline?

If Eldar are -walking- anywhere that Eldar Player deserves what they get quite frankly.

Fitzbaron
31-03-2009, 14:22
Dis-liked the Gav Thorpe lists. We use to say that his writing and testing routine went like this.

Gav: Got an idea for a new Codex.
(Explains to Boss)
Boss: Gav, I think you might have a balance issue, can you play test it?
Gav: (shouting) To Late, gone to print.
(Gav Thorpe skips away down the street)

zealot!
31-03-2009, 17:06
i like all the new stuff since eldar. 5th ed codexes rock socks

40kdhs
31-03-2009, 18:27
Why does a writer write better than others when they work for the same company and know the guidelines? You would think that a codex is very good when you have big 3 writers do it but it's not always the case. DH is a good example.

Dio´Ra
31-03-2009, 18:41
Why does a writer write better than others when they work for the same company and know the guidelines? You would think that a codex is very good when you have big 3 writers do it but it's not always the case. DH is a good example.

very simple....the people who write the codexes play the game....and they have their own bias....usualy the army codexes which they write they play themselves....so I bet sometimes they make stuff undercosted, OP etc on purpose for their own good....