PDA

View Full Version : What's the best codex ever written?



Casper Hawser
21-03-2011, 22:26
With all the hate directed towards a few recent codex's, whats the best codex ever written?
Ive only been into the hobby for a few years and ive got no problem with any of the 5th edition codex's ive read fluff or rule wise. Obviously i have not seen the changes made to peoples beloved armies other the years my only experiance was the little WD codex for the Blood Angels changing to a proper book there wasn't anything that made me feel like i would have to change my army just lots of new units that i could add.
But with all the hate i wonder if other editions of codex's have been that much better.

Brotheroracle
21-03-2011, 22:31
Chaos dex 3.5. Best Codex ever in terms of the amount of Legion Fluff and abilities.

hellhammer6
21-03-2011, 22:31
Orcs.

It can compete with any other codex (even Spacewolves)
and yet is not an overpowered "autowin" vs anything.

Blink
21-03-2011, 22:31
5th Dark Eldar gets my vote. The sheer amount of love put into it is apparent.

Still Standing
21-03-2011, 22:31
Not quite a Codex, I guess, but Slaves to Darkness and the Lost and the Damned were awesome books. As was Codex: Sisters of Battle.

The Rogue Trader books (Slaves to Darkness, Lost and the Damned, Waaaagh Da Orks, Freebooters etc) were amazing, best GW ever put out. 2nd Ed books were brilliant too. 3rd Ed books sucked massively, as they had no background section (generally speaking). 4th Ed onwards the books are getting better again.

Soupcat
21-03-2011, 22:33
5th Ed Dark Eldar, awesome fluff, awesome rules

Venkh
21-03-2011, 22:34
The current Ork Dex is awesome. Characterful, powerful, full of good fluff.

The Dark Eldar dex is pretty good as well. Loads of builds to explore. I reckon It will be a couple more years before i get to the end of trying them out.

Askari
21-03-2011, 22:34
Chaos 3.5

It got me into 40k. That speaks enough for me.

TheLaughingGod
21-03-2011, 22:34
2nd Edition Eldar. Period.

If you're talking current edition though, Dark Eldar.

Long_Fang
21-03-2011, 22:35
Dark Eldar also gets my vote. The background elaboration, the character development, and army expansion was pleasantly surprising.

I bought the book and don't play Dark Eldar, but I really enjoyed reading it.

Bunnahabhain
21-03-2011, 22:35
The Codex Imperialis.

For those who don't know, it's the second ed book that came in the box set that gave an introduction to every army in the game. Plus the background in it is better than 95% of that written now.

Harold Zoid
21-03-2011, 22:37
Orks. And I don't even play them.

bork da basher
21-03-2011, 22:40
currently codex dark eldar. that codex gave me hope for 40k. they hit it right on the money fluff wise and rules wise i have little to complain about.

old school the lost and damned slaves to darkness simply because of the fluff and artwork. beautiful books.

ghost21
21-03-2011, 22:40
orks second ed

marv335
21-03-2011, 22:42
Of the current crop?
I'd say Dark Eldar.
Nice rules, decent fluff, good artwork, great internal balance.
2nd place goes to Orks.
Worst? Space Wolves or Blood Angels.
Wolfy McWolf on his giant wolf wearing wolf armour and a wolf cloak with his wolf claws.
Someone needs flogging. BA is just as bad.

Dronevil
21-03-2011, 22:52
The Codex Imperialis.

For those who don't know, it's the second ed book that came in the box set that gave an introduction to every army in the game. Plus the background in it is better than 95% of that written now.


That still had Squats in too didn't it?

ghost21
21-03-2011, 22:52
Of the current crop?
I'd say Dark Eldar.
Nice rules, decent fluff, good artwork, great internal balance.
2nd place goes to Orks.
Worst? Space Wolves or Blood Angels.
Wolfy McWolf on his giant wolf wearing wolf armour and a wolf cloak with his wolf claws.
Someone needs flogging. BA is just as bad.

lol wolfy mcwolf i love that every time i see him now it will be that 3rd ed codexies were terrible, no fluff

Grimtuff
21-03-2011, 22:55
Worst? Space Wolves or Blood Angels.
Wolfy McWolf on his giant wolf wearing wolf armour and a wolf cloak with his wolf claws.
Someone needs flogging. BA is just as bad.

Everyone really needs to get over this. If you read the rest of the SW dex and not just Canis' entry you can see it is a well written codex overall with a lot of the old, better, fluff kept in. None of this OVAR 9000! Ward crap.

On which note, i'll let you have the BA one. ;)

jack da greenskin
21-03-2011, 22:55
IA8 :)

It's brilliant for anyone who loves orks.

DuskRaider
21-03-2011, 22:57
Best codex of all? Chaos 3.5, without a doubt. The mix of options, plethora of background, and writers who actually cared about the army. Current? Dark Eldar codex. Perfectly balanced, great fluff, made for the fans. Love it.

Slashattack
21-03-2011, 22:58
3.5 Editon Chaos.

You could never get bored with that book. There were just so many different builds, and options. Plus the characters were so customisable.

Grimtuff
21-03-2011, 22:58
Best codex of all? Chaos 3.5, without a doubt. The mix of options, plethora of background, and writers who actually cared about the army.

The rules (or rather the plethora of stealth updates) left a little to be desired though, IIRC by the end there was about 4 different printings of the 3.5 CSM dex, all with subtly different rules for things.

DuskRaider
21-03-2011, 23:02
The rules (or rather the plethora of stealth updates) left a little to be desired though, IIRC by the end there was about 4 different printings of the 3.5 CSM dex, all with subtly different rules for things.

Yeah, they did tweak it a lot, which they should have just released in FAQs or in WD... The thing that gets me angry the most about it is when people moan there were only two or three builds in the codex... NO. There were MANY builds in that codex, I blame the internet and WAAC players for shoving their uber builds down people's throats and convincing everyone that fluff lists are lame. THAT has been what's killing this hobby. You know, along with the "Matt Ward Codex of the Month".

Sarevok
21-03-2011, 23:06
no love for 2nd edition Chaos?

Inquisitor Gabriel Ashe
21-03-2011, 23:08
5th Edition Grey Knights. Easily.

Bestaltan
21-03-2011, 23:13
4th edition Orks. Why? Go read in the warboss entry why he can't take mega armor and a bike. :D

Mannimarco
21-03-2011, 23:13
IA 5, 6 and 7

Wanna see just how insidious Chaos is?
Wanna see how even a pure and devout cardinal can fall?
Wanna see GK getting chopped up?
Wanna see mary sue moments that would make Ward cringe?
Wanna play a real LATD army and not Straken the CSM or MechMeltaVets as blood pact?

That series got you covered.

owen matthew
21-03-2011, 23:14
3.5 chaos, without a doubt for me as well. Even with its very small problems. Nearly perfect, hard to get tired of, fluffy and competative all at once.

sayles78
21-03-2011, 23:16
I've gotta add my voice to the 3.5ed chaos choir. Damn good fluff and awesome rules. In that dex, you really had the options available to you to make an army, squad or character feel like he was yours. The new chaos dex is an absolute insult to the 3.5 one.

I've also got a lot of love for the 2nd ed Angels of Death codex. Worthy of a mention...

Lastie
21-03-2011, 23:17
3.5 Chaos beyond a doubt. It wasn't so much an add-on to a game than something that could quite easily be an entire game in it's own right. It was a Codex that kept giving me new combinations and tactics every time I looked at it, for over four years of playing.

Also the only Codex I've ever bought twice, just for the errata.

totgeboren
21-03-2011, 23:19
The Codex Imperialis.

For those who don't know, it's the second ed book that came in the box set that gave an introduction to every army in the game. Plus the background in it is better than 95% of that written now.

Not really a codex, but I agree, one of the best GW publications ever. I have never enjoyed 40k as much as when the 3.5 Chaos dex was in use. It had it's broken powerbuilds, but as long as you stayed clear of those, it was awesome. The only thing I really did dislike was that Bloodletters had a 3+/5++ save. Incredibly strange, since the models had loincloths, and Bloodletters have never worn any armour...

sayles78
21-03-2011, 23:22
4th edition Orks. Why? Go read in the warboss entry why he can't take mega armor and a bike. :D

Cos he might fall off a lot! Ork codexes have always been class for poking fun at themselves.

I liked the 2nd ed ork dex. There was a bionic leg in there that attacked at such a strength, did so many wounds and knocked victim back so many inches (can't remember exactly)... Anyway, one battle, some knob kicked my blood angels big boss chaplain over a hedge and smack into a wall. Killed him dead! Proper quality - we've talked about that for all these years! Still comes up every now n then.

Nym
21-03-2011, 23:24
3.5 chaos 'dex... minus Iron Warriors.

minionboy
21-03-2011, 23:37
The Codex Imperialis.

This! Electropriests will make your eyes explode with awe.

Second to that would be 2nd ed Chaos, or 2nd ed Tyranids. Both full of great rules, terrific fluff, and even rules for offshoot armies like chaos cults and genestealer cults.

If you're talking newer stuff, it will have to be Dark Eldar hands down. Good story, great art, a pleasure to read and very interesting and balanced rules.

daboarder
21-03-2011, 23:40
Another for 3.5 chaos, I loved being able to rock a deamon prince in terminator armour. and I'd kill men to get my cult terminators back.

DivineVisitor
21-03-2011, 23:54
Gotta be this! Though 3.5 was awesome as well got a real taste for my Alpha Legion then.

JagdWehrwolf
21-03-2011, 23:57
The Lost and the Damned, Slaves to Darkness and Codex: Chaos Space Marines 3.5 for never ending inspiration to corrupt, enslave, infect and slaughter (in any order).

Jack of Blades
22-03-2011, 00:00
Minimalism is a ****** concept. Why did they make CSM 4.0?

BigbyWolf
22-03-2011, 00:01
Bear in mind that I haven't played 40K in years, but the 2nd edition Eldar codex was great. It had everything, from the legions of special abilities you could give your characters, a full Harlequin army list. It also had rules for Exodite Dragon Knights (Basic Knights, and 2 or 3 levels of character).

It was also a lot bigger than any current codex and was packed full of artwork and background.

Okuto
22-03-2011, 00:07
3.5 chaos codex for the zeal put in each page, 4th edition dark eldar for the utter balance and fluff

Bubble Ghost
22-03-2011, 00:08
2nd edition Chaos was nothing special, really (amazing hobby sections excepted), unless you equate quantity with quality. The 3.5 book was a lot more interesting.

My favourites ever were probably the 2nd edition Ork and Eldar books. Special honours to the first Necron and Tau for books for being new races and actually interesting. Compare: 3e Dark Eldar.

But in all honesty, there's no 40K codex I've ever seen that has come close to the later 6th edition WFB books.

Vaktathi
22-03-2011, 00:08
In terms of producing balanced, fluffy, capable & competitive armies without being broken but still making almost everything worth taking?

Dark Eldar 5E followed by 2008 Orks (not quite as much as it used to, but still very much up there I think).




In terms of coolest background, armies having the appropriate options to reflect that background, and tons of variety?

Chaos Space Marines 3.5E (though yes, could be very broken as well)



I'd like to put the current IG book up in here somewhere also. It's got a ton of units and variety. All sorts of cool stuff. That said, it also suffers from some very noticeable poor internal balance, though the sheer number of units and options helps balance that out in at least some ways.


As for the worst? 2E Eldar in terms of metagame balance (practically an auto-win army). With regards to fluff? CSM 4.0/C:SM 5E/C:BA 5E/C:SW 5E/C:GK 5E. Worst in terms of consistently bad/mediocre books for the longest period of time? Imperial Guard (until 2009). Worst in terms of internal balance? CSM 4E and Tau Empire.

GrogDaTyrant
22-03-2011, 00:09
My vote's for 3.5 Chaos. Haven't had a good read through of the 2nd ed Chaos book, but if I find it I might change my mind.

4th ed Ork codex is nowhere near my top 3. I think *most* Ork players would not vote for it, largely due to the morale issues on units like MANz, reduction in options for units, silly 0-1 'Ard Boyz restriction, and Looted Wagons. Indeed... I seem to recall a recent thread on a much more green-minded board where the majority consensus preferred the 3rd ed collection of codices and clan listings. :shifty:

Stilton
22-03-2011, 00:11
Overall, Chaos Space Marines 3.5. It's everything a Chaos player could wish for, and more, unlike the soulless abomination that is Chaos Space Marines 4th.

In terms of prettiness, however, I'd say it's a tie between Eldar 2nd and Chaos Daemons 4th. John Blanche is a genius. He should do every single piece of art in every single GW publication ever.

UberBeast
22-03-2011, 00:18
Current orks and DE books are brilliant.

samiens
22-03-2011, 00:19
As a chaos player, I could live without the fanboi 3.5 ed codex and thought 2nd ed was better.

Although not my favourite army I'll go with Necrons- I read it on a train because a friend of mine was playing them and had to collect them after that journey- it was a really great insight into how much a new(ish) race can bring and it had such a different feel.

Sgt John Keel
22-03-2011, 00:20
Best codex of all? Chaos 3.5, without a doubt. The mix of options, plethora of background, and writers who actually cared about the army. Current? Dark Eldar codex. Perfectly balanced, great fluff, made for the fans. Love it.

Pretty much this. The only thing I dislike about the Chaos 3.5 Codex is the lacking miniatures section, but the sheer volume of written content and the diversity of the rules more than make up for it.

Bold_or_Stupid
22-03-2011, 00:23
While I love the 2e Space Wolves (though the WD RT article was better). I still have a love for the original Waaargh the Orks and it's companion volumes.

Mojaco
22-03-2011, 00:28
The best codex needs to be both a celebration of the hobby and a great set of rules. Chaos 3.5 was the first, but never the second. Because of that I can't have it win from current Orks or Dark Eldar, both by Phil in top shape.

GrogDaTyrant
22-03-2011, 00:29
...unlike the soulless abomination that is Chaos Space Marines 4th.


IMHO, anything after the halfway mark of 4th ed got treated to a 'soulless abomination' codex.

big squig
22-03-2011, 00:30
Orks. Easy to read, super simple, tons of variety and play styles, minimal special rules, mostly uses USRs. Best of all you can make every single clan with no need for extra rules.

big squig
22-03-2011, 00:35
4th ed Ork codex is nowhere near my top 3. I think *most* Ork players would not vote for it, largely due to the morale issues on units like MANz, reduction in options for units, silly 0-1 'Ard Boyz restriction, and Looted Wagons. Indeed... I seem to recall a recent thread on a much more green-minded board where the majority consensus preferred the 3rd ed collection of codices and clan listings. :shifty:

I'm an ork player and while I agree all of those are issues, its still the best codex GW has ever produced. It should be the model for ALL codexes.

Doppleskanger
22-03-2011, 00:43
Yeah reading Chaos 3.5 was great, but the rules were far far to prone to abuse. The degree of customization was incredible, such a flexible list. But how do you balance so many options and combos? Frankly they didn't solve that issue.
My vote would go for the current ork dex, it's just so well put together. Saying that I haven't read Dark Eldar yet, but looking forward to it very much.

crandall87
22-03-2011, 00:48
Chaos dex 3.5. Best Codex ever in terms of the amount of Legion Fluff and abilities.

I was reading through this last night. I forgot how much options each leigion had. Why oh why did GW take all the flavour away from Chaos? Also S5 T5 obliterators for 5pts less? Yes please.

Minsc
22-03-2011, 00:51
Of all time? CSM 3.5.

Current? Orks.

Nym
22-03-2011, 00:57
My vote would go for the current ork dex, it's just so well put together.
If "well put together" means "overly simplified and dried of all its flavor", then yes.

That 'dex is powerful, it's undeniable (though I hate many issues with it). T5 Warboss, cheap boyz, Assault 2 Shootas and dead'ard battlewagons are things to be thankful for. But what they did with clans, lootas, looted wagons and special boy units (Skarboyz, Ard'boyz, etc...) really took all the flavor away from the 'dex.

Heck, they even removed Nazdreg... :/

Let's hope they keep the good things in and bring back all the flavorful units in our next codex.

GrogDaTyrant
22-03-2011, 01:28
I'm an ork player and while I agree all of those are issues, its still the best codex GW has ever produced. It should be the model for ALL codexes.

How so? Ultra-simplified with internal problems including (but not limited to) a requirement for many units to have an HQ 'baby-sitter', dragooning transports, requiring deathrolla-battlewagons or to spam near-mandatory PKs for anti-tank? How about the nerf-bombing of Zzaps (rolling to hit would have been enough), or turning KMBs from an "unreliable ork plasma cannon" into an "AP2 gets-hot rokkit". Let's also not forget the removal of Krak grenades in their entirety, or having units who's wargear/upgrade allotment makes them resemble an Aspect-Warrior from Codex: Eldar. Hell, fluffwise the Clans are nothing more than an unnecessary paragraph entry, and a color-scheme example with a tag literally saying "Hurr Durr, Deathskulls field Lootas". (note, italic text is intended sarcasm)

For 4th edition standards, yeah... the book was alright. But late 4th ed was also the 'simplify as much as possible' era. Commenting that the Ork codex and it's flavorless approach is great, is also implying that Daemons, Eldar, and CSM 4e should be thoughtfully considered as well. Allessio's "Less = More" design ideal was applied to each, and all were written with ease of use in mind. If simplicity, minimal special rules, variety, and mostly using USRs is a benchmark for 'good', then any one of those 3 is also viable as such.

I'm not saying I'd prefer a gimmick-fest 5th edition codex... (to hell with that garbage). But Phil in no way did the 'outstanding job'. He did average. Mediocre. Not bottom-rung. IMO saying the 4e Ork codex is a grand example of codex-design, is like telling a chaos player "It's great that the Legions are just color-scheme ideas again!"

Hellebore
22-03-2011, 01:34
That just says how crappy codicies are in general though. Are we comparing codicies to an external metric or an internal relative scale?

Internally the ork codex is background and ruleswise better than most. It doesn't make it objectively awesome, just better than other codicies.

I personally would have preferred an entire set of eldar/chaos/ork codicies instead of the bloatybloat we got starting with the marine codex for 5th.

Hellebore

freddieyu
22-03-2011, 01:41
Chaos dex 3.5. Best Codex ever in terms of the amount of Legion Fluff and abilities.

This indeed was a great codex to read. I do not play CSM but I absolutely loved picking up this dex and skimming through it...

The old craftworld eldar dex was also fluffy and a fun read.

Tordeck
22-03-2011, 01:45
3.5 CSM for fluff and flavor

5 DE for fluff, flavor, balance. It took them 12 years to get the dex out but to me it was worth the wait.

VanDoo
22-03-2011, 01:51
Having started in 3rd ed, I'd say the 5th ed DE 'dex is probably the best put-together book so far. As someone else mentionned, it was obviously a labour of love, and it shows.

Although I have to say I still like the BA 'dex more as far as rules go. There's just so many ways you can run that army, it's fantastic!

veeteetwopointtwo
22-03-2011, 02:11
Codex grey knights, strictly because of draigo

cbelm
22-03-2011, 03:43
I just read the 2nd edition chaos codex for the first time in 10 years, and its still a brilliant book. The stories, unit entries and variety are all first class.

CthulhuDalek
22-03-2011, 05:11
Let's see...

I think the Dark Eldar book is the best codex so far. In this edition it can field many useful builds. I foresee it standing up well through follow-up editions, because, though it currently relies on vehicle spam (or pulls it off well), there are options to make a powerful infantry list as well. So far I have not seen 1 unit that has *no* utility. Mandrakes seemed to underperform when I saw them, but my friend had just started playing DE.

The Ork Codex is similar, in that almost every unit has its uses. Orks are much more point and click in terms of their playstyle, but I attribute this to the style of other books rather than the Ork book. Tons of builds, tons of options. The player above who is complaining about the lack of options compared to the old book... have they seen the "streamlining" that happened to the nids? Orks can pull off basically any playstyle, and do it WELL. Also, because the ork fluff is written well it inspires the players to develop even more fluff for their own speed freakz, etc etc. Ork klanz, while cool for fluff can all basically be represented by the book... or the player can develop their own klan with their own ideas.

If Codex SM, SW, and BA had been combined into one uber book (utilizing the special characters defining their armies route), that would be a very cool codex... as of now, each of those suffers from being an over-powered iteration of whichever marines came first...

I am pretty nostalgic about the 3rd edition Tyranids book. I loved the various charts and propaganda posters, loved the mutation rules (which would not really fly in 5th ed, but the next nids codex could benefit from an approach more like that) and character of the book overall. EDIT: Also some of that fluff is very cool too -- I love the story where the imperial guardsman is watching the 'nids approach in the darkness.

Ulrig
22-03-2011, 08:08
The Ork codex by far

Scythe
22-03-2011, 08:35
It is interesting to see so many people going for the 3.5ed Chaos book. Seems the dissapointment with the 4th edition book washed away all problems there were with the 3.5 book, with people only remembering the positive aspects. Goodbye, halcyon days indeed. The 3.5 book was great in terms of background, and seer amount of options, but also suffered from horrible balance issues. Sure, you could field a balanced force if you restricted yourself, but that doesn't make poor balance excusable, does it? Either way, because of that, I could never vote for the 3.5 dex.

Thus, I go for Orks. Great book overall. And less is, in some cases, indeed more. I don't need an alternative army list which lets me use lootas as troops to play a death skulls army. The new Dark Eldar book also looks quite solid, though I am not really a fan of the background.

Excessus
22-03-2011, 08:38
I'd have to say 2nd edition chaos! I had been playing fantasy and imperial guard before, but when I got hold of my codex: chaos I was absolutely enthralled! The stories about the heresy, the legions, the massive fluff about the EoT and the warp, the gods, daemons and LatD!

And besides, you could actually make a daemonworld army with chainmail armour and daemonic steeds/beasts and such...it was just awesome!!! :D



...though, the 2nd ed tyranid codex gets a special mention because of the Hive Tyrant weapon description: "Claws, jaws and a bad attitude!" :D

totgeboren
22-03-2011, 08:40
I don't really see why so many voted for 2:ed Chaos? Sure, the Chaos Cult-appendix list was pretty awesome, and the Daemon World list was incredibly broken, but Trolls and Minotaurs and Chaos Warriors in space, lulz, and the daemon summoning rules were kinda fun, but armylist-wise I think it closely mirrors what we have today, except that list had different daemons.
You could only mark characters, the four Cult Legion troops were as limited as they are today, and basic SCM were just SM, but worse, for the same cost, and with less options, and no icon/marks.

The fluff section was really nice, but the fluff section of the 3.5 dex was clearly better, now that I have both infront of me and can read them.

The hobby section of the 2:ed dex was on the other hand the best hobby section of any codex, ever.

Xabraxis
22-03-2011, 08:42
It is interesting to see so many people going for the 3.5ed Chaos book. Seems the dissapointment with the 4th edition book washed away all problems there were with the 3.5 book, with people only remembering the positive aspects. Goodbye, halcyon days indeed. The 3.5 book was great in terms of background, and seer amount of options, but also suffered from horrible balance issues. Sure, you could field a balanced force if you restricted yourself, but that doesn't make poor balance excusable, does it? Either way, because of that, I could never vote for the 3.5 dex.

Thus, I go for Orks. Great book overall. And less is, in some cases, indeed more. I don't need an alternative army list which lets me use lootas as troops to play a death skulls army. The new Dark Eldar book also looks quite solid, though I am not really a fan of the background.

And of course people against the extra options of the 3.5 codex are perfectly happy with their Option-overloaded codices they got afterwords.

Anyways, I feel that the original Tau dex was pretty good. The new Tau dex has issues with the terrible special characters, however it runs pretty well as well.
In fact, its ironically a shining beacon in this age of SUPER MEGA CHARACTERS by not having any.

hobodog
22-03-2011, 09:03
Fluffwise for me it's the Necron codex. It was full of cool drawings and strange stories. It was full of so much mystery, half the time it was as if it was some Ordo Xenos inquistor penning it, which I thought was cool!

However rule wise I'd have to echo a few people here and say the current Dark Eldar codex. Great internal balance (bar the mandrakes of course).

The previous Chaos dex was lots of fun as well with its great flexibility ... unlike the current one :(

Excessus
22-03-2011, 09:06
totgeboren, you are forgetting that you had veterans and termies as troops, and squads led by champions that could take items from the armory. Lords could have more marks than one, dreadnaughts had more melee weapon options and was only very rarely shooting your own troops. Besides, the Cult terminator rules came in a WD article some time later if I remember correctly, and cult troops could be equipped in so many ways that marked CSM today seem like a poor choice. (1k sons with special/heavy weps and/or assault weps, berzerkers with bolters, plaguemarines with poisoned daggers...awesome!)

back then, 1k sons were really nice, counted as fearless daemons (had immunity to lots of things, including poison and such) and could have special and assault weapons...no wonder I converted a squad with various equipment...they served me well! :D
I really never could get why they took away the 1k sons special and assault weps...

Angelwing
22-03-2011, 09:24
2nd ed Sisters of Battle, 3rd ed Necrons, 2nd ed tyranids.
I'm not talking about army power or balance, but how well written the codex is. These books have background, hobby material and scenarios. Daemon hunters and witch hunters are in the necron mould too and deserve mention.

Mirbeau
22-03-2011, 09:51
Codex Imperialis, though thats sort of cheating...
5th ed Dark Eldar
Angels of Death
and suprisingly, 5th ed Blood Angels.

lanrak
22-03-2011, 10:54
Hi all.
Waaagh! the Orks, and 'Ere we go! were the most fun to read,IMO.

Slaves To Darkness and lost and the Damned were the most interesting to read.IMO.

Current codexes , Orks.

TTFN

Bad monkey
22-03-2011, 11:07
Chaos dex 3.5, it reignited my love with the hobby.

One of the most flavoursome dex's iv read. shame they took all of that away in the new one.

I'v heard the DE dex is meant to be pretty good, not read it yet.

Abaraxas
22-03-2011, 11:27
no love for 2nd edition Chaos?

my vote would go to 2nd ed. space wolves,orks,chaos or eldar, or the codex imperialis...or the RT Ork books (waaghh the orks/ere we go-never had/read freebooterz though)

orkz222
22-03-2011, 11:30
Dark Eldar 5th edition. rules + fluff = win

Bad monkey
22-03-2011, 11:33
can i change my vote to the one thats got that cat with a laser cannon mouth in it in orkz222's avatar

ShurikenSerpent
22-03-2011, 11:42
I personally use the Eldar, Templars and Daemonhunters codexes, and regularly play against Tau Empire, Tyranids, Chaos and Imperial Guard.

I haven't seen a Codex I've wanted to buy since the advent of the latest edition. The possible exception would be Dark Eldar, but I haven't had an opportunity to look at the codex or play against them yet.

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, or resistant to change, but in my personal opinion the previous edition's codexes and in particular Eldar, Tau and Tyranids were all far superior to this edition.

Lord Khabal
22-03-2011, 11:43
Dark Eldar, 5th. Work of Art.

Zweischneid
22-03-2011, 11:47
To me... Space Marines 5th Edition.

I think it is the near-perfect solution of offering both a great variety of army-variants (FoC-swaps, Chapter Tactics, etc..) with mechanics that are less clunky than the old, prone-to-abuse and often (to your opponent) obscure and instransparent armory & trait systems that flawed older "variety-strong" books (Space Marines 4th, Chaos 3.5), yet transcending the somewhat "plain" approach of late 4th Edition books.

That book set a new gold standard IMO.

Max_Killfactor
22-03-2011, 12:40
Current Dark Eldar Codex. They did an amazing job of updating the rules while not making the old armies obsolete.

Almost worth the wait ;)

orkmiester
22-03-2011, 12:45
well i haven't been doing this for very long- since roughly, halfway through 3rd ed- but even then the codexes have changed rapidly. :eyebrows:

defo the new Dark Eldar, kept the orginal idea of that very small codex and made it an enjoyable thing to read, plus it really refreshed the gameplay.

orks well much better than it was- i really like the 'war of dakka' section who would believe that the tau could actually be OUTGUNNED! :rolleyes: and the army list still packs a punch even now (ahem nobz bikers but that is a whole different story...)

i agree about the necrons though, i hope when it is re-done they keep it much in the same way (i am a former player btw- i still like the fluff but the army is a bit 'meh')

space wolves and vanilla marines are good- but the vanilla has lost its appeal, the space wolf dex really capture the no nonsense approach coupled with a good swig of mead or two to help things along. But the vanilla dex well i don't like it much any more since i began with ultras i think i have finally 'grown out' of them- space pups for the win! ;)

the guard- another good one they really paid attention to the stuff that the imperial armour books had in them. IA 1 is still a very good read though :cool:

i haven't seen the grey knights codex yet, but i really like the ideas that the army is based on, in my mind much like a holy order of knights but very detached from the 'crusader' ideas (we must not forget black templars...) and they will be a perfect replacement for my ultramrines i hope. :D

Wade Wilson
22-03-2011, 13:29
The Codex Imperialis.

For those who don't know, it's the second ed book that came in the box set that gave an introduction to every army in the game. Plus the background in it is better than 95% of that written now.

I still have that along with the Wargear codex.

For me, my personal favorite was 2nd ed Codex Tyranids. Lictors and carnifexs were real beasts back then. So were warriors come to think of it. The options for bimorph upgrades was staggering. Hive Tyrants really were 'Tyrants' and could go toe to toe with almot everything else in the game. Also there was the option to take a genestealer cult as allies or an army to itself. Great stuff that is sadly lacking nowadays.

I dont play them but have the codex and Dark Eldars recent update is very impressive. It isnt overpowered although it is very strong. It would get my vote.

Axeman1n
22-03-2011, 13:42
Craftworld Eldar get's my vote. I loved the individualization for each aspect of the armies. They even changed force orgs to fit better.

Chaos Undecided
22-03-2011, 14:39
I really loved the really old books like the Realms of Chaos - Slaves to Darkness and Lost & the Damned. The old Waaagh! Orks codex to so much effort put into background and character in those old books

LonelyPath
22-03-2011, 15:20
Out of the current range it's a tie between DE and Orks.

Covering all of the codices produced however, I'd go with Codex: Tyranids from 2nd edition. Not just for the Nids list, rules and fluff, but that it also contained a Genestealer Cult list!

Of course, If we can include all the books, the RoC and Ork books from RT without a doubt are the best books GW have ever produced.

Grindgodgrind
22-03-2011, 15:32
Codex Imperialis, purely because it was my first real taste of all the races...

The 2nd ed Ultramarine book, just because it was the first I ever bought.

2e Eldar, love this book.

Currently the 4th ed Eldar, Orks, and the 5th ed Dark Eldar.

shandy
22-03-2011, 16:48
I like the Ork codex for overall content.

5 edition SM codex I like because of the increased flexibility and builds it gave Space Marines- feel like it really pushed the Marines forward and the codecies that followed benefitted from it.

Wade Wilson
22-03-2011, 16:51
Covering all of the codices produced however, I'd go with Codex: Tyranids from 2nd edition. Not just for the Nids list, rules and fluff, but that it also contained a Genestealer Cult list!

See, there would be a great army ressurection by GW. i have considered making a converted Imp Guard army into a genestealer cult but i cant justify the cost when im starting a orc and bobbo fantasy army. now, should an offical stealer cult army appear that would be a different matter...

GrogDaTyrant
22-03-2011, 16:57
You know... as much as I disagree with the "pro Ork-codex supporters" on this site, I do really hope GW listens to them and puts off re-writing the Ork codex until 2nd or 3rd army into 6th edition.

I don't want to see the Orks redone during the gimmick-happy 5th ed, let alone at the final moments of 5th edition and to be just in time for (yet another) new set of core rules.

Lexington
22-03-2011, 17:25
Of all time? Not sure I can pick one, but the 2nd Edition Space Wolf, Eldar and Chaos books were all massively impressive tomes. The Eldar and Chaos books are the touch-off points for the races as we know them today, and I don't think the presentation of either has ever been done in such an intriguing way. The Chaos book in particular is still the biggest influence over my own Word Bearers, ten years of continuous development be damned. ;)

The Space Wolf Codex is just a joy to read. It struck an engaging balance between sober historical record and legendary speculation, and the way it managed to so securely lock down an archetype without resorting to cliche`s is a testament to the solid creative minds that populated the Studio at the time. There's also another of the "reverie, interrupted" pieces that Bill King did in a lot of Fantasy/40K books at the time, this one about Bjorn the Fell-Handed, that remains one of my favorite pieces of 40K fiction, period.

Of the current books, I think the Eldar Codex actually comes out best, if only because it was practically a word-for-word reprint of the 2nd Edition book, with a lot of repeated art from that superior era. Plus, it shows off their gorgeous revamped miniatures, which remain one of the most solid lines in GW's catalogue. The Ork book's also nice, and the Daemon Codex is a fun but silly read. Everything from 5th Edition on has been complete crap, bar bits and pieces of the Dark Eldar book.


2nd edition Chaos was nothing special, really (amazing hobby sections excepted), unless you equate quantity with quality.
I don't think this gives the book enough credit - this is where the Word Bearers, Night Lords and Alpha Legion were first detailed, giving them the strong foundation that continues to draw players' imagination. It's also the first time we really saw the Traitor Legions as their own organizations, with their own agendas and ideas, rather than being servants of one Chaos Power or another. Add to that the illustrations, the detailing of pre-Heresy equipment and fun bits like the Daemon World and Cultist sub-list, and you get one of the most influential tomes in the game's history.

Uncletrunx
22-03-2011, 17:32
My nostalgic, rose tinted specs still see The Lost And The Damned as my favourite book, shading out Slaves To Darkness. The sheer enthusiasm, the depth, the way that a whole universe of Chaos was unleashed with those books hasn't been replicated since. Far from perfect (IMO they made Chaos overly powerful at the time) but I still look back at those books fondly.

Of the current crop, The recent Dark Eldar codex is as close as anyone has come to replicating that depth of background; it was a great update which, as has already been mentioned, managed not to make the previous army obsolete.

KingDeath
22-03-2011, 17:33
While the Dark Eldar dex is pretty good i think that the current Spess Mehreens dex is imo the "best one". It has a good internal balance and allows many different ways to play. Sure, it's fluff is very weak, but for that we have the various Forgeworld/FFG publications. The only thing it lacks is a way to play a first company/reserve company force ( Fortunately the former can be done with the Dark Angels codex ).

Obrimos
22-03-2011, 17:51
3rd ed. Space Marine dex.

Straight, simple, usability as a prime concern.
No overpowered units or rules. Good inherent balancing.
Low IC powerlevel.

In it's simplicity it is a jewel.

Colonel Kolm
22-03-2011, 17:58
chaos 3.5. i want my legions back. that being said fluff wise i think it was the best especially considering you could make legion based armies that had rules to go with them

Thirst
22-03-2011, 18:29
Chaos 3.5 was the best. So much fun. Shame the moaners got their way and everything fun was ripped out when they came to write the current one. The previous Tyranid one was also great. I like having lots of options, even if they allow for some really powerful builds. Better to have several really powerful builds for every codex, rather than just one no-brainer list in each, and some armies simply getting the shaft.

Who wants to watch yet another Double Flying Nurgle Prince + Plague Marines + Obliterators army versus another IG Mech Melta Vet Spam + Vendettas force or something equally one-dimensional from the Blood Angels or Space Wolves books?

Endobai
22-03-2011, 19:07
I would go with 2nd edition Eldar for fluff (inherited by 4th edition Eldar codex which is also very good), 3.5 Chaos for variety and the best coverage of Legions in the history of the game, current Dark Eldar book thanks to balance, variety of buildable and playable army lists + turning this race into something distinct.

Finally there are Orks - great book in so many ways combining great fluff and funny rules from the past with certain level of modern playability and fun.

PapaDoc
22-03-2011, 19:28
I've played warhammer 3d, 4th and 5th editions. These are the armies:

3d: Chaos/Space Marines w Index Astartes, nice combination of fluff and power. A nice way to play the chapter/legion you like.

4th: 3.5 Chaos codex space marines. Everything every other army could do, chaos did better. Tons of options that made sure every possible legion, warband from the background. A lot of good pieces of wargear and rules are present in many 5th edition codices.

5th: Space Wolves. Ludicrous amounts of power in one book and easy to spot synergies. Every unit in codex space wolves is playable and the book lacks units that are never taken. Everything is possible with the wulf codex.

Rated_lexxx
22-03-2011, 19:29
Orcs.

It can compete with any other codex (even Spacewolves)
and yet is not an overpowered "autowin" vs anything.

Though you have to admit any heavily armored army orks have a problem with. I know I have been working on the best strategy for a few weeks now

Casper Hawser
22-03-2011, 19:42
I suppose I should have started two threads one for best codex in terms of fluff and one for rules.
Is the Chaos 3.5 an actual book or was it a WD supplement? And why was it 3.5? I enjoyed the fluff in the latest chaos codex so i'm expecting to be blown away by this 3.5 I Always have a look at old codex's on E bay and often cosider buying old chaos ones ive got a Black Legion army and the beginnings of Death Guard and World Eaters.

Mannimarco
22-03-2011, 19:47
I suppose I should have started two threads one for best codex in terms of fluff and one for rules.
Is the Chaos 3.5 an actual book or was it a WD supplement? And why was it 3.5? I enjoyed the fluff in the latest chaos codex so i'm expecting to be blown away by this 3.5 I Always have a look at old codex's on E bay and often cosider buying old chaos ones ive got a Black Legion army and the beginnings of Death Guard and World Eaters.

3.5 is/was a codex, the legend goes that 3.0 was a peice of crap and hated by the fans so they rushed out 3.5 to appease us and keep us spending unfortunately 3.5 had its broken combos (doesnt everything though) so 4.0 (the current dex) stripped it all away and is closer to 3.0 than 3.5.

DuskRaider
22-03-2011, 19:58
Unfortunately for us, 3.0 still had more flavor than the current 4.0...

Casper Hawser
22-03-2011, 20:01
Cheers what was pic on front ill see if I can get it on ebay i'm going to have to pick up the DE codex sometime soon with such good reviews.

Vaktathi
22-03-2011, 20:15
The "3.5" book was the 2nd Chaos Space Marine book released in 3rd edition. The first 3E Chaos Space Marine book was released in February 1999 and was less than 50 pages including mini's showcase.

This was a really bare bones book, with entries for a Chaos Lord and retinue, Daemon Prince, Sorceror, the 4 Greater Daemons for HQ's.

For Elites there were Chaos Terminators (no marks or icons), Chaos Veterans (basically basic CSM's with 1pt higher Ld and Infiltrate), and then 3 "cult" troops (berzerkers, noise marines, & plague marines) that could be made Troops if a Lord with the appropriate mark was taken.

For Troops there were basic Chaos Space Marines (who had a bolter *or* bolt pistol & CCW, then had to pay for grenades and the like) and then Daemons which added +1 to a stat depending on the Mark they had, and then Nurglings.

Fast Attack consisted was somewhat interesting with the first instance of Raptors (being pretty much as they are now but 35pts per model :wtf:) but also Daemonic Cavalry, Daemonic Beasts (e.g. fleshhounds) and Juggernaughts, in addition to Bikes. Heavy Support was Noise Marines (yes they were Heavy Support), Havocs, Predators, Land Raiders, Dreadnoughts and early Obliterators (that couldn't all use the same weapon in the same turn and were a 0-1 choice)

And that's pretty much the entire book. It was rather limited and boring, in addition to having some units that were just pants on head silly expensive (30pt Noise Marines, 35pt Raptors, 40pt Bikers) that was the hallmark of 3rd edition.

The second 3rd Edition Chaos Space Marine codex, or "3.5" was released in October of 2002. It nearly doubled the size of the book (although even this book is smaller than the 2007 book), and included the full panoply of Daemons, Cult status options for many more units, a couple pages of background and rules for each Legion and more wargear/upgrades/options than probably any other 40k book ever had.

jsullivanlaw
22-03-2011, 20:17
Best ever? Waaagh Da Orks 2nd edition. Best Current? Dark Eldar. Worst ever? Space Wolves 5th edition and the trend they set by becoming a parody of themselves.

Telesedrin
22-03-2011, 20:19
The best codex needs to be both a celebration of the hobby and a great set of rules. Chaos 3.5 was the first, but never the second. Because of that I can't have it win from current Orks or Dark Eldar, both by Phil in top shape.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Lord Inquisitor
22-03-2011, 20:38
I quite like the 4e Chaos Codex. I wouldn't go as far as the best Codex evah but it certainly isn't the worst. I think I prefer it to any of the 5e codecies, which I regard as overcomplicated with poor fluff.

For best Codex, I'm going to limit myself to current codecies and I think I'm going to go for ... Codex: Chaos Daemons.

Now, in that decision, I'm assuming the writers had to start with a given set of models, so its main failing (insufficient variety of 40K units, particularly a lack of ranged options) is forgivable. But it is superbly written - it differentiates the flavour of each unit nicely, it does not use excessive special rules, it keeps all the special rules in the "armoury" rather than spread out all over the codex, it was nicely balanced upon release - not overpowered but capable of winning tournaments in the right hands. The rules are concise but get the job done - the lack of FAQ issues is proof of this. The fluff is great, with much of the madness of the Chaos realm exposed and well-written. It even explains the whole all-gods-working-together thing satisfactorily. Given it covered much of the same ground as the WFB army book, I much prefered this version, it fit so well into the 40K universe.

Good fluff + artwork - check
Well organised codex for ease of play - check
Limited unique rules, relies on basic profiles and USRs, easy on the memorisation required to play with/against them - check
Unique play style, unlike any other army - check
Easy to learn, hard to master - check
Balanced, not overpowered yet competitive (at least at release) - check

Ronin_eX
22-03-2011, 23:44
2nd Edition Chaos for fluff and flexibility (did Marines, Cultists and Daemon worlds all in one go and they could mix) or 2nd Edition Orks for mechanics and background meeting in a wonderful melange of awesome. If forced to choose one it would probably be the 2nd Edition Chaos codex because it blows the later iterations of Chaos out of the water in almost every way.

And I say the above as a hard core Dark Angels player since the Angels of Death codex. But I can't choose that one in good faith because both halves suffered from some poorly done rules. And I can't choose later DA codices because they have been reprinting the same basic fluff for the last decade in them and not even trying to improve them, so they have been stagnating for a while (a lot like my beloved Dwarfs in WFB actually).

Carlosophy
22-03-2011, 23:54
Codex: Assassins.

It was free, and contained one of the greatest 40k scenarios ever written: Assassination.

Scaryscarymushroom
23-03-2011, 00:10
A tossup between 3.5th Chaos Space Marines, 3.5th Imperial Guard, 4th Space Marines, and 5th Dark Eldar.

It's true that the Dark Eldar had some serious thought put into writing their codex. There's got to be something in there for every sort of player, and the non-gaming parts are good too.

But I'm partial to the type of flexibility in the guard and space marine codices. I have tons of space marines. But I didn't want to use them at all until I found out that without including special characters, and for +6 points per model, my entire army could infiltrate and have the counter attack special rule.

And the art in 3.5th codex CSM is just beautiful. That book is the epitome of chaos in 40k.


Codex: Assassins.

It was free, and contained one of the greatest 40k scenarios ever written: Assassination.

:yes: Except that I paid for my copy of Codex: Assassins.

Then again, I also paid for my copies of Codex: Witch Hunters, Codex: Daemonhunters, and Codex: Catachans. All of those books were at some point made available (At least in part) for free.

TheMav80
23-03-2011, 01:09
I honestly feel like the 3.5 CSM was too restrictive with the builds for the Legion. I would rather a more open design.

That said, I like it way more than the current version.

Out of the current books, I think I like the Dark Eldar best (excessive focus on how awesome Vect is aside).

carlisimo
23-03-2011, 01:23
Playing against Chaos 3.5 was annoying. Not only because of the unbalanced combinations, but because it was hard for opponents to keep track of everything. There was a lot going on. It really felt like a codex that could use splitting into parts.

I was actually very happy with 4th edition Eldar. It might even get my vote, along with 5th ed. Dark Eldar. I like the Ork book too, but it’s not perfect (though I do prefer the current approach to looted wagons).

For fluff, the Necon codex stands out. It was a masterful way to take us into the depths of the Adeptus Mechanicus.

Threeshades
23-03-2011, 01:34
I remember selling my 3.5 Codex Chaos Space Marines a few months before 4.0 would hit the shelves. I knew a new codex was coming when selling it, but I didn't think I would ever regret selling a soon to be outdated book that much.
That codex, aside from the (often quite massive) balance issues was in my opinion the definition of a perfect 40k codex.

Then Karma came back with a vengeance. And the worst thing is that nowadays from what I hear from Chaos Marines players is that with the current codex the only effective army composition is almost the same as the most hated and imbalanced composition in the previous codex: 9 obliterators and 3 heavy supports.


Also an honorary mention to 4th edition Tyranids. The only issue I ever had with this codex was that Carnifexes were a poor choice when you wanted to play them for close combat. But shooting fexes only was still better than none at all...
I need to stop venting my frustration about nids in public...

Tymell
23-03-2011, 01:51
Reading through this thread, it seems a lot of people have a slightly rose-tinted view of the 3.5 Chaos codex.

In it's favour, it was a very flavoursome codex with lots of potential for variety. No disputing that. But it also suffered from becoming clogged up with all those options, and had some terrible internal balance issues.

"But the legion fluff was sooo much better in that one!" I hear you cry.

Not really. One page a piece on 5 of the legions, two pages on the others. It's true the legions as a whole were more of a focus, but to claim it was a grand repository of legion background is an exagerration. If you want legion info, the Index Astartes series is far better.

Anywho, best codex for me is probably the new Dark Eldar one. Great balance, excellent background info, good tone, even with how long it took to get here it's worth the wait.

Threeshades
23-03-2011, 01:56
Not really. One page a piece on 5 of the legions, two pages on the others. It's true the legions as a whole were more of a focus, but to claim it was a grand repository of legion background is an exagerration. If you want legion info, the Index Astartes series is far better.


Not so much the info as the rules. The codex provided indiviual rules for each legion, which now has been boiled down to everything is Black Legion (But you have to play it as iron warriors anyway ;)).
I wouldnt even have asked for that much coverage on the legions in the followup if they had just given you some alternating FOC choices based on the choice and equipment (marks) of your HQ, similar to Codex Space Marines for example.

Vaktathi
23-03-2011, 02:06
Reading through this thread, it seems a lot of people have a slightly rose-tinted view of the 3.5 Chaos codex.

In it's favour, it was a very flavoursome codex with lots of potential for variety. No disputing that. But it also suffered from becoming clogged up with all those options, and had some terrible internal balance issues.

"But the legion fluff was sooo much better in that one!" I hear you cry.

Not really. One page a piece on 5 of the legions, two pages on the others. It's true the legions as a whole were more of a focus, but to claim it was a grand repository of legion background is an exagerration. If you want legion info, the Index Astartes series is far better.

Anywho, best codex for me is probably the new Dark Eldar one. Great balance, excellent background info, good tone, even with how long it took to get here it's worth the wait.

It's still quite a bit more on most Legions than the current book has :p

The whole thing just had a much darker, ancient feel to it. It gave you the impression of the Chaos Space Marines as an eldritch nightmare borne from the Imperium's excesses at its birth, the mighty heroes who built the Imperium with their blood and toil now bitter traitors fighting to their last breath to tear down what they see as a galaxy spanning sham, a great lie they helped perpetrate and sustain themselves on little more than hatred and spite, or in some cases, insanity and the madness of the Chaos gods.

The current book just doesn't evoke that same feel, flipping through it doesn't feel as...dark as it should. Everything from the art, visual design, unit description, etc doesn't quite do the same thing. For some good examples, look at the artwork for Raptors and Obliterators in each codex, in the newer book they look more...comicy and certainly nowhere near as violent.

Nazguire
23-03-2011, 02:13
I thoroughly enjoyed the 3.5 edition Chaos Codex the most. Daemonhunters was pretty aces too. But yeah, 3.5 edition Chaos Codex. You could do whatever you wanted, the artwork was depressingly violent, the rules were great and the models were the best in the range at the time.

Enjoyed Abaddon's Drachynen rules, Word Bearers had Chaplains (sorta...) and the armoury was so long it required a degree in logistics to understand and convey to an army list. That's what I loved about it.

Tymell
23-03-2011, 02:25
Not so much the info as the rules. The codex provided indiviual rules for each legion, which now has been boiled down to everything is Black Legion (But you have to play it as iron warriors anyway ;)).
I wouldnt even have asked for that much coverage on the legions in the followup if they had just given you some alternating FOC choices based on the choice and equipment (marks) of your HQ, similar to Codex Space Marines for example.

Thing is, you don't need individual rules for that anyway. You can still create legion forces within the existing army list, and with more flexibility too.


The whole thing just had a much darker, ancient feel to it. It gave you the impression of the Chaos Space Marines as an eldritch nightmare borne from the Imperium's excesses at its birth, the mighty heroes who built the Imperium with their blood and toil now bitter traitors fighting to their last breath to tear down what they see as a galaxy spanning sham, a great lie they helped perpetrate and sustain themselves on little more than hatred and spite, or in some cases, insanity and the madness of the Chaos gods.

The current book just doesn't evoke that same feel, flipping through it doesn't feel as...dark as it should. Everything from the art, visual design, unit description, etc doesn't quite do the same thing. For some good examples, look at the artwork for Raptors and Obliterators in each codex, in the newer book they look more...comicy and certainly nowhere near as violent.

No objection to any of that :) Nothing wrong with people saying they like/love/prefer the 3.5 Chaos codex. My only protest is to those asserting it's the "perfect codex" or that it "had lots more legion background/fluff".

DuskRaider
23-03-2011, 02:31
It's called an opinion, my friend. That's what this thread is about.

Tymell
23-03-2011, 02:37
It's called an opinion, my friend. That's what this thread is about.

And your own above statement is doing exactly the same thing I am ;)

But seriously, any publicly stated opinion is open to critique, and a thread is about debate and discussion as much as it is everyone throwing out their own take and ending it there.

DuskRaider
23-03-2011, 02:52
This is true... I know there were imbalances and abusive lists in 3.5, but they were no worse (or no where near as bad) as most of the other current codices have. In fact, 3.5 looks relatively tame compared to 5th Edition IG, SW, or GK (especially IG & GK).

Vaktathi
23-03-2011, 03:01
No objection to any of that Nothing wrong with people saying they like/love/prefer the 3.5 Chaos codex. My only protest is to those asserting it's the "perfect codex" or that it "had lots more legion background/fluff". True, it wasn't by any means perfect.




This is true... I know there were imbalances and abusive lists in 3.5, but they were no worse (or no where near as bad) as most of the other current codices have. In fact, 3.5 looks relatively tame compared to 5th Edition IG, SW, or GK (especially IG & GK).

Yeah, it's hard to imagine any of those armies doing particularly well now. Ok, so the Iron Warriors brought 9 Oblits and 4 TLLC/LC Predators. Well, that's 1255pts and you have no scoring units, you'll have to really skimp on HQ and Troops to fit that into 1750, and good luck at 1500. At 2000 you'll have 3 relatively simple mechanized CSM units and no CC ability to speak of. Back in 3E/4E that would have been ok. In 5th, it just won't work, and you'll get outshot by Space Wolves and Blood Angels, god help you if you have to fight IG.

DuskRaider
23-03-2011, 03:07
Exactly. I've thought of bringing the 3.5 codex to game night at some point though, just to try it out against newer books and see how it does.

Scaryscarymushroom
23-03-2011, 03:14
Exactly. I've thought of bringing the 3.5 codex to game night at some point though, just to try it out against newer books and see how it does.

Testing out old books can be a lot of fun. Considering the changes from BRB to BRB, you can find some really crazy stuff. 4th edition genestealers can be given preferred enemy for +1 point per model. The old Daemonhunters book has smoke launchers that downgrade penetrating hits to glancing hits, instead of the typical effect. This can make for fairly resilient vehicles, including land raiders. Sisters of Battle used to have an act of faith that gave them fleet of foot in addition to extra attacks and initiative.

daboarder
23-03-2011, 03:29
Really? Are we reading the same book tymell?

In tghe book Im reading the best I can do to get a "cult" army is a Marked army backed up by cult troops where all your support elements aren't really cult troops more like wannabe's really. Oh and even if you do limit yourself to the troops and vehicles only, well who ever is in charge still isn't going to be a cult member.....except maybe tzeentch.

Angelwing
23-03-2011, 05:04
Testing out old books can be a lot of fun. Considering the changes from BRB to BRB, you can find some really crazy stuff. 4th edition genestealers can be given preferred enemy for +1 point per model.
I agree you can find some crazy stuff, however to test an old book properly you would also have to use the version of preferred enemy that was originally point costed for. In this particular case of genestealers, preferred enemy was 99% useless, explaining it's low point cost.

HK-47
23-03-2011, 05:57
My favorites rulebooks from when I started playing 40k are the 3.5 ed Chaos Codex, the 5th ed Chaos Daemons codex, the 4th ed Orks Codex, and the 5th ed Dark Eldar codex.

I'm also a big fan of the Realm of Chaos, Index Astartes, and the Lost and Damned books.

Azzy
23-03-2011, 08:07
I'm an ork player and while I agree all of those are issues, its still the best codex GW has ever produced. It should be the model for ALL codexes.

While I have some issues with it, I agree that it's a great codex (and a vast improvement of the previous one). I also like the IG codex (imba aside) with its ton of options. I really haven't read the DE codex nor have I seen it played, so I really can't give an informed opinion there.

Pre-3e books? The trinity of RT-era Ork books and the 2e Ork codex are fantastic, as are the 2e SoB, Eldar, AoD codices (from a reading standpoint--I've never played 2e).


If "well put together" means "overly simplified and dried of all its flavor", then yes.

But what they did with clans, lootas, looted wagons and special boy units (Skarboyz, Ard'boyz, etc...) really took all the flavor away from the 'dex. Heck, they even removed Nazdreg... :/

Well, what the 3e Klan rules did to the clans was worse in many respects (with its hamfisted attempt to reinterpret the clans as a set of rules restrictions and almost no fluff to speak of and it departed from preexisting fluff in some regards). At least the current codex brought back a lot of the fluff from 2e and RT and allows you to make different types of fluffy lists with a metric ton less restrictions.

I'll see your missing Skarboyz and limited 'Ard Boyz and raise you missing Boarboyz and Mad Boyz--I'll make no claim that the codex couldn't be improved. However, the current Lootas are much closer to the 2e counterparts (with Deffguns in place of the old Kustom Kombi-Weapons)--and I'll take that over access to Imperial weapons any day. I'll give you that Looted Wagons need more options, but the old approach was less than sound, mechanically speaking and required you to reference other codexes. As far as taking flavor away? Um, no... there's actually a lot more flavor in the current codex than ever dreamt of by the 3e dex. Bleh.

Hopefully Nazdreg, Zodgrod Wortsnagga, Skarboyz, Mad Boyz and Boarboyz will return in the next codex... And they need to retcon Makari's death. That was just stupid.

New Cult King
23-03-2011, 08:47
I loved 3.5 and I was an IW player - though I had NO Oblits, and my HS slots were taken up by a Vindicator, Basilisk, and 2 x Havoc squads, so I don't think that's too cheesy.

I get a bit sick of the regurgitated "3.5 IW CHEESECAKE!" crap.

DarkstarSabre
23-03-2011, 09:42
I loved 3.5 and I was an IW player - though I had NO Oblits, and my HS slots were taken up by a Vindicator, Basilisk, and 2 x Havoc squads, so I don't think that's too cheesy.

I get a bit sick of the regurgitated "3.5 IW CHEESECAKE!" crap.

I was a 3.5 Death Guard player. I had 2 lists I used.

Plaguewing or Infantry Advance.

No vehicles bar dreadnoughts.

My complete force org chart was as follows...

Lord
Sorceror
6 Chaos Terminators
6 Chaos Terminators
7 Chaos Terminators
6 x 7 man Plague Marine squads
3 Dreadnoughts.

Tymell
23-03-2011, 09:47
Trying out old codexes against recent ones sounds interesting.

I'll also say I really did like the 3.5 codex, Chaos was and still is my biggest 40K force, I even remembering giving a little whoop when I read that a bit of Khornate wargear was called the Berzerker Glaive, since I'd modelled my Khornate Lord with the Vermin Lord Doom Glaive as his weapon :D


Really? Are we reading the same book tymell?

In tghe book Im reading the best I can do to get a "cult" army is a Marked army backed up by cult troops where all your support elements aren't really cult troops more like wannabe's really. Oh and even if you do limit yourself to the troops and vehicles only, well who ever is in charge still isn't going to be a cult member.....except maybe tzeentch.

I'm not going to get into a full debate on the ins and outs of the current Chaos Marine codex (honest :p), I'll just say that if you can't make a legion representative force from it then you're not really trying hard enough ;)

Sekhmet
23-03-2011, 12:59
Orks. I dont even play orks.

Castigator
23-03-2011, 13:14
Orks. I dont even play orks.

I think this is key actually.

A "good" Codex also needs to be written as an element of the larger game, not "just" as a book for the respective collecters of said army. A "good" Codex should also be fun and accessible to people who play the game 40K (and thus possibly against said army), but not necessarly the detailed army itself.

The Ork Codex arguably manages that rather well. On the other hand, the Chaos 3.5 IMO appears to be the exact opposite. It is much loved by Chaos Marine players for the wealth of options, background and variants it allowed if you had the passion (or simply the stamina) to dig into it and mine it for its gold. To anyone else, it was an inscrutable mess from with Chaos players constantly pulled strange tricks and odd-looking surprise-combos that often seemed unfair (even if each option viewed by itself in isolation would have perhaps been balanced).

Sekhmet
23-03-2011, 13:34
Yeah, I hated the 3.5 chaos codex from an outsider point of view. Rhinos that tank shock at -4 Ld or something ridiculous?!

Essentially 7 heavy support slots + daemon prince close combat monster in an IW list?

Daemon bombs?

Yeah. If I was a chaos player, I'd love 3.5 too.

eldargal
23-03-2011, 13:41
5th ed Dark Eldar, obviously. Fluffy, competitive, no real runt units (I find mandrakes useful), innumerable builds. Absolutely brilliant.

Hrogoff the Destructor
23-03-2011, 14:49
Here's another vote for Chaos 3.5.

The options were limitless, not to mention you could represent each army properly.

My gaming group loved playing me because I always brought something new to the table. They never knew what to expect and no two army lists were the same. They always got to see the options that no one else dare took (raptors, horrors, spawn pets).

All of them even admitted how jealous they were of that book and of the freedom if provided.

They also liked me because I avoided the broken lists that Chaos was so well known for (my gaming group plays more for social interaction rather than competition), that is unless I lost multiple games in a row.

Castigator
23-03-2011, 14:59
They also liked me because I avoided the broken lists that Chaos was so well known for (my gaming group plays more for social interaction rather than competition), that is unless I lost multiple games in a row.

Sooo wait?

A group playing for "social interaction" where one guy is gracious enough to not only not abuse the obvious imbalance, at least as long as he fancies it, but also claps himself on the back for his own gentlemanly behaviour of actually letting other people win at his discretion in the name of good sportsmanship?

Sounds awsome.

Monospot
23-03-2011, 14:59
I'm going to vote for the RT era "Ere we go"/"Freebooterz" books for orks. The sheer quantity of options and customization that was available was awesome (the kustom/kombi weapons of the day still hold a dear place in my little green heart).

Poseidal
23-03-2011, 15:05
I want to say 2nd ed Codex: Eldar, though being an Eldar player that might make me biased; though I have to say it made me want to start them (which I did).

Of the current lot, Orks (4th) is one I've purposefully bought with no intention of getting the army (though I may some day, I got a Shokk Attack Gun for the mini and have some Black reach Orks lying around).

Dark Eldar (5th) I bought before I had an army, though it was the miniatures that really sold me on them to start them a bit afterwards. If the miniatures weren't quite to my taste (though still interesting), they would be like the Ork codex to me.

Other armies I had decided on were solely around Miniatures or the army/concept itself, with the Codex being less interesting to me. (my other 40k forces being Tyranids and vanilla Marines, started in 4th probably as I have the 4th edition codices for those two lying around somewhere)


So those are my top 3, the ones that made me want to start armies or I bought for it's own case without me having invested in the army itself beforehand.

Thirst
23-03-2011, 15:05
Codex: Eye Of Terror is my second favourite. Just for the LATD list.

Hrogoff the Destructor
23-03-2011, 15:08
Sooo wait?

A group playing for "social interaction" where one guy is gracious enough to not only not abuse the obvious imbalance, at least as long as he fancies it, but also claps himself on the back for his own gentlemanly behaviour of actually letting other people win at his discretion in the name of good sportsmanship?

Sounds awsome.

The people I play with are the same people I grew up with. Most of them are friends I've had for around 20 years (aka my early childhood). I don't want to make them mad at me and hate the hobby we all spent a small fortune on. With the 3.5 book I could quite easily accomplish both those tasks if I wanted to.

Yes the book is horrendously imbalanced. I'm not even going to try and deny it. However, I never intentionally threw away a victory or made it easy for them. I only ever lost because my army list didn't compliment itself or I played like an absolute *****.

And for your information, I do love clapping myself on the back (especially when people on the internet seem to take offence to it).

Polaria
23-03-2011, 15:14
Of the current crop?
I'd say Dark Eldar.
Nice rules, decent fluff, good artwork, great internal balance.
2nd place goes to Orks.
Worst? Space Wolves or Blood Angels.
Wolfy McWolf on his giant wolf wearing wolf armour and a wolf cloak with his wolf claws.
Someone needs flogging. BA is just as bad.

I agree with this 95%. Dark Eldar is the best of current ones for all the reasons already presented. Orks is the best when the older ones are taken into account.

Space Wolves is worst and by far. Blood Angels is redeemed (but not much) by not being quite so across-the-board-OP as Wolves one is. I could play Blood Angels, but playing Wolves would feel like cheating...

Castigator
23-03-2011, 15:19
With the 3.5 book I could quite easily accomplish both those tasks if I wanted to.

Yes the book is horrendously imbalanced.


And yet you voted it to be the best Codex ever written? Did you make that vote because the book was actually any good, or because it gave you the opportunity to be so smug about yourself?



And for your information, I do love clapping myself on the back (especially when people on the internet seem to take offence to it).

So your primary concern was not making a contribution to the topic at hand, but simply to irritate people and possibly incite an argument?

Hrogoff the Destructor
23-03-2011, 15:26
And yet you voted it to be the best Codex ever written?

Yup. I think it was the most enjoyable codex that I've used.


So your primary concern was not making a contribution to the topic at hand, but simply to irritate people and possibly incite an argument?

Not really. It was sarcasm. I guess I should have put a smiley face in there or something.

Internet arguments aren't exactly my thing.

Hypaspist
23-03-2011, 15:31
I would say currently, the Ork Codex is the best one out there, closely followed by the Dark Eldar Codex, and whilst some of the opinions I have on the Ork codex cannot yet be applied to the Dark Eldar Codex.. (such as longevity), some of them ring true even now (fluff and flexibility being the two that leap to mind instantly).

The reasons for my choice are below.
Yes, for the record. I do play Orks! (and thus accept I am slightly biased) :D

1) It's a rare day that people complain that the Ork Codex is broken (and certainly none of my local group do).
2) The Ork Codex has held it's own against most/all subsequent codices.
3) The Ork Codex is capable of multiple (read FOC legal) builds (which are competetive) and has great variety. (which holds the interest, and gives a player the desire to explore most/all unit options, which is good for GW)
i.e. Walker Heavy list/All Infantry list/All Biker list/All Multi-wound list/All Mech (albeit very light mech) list etc...
4) It has incredibly good internal balance, whilst there are units that are less seen than others, there are not many units that are flat out *not* worth taking at all.
5) The background section is well written, with little in there that *feels* out of character for the Orks (focusing predominantly on the story of the Orks through one character)
Interestingly Phil Kelly has taken the same approach with the Dark Eldar Codex in this regard, and I think it works

Phazael
23-03-2011, 15:35
All time, Witch Hunters. Good Fluff, great art, lots of options and a couple solid builds. Most telling of all, the army is still workable after all these years, while being really unique.

Modern era, I have to agree Orks are pretty much the best book, but they kind of got reduced to just Ghazwagon in competitive play, due to Jaws spammers.

Oakwolf
23-03-2011, 15:48
The Codex Imperialis.

For those who don't know, it's the second ed book that came in the box set that gave an introduction to every army in the game. Plus the background in it is better than 95% of that written now.

This.

Currently, codex Dark Eldar is good.

Keichi246
23-03-2011, 15:52
I *seriously* doubt the sanity of anyone who claims that the "3.5 Chaos" or the "Craftworld Eldar" books were the 'best Codex evar!'

Sure - if you PLAYED that army - they were great. Full of lovely fluff, great artwork, and powerful rules and untis. But if you played AGAINST them - they were ludicrously overpowered and nearly impenetrable - especially in the wrong hands.

I think I can count on one hand the number of "3.5 Chaos" lists I wound up playing agains that were actually fully LEGAL and played as they were supposed to by the rules. Everyone and their DOG seemed to 'forget' inconvenient special rules, they miscalculated daemonic gifts and wargear, or otherwise screwed things up in their quest to build the uber list of doom.

And Craftworld Eldar was just a seething mass of broken special rules in order to build "flavorful" armies. (i remember the horror of the Pathfinder disruption tables REALLY well - with entire armies being wrecked before they even got to the table... Sure - that's LOADS of fun guys...)

I agree with the comment that the BEST codex has to have good fluff, good rules, and be fun to both play WITH and AGAINST! That's why my vote is for Orks 4th. Good fluff - good rules, and they are always a riot to play against.

Honorable mention to 2nd Ed Sisters of Battle - which was a rocking codex fo rhte very short period of time it was legal.

Casper Hawser
23-03-2011, 16:06
Well ive won Chaos 3.5 and the 2nd editon codex for Eldar on ebay cost me about a fiver combined but with a few comments on the 2nd editon for chaos maybe I should have tried for that instead of 3.5. Ill have to wait til ive got enough money to get the recent DE and Chaos Daemon dexs (I want to start a Chaos Daemon army as it will go quite nicely with my chaos marines) as they also seem popular ive got the latest ork codex i'm going to have to reread it with all the good reviews it's getting I wasn't that impressed with it when I read it but thats more than likely because id being reading the first few Horus Heresy novels and was all about marines (Blood Angels) and chaos marines and just got the codex because I had some orks from the Black Reach set. Although I had a game with a friend the over day and wiped his Salamanders off the board in 4 turns with the Orks so maybe i'll increase my horde before thinking about new armies.

loveless
23-03-2011, 16:20
From a background standpoint:
1) Codex: Witch Hunters (Ridiculously entertaining. First Codex I ever read.)
2) Codex: Dark Eldar (5th) (Nearly every line in this book makes me giggle with delight)
3) Codex: Blood Angels (5th) (I like it, shush :p)

Rules standpoint (not my strong suit, but meh):
1) Codex: Blood Angels (5th) (I adore this book)
2) Codex: Dark Eldar (5th) (This would be #1 if Mandrakes and the Decapitator were more usable and Raiders/Ravagers were cheaper with Disintegrators standard (+pts to upgrade to Dark Lances))
3) Codex: Orks (4th/5th) (Ridiculously fun. If I could stand painting that much green, I'd have my Trukk/Biker/Storm army)

Books I just plain don't like:
1) Codex: Space Wolves (5th) (The background is boring outside of Lukas, the rules are a bit much, and unit selection is all over the place in terms of effectiveness)
2) Codex: Tau Empire (4th) (Boring background, annoying wargear section, and relatively poor internal balance from my POV)

Draigo
23-03-2011, 16:22
Dark eldar and grey knights have the best books.

GrogDaTyrant
23-03-2011, 17:01
3) Codex: Orks (4th/5th) (Ridiculously fun. If I could stand painting that much green, I'd have my Trukk/Biker/Storm army)

I can say from experience that a light-weight KOS force like that really is not as fun as it looks.

Unless of course "win big, loose REALLY big, no middle ground," is your idea of fun. :shifty:

loveless
23-03-2011, 17:08
I can say from experience that a light-weight KOS force like that really is not as fun as it looks.

Unless of course "win big, loose REALLY big, no middle ground," is your idea of fun. :shifty:

As my Warhammer-playing companions can tell you, the most frequent thing I say during a game is "Well, let's see what happens..."

I honestly don't care if I win or lose, as long as cool crap takes place during the game - my primary goal is to make my army look good.

I only get annoyed if my dice fail me. Like the time I ended up calling a game because my dice rolled 2 or under about 90% of the time...such a weird little statistical blip.

*Fires 12 twin-linked shots at target with BS4, hits with 2.
"Okay..."
*Rerolls, gets an additional 1 hit.
"..."

GrogDaTyrant
23-03-2011, 17:32
I honestly don't care if I win or lose, as long as cool crap takes place during the game - my primary goal is to make my army look good.

And there's plenty of merit to that. I myself take a similar approach, and made sure I had a great-looking army full of conversions. Aesthetically-speaking, my warbike-focused KOS looks awesome. Game-wise... meh. I prefer close games that are tactically challenging. Effortlessly steamrolling every Tau, Necron, Daemon army, while getting hopelessly steamrolled by Dread-spam, Sisters, and TWC 2+ Runepriest SW, is not enjoyable in the least. Your mileage may vary...

To your original list of Trukks, Bikes, and Stormboyz, I'd add Battlewagons full of Shootas/Burnas, Lootas, and possibly Snikrot. For all the 'customizable builds' the Ork codex allows, almost all of them end up 'rock, paper, scissors'.

loveless
23-03-2011, 17:39
To your original list of Trukks, Bikes, and Stormboyz, I'd add Battlewagons full of Shootas/Burnas, Lootas, and possibly Snikrot. For all the 'customizable builds' the Ork codex allows, almost all of them end up 'rock, paper, scissors'.

Oddly enough, my final list did have Battlewagons with Burnaz or Lootaz (I forget which) and Snikrot due to an epic model. Naturally, by the time I got everything I wanted it was like a 2500 point list :p

x-esiv-4c
23-03-2011, 17:40
I quite liked 2nd ed chaos. I thought the inclusion of cult and daemon armies was a nice direction.

Skyros
23-03-2011, 17:53
So your primary concern was not making a contribution to the topic at hand, but simply to irritate people and possibly incite an argument?

It takes two people to start an argument.

I like the current Witch hunters codex. So many of the choices in it are terrible, but, I dunno, I have a soft spot for it. I liked the 'build your own retinue' aspect.

DuskRaider
23-03-2011, 17:57
Oddly enough, my final list did have Battlewagons with Burnaz or Lootaz (I forget which) and Snikrot due to an epic model. Naturally, by the time I got everything I wanted it was like a 2500 point list :p

A Battlewagon full of Burnas and a Big Mek w/ KFF is downright scary. I've actually gone so far as to make it mandatory in most all of my lists (Dread Mob aside).

GrogDaTyrant
23-03-2011, 18:02
A Battlewagon full of Burnas and a Big Mek w/ KFF is downright scary. I've actually gone so far as to make it mandatory in most all of my lists (Dread Mob aside).

Indeed. That setup is the arguably the favorite way for the Ork-forum to take down 5th ed's terminator shenanigans. Second would be through saturation of Shoota-fire (cheap, and effective).

Burnas tend to also be one of those units that pretty much goes hand in hand with Big Meks. The Big Mek needs the unit for protection, and the Burnas need the KFF and HQ baby-sitter.

mephy77
23-03-2011, 23:28
I've dug up my old 3.5 codex and Sisters of Battle codex because of this thread.

I think the best is the New Dark Eldar Codex. At the moment, it is a very fine piece of work (fluff is a little iffy in place - Vect, The Decapitator and the tag team battle with the tau that pops up in all recent codexes) but I think that this will stand the test of time thanks to their unique style of play.

jspyd3rx
24-03-2011, 02:17
Can you add a poll to this thread? Anyway, played Orks and Dark Eldar. The possibilities in constructing many varied competitive lists is just awesome. Out of the two, Orks is best. Even with GK coming out soon, Orks aren't worried.

Malik
24-03-2011, 02:19
I think my favourite 40k book isn't a codex but the Siege of Vraks trilogy an even more nightmarish version of WW1 turning into Deathwatch (the movie not the Xenos hunters).

Actual codex wise, Dark Eldar. They were ignored for so long and were given a decent yet balanced army list and some brilliant new characters (Lady Malys) with supporting lore.

OneMeanDuck
24-03-2011, 03:07
Chaos Space Marines 3.5E (though yes, could be very broken as well)


No more brocken then current space wolfs, blood angels, imperial guard...
Chaos 3.5 was amazing.... and I honestyly think it would be pretty balenced in todays meta. Brocken during 3rd ED however...

My vote has to go to my beloved Elves... The last eldar and craftworld eldar addicted me to this game. Chaos 3.5 for number 2.

New ed codexes I love Dark Eldar and Grey Knights

Achaylus72
24-03-2011, 03:13
I never got to see 3.5 Chaos but i gotta love the current issue.

But my fave is the current Ork dex it is a comical read.

My fave unit are Grots

Stinkfoot
24-03-2011, 05:14
2nd Edition Eldar. Period.

I have heard this described, a couple of times, as the most broken rulebook ever written for any GW game (and I even heard that after WHFB Daemons was released).

As for my favorite, I'd say the current Ork book. Flexible, powerful, you don't need special characters to take characterful lists, it's green - truly it's everything you could want in a codex.

hawo0313
24-03-2011, 05:17
I too never saw the chaos 3.5 whenit was used but a friend of mine had it and i spent 6 hours in one weekend reading it as i was new i didn't know its balance flaws but in terms of options,artwork and background they gave the idea of the real evil that is menacing the galaxy with thier awesome decor and insanely awesome looking warriors

currently I like the New blood angels codex(i play them) but onlyin terms of rules some things ofcourse are bad like the small background section imo and ott parts of it but rules wise and balance are good so i like them.

The dark eldar are amazing the closest thing to a flawless codex in my top 3 for balance, rules and background/artwork

not sure of the ark codex not really my taste to be honest

also i really liked both the old inquisition codex's daemon hunters and witch hunters

Shipmonkey
24-03-2011, 06:26
I think this is key actually.
On the other hand, the Chaos 3.5 IMO appears to be the exact opposite. It is much loved by Chaos Marine players for the wealth of options, background and variants it allowed if you had the passion (or simply the stamina) to dig into it and mine it for its gold. To anyone else, it was an inscrutable mess from with Chaos players constantly pulled strange tricks and odd-looking surprise-combos that often seemed unfair (even if each option viewed by itself in isolation would have perhaps been balanced).

Funny enough, the "fluffy" options that so many of the 3.5 supporters loved were special rules jacked from other armies. After all, all Khorne Besrkers are required to beat a Ork over his head and steal his Choppa before one could truly be considered a World Eater. And oddy, Demonettes hands began to resemble Genestealers claws after the book was released. The Death Guard, for some reason, started to take weapons handling courses at the Fang. For as "fluffy" as 3.5 was, it was also marked an end to army specific special rules( You know, the rules that made the rest of the armies fluffy) for an editon.


I *seriously* doubt the sanity of anyone who claims that the "3.5 Chaos" or the "Craftworld Eldar" books were the 'best Codex evar!'

Sure - if you PLAYED that army - they were great. Full of lovely fluff, great artwork, and powerful rules and untis. But if you played AGAINST them - they were ludicrously overpowered and nearly impenetrable - especially in the wrong hands.

I think I can count on one hand the number of "3.5 Chaos" lists I wound up playing agains that were actually fully LEGAL and played as they were supposed to by the rules. Everyone and their DOG seemed to 'forget' inconvenient special rules, they miscalculated daemonic gifts and wargear, or otherwise screwed things up in their quest to build the uber list of doom.


Keichi speaks the truth. The 3.5 Chaos 'dex was the only 'dex I ever purchased with no intention of ever playing the army. I needed to own a copy though to stop rules shenanigans from totally destroying any chance of having fun. And in the end, it didn't work. It was no fun having to go over my opponents list and having to refuse to play more than three quarters of all the local Chaos players because they couldn't figure out how to use their own 'dex.

The book had zero internal balance. It gave too many bonus for no trade offs. The free Aspiring Champions for example, or the bonus HS choice for Iron Warriors for not taking any of the very poor FA choices they weren't going to take anyway. The book was full of such poor design choices.

And worst of all, it gave Chaos players the idea that each Legion was a special snowflake deserving mounds of speical rules for no reason at all. Now, any book that doesn't heap these bonuses onto the Legions will forever be ridiculed by the 3.5 supporters as "bland", "tasteless", "unfluffy" or any of the other insults they hurl at it despite the fact that most of those bonuses only ever existed in 3.5 and none of it's predicessors.

CushionRide
24-03-2011, 06:30
4th ed space marine has my votes.

soley for the trait system. it allowed you to totally make a unique army every time you played your marines

Shipmonkey
24-03-2011, 06:52
4th ed space marine has my votes.

soley for the trait system. it allowed you to totally make a unique army every time you played your marines

For some reason, ever totally unique Marine Chapter seemed to like to Stand Alone.

Excessus
24-03-2011, 07:56
I find it strange that people think that the old legions have no right to have their own rules, but at the same time have no problems with SW/BA/DA/BT special rules...

The chapters that didn't comply with mr. G's codex thingy all have their own rules...and guess what...the traitor legions doesn't follow the codex either! But are we asking for nine different books? No we are not, we are asking for some minor rules and options to be able to play our favorite legions...

Imagine to be forced to play your SW or BA as codex marines... (no more wolf of the wolfwolf or blood of the bloodblood, but codex of the codexcodex instead...)

tezdal
24-03-2011, 08:08
3.5 chaos dex!

Wishing
24-03-2011, 08:25
And worst of all, it gave Chaos players the idea that each Legion was a special snowflake deserving mounds of speical rules for no reason at all. Now, any book that doesn't heap these bonuses onto the Legions will forever be ridiculed by the 3.5 supporters as "bland", "tasteless", "unfluffy" or any of the other insults they hurl at it despite the fact that most of those bonuses only ever existed in 3.5 and none of it's predicessors.

Much in the same way that many marine players would be dissatisfied if a future edition scrapped all marine chapter rules and said that all marine armies now use the basic codex: space marines and nothing else, yes? All those variant chapters who think they're special snowflakes... :P

Wishing
24-03-2011, 08:26
[double post]

Chapters Unwritten
24-03-2011, 08:34
Competitively, the Imperial Guard is the "best" codex.

As for the best overall, I think they did a great job on Orks, and though I will get flak for it, I like the Space Wolves codex as well. When you factor in fluff, power level, and "fluff-reality-to-tabletop-reality" ratios, these two books are the ones closest to working nearly totally parallel.

Most others either do not provide an effective analog in gameplay, or they simply make you loathe that effective analog with pretentious or poorly-written "wardfluff".

Vaktathi
24-03-2011, 09:37
Well, to be fair, "wardfluff" and the SW's fluff in their current book aren't exactly leaps and bounds apart, they both read like bad fanfiction.

Zweischneid
24-03-2011, 09:51
As for the best overall, I think they did a great job on Orks, and though I will get flak for it, I like the Space Wolves codex as well. When you factor in fluff, power level, and "fluff-reality-to-tabletop-reality" ratios, these two books are the ones closest to working nearly totally parallel.
.

You mean naughty Wolfy McWolf and his Wolfclaw going on a Ferris Bueller's day off with hitchhiked Thunderhawks and having a jolly good laugh while the rest of the Imperium is fighting a desperate grimdark battle against the darkness of the 40K universe?

Most certainly a "fluff-reality-to-tabletop-reality" I'd love to see (the current atrocious incarnation of the) Wolves life up to a lot more often by not showing up to the fights.

nedius
24-03-2011, 10:12
My fav was the 2nd ed tyranids.

It had everything you'd want in a nid codex.

The big monsters really were monsterous. Screamer Killers were something to truely fear. The little creatures were numberous but poor, except for genestealers, which were, perhaps, the closest they've been represented on table top to their actual fluff.

But overall it was how well the army worked together.

Turn one was a bust - you'd get almost no shooting in, and take a hammering. Even then, however, you had barbed stranglers causing something akin to instant death. I took out bloodthirsters with them in single shots. But turns two and three... oh my, turns two and three... Gives me shivers still thinking about it.

Turn two your lictors pop out and gargoyles drop down from flying high and hit dozens of template attacks. Now they've got scary templates and CC nightmares running about in the deployment zone. Got to deal with them... But, just out side of charge range are now swarms of hormagaunts.

Turn three the hormagaunts hit with their 18" charge (normal at the time was 8"). Now you've got the remains of the gargoyles, lictors and hormagaunts running around your feet. And while you're dealing with that lot, the hive tyrants, screamer killers, warriors and genestealers are now in charge range.

The army worked so well together, it was a thing of beauty. It had a real synergy I don't think I've ever seen as effectively replicated.

But it didn't even end there! The codex gave you new missions (as many did back then) AND the Genestealer Cult list! The artwork was fantastic, the fluff enjoyable.

Honourable mentions go to 2nd ed chaos (THREE armies in one book! CSMs & Deamons, cultists and deamon world armies - want to use your Fantasy chaos army in 40k? no probs!), and the 4th Ed SM and IG codexes. I thought both were very solid codexes, yet allowed for flexablity and creativity via traits and doctrines.

Sephiroth
24-03-2011, 10:15
For some reason, ever totally unique Marine Chapter seemed to like to Stand Alone.

Indeed. That was it's downfall. It needed more Flaws which were... y'know, actual flaws, not just they couldn't take allies or lack of Inquisitors or something. :rolleyes:

Chapters Unwritten
24-03-2011, 10:54
Ah, well, it is reactions like those displayed at the mere mention of my codex of nearly a decade that has made me decide to shelf my Space Wolf army, but that doesn't change my opinion that it is a solid book. If you are a die-hard from days of old, that book felt crafted with you in mind (yes, despite it's divergence), and it really perfectly nailed this old SW fan's ideas of how they should "feel" in-game Something most books fail at (particularly Ward's).

If the worst flaw you can find with the book is that more than one thing has the word "Wolf" in it's name then I think it is rather successful in the fluff department. Nevermind the massive double standard that exists. After all, I don't see a lot of the Blood Angels or GK fans getting ragged on and called "Psyko McPsyk-out" or "Bloody McBloodBlood" at the mere mention of these books, even though they are much more guilty of such things. In fact, I have noticed that GK and BA have been mentioned throughout this thread without so much as a scoff (even though the GK guy is obviously trolling).

Even though these books are guilty of the same issues, no one has reacted out of involuntary disgust until the mention of the pups. Nevermind that the Space Wolves units were largely called the same things for several years and had a precedent they continued, while Ward was busy renaming basic wargear like DCCWs and narthecium/reductor and calling it an honest day's work.

As for the allies thing from the original SM, wasn't one of the most common downsides no deep striking, IIRC? A fairly HUGE handicap nowadays, eh?

As for 3.5, the joke's on you, my Chaosy mates. That book was a mess. I have many memories of daemon princes wading through entire forces, their controlling players cackling madly. While it was fun to face a more implacable foe, that book was quite beyond broken.

Draigo
24-03-2011, 11:04
Old chaos was quite broken, but not because of 'uber' statted units.
No, not iron warriors, either.

The reason: 100% infiltrate and cavalry movement. You literally lost to chaos during deployment, with no way to counter it.

Vaktathi
24-03-2011, 11:05
Ah, well, it is reactions like those displayed at the mere mention of my codex of nearly a decade that has made me decide to shelf my Space Wolf army, but that doesn't change my opinion that it is a solid book. If you are a die-hard from days of old, that book felt crafted with you in mind (yes, despite it's divergence), and it really perfectly nailed this old SW fan's ideas of how they should "feel" in-game Something most books fail at (particularly Ward's).

If the worst flaw you can find with the book is that more than one thing has the word "Wolf" in it's name then I think it is rather successful in the fluff department. Nevermind the massive double standard that exists. After all, I don't see a lot of the Blood Angels or GK fans getting ragged on and called "Psyko McPsyk-out" or "Bloody McBloodBlood" at the mere mention of these books, even though they are much more guilty of such things. In fact, I have noticed that GK and BA have been mentioned throughout this thread without so much as a scoff (even though the GK guy is obviously trolling).

Even though these books are guilty of the same issues, no one has reacted out of involuntary disgust until the mention of the pups. Nevermind that the Space Wolves units were largely called the same things for several years and had a precedent they continued, while Ward was busy renaming basic wargear like DCCWs and narthecium/reductor and calling it an honest day's work.



Well, aside from the naming, just off the top of my head without going through the book again, there's the sillyness about firing artillery by *smell* and then driving their vehicle forward to try and watch the results, being not only absurd in the extreme but a gross breach of military discipline and putting a valuable fire support asset in danger.

The problem with the book fluffwise, is that, in addition to the absurd amount of times they need to repeat "wolf", the SW's often simply come across as comical parody's of what they really should be. There's a lot of buffonery and sillyness that just doesn't really work. If they SW's have so much time to drink, play pranks (and keep such pranksters around...), and tell great tales and boast all the time, what are all those other chapters that spend 22 hours a day training doing wrong?

As to other chapters, in case you haven't seen it around, the BA's and UM's definitely do get their share of fluffhatred. GK's aren't actually released yet, while the current DH book doesn't really have the same level of derpy fluff the newer SM books do. Expect that to change, especially after people read Draigo's entry.




As for the allies thing from the original SM, wasn't one of the most common downsides no deep striking, IIRC? A fairly HUGE handicap nowadays, eh? Only if you built your army around that, otherwise it didn't really matter. Not all SM armies have DS'ing units by any means. Additionally, the 5E book encourages DS'ing quite a bit more than the previous book.

Also, the only drawback people ever really took was "no allies". Why take the other drawbacks if you didn't have to? There was also the one where you couldn't take more than one bike or land speeder unit, which also happens to be irrelevant to the vast majority of SM armies out there (not saying that these units aren't taken, only that a restriction on taking more than one isn't going to be an issue for most lists).




As for 3.5, the joke's on you, my Chaosy mates. That book was a mess. I have many memories of daemon princes wading through entire forces, their controlling players cackling madly. While it was fun to face a more implacable foe, that book was quite beyond broken. Nobody is saying there weren't some very broken aspects of it. It definitely could be broken. However the whole design, feel and presentation, coupled with the huge customizeability really made it feel cool. The brokenness was a problem of execution, not necessarily concept.

Zweischneid
24-03-2011, 11:07
Ah, well, it is reactions like those displayed at the mere mention of my codex of nearly a decade that has made me decide to shelf my Space Wolf army, but that doesn't change my opinion that it is a solid book. If you are a die-hard from days of old, that book felt crafted with you in mind (yes, despite it's divergence), and it really perfectly nailed this old SW fan's ideas of how they should "feel" in-game Something most books fail at (particularly Ward's).
.

Quite the contrary. The biggest flaw of the current Space Wolf book is that it precisely does not feel like Space Wolves.

Blood Angels do feel like Blood Angels on the table.. fast, excelling and specializing on the charge. Space Marines do feel like Space Marines with a wide variety of tactical options, close range firefights, etc.. . Grey Knights do feel like Grey Knights with elite-units excelling in psy-supported/strengthend precision strikes, etc.. .

Space Wolves on the other hand got it the wrong way. Counter-attack is a problem. It is a defensive ability that lessens the need to be offensive in your moves and strategy, ultimately making the current Wolves play more like you'd expect Iron Hands or Dark Angels. Similarly, all the (this version included) fluff of big Heros with axe and shield slaying terrifying opponents gets turned up-side down by overpriced (melee-)characters sidelined by JoTWW-spam.

Indeed. The current Space Wolves is far and wide the only 5th Edition Marine book that fails to capture how the army it represents is supposed to fight according to fluff and background. Indeed, the Blood Angel book is probably far superiour to representing fluffy Space Wolves in the vein of the 2nd Edition book than the current Space Wolves codex is.

DeeKay
24-03-2011, 11:18
Best codex ever written... Depends on the reader.

If the reader plays competitively, then it could be almost any army that allows him to win with relative ease. If the player is in it for the fluff, as I have been, then it will be dependant on what they consider good fluff.

Personal opinion, I think the 3.5 Chaos Codex is probably the best book written in terms of background. After a quick flick through it earlier, I remembered just how dark they made the atmosphere, the artwork and little snippets adding a little more each time. They genuinely made it seem as if humanity is on its knees, with no clear or clean route to recovery.

People keep complaining about the power level and yes, you could do some really cheap things with it, but now it seems as though other books have surpassed it in terms of power creep and fluff craptitude. Blood Angels and Grey Knights seem to be prime examples of this sort of thing.

With regards,
Dan.

Valek
24-03-2011, 11:45
Chaos 2nd and 3.5
Eldar 2nd

But atm I would say Dark Eldar

Mr. Ultra
24-03-2011, 21:59
Codex Chaos Space Marines 3.5

Remembering how awesome it was, I hate more the current awful incarnation of the army.

jonadaya
25-03-2011, 17:25
5th ed Dark Eldar or 4th ed Orks, both is awesome.

Lord Inquisitor
25-03-2011, 18:24
Space Marines do feel like Space Marines with a wide variety of tactical options, close range firefights, etc...
Meh, I never like the "feel" of the SM codex.

- Combat Tactics. Yes, I get that Space Marines value their own worth, but they're supposed to know no fear. Combat Tactics is very useful, but undermines the fearlessness of the Astartes. Charge in, lose, run away! Games against Space Marines (particularly with Calgar) tend to involve them running away. A lot. While guardsmen stand and fight to the last man these days as they're stubborn.

- Bolster Defences. Space Marines are renown for their lightning strikes! So let's give them (and not, say, the Imperial Guard who hunker down and defend the imperium) the ability to turn terrain into bunkers and stand still all game!

- Thunderfire Cannon. Wait, what? Even now it still doesn't make any sense. Even the fluff for the Thunderfire Cannon says it's not fluffy.

- Scout bikers. Minefields are an obvious part of any lightning assault. Of course scout bikes needed to be able to vomit minefields. How else would you differentiate them from normal bikes? And of course the emperor's finest want to lace the area they're landing in with minefields, that makes perfect sense.

That's not even looking at the minor niggles, the unnecessary faff like the ridiculous 3++ storm shields that have basically dominated the game in every codex since then even with the price hike (a straight 4++ inv save would have been just fine, but why fix something when you can overcompensate?), scouts with ultra-rare hellfire ammo, jamming beacons or cereberus launchers.

Now, much of the Space Marine army was pre-existing ... much of what was added to pad out the basic army (which was fine as was) actually didn't match up with the background or the general theme of the Space Marines at all.


Indeed. The current Space Wolves is far and wide the only 5th Edition Marine book that fails to capture how the army it represents is supposed to fight according to fluff and background. Indeed, the Blood Angel book is probably far superiour to representing fluffy Space Wolves in the vein of the 2nd Edition book than the current Space Wolves codex is.
You can throw in the fact that I've not yet seen a Blood Claw on the table after the new book, and every single army has been led by Grimnar. Yawn. That's why (special) characters that make elites into troops are a bad idea in general. Phil, did you not get that people didn't really dig the whole Nob-Bikers-As-Troops thing?

archondan
25-03-2011, 20:22
[COLOR="magenta"]You can throw in the fact that I've not yet seen a Blood Claw on the table after the new book, and every single army has been led by Grimnar. Yawn. That's why (special) characters that make elites into troops are a bad idea in general. Phil, did you not get that people didn't really dig the whole Nob-Bikers-As-Troops thing?

Unfortunately he was not the 1st nor the last. All the new codexes seem to like the idea of special characters unlocking units. I personally don't like special characters as they seem to be every where. I liked it better when special characters require a certain point value of the army to be included. Made their appearance more epic.

Combat patrol led by Dante, clogged toilet call in Calgar? Heck it was like 3rd Eldar - the Avatar was always on the field regardless of how small or large the batter was.

I agree with you on the "new" toys that the SM got in the codex, they lost their shock trooper role for more of a standard army with all the bells and whistles.

'IllBillyOrk
26-03-2011, 00:40
I like the Ork codex..like someone posted earlier on this thread, funny always poking at themselves but still a fearsome army. I like the backgroun stories and the lil tidbits on the unit characteristic pages (Because they like watching people do "da burny dance"). On the Space Wolves i dont mind them, but then again i have only played in this edition of the game. I do think it is weird though that some of the fluff for the Wolves seems a little to Orky, the drinking and pranks and what not, and less like Space Marines. I understand they are more like space vikings which is cool but i guess i expected more along that line, well in the same instant you can kind of see the old Norse gods mixed into the IC background stories. Most notably the trickster, I cant think of his name, is very reminiscent of the Norse god Loki or is it Loky...any ways thats my 2 cents

Wishing
26-03-2011, 01:23
Indeed. The current Space Wolves is far and wide the only 5th Edition Marine book that fails to capture how the army it represents is supposed to fight according to fluff and background. Indeed, the Blood Angel book is probably far superiour to representing fluffy Space Wolves in the vein of the 2nd Edition book than the current Space Wolves codex is.

I suppose it is tricky when at least three of the SM variant chapter dexes are meant to be for close combat specialised chapters. BAngels, Wolves and Templars are all marines that like to run up to people and hit them with swords, so as I see it, it is equally fluffy (playstyle wise) to play any of those armies with any of those dexes.

Bubonic Chronic
26-03-2011, 11:12
Codex armageddon, first codex I bought and still the best

thorgrim
26-03-2011, 17:25
Everyone really needs to get over this. If you read the rest of the SW dex and not just Canis' entry you can see it is a well written codex overall with a lot of the old, better, fluff kept in. None of this OVAR 9000! Ward crap.

On which note, i'll let you have the BA one. ;)

+1 to this. The wolf codex is a good codex. It does go a little over the top in a few places but the BA and GK are rediculous in the same places.

Back on topic. 2nd ed Space Wolves was a great book with plenty of 'special' pack leaders and characters in and plenty of fluff to keep people happy.

Coasty
26-03-2011, 17:27
Ruleswise? 2nd Ed. Orks. Squig catapults! Traktor beams!

Fluffwise? Current Orks. Breaking the universe to nick your own gun? Using Cadia as practice for a WAAAGH! into the Eye of Terror? The Burny Dance?

Crimson Templar
26-03-2011, 17:51
I forget which codex it was in Second that had great rules for chaos cultists and genestealers cults. One of the best battle reports I read was of Genestealer cult with cultist IG squad lead by genestealer acolyles, hybrid genestealers toting autoguns, leman russ battle tanks and purestrain genestealers all in the same list. That was a great codex.

The favorite codex i every played was 2nd edition marines.

Notanoob
26-03-2011, 19:29
The codex I had the most fun with was the 4th edition Tyranids one. Sure, no Deathspitter Termagants or LW/BS Warriors, but those were things I got past and really enjoyed the book.

Also, the fluff owned all.

However, I'd be lying if I said it was the best ever, there were internal balance issues like how CC based fexes/warriors were kind bad. Warriors in general were kind of weak, and HGs were overpriced. But whatever, I had so much fun with that book.

Zeroth
26-03-2011, 22:48
Gonna go ahead and give Imperial Guard a vote on this one, although I want to say Chaos 3.5.

Imperial Guard went from being super boring to really interesting with the psyker squads, a ton of different orders, more special characters than most armies got troop choices and awesome flyers. Not to mention many fun Leman Russ patterns. Job well done Cruddace, now go rewrite my Tyranid codex.

I find Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Grey Knights also awesome. More or less all new codexes are pretty nicely written. But then again I'm a Matt Ward fan.

Firmlog
27-03-2011, 01:09
Sisters of battle 3rd. ed.
Chaos 3.5
Doctrine IG dex.
Angels of Darkness 2nd. ed.
Ultramarines 2nd ed.
Dark Eldar 5th ed.
Orks 4th ed.

Those were all fantastic dex's. I think the current Tau dex is a vast improvement over the last one, but doesn't make it to great.

chromedog
27-03-2011, 04:56
The best one written has not been written yet (but according to the rules of the internets, people will still bitch about it being overpowered, nerfing their units or a combination of both).

:D

The 3.5 CSM codex was broken - and we all know it. If it wasn't then we would still be seeing iron warriors armies painted and fielded on the table. That we don't seems to indicate many people only played them because of the swap of 1 FA for an extra HS slot option.
[Let the CSM hate flow - I never liked chaos in any incarnation, I was never part of the demographic for the marketing anyway.]

herostoaces
27-03-2011, 07:16
Angels of Death. Still my fav and got me in to the game.

Xabraxis
27-03-2011, 07:25
The best one written has not been written yet (but according to the rules of the internets, people will still bitch about it being overpowered, nerfing their units or a combination of both).

:D

The 3.5 CSM codex was broken - and we all know it. If it wasn't then we would still be seeing iron warriors armies painted and fielded on the table. That we don't seems to indicate many people only played them because of the swap of 1 FA for an extra HS slot option.
[Let the CSM hate flow - I never liked chaos in any incarnation, I was never part of the demographic for the marketing anyway.]

That seems like a small problem to fix though. Yes it had some problems, however what they did with the 4th ed codex was overkill and unnecessary, especially with the miraculous change of direction right afterwords.

Carlosophy
27-03-2011, 16:16
I think I have to vote 2nd Ed Chaos.

My friend and I, Eldar and Dark Angels, both had our own proper codices and my dad used to play Chaos and only had the CI list to get by. We used Gate and Teleportation without abandon and he got lumbered with no special characters.

Then the 2nd Edition Chaos book came out and turned everything on its head: Abaddon lead every battle, Foulspawn and Doombreed made the occasional appearance, Teleporting meant being possessed by daemons and to top it all off he could take imperial units as well!

Good times.

Scaryscarymushroom
30-03-2011, 05:17
Old chaos was quite broken, but not because of 'uber' statted units.
No, not iron warriors, either.

The reason: 100% infiltrate and cavalry movement. You literally lost to chaos during deployment, with no way to counter it.

Unless you had 9 death cult assassins. In the days of Old Chaos, there were a few really weird options available to several armies that made the 100% infiltration seem like a total waste of points.

Edit: That's assuming we're talking v3.5

I didn't play chaos myself. I played against chaos, mostly. I hated it. I hated losing against khorne stuff, battle cannons, and obliterators. But I loved my friend's codex. The extensive options, paired with the artwork and fluff made me the slightest bit envious.

Edit again: And if we're talking about Chaos space marines v3.0... I think that typhus (That fallen angel that hasn't had rules since then) was really broken against dark angels. I don't know much about that codex. Nothing more to say.

Sarevok
30-03-2011, 10:07
.
[Let the CSM hate flow - I never liked chaos in any incarnation, I was never part of the demographic for the marketing anyway.]

Do you only play mature armies for mature gamers?
You're cool. I want to be like you.

CushionRide
31-03-2011, 01:33
My fav was the 2nd ed tyranids.

......
Honourable mentions go to 2nd ed chaos (THREE armies in one book! CSMs & Deamons, cultists and deamon world armies - want to use your Fantasy chaos army in 40k? no probs!), and the 4th Ed SM and IG codexes. I thought both were very solid codexes, yet allowed for flexablity and creativity via traits and doctrines.

i have to second this.... although i witnessed some 40k second ed, i never actually played that early on. i did own the angels of death codex and the chaos codex. and i have to say i agree with nedius' assessment of the 2nd ed chaos dex, it was a thing of beauty. it actually was the first book i purchased for 40k, and is what started my model collecting for the game, but alas all my friends were not totally into it yet, and by the time i found people to play, 3rd ed kicked off and i had new armies to play.

Freman Bloodglaive
31-03-2011, 01:35
I liked the second edition Space Wolf Codex.

blanker
31-03-2011, 14:02
3.5 chaos was the best dex easily. full of fluff, you could build any kind of army from shooty, hordes, fast, stealthy,tought as nails, magic, choppy or balanced, you can say it was broken with the iron warrior list but i say it was just ahead of its time as guards spacewolves ect can be just as shooty these days.

mulkers
31-03-2011, 14:14
I am going to go out on a limb here and say Codex: Catachans.

Loved that book

ColShaw
31-03-2011, 15:54
I am going to go out on a limb here and say Codex: Catachans.

Loved that book

Could've and should've been a great book. Unfortunately, they pointed the army with the assumption it would be playing jungle games exclusively (massively expensive Flamers and Mortars, expensively upgraded infantry) so what ended up happening was people refusing to play against them in the jungle, and the poor Catachans dying like flies in the open... unless they went counter to their fluff and bought non-Flamer weaponry instead! I liked the jungle fighting rules, I liked the Catachan list, but they shouldn't have been combined like that. :(

I really liked the 4th Ed Imperial Guard codex, with its Doctrine system. It allowed for lots and lots of personalization, and didn't tend to get the cries of ":cheese:" from people as much as the current one does.

spekkiebig
31-03-2011, 16:41
Chaos 3.5 for me to.
Even taking in account the messy layout and horrilble things you could pull from the list. I think that's actually why i like it so much. You could play a very "fluffy" list without being stomped into the ground every time or pull a realy nasty list from it and trash your opponent big time.

I realy miss my Deathguard...

Laughingmonk
01-04-2011, 10:08
All of Phil kelley's books have been of pretty decent quality. They may not all have been super balanced, but he does have a pretty good understanding of how to please the playerbase. He did 4th Eldar, 4th orks, 4th nids, and 5th DE.

All were pretty well received. They had their issues to be sure, but people were excited about them.

Matt Ward's books have the "everything farts lightning" philosophy. They are certinly bold things, that frequently break previous gaming conventions (flying dreadnoughts, psyker vehicles, etc.) This seems to have mixed results. The Grey Knight book is pretty cool. It has some neat stuff in it but it is not nearly over the top as the BA book. He did a reasonable job at fleshing them out as an army.

While talking about the BA book, it should be said that it is a pretty decent rendition of the chapter. My only issue with it is that it is "marines plus" with no real reason to go vanilla. It breaks a lot of molds. It uses silly naming conventions. It does have the potential to make some characterful, fluffy lists though, while still being competitive. On the other hand, it has mephiston. A mixed bag, to be sure.

I don't really know what Cruddace's paradigm is. I was initially impressed with the new guard book, but it turned out to pretty poorly balanced. The Nid book is probably the worst book in 5th, with horrible internal balance and many useless options, with even necessary, existing options in kits, such as flesh hooks, cut for no apparent reason.

The nid release was actually the second worst army release I have seen in my decade of gaming, second only to 4th Chaos (by a decent margin, I lament for all chaos players).


I think my favorite book was the 3.5 chaos book. Tons of options. Tons of controversy. Tons of fluff. You could do ANYTHING with the book. Armored column? done. Slaaneshi cult terminator army with sonic weapons? Done (it was called lustwing). Demon spam? Done. Ultra heinous lords? Done. Sacred numbers being significant? Done.

I remember when this book came out. It was right after Necrons. It was in a league of its own. By a LOOOONNGG shot. Old timers will remember the other 3rd books at the time. Simple design philosophies. I mean, if you hate the current chaos book, you would have loathed the original third. People didn't play chaos anymore. They played "thousand sons," "Emperor's Children," "Alpha Legion," and he infamous "Iron warriors." And they were all different.

What you have to understand is that while that book did have a few balance issues, most people didn't exploit them. Most of the legions were quite underpowered. But players loved the book because it not only allowed them to make their own army, but it also gave them quite a lot of inspiration and incentive to do so as well.

Bad monkey
01-04-2011, 10:35
But players loved the book because it not only allowed them to make their own army, but it also gave them quite a lot of inspiration and incentive to do so as well.

For me this is probably the most important thing that makes a good codex. I tshould make you love the army that you collect, not just the rules but everything, if nothing esle you should feel insipred by the book.

If you are collecting an army that you absolutly love, it makes what is quite an expensive hobby, all the more worthwhile.