The Space Wolves codes doesn't even hit the streets until this Friday, but it's already out of date. GW has ALREADY changed how some mechanics will work. See below:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/08/21/20th-aug-updated-space-wolves-warlord-traitsgw-homepage-post-2/

Why do we give this company our money? It seems like everything they do is half-assed. If someone told me that there is NO ONE working for the company with the tile of "40k Game Designer" and the responsibility of developing and releasing a coherent & cohesive set of game rules then I would not be surprised.

If someone said "All of 8th Ed was a beta test, but GW couldn't be arsed to hire playtesters so they just sold the beta version retail" then I would not be surprised.

In fact the only thing that would ever surprise me if if GW released a quality product that could attract customers on its merits alone.

I had intended to buy the SW codex this Friday, and paint my new models as Space Wolves. As of this morning I intend to use that money to buy cheeseburgers instead.

I haven't seen the page on Saga's before this FAQ'd one. I gathered from Previews that Saga's affected just the lone dude before achieving the "saga" trigger, and then affected a bubble (likely 6 inches) thereafter. I bet they forgot to put in that line in the codex saying what the saga does after it goes off. Hilarious. Unfortunate. Sloppy. However, I'm glad they're being honest about their mistake and pro-active.

That would just be an editing mistake. While you're right, sloppy, that's not what they're saying. Their official story is that they wrote the rules one way, did additional play testing, changed their minds, and wrote the rules this way.

The lie, of course, is that they did ANY play testing. Ever. That would require a Game Designer with a clue on how to do his job and a company that gave a damn about its customers. GW has/is neither.

Nor, it would seem, do they have any editors or proofreaders.

Games Workshop - Staffed entirely by interns recruited from the Gender Studies department of the Nottingham Evening College, Cheese Bakery & Muffler Shop.

I wonder if this was just damage control from incorrect information posted in the community preview. Why announce this before the book even releases, instead of including it in the next chapter approved?

There are several strong warlord traits in the codex, and they are all significantly worse now as Sagas. If this was intended as an upgrade for players who like narrative play, they forgot to check the impact on competitive lists. It just baffles me why they would nerf a codex in the week before it’s release, unless the real reason is that it’s an extremely overpowered army, which I doubt.

So y'see that line they say where the correct version is in the non-English language printings of the book but they messed up on getting the right version to the English printer?
Stay classy Dakka

phydaux wrote:
The Space Wolves codes doesn't even hit the streets until this Friday, but it's already out of date.

...how is it 'out of date and invalid' when they literally pushed the one-page fix out to you, free of charge- ahead of the book so you can use it as soon as you get it? These aren't bad at all, I kind of like this. What's wrong... are you just not used to playing Space Wolves or something? This ties right in to how they work, based on my experience with them. They're not going to be the same as regular Space Marines with a few unique characters and weapons, dude.

phydaux wrote:
Why do we give this company our money? It seems like everything they do is half-assed. If someone told me that there is NO ONE working for the company with the tile of "40k Game Designer" and the responsibility of developing and releasing a coherent & cohesive set of game rules then I would not be surprised.

How many actual games do you play? Because if this counts as 'half-assed' to you, then you're gonna have some difficulties.

phydaux wrote:
In fact the only thing that would ever surprise me if if GW released a quality product that could attract customers on its merits alone.

And here you are, upset about a product. You know what I do when WarMaHordes releases a crappy model or rule? Nothing, because I don't care about that game. I guess if I cared about it, it'd be different, and I'd be on their forums with these sorts of angry posts.

phydaux wrote:
I had intended to buy the SW codex this Friday, and paint my new models as Space Wolves. As of this morning I intend to use that money to buy cheeseburgers instead.

1- That's a lot of Hamburgers, don't do that. You'll get obese and it's not healthy. Get some veggies and stuff, buy a novel, get some tea.

2- If this is an error that's got you pissed off, you should see what kind of errors happen at the typical burger joint. Just warning you.

Tower wrote:
I wonder if this was just damage control from incorrect information posted in the community preview. Why announce this before the book even releases, instead of including it in the next chapter approved?

Only English language is FAQed, the other versions already have this information so the change was done some months ago.

Well this is pretty normal these days. Generally new games in computer also need updating right away.

I have called a waaahmbulance.

On a side note, am i the only one who think these sagas are too situational and abit on the lame side?

These aren't bad at all, I kind of like this

I think what makes me salty is seeing what the codex could have had (and apparently has in English), and having that taken away for something worse. If I had never seen the original warlord traits, I probably would have liked the Sagas. And part of me thinks the authors don’t realize that the new Sagas are worse than what they replace, which also annoys me.

For example, I think the saga of majesty in the English book granted a 12” aura of fearlessness. That’s pretty good (and probably only the third best original warlord trait). Now it makes the warlord fearless, which has zero in game benefit on a single model character, and instead extends the character’s aura 3”, which gets a big “who cares” from me. And good luck ever triggering that saga. In the one game in ten that it triggers, it will be epic (but even then, the aura from the saga will only have half the range of the printed version).

Timely FAQ and errata, the horror!

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:
1- That's a lot of Hamburgers, don't do that. You'll get obese and it's not healthy. Get some veggies and stuff, buy a novel, get some tea.

2- If this is an error that's got you pissed off, you should see what kind of errors happen at the typical burger joint. Just warning you.

Good thing they're planning on getting cheeseburgers instead of hamburgers then.

You guys doing ok? You all seem very stressed over a rules update.

Maybe go outside? Take a deep breath, play some other games? A bunch of us are still having fun playing 8th edition however if you want to come back to the table.

Tower wrote:

These aren't bad at all, I kind of like this

For example, I think the saga of majesty in the English book granted a 12” aura of fearlessness. That’s pretty good (and probably only the third best original warlord trait). Now it makes the warlord fearless, which has zero in game benefit on a single model character, and instead extends the character’s aura 3”, which gets a big “who cares” from me. And good luck ever triggering that saga. In the one game in ten that it triggers, it will be epic.

Just running that over in my head- and don't get me wrong, it's something that should have been caught- but I can almost see this being something that could easily be overpowered. It's one of those "Oh, you're using that Warlord Trait? Let me put my models up, good luck finding a game" kind of things. I think, maybe- my coffee hasn't kicked in yet.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 IronBrand wrote:
Good thing they're planning on getting cheeseburgers instead of hamburgers then.

That's even worse.

What's with the clickbait title?

"One page in a codex is updated. CODEX IS INVALID!"

I was expecting a "Codex is invalid" thread to have something to do with how it's 'invalid for competitive play' or how it's 'not allowed for matched play'.

This is silly. Yes, a single page had to be rewritten, and was done so for free and at no cost to you, and then distributed digitally so you could have a look.

Tower wrote:

These aren't bad at all, I kind of like this

I think what makes me salty is seeing what the codex could have had (and apparently has in English), and having that taken away for something worse. If I had never seen the original warlord traits, I probably would have liked the Sagas. And part of me thinks the authors don’t realize that the new Sagas are worse than what they replace, which also annoys me.

For example, I think the saga of majesty in the English book granted a 12” aura of fearlessness. That’s pretty good (and probably only the third best original warlord trait). Now it makes the warlord fearless, which has zero in game benefit on a single model character, and instead extends the character’s aura 3”, which gets a big “who cares” from me. And good luck ever triggering that saga. In the one game in ten that it triggers, it will be epic (but even then, the aura from the saga will only have half the range of the printed version).

Honestly Majesty was probably the worst OG one, because Morale really isn't that big of a deal in 8th (especially for Marines).
Pretty much all of them look to be buffs (or at the very least sidegrades for traits like Hunter) to the original sagas.

I was actually thrilled they found this, and reacted so quickly.

Tower wrote:
I wonder if this was just damage control from incorrect information posted in the community preview. Why announce this before the book even releases, instead of including it in the next chapter approved?

Because the change made it into the non-English version of the Codex. Only the English version was wrong.

Pretty much all of them look to be buffs (or at the very least sidegrades for traits like Hunter) to the original sagas.

Wolfkin was probably the best one of the printed traits. I don’t have the book, but if I recall correctly, it gave the plus one attack buff in an aura around the warlord. Now it only grants that aura on the turn after your warlord slays its fifth model, which likely isn’t going to happen on your first turn charge. That one is reasonable to trigger, but the fact that you need to trigger it to get the bonus that you have already in the printed book is a straight downgrade.

Hunter is easy to trigger, but then your word lord is way up in front of your army, or has already charged with other charging models, and the benefit from the aura is very hard to utilize. The models in the second wave that could advance and charge, either aren’t going to be within 6 inches of your warlord, or don’t need the benefit if they are already that close. It’s the fact that you don’t get the benefit immediately, that makes the Sagas pretty bad in my opinion.

 sfshilo wrote:
You guys doing ok? You all seem very stressed over a rules update.

Maybe go outside? Take a deep breath, play some other games? A bunch of us are still having fun playing 8th edition however if you want to come back to the table.

No joke, ever since I've started to look into other games I've become more relaxed and less caring about 40k i still play it but it's become more of a hobby and collection I own rather than a life style. Something gets changed i have weeks to adapt to it as I focus on other games. Also, less stress when it comes to painting because I bought some x wing so I don't feel like I'm overwhelmed.

Tower wrote:

Pretty much all of them look to be buffs (or at the very least sidegrades for traits like Hunter) to the original sagas.

Wolfkin was probably the best one of the printed traits. I don’t have the book, but if I recall correctly, it gave the plus one attack buff in an aura around the warlord. Now it only grants that aura on the turn after your warlord slays its fifth model, which likely isn’t going to happen on your first turn charge. That one is reasonable to trigger, but the fact that you need to trigger it to get the bonus that you have already in the printed book is a straight downgrade.

Hunter is easy to trigger, but then your word lord is way up in front of your army, or has already charged with other charging models, and the benefit from the aura is very hard to utilize. The models in the second wave that could advance and charge, either aren’t going to be within 6 inches of your warlord, or don’t need the benefit if they are already that close. It’s the fact that you don’t get the benefit immediately, that makes the Sagas pretty bad in my opinion.

Yeah Wolfkin is the main exception - that one is just a straight nerf.
I say sidegrade for Hunter because +2 cover is pretty situation, since you'll likely either be untargetable or not in cover after your opponent flees from combat anyway.

Yeah Wolfkin is the main exception - that one is just a straight nerf.
I say sidegrade for Hunter because +2 cover is pretty situation, since you'll likely either be untargetable or not in cover after your opponent flees from combat anyway.

Agreed

phydaux wrote:

The lie, of course, is that they did ANY play testing. Ever. That would require a Game Designer with a clue on how to do his job and a company that gave a damn about its customers. GW has/is neither.

Utter tripe.

Yeah, they ballsed this up big time. But to suggest they don't care is simply wrong. They are real people, passionate gamers, who spend all their time thinking about and working on this stuff. They finish their day at work, then go to the tables and play games. Every week. They care a lot about what they do.

To the OP, you do realize this is pretty much how every single video game launched works these days, right?

SG

 ServiceGames wrote:
To the OP, you do realize this is pretty much how every single video game launched works these days, right?

SG

Right!?

We don't even know if it's the designer's fault. Someone might have just sent an early version of the document in error.

"We don't even know if it's the designer's fault. Someone might have just sent an early version of the document in error."

But that's just it - It IS the Designer's fault. There has to be SOMEONE who says "I'm the one responsible for 8th Ed being a quality product."

8th Ed is a major revision from previous editions - AP system, Armor Penetration, Wound Table, Initiative in melee, all majorly changed. OK, fine.

3rd Ed was a major revision, too. And 3rd Ed had ONE GUY who was "The Game Designer." His name was Jervis. And a couple of years after 3rd was released Jervis was []i]FIRED[/i].

People remember that, and now NO ONE at GW wants to be "The Game Designer" because if the game turns into a total Dog's Breakfast then it will be their job on the line. So now we have cock-ups a plenty and people saying "Awe, someone should have caught that..." when there IS NO "someone."

Stux wrote:

 ServiceGames wrote:
To the OP, you do realize this is pretty much how every single video game launched works these days, right?

SG

Right!?

We don't even know if it's the designer's fault. Someone might have just sent an early version of the document in error.

It's not the end of the world or anything but something like this should've never happened. There should be checks in place to make sure whatever hits the presses is the final version. The other languages having the correct text indicates that they just sent it off to the presses without checking things properly.

This can't really be compared to a patch on video games either. GW never really gives us dates for anything until practically the day it's dropped so delays with a codex would largely go unnoticed whereas as video games shipped broken is usually a result of things being rushed to meet the release date they promised a year ago.

There's really no excuse when we're not given release dates that things should be rushed in any way. Additional play testing shouldn't happen after things are sent to the presses. They should write and test everything, rewrite and perform additional testing as necessary then and only then send it off to the presses. After that they should move that team onto their next project. I'm not saying something can't be broken or need adjusting. Just that there is no excuse for it to happen between the book being printed and the release date.

While I realize this is not a big deal, I do find it a little funny how quickly people will defend a lack of basic proofreading. It's unprofessional, regardless of if it is a big deal or not, yet it's constantly excused.

And mistakes are constantly over reacted to as well.

Wayniac wrote:
While I realize this is not a big deal, I do find it a little funny how quickly people will defend a lack of basic proofreading. It's unprofessional, regardless of if it is a big deal or not, yet it's constantly excused.

Not sure anyone is excusing it mate. It's bad, and unprofessional, through-and-through. So what? GW is an unprofessional company, news at 11. Also in the news, water is wet and iron is not wood.

If "professionalism" is a major stick-in-the-mud point for you, then perhaps hobby wargaming in general is a bad idea.

Wayniac wrote:
While I realize this is not a big deal, I do find it a little funny how quickly people will defend a lack of basic proofreading. It's unprofessional, regardless of if it is a big deal or not, yet it's constantly excused.

Have you been a professional proofreader?

This one is obviously a huge mistake (and at least one they're rectifying), but basic errors still happen even with the big stuff like New York Times all the way down to your local newspaper.

Wayniac wrote:
While I realize this is not a big deal, I do find it a little funny how quickly people will defend a lack of basic proofreading. It's unprofessional, regardless of if it is a big deal or not, yet it's constantly excused.

From what's being said, it's not a case of proofreading being an issue.

They went to print with a concept, then later on it got expanded. Don't know how or why but it happened.
Since English copies go to print a fair amount of time in advance of localized versions, they won't have them but by the time they started printing the localized versions they'd get the expanded stuff but the English versions already printed would not have it.

Wolves getting special treatment as always. SW traits not strong enough so they make a hotfix to give them buffs.

Space marine codex virtually unplayable for a whole year - nerfs in each chapter approved.

Go Wolfy McWolfermurderface! I think everyone is just constantly high at GW - it's the only thing that makes sense. Standard GW.

Wayniac wrote:
While I realize this is not a big deal, I do find it a little funny how quickly people will defend a lack of basic proofreading. It's unprofessional, regardless of if it is a big deal or not, yet it's constantly excused.

You're right that it's unprofessional, I'm not arguing that. I'm sure internally someone is getting a stern talking to over this.

What I take issue to is people trying to claim the GW staff don't give a crap and are all wringing their hands watching the money roll in.

They are gamers like us, they are good people.

The hyperbole is unreal.

The pace with which GW releases new produces or updates products is rather high atm.
This might be one reason for this fault. They mentioned play testing. I doubt that over the years GW did a lot of play testing.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
What's with the clickbait title?

"One page in a codex is updated. CODEX IS INVALID!"

I was expecting a "Codex is invalid" thread to have something to do with how it's 'invalid for competitive play' or how it's 'not allowed for matched play'.

This is silly. Yes, a single page had to be rewritten, and was done so for free and at no cost to you, and then distributed digitally so you could have a look.

OP is technically correct, especially if you believe some of the tripe that comes out the mouths of certain people here. Remember, the internet community is just a minor wedge of of 40k fans and the majority don't even know what a computer is. So using that bs logic then the majority of SW players picking up the codex on saturday have an invalid product that been updated on a medium they don't use. Right?

This just further begs the question: WHY SELL PRINT CODEXES AT ALL?

Digital rules subscription. Searchable rules. Why we no has?

Grimtuff wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
What's with the clickbait title?

"One page in a codex is updated. CODEX IS INVALID!"

I was expecting a "Codex is invalid" thread to have something to do with how it's 'invalid for competitive play' or how it's 'not allowed for matched play'.

This is silly. Yes, a single page had to be rewritten, and was done so for free and at no cost to you, and then distributed digitally so you could have a look.

OP is technically correct, especially if you believe some of the tripe that comes out the mouths of certain people here. Remember, the internet community is just a minor wedge of of 40k fans and the majority don't even know what a computer is. So using that bs logic then the majority of SW players picking up the codex on saturday have an invalid product that been updated on a medium they don't use. Right?

XD ok, you win.

Marmatag wrote:This just further begs the question: WHY SELL PRINT CODEXES AT ALL?

Digital rules subscription. Searchable rules. Why we no has?

They do for AOS. I have no idea why not for 40k but it's a good idea.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Marmatag wrote:This just further begs the question: WHY SELL PRINT CODEXES AT ALL?

Digital rules subscription. Searchable rules. Why we no has?

They do for AOS. I have no idea why not for 40k but it's a good idea.

AoS doesn't give you stuff like this as part of the app. Warlord Traits, Enclave/Regiment/Chapter rules, etc are all in the army books or paid content.

 Marmatag wrote:
This just further begs the question: WHY SELL PRINT CODEXES AT ALL?

Digital rules subscription. Searchable rules. Why we no has?

Some people like print codexes....

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Marmatag wrote:This just further begs the question: WHY SELL PRINT CODEXES AT ALL?

Digital rules subscription. Searchable rules. Why we no has?

They do for AOS. I have no idea why not for 40k but it's a good idea.

AoS doesn't give you stuff like this as part of the app. Warlord Traits, Enclave/Regiment/Chapter rules, etc are all in the army books or paid content.

Right but you can buy the digital books there, they're kept nice and organized and in a format the app can read without having to hunt for a 3rd Party App that probably has advertisements, and you can even download free stuff like warscrolls for unsupported units and armies. Forge World is flawlessly integrated, and you can read most of the relevant rules for enemy units right there on the app.

And paid content is fine, that's the point. Digital rules subscription isn't expected to be free, but at least you know you've the latest & greatest without having to coalesce 50 different pdfs/printouts and hope your 3rd party software can open GW's 40k epubs without an error.

phydaux wrote:
"We don't even know if it's the designer's fault. Someone might have just sent an early version of the document in error."

But that's just it - It IS the Designer's fault. There has to be SOMEONE who says "I'm the one responsible for 8th Ed being a quality product."

8th Ed is a major revision from previous editions - AP system, Armor Penetration, Wound Table, Initiative in melee, all majorly changed. OK, fine.

3rd Ed was a major revision, too. And 3rd Ed had ONE GUY who was "The Game Designer." His name was Jervis. And a couple of years after 3rd was released Jervis was []i]FIRED[/i].

People remember that, and now NO ONE at GW wants to be "The Game Designer" because if the game turns into a total Dog's Breakfast then it will be their job on the line. So now we have cock-ups a plenty and people saying "Awe, someone should have caught that..." when there IS NO "someone."

Would you really be happier knowing who was at fault? I assure you, nobody would get fired over this, aside from perhaps a dedicated QA manager or final editor.

Frankly, you seem to be catastrophizing an error. 8th edition is a quality product. It has flaws, which nearly all quality products do. If you really feel that this makes space wolves, or 8th edition, or all GW stuff, completely unplayable, that is your right as a consumer, but I don't think that attitude will get a lot of traction here.

pm713 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
This just further begs the question: WHY SELL PRINT CODEXES AT ALL?

Digital rules subscription. Searchable rules. Why we no has?

Some people like print codexes....

Indeed, I need something to read when I'm on the bog.

 Grimtuff wrote:
OP is technically correct, especially if you believe some of the tripe that comes out the mouths of certain people here. Remember, the internet community is just a minor wedge of of 40k fans and the majority don't even know what a computer is. So using that bs logic then the majority of SW players picking up the codex on saturday have an invalid product that been updated on a medium they don't use. Right?

Food for thought- if you can financially support a this insanely pricey hobby with $35.00 little individual plastic men, it might be time to invest in something like a computer or an updated phone- it's 2018, it's practically becoming an essential part of functional adult life to have some means of accessing the internet. PRIORITIES.

And this page is a problem that can be resolved by going to a local library and paying 25 Cents for a printout.

I'm really starting to become convinced that this hobby is full of people that will dig up any excuse and do mental ninjutsu to find a way to complain about something that could easily be resolved by any rational, reasonable, and mature teenager- why an adult struggles with it, I don't know.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:
OP is technically correct, especially if you believe some of the tripe that comes out the mouths of certain people here. Remember, the internet community is just a minor wedge of of 40k fans and the majority don't even know what a computer is. So using that bs logic then the majority of SW players picking up the codex on saturday have an invalid product that been updated on a medium they don't use. Right?

Food for thought- if you can financially support a this insanely pricey hobby with $35.00 little individual plastic men, it might be time to invest in something like a computer or an updated phone- it's 2018, it's practically becoming an essential part of functional adult life to have some means of accessing the internet. PRIORITIES.

And this page is a problem that can be resolved by going to a local library and paying 25 Cents for a printout.

I'm really starting to become convinced that this hobby is full of people that will dig up any excuse and do mental ninjutsu to find a way to complain about something that could easily be resolved by any rational, reasonable, and mature teenager- why an adult struggles with it, I don't know.

Mate, I agree with you. Look around in several threads and you'll see the same excuse of "Oh the internet and 40k forums/social media are just a minor part of the loads of people in this hobby. The majority don't even go on the Internet."

Someone actually did the maths on here a few years back- it's pure male bovine excrement. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/520064.page

phydaux wrote:
The Space Wolves codes doesn't even hit the streets until this Friday, but it's already out of date. GW has ALREADY changed how some mechanics will work. See below:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/08/21/20th-aug-updated-space-wolves-warlord-traitsgw-homepage-post-2/

Why do we give this company our money? It seems like everything they do is half-assed. If someone told me that there is NO ONE working for the company with the tile of "40k Game Designer" and the responsibility of developing and releasing a coherent & cohesive set of game rules then I would not be surprised.

If someone said "All of 8th Ed was a beta test, but GW couldn't be arsed to hire playtesters so they just sold the beta version retail" then I would not be surprised.

In fact the only thing that would ever surprise me if if GW released a quality product that could attract customers on its merits alone.

I had intended to buy the SW codex this Friday, and paint my new models as Space Wolves. As of this morning I intend to use that money to buy cheeseburgers instead.

Holy overreaction... seriously dude? Take a few deep breaths.

 Grimtuff wrote:
Mate, I agree with you. Look around in several threads and you'll see the same excuse of "Oh the internet and 40k forums/social media are just a minor part of the loads of people in this hobby. The majority don't even go on the Internet.

Yeah, at this point if someone doesn't find out about the Errata sheet, and "they can't do internets machine" is the reason?

1- Your FLGS owner is clueless
2- Everyone you play with sucks for not letting you know
3- Your TO that doesn't make sure you're using it sucks
4- Your opponents suck for not noticing you're using the wrong stuff
5- How the HELL did you manage a pre-order?

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:
Mate, I agree with you. Look around in several threads and you'll see the same excuse of "Oh the internet and 40k forums/social media are just a minor part of the loads of people in this hobby. The majority don't even go on the Internet.

Yeah, at this point if someone doesn't find out about the Errata sheet, and "they can't do internets machine" is the reason?

1- Your FLGS owner is clueless
2- Everyone you play with sucks for not letting you know
3- Your TO that doesn't make sure you're using it sucks
4- Your opponents suck for not noticing you're using the wrong stuff
5- How the HELL did you manage a pre-order?

The LGS here offers pre-orders on GW products as I'm sure many others do but the other points are all valid.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:
OP is technically correct, especially if you believe some of the tripe that comes out the mouths of certain people here. Remember, the internet community is just a minor wedge of of 40k fans and the majority don't even know what a computer is. So using that bs logic then the majority of SW players picking up the codex on saturday have an invalid product that been updated on a medium they don't use. Right?

Food for thought- if you can financially support a this insanely pricey hobby with $35.00 little individual plastic men, it might be time to invest in something like a computer or an updated phone- it's 2018, it's practically becoming an essential part of functional adult life to have some means of accessing the internet. PRIORITIES.

And this page is a problem that can be resolved by going to a local library and paying 25 Cents for a printout.

I'm really starting to become convinced that this hobby is full of people that will dig up any excuse and do mental ninjutsu to find a way to complain about something that could easily be resolved by any rational, reasonable, and mature teenager- why an adult struggles with it, I don't know.

They probably struggle with it for the same reason GW struggles with the concept of digital codex rules, and list building apps.

GW is the one telling people to buy print codexes.

You can't get upset at people for doing what they're supposed to do, which is buy and use book-based rulesets.

The argument that we need to supplement the rules with a computer kind of invalidates the need to even have a codex in the first place. "I like something to read in the <insert here>" so take your damn phone, you already need it for a comprehensive ruleset.

How dare they make a mistake and do their best to fix it before the product is released. Those fiends!

 Marmatag wrote:

They probably struggle with it for the same reason GW struggles with the concept of digital codex rules, and list building apps.

GW is the one telling people to buy print codexes.

You can't get upset at people for doing what they're supposed to do, which is buy and use book-based rulesets.

The argument that we need to supplement the rules with a computer kind of invalidates the need to even have a codex in the first place. "I like something to read in the <insert here>" so take your damn phone, you already need it for a comprehensive ruleset.

I mean, at the end of the day you're right about the list building app. I can't fathom why this hasn't been a thing for a while now.

But it's one piece of paper, and the masses are upset about it. Yeah, it's kind of a bonehead mistake- but when you get down to brass tacks, there could have been one of hundreds of ways this went to print with the wrong pages. It's not like some guy got to the last sentence yesterday, hit 'print books', and then just went home to sleep while the books were being cranked out and loaded into trucks.

Maybe I'm just annoyed. Since this Space Wolf Codex dropped, the online world has been nothing but screaming and whining. Might be better to tune it out.

In this thread we project negative assumptions about a company based on their correction of a printing error to ensure their product is playable instead of left unplayable.

Seriously, what is the point of this thread other than to stir up the pot and get angry over what is basically a minor mistake that is being corrected instead of being left alone like they would have done in past editions?

And I love the claim that GW isn't doing play testing in the edition where they actually thank the playtesters for each book in said book.

 ClockworkZion wrote:


And I love the claim that GW isn't doing play testing in the edition where they actually thank the playtesters for each book in said book.

Nope no play testing it's all a lie. All their internal testers and guys at FLG are all paid actors to just say they play test. All the people at GW you see playing the game are actually well made cardboard cut outs.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:


And I love the claim that GW isn't doing play testing in the edition where they actually thank the playtesters for each book in said book.

Nope no play testing it's all a lie. All their internal testers and guys at FLG are all paid actors to just say they play test. All the people at GW you see playing the game are actually well made cardboard cut outs.

They might not playtest WELL, but they're still doing it. That's definitely a step above how it used to be.

Plus thankfully this codex looks to be semi-functional as a standalone Codex. I wish Scouts were better (they still don't have Vet statlines!) but I think there's some interesting stuff to work with.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:


And I love the claim that GW isn't doing play testing in the edition where they actually thank the playtesters for each book in said book.

Nope no play testing it's all a lie. All their internal testers and guys at FLG are all paid actors to just say they play test. All the people at GW you see playing the game are actually well made cardboard cut outs.

Does that make Duncan a bit of left over Imperial Knight sprue sprayed with ultramarine blue that gets waggled in front of the camera?

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:


And I love the claim that GW isn't doing play testing in the edition where they actually thank the playtesters for each book in said book.

Nope no play testing it's all a lie. All their internal testers and guys at FLG are all paid actors to just say they play test. All the people at GW you see playing the game are actually well made cardboard cut outs.

Does that make Duncan a bit of left over Imperial Knight sprue sprayed with ultramarine blue that gets waggled in front of the camera?

Clearly he was cast in blue plastic not sprayed with ultramarine blue and it's more of a jiggle than waggle.

I clicked on the thread knowing exactly what it was going to be.

1) Yes, GW has abysmal editing, and it's likely they have no one hired on as a professional, technical editor. It isn't a crime, it's just lazy.

2) If this upsets you that much, you probably need to look into other parts of your life and what's going on - it's generally not a good sign.

3) If you "hate" this so much, you need to quit playing the game. It's having a negative impact on you, and that should not happen with a hobby.

 Marmatag wrote:
This just further begs the question: WHY SELL PRINT CODEXES AT ALL?

Digital rules subscription. Searchable rules. Why we no has?

I have exalted your post once, and wish I could exalt it many more times. I've not owned a print book since the release of PDF rules. I know some people want print and bully for them, but lets keep to allowing all us good people to have perfect Dex's.

-Ed

What store managers should do is download the pdf, print it out and make sure that anyone who buys a copy of the codex is given a hard copy of the new stuff with a proper explanation.

You could probably grit roads with the amount of salt in this thread.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:


And I love the claim that GW isn't doing play testing in the edition where they actually thank the playtesters for each book in said book.

Nope no play testing it's all a lie. All their internal testers and guys at FLG are all paid actors to just say they play test. All the people at GW you see playing the game are actually well made cardboard cut outs.

Does that make Duncan a bit of left over Imperial Knight sprue sprayed with ultramarine blue that gets waggled in front of the camera?

Our lord Duncan is one of the few people who is not a cardboard cutout.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
Our lord Duncan is one of the few people who is not a cardboard cutout.

If you go to Warhammer World with models painted in anything but GW paint, Duncan actually knows it. And if you do that with an Imperial Knight, he'll come to your house at night, open your fridge, and pour Lamian Medium in your orange juice.

This is beyond unacceptable. I really hope GW get their gak together and move their codexes to online living rulebooks for 9th edition because this once again proves they can't write rules for gak.

Banville wrote:
What store managers should do is download the pdf, print it out and make sure that anyone who buys a copy of the codex is given a hard copy of the new stuff with a proper explanation.

WHy the store manager? Is anyone anywhere buys a book the first thing they should be doing is checking for a errata. I regular check for errata in all my games. Its why I like stuff like PP's Warroom. I just hit the update button and know I'm now up to date.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
This is beyond unacceptable. I really hope GW get their gak together and move their codexes to online living rulebooks for 9th edition because this once again proves they can't write rules for gak.

But then they can't charge us as much for those!

Reemule wrote:

Banville wrote:
What store managers should do is download the pdf, print it out and make sure that anyone who buys a copy of the codex is given a hard copy of the new stuff with a proper explanation.

WHy the store manager? Is anyone anywhere buys a book the first thing they should be doing is checking for a errata. I regular check for errata in all my games. Its why I like stuff like PP's Warroom. I just hit the update button and know I'm now up to date.

Not everyone is hip to the fact that GWs physical books are invalid on arrival.

Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

 Insectum7 wrote:
Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

No, some would call that covering their arse after the fact.

Why in the name of the Manperor were they playtesting the codex AFTER SENDING IT TO THE PRINTERS. You're supposed to do that BEFORE.

There is also the fact that only ONE codex in 8th has released without some sort of errata needed after the fact (Harlequins for those who care). Add to that the nonsense that is the Indexes, where Space Wolves almost have more Errata text than actual rules in the index. And that's not even counting the Chapter Approved "Balance" changes which wouldn't be needed in the "most playtested edition ever".

19 out of 20 is not acceptable as a failure rate for writing rules.

 Insectum7 wrote:
Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

This is a broader discussion on the value of print codexes, not on whether or not they corrected the mistake. No one disputes that they're correcting this in the best way they can.

The point here is that printed codexes are a fixture in this game, yet no one can defend this really, other than with "but I like a physical book." The logistics behind a codex are constantly called into question. This is just the latest example.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

No, some would call that covering their arse after the fact.

Why in the name of the Manperor were they playtesting the codex AFTER SENDING IT TO THE PRINTERS. You're supposed to do that BEFORE.

There is also the fact that only ONE codex in 8th has released without some sort of errata needed after the fact (Harlequins for those who care). Add to that the nonsense that is the Indexes, where Space Wolves almost have more Errata text than actual rules in the index.

I've eventually wanted to pick up Harlequins, so I'm curious what the issue was.

Didn't the fix happen so fast, only because there was a difference between the english and non english books?

It is good that they fixed it. And it ain't that bad, it is just one thing. If the book required like 4+ changes in units and rules, then it would be a much bigger problem.

On the other hand I do understand that if someone buys a limited edition, hearing it requires fixing day one is not something you want to hear. Same would happen if you bought a luxury car, and before it got shiped from China you hear you need to fix it, because one part does not work.

To err is human.

To arr is pirate.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

No, some would call that covering their arse after the fact.

Why in the name of the Manperor were they playtesting the codex AFTER SENDING IT TO THE PRINTERS. You're supposed to do that BEFORE.

There is also the fact that only ONE codex in 8th has released without some sort of errata needed after the fact (Harlequins for those who care). Add to that the nonsense that is the Indexes, where Space Wolves almost have more Errata text than actual rules in the index.

I've eventually wanted to pick up Harlequins, so I'm curious what the issue was.

I'm saying the Harlequin codex is the only one that has not gotten any Errata. Every other codex has.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

No, some would call that covering their arse after the fact.

Why in the name of the Manperor were they playtesting the codex AFTER SENDING IT TO THE PRINTERS. You're supposed to do that BEFORE.

There is also the fact that only ONE codex in 8th has released without some sort of errata needed after the fact (Harlequins for those who care). Add to that the nonsense that is the Indexes, where Space Wolves almost have more Errata text than actual rules in the index.

I've eventually wanted to pick up Harlequins, so I'm curious what the issue was.

I'm saying the Harlequin codex is the only one that has not gotten any Errata. Every other codex has.

Every book GW has ever released has had FAQs and Errata. Hell, almost every table game has needed tweaks. At least now GW does so in a timely manner. I remember back in 5th edition it could be months between things being released and any word on GW on fixes. Any complex game system will need patches.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
To err is human.

To arr is pirate.

Why would somali or far eastern pirates ever say arr? Or if we go back in the past the barbary or turkish pirates? Am not even sure if english speaking pirates used it that often. May as well be an american hollywood invention. Along the lines of chainmail armor cut with arming swords and full plate on migration era Arthurian "knights".

So saga of the hunter no longer offers +2 cover saves? That's disappointing, I was really excited about that...

Hunter seems pretty meh now.

So OP managed to blame bad rules in a game about toy soldiers on "gender studies" classes. Should have just titled this thread "How Millenials Are Killing Warhammer 40k". Amazing reach to find political enemies in this proof reading error there.

Edited by moderator. Please leave politics out of the discussion. Thanks!

Stux wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
While I realize this is not a big deal, I do find it a little funny how quickly people will defend a lack of basic proofreading. It's unprofessional, regardless of if it is a big deal or not, yet it's constantly excused.

You're right that it's unprofessional, I'm not arguing that. I'm sure internally someone is getting a stern talking to over this.

What I take issue to is people trying to claim the GW staff don't give a crap and are all wringing their hands watching the money roll in.

They are gamers like us, they are good people.

The hyperbole is unreal.

They might be nice people but they are amateurs pretending to be professionals. They should do job they are actually qualified to do

tneva82 wrote:

Stux wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
While I realize this is not a big deal, I do find it a little funny how quickly people will defend a lack of basic proofreading. It's unprofessional, regardless of if it is a big deal or not, yet it's constantly excused.

You're right that it's unprofessional, I'm not arguing that. I'm sure internally someone is getting a stern talking to over this.

What I take issue to is people trying to claim the GW staff don't give a crap and are all wringing their hands watching the money roll in.

They are gamers like us, they are good people.

The hyperbole is unreal.

They might be nice people but they are amateurs pretending to be professionals. They should do job they are actually qualified to do

No, they are literally professionals. Many of whom have spent literally decades in the industry.

HoundsofDemos wrote:
[Hell, almost every table game has needed tweaks. At least now GW does so in a timely manner.

Lets not forget that they missed their own deadline for releasing the last FAQs because Adepticon (and then still managed to put the Index: Chaos text up in place of Imperium 2...)

I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

Yeah most of them seem pretty terrible now. The only ones that seem worth it are Wolfkin and Beastslayer. Saga of the Bear seems really risky trying to trigger the Deed, but it could be worth it.

The mistake doesn't bother me so much, but the changes themselves are very disappointing.

phydaux wrote:
That would just be an editing mistake. While you're right, sloppy, that's not what they're saying. Their official story is that they wrote the rules one way, did additional play testing, changed their minds, and wrote the rules this way.

The lie, of course, is that they did ANY play testing. Ever. That would require a Game Designer with a clue on how to do his job and a company that gave a damn about its customers. GW has/is neither.

Nor, it would seem, do they have any editors or proofreaders.

Games Workshop - Staffed entirely by interns recruited from the Gender Studies department of the Nottingham Evening College, Cheese Bakery & Muffler Shop.

What does being in Gender Studies have to do with anything?

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Wolfkin and Warrior Born are both good traits for a choppy character, and not too hard to trigger the saga.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blndmage wrote:

phydaux wrote:


Games Workshop - Staffed entirely by interns recruited from the Gender Studies department of the Nottingham Evening College, Cheese Bakery & Muffler Shop.

What does being in Gender Studies have to do with anything?

I mean, why waste a perfectly good rant and not include an unrelated attack on things you don't like?

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

yeah you don't take saga of majesty for the deed of legend. you take it to have one guy with a 9 inch radius (people complain all the time about Gulliman's aura being so big.) to his re-roll aura. and if you really want some crack fearless guys, make logan your warlord and run him along side some wolfguard. boom every wolfguard unit within 9 inches is fearless and re-rolls their ones on attacks and wounds. potent.

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

 Marmatag wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

This is a broader discussion on the value of print codexes, not on whether or not they corrected the mistake. No one disputes that they're correcting this in the best way they can.

The point here is that printed codexes are a fixture in this game, yet no one can defend this really, other than with "but I like a physical book." The logistics behind a codex are constantly called into question. This is just the latest example.

If customers like the physical book, that should be reason enough to sell a physical book. That's pretty simple business sense. Any real issue comes from possibly having to pay money for a correction, and in this case it appears to be a non issue.

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

Yeah but the way I'm looking at it as a force multiplier, and giving everyone in a 6" area an extra attack seems better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's area. Unless the space wolves have a really good aura that I'm not aware of.

But you're right, I do see a little more merit in it than I did before, however I still think it's one of the less competitive ones.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

Well I see more merit in it than I did before, but I still think, as a force multiplier, the +1 attack or wound options are better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's aura.

Primortus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

Yeah but the way I'm looking at it as a force multiplier, and giving everyone in a 6" area an extra attack seems better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's area. Unless the space wolves have a really good aura that I'm not aware of.

But you're right, I do see a little more merit in it than I did before, however I still think it's one of the less competitive ones.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

Well I see more merit in it than I did before, but I still think, as a force multiplier, the +1 attack or wound options are better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's aura.

yeah it all depends how you wannt run. a Primaris hellblaster and Longfang gunline? saga of majesty'll be damned good. Mass blood fangs an wulfen? less so

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

Considering it was 12" of Ignore Morale....

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

Yeah but the way I'm looking at it as a force multiplier, and giving everyone in a 6" area an extra attack seems better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's area. Unless the space wolves have a really good aura that I'm not aware of.

But you're right, I do see a little more merit in it than I did before, however I still think it's one of the less competitive ones.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

Well I see more merit in it than I did before, but I still think, as a force multiplier, the +1 attack or wound options are better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's aura.

yeah it all depends how you wannt run. a Primaris hellblaster and Longfang gunline? saga of majesty'll be damned good. Mass blood fangs an wulfen? less so

why would you want to run SW hellblasters when DA ones are superior in every way

Karol wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

Yeah but the way I'm looking at it as a force multiplier, and giving everyone in a 6" area an extra attack seems better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's area. Unless the space wolves have a really good aura that I'm not aware of.

But you're right, I do see a little more merit in it than I did before, however I still think it's one of the less competitive ones.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

Well I see more merit in it than I did before, but I still think, as a force multiplier, the +1 attack or wound options are better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's aura.

yeah it all depends how you wannt run. a Primaris hellblaster and Longfang gunline? saga of majesty'll be damned good. Mass blood fangs an wulfen? less so

why would you want to run SW hellblasters when DA ones are superior in every way

because not everyone changes their chapter based on whatever rules are best? *shrugs* I'm not saying it;s great just I can see a use for it. and a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

But is it better than 6" of re-rolls and 12" of Ignore Morale. Because that is the actual difference.

Justyn wrote:

a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

But is it better than 6" of re-rolls and 12" of Ignore Morale. Because that is the actual difference.

Morale rarely impacts small squads, which most people run to maximize CP gain.so yes I think this is a net gain.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

This is a broader discussion on the value of print codexes, not on whether or not they corrected the mistake. No one disputes that they're correcting this in the best way they can.

The point here is that printed codexes are a fixture in this game, yet no one can defend this really, other than with "but I like a physical book." The logistics behind a codex are constantly called into question. This is just the latest example.

Physical books don't require batteries, are easier to thumb through at a moment's notice and are less wince inducing if your opponent accidently drops them after you let them use it to read a rule for themselves.

I mean, sure, digital media has some good things for it, but considering the mistakes GW makes there as well, I wouldn't say it's quite made it to being in superior in quality to print versions yet.

A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

You know, when I was a teenager you paid one internet bill and got unlimited access. Now you pay for data. Think about that and how that applies to books. No one trusts GW to write rules, why do you think paying for bit packets would improve that? If anything digitalization of codices would lessen the proverbial pressure on GW to actually proofread and edit. Why would you care about getting a codex right the first time when you can just slap a PDF on the screen? Would you even need to play test anything when you could just sell rules subscriptions and "update" them based on fan feedback? People seem to think we don't need books, physical copies, but we aren't doing away with books by going digital we are simply changing the medium. We are turning our cellphones into books, basically, but without one fundamental freedom; property. Will you actually own your copy of the rules when access to them requires an intermediary device and the approval of a third party? No, you won't, all you'll be paying for is the right to access information. Given that GW has had some very shady dealings in the past (chapterhouse, staff disputes and creative licensing issues) does anyone really trust GW to have such control over how we interact with the hobby?

I think an oversaturation of technology in our daily lives has had far reaching impacts on how we view ourselves and the world around us and the next few decades will be spent figuring out how to live in a technological era. I mean, let's face it folks. To live in these times is to be a guniea pig in the lab of new technology. We only just really figured out the internet, and even that seemingly normal life necessity still sparks debate about ethics and human nature that simply was not possible ten years ago. We have a magical repository of all human knowledge to date that can be accessed at the click of a button, but we can't see the intrinsic value of a printed book.

Knowledge is power, and power can only be weilded by those who have it. Just so happens it's nerd knowledge, but still...




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, when your phone dies mid game and you don't have a book to point to, how can I be sure that Storm Shield gives you a 3++? Does your FNP really trigger on a 5+? What about that proxy you had? Was the plasma gunner in this squad or that one? Who had the Powerfist again? No list? Oh dang huh? Back in my day if you wanted to write a list you had to go to a store and get a notebook and a pencil!

 darkcloak wrote:
A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

You know, when I was a teenager you paid one internet bill and got unlimited access. Now you pay for data.

When I was a teenager, I paid per minute for internet access. Now it's unlimited. What's your point?

My experience with GW's digital codexes is that they're updated with errata, but that a new edition is a new product.

What a useless thread. The only reason this thread exists is to give unsatisfied bitter people another outlet for their vitriol.

Have you ever had a real job in your life? Now in that job did you ever make mistakes? I bet you did, you are human. So are GW employees. They made an honest mistake and admitted it with an explanation, which is really stand up behavior in my eyes.

But no. You guessed it, it's GW, the company that can't get anything right. They mess everything up and sell a product that is subpar and just inferior crap in every imaginable way. What an utter load of tripe.

phydaux wrote:
Games Workshop - Staffed entirely by interns recruited from the Gender Studies department of the Nottingham Evening College, Cheese Bakery & Muffler Shop.

I think your politics are showing, where they shouldn't.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

phydaux wrote:
Games Workshop - Staffed entirely by interns recruited from the Gender Studies department of the Nottingham Evening College, Cheese Bakery & Muffler Shop.

I think your politics are showing, where they shouldn't.

Not really a political thing. It's an utterly useless degree with no real world applications. Most of the worst employees I've had to deal with are of similar graduates.

BrianDavion wrote:

Justyn wrote:

a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

But is it better than 6" of re-rolls and 12" of Ignore Morale. Because that is the actual difference.

Morale rarely impacts small squads, which most people run to maximize CP gain.so yes I think this is a net gain.

I think SW are actually one of the few armies that might prefer large squads, and it's nice to at least have the option to do so.

Thankfully I think one of the relics let's you ignore morale?

Karol wrote:
Well considering most of GW designers are know supporters of labor party, or other type of leftists it is not like he is wrong. One of the main traits of the left is that they are very bad orgnisers, if they can't write good rules to govern countries, one shouldn't expect them to write perfect rules for a table top game. You would need conservatives for that. The problem with conservatives though is that, unlike those on with left leanings, they aren't very good with inventing new stuff like fluff etc. A conservative w40k would be a game of 400pg long tables of stats, weapons, skills etc.

That is all.

Yeah they have crappy proofreading (still remember squid armor boyz and rest of the pearls).
But error was discovered and corrected very early.
Necron had lychguard and deathmarks as troops till FAQ.

 Weazel wrote:
What a useless thread. The only reason this thread exists is to give unsatisfied bitter people another outlet for their vitriol.

Have you ever had a real job in your life? Now in that job did you ever make mistakes? I bet you did, you are human. So are GW employees. They made an honest mistake and admitted it with an explanation, which is really stand up behavior in my eyes.

But no. You guessed it, it's GW, the company that can't get anything right. They mess everything up and sell a product that is subpar and just inferior crap in every imaginable way. What an utter load of tripe.

Sorry but 20 years and zero improvement means they don't get a "everyone makes mistakes" card to play.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 darkcloak wrote:
A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

You know, when I was a teenager you paid one internet bill and got unlimited access. Now you pay for data.

When I was a teenager, I paid per minute for internet access. Now it's unlimited. What's your point?

My experience with GW's digital codexes is that they're updated with errata, but that a new edition is a new product.

The point is that the internet used to be quite a bit cheaper and based on the same monthly usage/billing setup as say, cable TV. You paid the bill and got access based on a set amount of time. Now they sell internet by the bit. If you have Shaw hi-speed you get x amount of data per month and pay for any overages. So GW now gives you an option, book or digital. That's fine and that's how it should continue, but what if GW were given complete control over what data you accessed and when? Do you really trust them to treat you fairly? Digital copies are fine, but at the end of the day you are trusting GW with your property. It's stewardship of information.

 darkcloak wrote:
A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

Well they could fix this with seson passes, And if you would want to also get legacy rules, those could be broken up in to legacy subscriptions. They could even add a w40k legends for OOP models or even armies, they would have rules for narrative play.

But no. You guessed it, it's GW, the company that can't get anything right. They mess everything up and sell a product that is subpar and just inferior crap in every imaginable way. What an utter load of tripe.

I think the problem is not that GW makes crap stuff, but that the stuff they make has mountain sized differences in quality of player expiriance. If your, lets say an eldar or Knight players, GW product are great for you. Historicly, although am not basing this out of my own expiriance, for eldar players this was always the case. Now on the other hand if you ask a GK players about the quality of GW products you would get a totaly different response. Add to this the whole we make a luxury top end hobby no other company can stand up to, and you will always get unhappy people. This is as if two people bought two Mizuno golf club sets, both costing the same money, and for one dude the clubs break durning the opening swing.

because not everyone changes their chapter based on whatever rules are best? *shrugs* I'm not saying it;s great just I can see a use for it. and a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

That makes no sense at all. Hellblasters weren't good for SW when they just had an index, and the DA codex that actually did have good hellblasters came out way before codex SW. Unless time travel is involved, it would be impossible for someone who wants to play hellblasters in their army to pick SW.

That is all.

What part of what I say you disagree with my friend. Because Labor support of GW employees that write books and rules can easily be checked on social media. And conservatives being more industrious, and leftiest being more creative was established durning the 5 big traites studies, and those were done like in the 70-80s.

Digital only codexes would be good for Dakka. Just think of all of those rage filled threads once someone's device dies while playing on a tournament top table. Did he do it deliberately? or did the TO sabotage him by denying him a plug to recharge?

Lots of juicy drama potential.

Yes! Haha! That part would be fun!

I think there are a few things GW could do to tackle this issue:

A very fair and simple solution would be when you buy a physical Codex for ~£25 you should get the digital version included. With the current model of regular FAQs, balance changes, not to mention mistakes like these it makes purchasing a physical Codex (I love having a physical book in my hand) a slightly doubled edged sword and definitely takes some shine off the purchase if/when it is out of date or inaccurate. Especially if this occurs Day 1 or very early in the release cycle of the Codex.

GW don't really lose anything here because I'm sure there can't me many people at all who buy a physical Codex and the digital version? Seeing as books are put together digitally anyway the conversion from whichever software they use to digital copy for the public requires very little work.

This way you get to buy your physical copy, without the potential 'buyers remorse' if/when you have to reference the digital version.

They could even do something cool in this specific Space Wolf situation of printing off the freely available PDF 'Saga' update page, doing so in a fairly decent standard. Making them available in store if you show your SW:Codex and proof of purchase. I assume this is what plenty of people will do, print it off themselves and insert in to the Codex, but it'd be a ncie gesture from GW - although equally might set a precedent they wouldn't want to have to follow in the future if they mess up again lol!

Back to the origonal topic of why did GW change the benifits with what most people see as making them worse.

I am wondering if they have finally started testing CA 2018 changes given the lead time for the books and realised that Codex Furries plus CA 2018 points changes (presumably-20% for marines) resulted in some extremely powerful furrie hero hammer.

I must admit I 2as hoping for something a bit more original than just least seen units get massive points cost and call that balanced but I'm not gonna hold my breath.

I suppose the biggest clue will be when if the 2nd big FAQ even attempts to address soup/allies or not.

phydaux wrote:


The lie, of course, is that they did ANY play testing. Ever. That would require a Game Designer with a clue on how to do his job and a company that gave a damn about its customers. GW has/is neither.

Not here to argue anything else being said, just this part - how can you say this when there are people who are active in the community who have also made it clear they are playtesters for 40k?

Eh, errors aside, at least they're trying to fix/update their codex. It is odd that they've taken this long to get the damn thing out just to have a day 1 errata.

That being said, I do like the way the warlord traits are more unique and have a bonus effect. But it seems like the utility varies wildly.

For example - the saga of majesty seems crazy difficult to accomplish the deed of legend. I very, VERY rarely have my warlord kill the enemy warlord (or even vice versa), and it seems like the buff you get for accomplishing it is pretty lackluster.

But then saga of the hunter and bear (bear especially) are stupid easy to accomplish and have pretty damned solid buffs.

Still, I like their attempt to make warlord traits a bit more interesting. Just wish they'd do their homework BEFORE printing codexes. Like, say, one with little green men.

crzylgs wrote:
I think there are a few things GW could do to tackle this issue:

A very fair and simple solution would be when you buy a physical Codex for ~£25 you should get the digital version included. With the current model of regular FAQs, balance changes, not to mention mistakes like these it makes purchasing a physical Codex (I love having a physical book in my hand) a slightly doubled edged sword and definitely takes some shine off the purchase if/when it is out of date or inaccurate. Especially if this occurs Day 1 or very early in the release cycle of the Codex.

GW don't really lose anything here because I'm sure there can't me many people at all who buy a physical Codex and the digital version? Seeing as books are put together digitally anyway the conversion from whichever software they use to digital copy for the public requires very little work.

This way you get to buy your physical copy, without the potential 'buyers remorse' if/when you have to reference the digital version.

They could even do something cool in this specific Space Wolf situation of printing off the freely available PDF 'Saga' update page, doing so in a fairly decent standard. Making them available in store if you show your SW:Codex and proof of purchase. I assume this is what plenty of people will do, print it off themselves and insert in to the Codex, but it'd be a ncie gesture from GW - although equally might set a precedent they wouldn't want to have to follow in the future if they mess up again lol!

They'd never do this. Even if the digital copy was only given if you ordered directly from the GW website they wouldn't do it. They'd be too worried about people reselling the physical codex or code for the digital if it came with a download code.

 darkcloak wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 darkcloak wrote:
A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

You know, when I was a teenager you paid one internet bill and got unlimited access. Now you pay for data.

When I was a teenager, I paid per minute for internet access. Now it's unlimited. What's your point?

My experience with GW's digital codexes is that they're updated with errata, but that a new edition is a new product.

The point is that the internet used to be quite a bit cheaper and based on the same monthly usage/billing setup as say, cable TV. You paid the bill and got access based on a set amount of time. Now they sell internet by the bit. If you have Shaw hi-speed you get x amount of data per month and pay for any overages. So GW now gives you an option, book or digital. That's fine and that's how it should continue, but what if GW were given complete control over what data you accessed and when? Do you really trust them to treat you fairly? Digital copies are fine, but at the end of the day you are trusting GW with your property. It's stewardship of information.

Overblown paranoia. I can get PDFs of Battletech TROs with the long-removed Unseen mechs with no difficulty at all. Don’t even get me started on the conversion from 8-track (yes, I’ve been around since the days I had the Star Wars soundtrack on 8 track) or LP to cassette to CD to MP3 and having to rebuy the same damn music each time the media changed.

And as for internet access “being cheaper”, I recall the days of it taking 24 hours to download the trailer for Phantom Menace - and if you wanted to rewatch it, you had to download it AGAIN. Now, I can download something like that in seconds (or stream it) and a couple hundred gigs of other stuff to boot before coming near any sort of cap. Internet access, speed and data caps have gotten better, not worse.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I have called a waaahmbulance.

No kidding, the level of salt in this thread is higher than that of a McDonalds Cheesburger.

Mistakes happen, either accept that people aren't perfect, or go find some other hobby to entertain your mind and take your hard earned cash.

The codex isn't invalid, it has a mistake in it, one that has now been corrected.

 Togusa wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I have called a waaahmbulance.

No kidding, the level of salt in this thread is higher than that of a McDonalds Cheesburger.

Mistakes happen, either accept that people aren't perfect, or go find some other hobby to entertain your mind and take your hard earned cash.

The codex isn't invalid, it has a mistake in it, one that has now been corrected.

And once again, no-one is mad the mistake was fixed. They are mad that these mistakes keep happening. Literally ONE 8th edition book of theirs is still valid as printed, out of 22. Not even their Errata book could be printed without mistakes.

When your big book of errata needs errata, you've officially given up any right to be taken seriously as a rules publisher.

I'm not really mad the mistake happened, i'm more annoyed that GW insists on this antiquated system for rules.

It'd be entirely different if they offered a rules subscription like I mentioned, and also sold codexes. Then I can pay $5 a month or something, saving money, having up-to-date books with erratas, FAQs, etc, that are fully searchable and with links to make reading and referencing easy. Meanwhile, book lovers can circle jerk over how inaccurate and error filled their codexes are, while they buy 3-4 a year to the tune of ~$160.

Apologies if I've missed it - I think I've gone through most of this thread ...

But have GW confirmed that the epub version from warhammerdigital.com will have the fix in it or not?

daisy666 wrote:
Apologies if I've missed it - I think I've gone through most of this thread ...

But have GW confirmed that the epub version from warhammerdigital.com will have the fix in it or not?

IDK - what program do you use to read those dreaded files anyways?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I have called a waaahmbulance.

No kidding, the level of salt in this thread is higher than that of a McDonalds Cheesburger.

Mistakes happen, either accept that people aren't perfect, or go find some other hobby to entertain your mind and take your hard earned cash.

The codex isn't invalid, it has a mistake in it, one that has now been corrected.

And once again, no-one is mad the mistake was fixed. They are mad that these mistakes keep happening. Literally ONE 8th edition book of theirs is still valid as printed, out of 22. Not even their Errata book could be printed without mistakes.

When your big book of errata needs errata, you've officially given up any right to be taken seriously as a rules publisher.

I'm not sure I understand, because my group doesn't play competitively, we never bother with FAQ's and just play the rules as they're printed in the BRB and the Codex.

Also, isn't there a difference between an errata designed to expand on rules issues, vs. actual typos that need to be reprinted such as the space wolf book?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm not really mad the mistake happened, i'm more annoyed that GW insists on this antiquated system for rules.

It'd be entirely different if they offered a rules subscription like I mentioned, and also sold codexes. Then I can pay $5 a month or something, saving money, having up-to-date books with erratas, FAQs, etc, that are fully searchable and with links to make reading and referencing easy. Meanwhile, book lovers can circle jerk over how inaccurate and error filled their codexes are, while they buy 3-4 a year to the tune of ~$160.

I mean lets be honest here, the rules could easily just be released in PDF form, and the codex books could be switched to lore, art, painting etc only. That might be the absolute best way to handle this option, make the rules free and then get people with the lore and what not.

crzylgs wrote:
I think there are a few things GW could do to tackle this issue:

A very fair and simple solution would be when you buy a physical Codex for ~£25 you should get the digital version included. With the current model of regular FAQs, balance changes [...]

GW don't really lose anything here because I'm sure there can't me many people at all who buy a physical Codex and the digital version? Seeing as books are put together digitally anyway the conversion from whichever software they use to digital copy for the public requires very little work.

This way you get to buy your physical copy, without the potential 'buyers remorse' if/when you have to reference the digital version.

I work for a publisher as a digital assistant and get asked why this isn't standard practice across the industry. There are so many articles/ Twitter threads out there that answer the question better, but here goes.

There isn't a viable delivery method for providing your free ebooks! TLDR; it's not feasible because of boring DRM stuff.

1. Vendors add the DRM, they own the algorithm things. And I don't see GW giving away DRM free epubs for everybody to pirate any time soon. And the cost for licensing Adobe DRM is insane (the only one I have heard about licensing).

2. Say vendors did get on board, they'd probably charge the publisher for delivery costs (KDP charges by the MB, which for fixed layouts would be insane) as they aren't making money off giveaways...

3. Where are you getting the physical books from, that also sells digital editions? Amazon is the only place I can think of, but last time I checked, GW only do fixed layout epubs, due to mobi and KF8 being [insert dumpster fire gif here]. Why not sell a wider market of ebook consumers? Because kindle is literally only any good for reflowable ebooks, because its CSS support is straight out of 1998. Amongst other things, but I could rant about Kindle being for days.

I bet that was full of typos and ranty but I'm on a train, tapping at a tiny screen and very sleepy. Will probably reread and edit later if I remember.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I have called a waaahmbulance.

No kidding, the level of salt in this thread is higher than that of a McDonalds Cheesburger.

Mistakes happen, either accept that people aren't perfect, or go find some other hobby to entertain your mind and take your hard earned cash.

The codex isn't invalid, it has a mistake in it, one that has now been corrected.

And once again, no-one is mad the mistake was fixed. They are mad that these mistakes keep happening. Literally ONE 8th edition book of theirs is still valid as printed, out of 22. Not even their Errata book could be printed without mistakes.

When your big book of errata needs errata, you've officially given up any right to be taken seriously as a rules publisher.

I don't think anybody was realistically taking them seriously in the first place - it's a game about tiny plastic army men. Taking it too seriously is how you get a signature block like yours.

I feel like those most upset about this aren't even Space Wolf players in the first place.

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm not really mad the mistake happened, i'm more annoyed that GW insists on this antiquated system for rules.

It'd be entirely different if they offered a rules subscription like I mentioned, and also sold codexes. Then I can pay $5 a month or something, saving money, having up-to-date books with erratas, FAQs, etc, that are fully searchable and with links to make reading and referencing easy. Meanwhile, book lovers can circle jerk over how inaccurate and error filled their codexes are, while they buy 3-4 a year to the tune of ~$160.

I think they should just follow the approach they have with AoS and Kill Team - everybody in AoS and Kill Team have access to the unit rules for everything. In AoS it's through online PDFs linked from the army tool, and in KT it's part of the main book, but in either case the basic component stands - a unit's rules are available outside of the army book. KT box sets give you extra rules and abilities, though, and in some ways that's similar to a codex. But you don't need to buy every box set to get the rules for every unit.

Sure, there are third party sources for that information - but GW should be the source, not some other completely unrelated community.

I think they should establish that concept directly by revamping their codex design - remove data sheets, points lists, and wargear profile lists. Those should be available via access to an app - where they can be updated and balanced independently and at any time they wish, without the need for a yearly supplemental rule book.

And like the KT boxes, the codex should be the home of army specific special rules, stratagems, warlord traits, and relics - all of which are unlocked on the app upon the codex purchase. This approach obviously wouldn't have resolved anything in this particular case, but less is more here. Trim the fat from codexes and you'll have an opportunity to put more care into what's left. The rest of the codex should be devoted to supplementing the rest of the hobby for your army. The lore is key here, but I'd like to see more hobby related content - kitbash ideas, awesome paint tutorials or examples, and maybe even a cool battle report using unique narrative campaign focused missions specific to that faction.

I do dislike buying a codex and knowing that only the lore is relevant past a certain point. But I know that it's far better than the alternative - a broken, unwieldy codex that cannot learn from mistakes at all.

I guess I'm one of the few people (if not the only one) who thinks this is a positive?

GW could have easily just kept quiet about sagas in their previews. They could have easily kept all Space Wolf codexes the same and released them without.

Then, when it was time for something like Chapter Approved they could have released it in that and charged you for the privilege. And you'd be none the wiser.

Instead, they admitted to making a mistake, corrected their codexes with smaller volumes (non-English) and offered a free errata before the codex is even released for those they could not justify fixing themselves.

There is perhaps an argument to say that they should have printed the errata and included it themselves with every codex but I don't think we can realistically expect them to reprint thousands of books for the sake of one page?

It's not ideal, but the reaction here is quite bizarre and over the top.

I also disagree that it's the hallmark of an unprofessional company as so many of you claim. Not many companies have the balls to admit they have made a mistake and take steps to correct it. For me it has only increased my trust. This the open, transparent GW we all wanted and begged for, is it not?

Yeah, I agree with the Englishman. Remember 7th. edition where that kind of mistake would have never been fixed. Remember not working Ork upgrades, the formation rule of heldrakes that never could come into play... these things. And they would stay unfixed for years.

 An Actual Englishman wrote:
I guess I'm one of the few people (if not the only one) who thinks this is a positive?

GW could have easily just kept quiet about sagas in their previews. They could have easily kept all Space Wolf codexes the same and released them without.

Then, when it was time for something like Chapter Approved they could have released it in that and charged you for the privilege. And you'd be none the wiser.

Instead, they admitted to making a mistake, corrected their codexes with smaller volumes (non-English) and offered a free errata before the codex is even released for those they could not justify fixing themselves.

There is perhaps an argument to say that they should have printed the errata and included it themselves with every codex but I don't think we can realistically expect them to reprint thousands of books for the sake of one page?

It's not ideal, but the reaction here is quite bizarre and over the top.

I also disagree that it's the hallmark of an unprofessional company as so many of you claim. Not many companies have the balls to admit they have made a mistake and take steps to correct it. For me it has only increased my trust. This the open, transparent GW we all wanted and begged for, is it not?

It's not that they made a mistake, they didn't. A mistake is a typo. This is them changing their mind between sending it to print and release.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Yeah, I agree with the Englishman. Remember 7th. edition where that kind of mistake would have never been fixed. Remember not working Ork upgrades, the formation rule of heldrakes that never could come into play... these things. And they would stay unfixed for years.

What DID that Heldrake formation do? 7th feels so long ago haha!

 Xenomancers wrote:

daisy666 wrote:
Apologies if I've missed it - I think I've gone through most of this thread ...

But have GW confirmed that the epub version from warhammerdigital.com will have the fix in it or not?

IDK - what program do you use to read those dreaded files anyways?

Azardi for Windows is the most compatible, but Chrome's Readium extension is the most featured and user friendly.

You are right - the epub file is horrible - specifcially epub3 standard is so poorly fully implemented - you either have Readium with its mashing of text together, or Azardi with its lack of zoom.

Wish they released them as PDFs ...

 trephines wrote:

crzylgs wrote:
I think there are a few things GW could do to tackle this issue:

A very fair and simple solution would be when you buy a physical Codex for ~£25 you should get the digital version included. With the current model of regular FAQs, balance changes [...]

GW don't really lose anything here because I'm sure there can't me many people at all who buy a physical Codex and the digital version? Seeing as books are put together digitally anyway the conversion from whichever software they use to digital copy for the public requires very little work.

This way you get to buy your physical copy, without the potential 'buyers remorse' if/when you have to reference the digital version.

I work for a publisher as a digital assistant and get asked why this isn't standard practice across the industry. There are so many articles/ Twitter threads out there that answer the question better, but here goes.

There isn't a viable delivery method for providing your free ebooks! TLDR; it's not feasible because of boring DRM stuff.

1. Vendors add the DRM, they own the algorithm things. And I don't see GW giving away DRM free epubs for everybody to pirate any time soon. And the cost for licensing Adobe DRM is insane (the only one I have heard about licensing).

2. Say vendors did get on board, they'd probably charge the publisher for delivery costs (KDP charges by the MB, which for fixed layouts would be insane) as they aren't making money off giveaways...

3. Where are you getting the physical books from, that also sells digital editions? Amazon is the only place I can think of, but last time I checked, GW only do fixed layout epubs, due to mobi and KF8 being [insert dumpster fire gif here]. Why not sell a wider market of ebook consumers? Because kindle is literally only any good for reflowable ebooks, because its CSS support is straight out of 1998. Amongst other things, but I could rant about Kindle being for days.

I bet that was full of typos and ranty but I'm on a train, tapping at a tiny screen and very sleepy. Will probably reread and edit later if I remember.

Osprey/Warlord makes their rulebooks available as PDFs (I’ve bought several) or ePubs, and several other companies parter with DriveThruRPG to deliver PDF versions of their older, and often current, offerings. Heck, I’m a vendor on DriveThruRPG; it’s not hard at all these days to export your book design out to PDF format and either lock it down yourself or get a 3rd party involved to add protection to it.

Not that all the DRM in the world is going to do much to protect it anyways - GW’s current Codexes in all their glory are out there for those who look for it for five minutes. Even the ones they didn’t put up (for the likes of past editions, like 3rd and such). I know, I know - “If all of this is just available for free, why should GW bother?” ‘Cuz most people prefer the inferred quality from the original publisher and the ease by which it could be obtains vs. finding some crooked phone-picture scan with people’s thumbs holding the book open on a possibly virus-laden website.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Yeah, I agree with the Englishman. Remember 7th. edition where that kind of mistake would have never been fixed. Remember not working Ork upgrades, the formation rule of heldrakes that never could come into play... these things. And they would stay unfixed for years.

What DID that Heldrake formation do? 7th feels so long ago haha!

Well, I don't really know anymore, too
I think it gave a penalty to leadership at a point in the game round where you'd never had to do a leadership test...

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:
Yeah, I agree with the Englishman. Remember 7th. edition where that kind of mistake would have never been fixed. Remember not working Ork upgrades, the formation rule of heldrakes that never could come into play... these things. And they would stay unfixed for years.

What DID that Heldrake formation do? 7th feels so long ago haha!

Well, I don't really know anymore, too
I think it gave a penalty to leadership at a point in the game round where you'd never had to do a leadership test...

Like Tyranid SiTW in 7th? Penalty to a psykers leadership when casting powers which is when they don't need it ever.

 IronBrand wrote:
It's not that they made a mistake, they didn't. A mistake is a typo. This is them changing their mind between sending it to print and release.

They are entitled to change their own rules on a whim, particularly when it's for the benefit of the game.

As my previous post, it's better than the alternative (which is them charging for these changes).

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

They are entitled to change their own rules on a whim, particularly when it's for the benefit of the game.

A local hero needs to save this quote for when they nerf the pants off of Orks in like 6 months.

 Marmatag wrote:
A local hero needs to save this quote for when they nerf the pants off of Orks in like 6 months.

You've obviously not seen my lists. If winning was my sole aim I would run more Boyz.

Just do what I'm doing with the codex

And once again GW gets a free pass just for being GW, and the white knight responses cover the full spectrum from "It's only toy soldiers bruh why so triggered?" to "be thankful you get anything at all, filthy peasants".

The bare minimum fix for a sanfu like this is an errata sheet bundled with each book. When this happened to PP in the early days, they actually covered the offending paragraph with a sticker in each copy. And far more expensive books have been pulped and reprinted for this sort of error.

As for accountability, I got 1 country name wrong in an atlas once as a translator and you can be sure I'll never get work with that publisher again. There should be heads rolling for this level of snafu.

Not everyone defending them for this is a White Knight.

But to be on topic for once...

This printing error is proof of the power of the medium and in fact GW has made the right call. I have to say I'm sure the "extra playtesting" was just a nice way of saying "we noticed we fethed up".

Sure a pdf would be easier to fix but, I think my point about ownership still stands.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
And once again GW gets a free pass just for being GW, and the white knight responses cover the full spectrum from "It's only toy soldiers bruh why so triggered?" to "be thankful you get anything at all, filthy peasants".

The bare minimum fix for a sanfu like this is an errata sheet bundled with each book. When this happened to PP in the early days, they actually covered the offending paragraph with a sticker in each copy. And far more expensive books have been pulped and reprinted for this sort of error.

As for accountability, I got 1 country name wrong in an atlas once as a translator and you can be sure I'll never get work with that publisher again. There should be heads rolling for this level of snafu.

the sticker etc ideas would proably take time, GW proably assumes we'd rather get the book this week instead of mid september

 Stormonu wrote:

 darkcloak wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 darkcloak wrote:
A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

You know, when I was a teenager you paid one internet bill and got unlimited access. Now you pay for data.

When I was a teenager, I paid per minute for internet access. Now it's unlimited. What's your point?

My experience with GW's digital codexes is that they're updated with errata, but that a new edition is a new product.

The point is that the internet used to be quite a bit cheaper and based on the same monthly usage/billing setup as say, cable TV. You paid the bill and got access based on a set amount of time. Now they sell internet by the bit. If you have Shaw hi-speed you get x amount of data per month and pay for any overages. So GW now gives you an option, book or digital. That's fine and that's how it should continue, but what if GW were given complete control over what data you accessed and when? Do you really trust them to treat you fairly? Digital copies are fine, but at the end of the day you are trusting GW with your property. It's stewardship of information.

Overblown paranoia. I can get PDFs of Battletech TROs with the long-removed Unseen mechs with no difficulty at all. Don’t even get me started on the conversion from 8-track (yes, I’ve been around since the days I had the Star Wars soundtrack on 8 track) or LP to cassette to CD to MP3 and having to rebuy the same damn music each time the media changed.

And as for internet access “being cheaper”, I recall the days of it taking 24 hours to download the trailer for Phantom Menace - and if you wanted to rewatch it, you had to download it AGAIN. Now, I can download something like that in seconds (or stream it) and a couple hundred gigs of other stuff to boot before coming near any sort of cap. Internet access, speed and data caps have gotten better, not worse.

I remember those days. Stealing IP off Ubuntu used to take hours! But in reality, that didn't really matter at that time because hours was actually an improvement over days! It's only now that we look back and go oh wow dial up was slow. Back then we were glad a webpage opened in under 10 seconds, now we aren't even willing to wait two seconds for content. Which, given the actual inner workings of the internet, is pretty freaking amazing. Yes, I do remember getting frustrated about the internet back in the day, but it was never really a problem. In 2009 it was feasible to not use the internet for a few hours, but now we can't go five minutes.

You can call it overblown paranoia if you want, I probably am being paranoid. However, there is a lot to be paranoid about! Major corporations know more about me than most people I know. They know more about you than your friends do. Even here on dakka there is a record of everything you ever typed. Is dakka selling your information to nefarious entities? No, but it begs the question, why the need for such intensive data collecting? To sell us products better? If Coca Cola decided to stop collecting information on its customers, how many people would stop drinking coke? Would we even notice? We might wonder why we don't see so many Cola ads on our Facebook but when we go to the grocery store we are still going to buy Coca Cola. But we allow such things when we click okay to TOS agreements that we never ever read, and if we do read them they are designed to be confusing unless we know business jargon, which is often different from one company to another. Think about copyright infringement for a second, those blue screened warnings on every dvd ever. You could be prosecuted and imprisoned for violating copyrights. How many of us have downloaded a movie or a cd? That's jail time should the authorities decide it. I know I could go to jail for downloading Spore, which I believe is still the most pirated game, thanks to inbuilt DRM protection. So, what's to stop GW from pressing charges against people who steal their IP? I have several copies of codices on my PC that could land me in hot water. I also have spent a slew of cash of GWs books too by the way.

Now I'm sure you think I'm insane! But really when you look into the reality of life in a technological world there are some surprisingly Orwellian problems arising and we are not equipped to deal with them. Not as individuals. Not when global media can sway literally millions of minds. It's not just about GW at this point. We need to take a long hard look at how social media functions and how we are going to interact with it going forward. When companies you've never even heard of can decide what content is on the internet and what isn't, we need to do some serious debating.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Togusa wrote:

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I have called a waaahmbulance.

No kidding, the level of salt in this thread is higher than that of a McDonalds Cheesburger.

Mistakes happen, either accept that people aren't perfect, or go find some other hobby to entertain your mind and take your hard earned cash.

The codex isn't invalid, it has a mistake in it, one that has now been corrected.

And once again, no-one is mad the mistake was fixed. They are mad that these mistakes keep happening. Literally ONE 8th edition book of theirs is still valid as printed, out of 22. Not even their Errata book could be printed without mistakes.

When your big book of errata needs errata, you've officially given up any right to be taken seriously as a rules publisher.

I look foward to playing your game.

Seriously, BCB, you seem to have a good head for game design, make your own game, design your own rules. I bet you'd produce something solid.

 Marmatag wrote:
I'm not really mad the mistake happened, i'm more annoyed that GW insists on this antiquated system for rules.

It'd be entirely different if they offered a rules subscription like I mentioned, and also sold codexes. Then I can pay $5 a month or something, saving money, having up-to-date books with erratas, FAQs, etc, that are fully searchable and with links to make reading and referencing easy. Meanwhile, book lovers can circle jerk over how inaccurate and error filled their codexes are, while they buy 3-4 a year to the tune of ~$160.

Not possible.

There's a sister thread with people talking about how they don't trust digital nor the people using it.
I don't think that kind of attitude can change in any short amount of time.

 Marmatag wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

They are entitled to change their own rules on a whim, particularly when it's for the benefit of the game.

A local hero needs to save this quote for when they nerf the pants off of Orks in like 6 months.

oof

I'm not White Knight, but you have to love that GW can't win.

GW rushes to get the Codex to the printer as soon as possible because "Where is my Space Wolf Codex? GW hates me!"

GW continues play-testing (if you believe them) and realizes the Warlord Traits are not up to snuff and comes up with better rules. They are even fast enough with the update to get the new rules into the translated versions of the codex. They then release it to the fans before they get the Codex in their hands.

"It is inexcusable for GW to put out rules that need correction before we even get them in our hands. They suck."

I guess they should have just left the bad rules in place and not worked to give us a better product, even if it means we need to print out one piece of paper.

Or maybe they should have save it for Chapter Approved 2018 to make it worth the cost for Space Wolf players

 alextroy wrote:
I'm not White Knight, but you have to love that GW can't win.

GW rushes to get the Codex to the printer as soon as possible because "Where is my Space Wolf Codex? GW hates me!"

GW continues play-testing (if you believe them) and realizes the Warlord Traits are not up to snuff and comes up with better rules. They are even fast enough with the update to get the new rules into the translated versions of the codex. They then release it to the fans before they get the Codex in their hands.

"It is inexcusable for GW to put out rules that need correction before we even get them in our hands. They suck."

I guess they should have just left the bad rules in place and not worked to give us a better product, even if it means we need to print out one piece of paper.

Or maybe they should have save it for Chapter Approved 2018 to make it worth the cost for Space Wolf players

Or maybe they could have printed the rules on time, and printed them correctly? Shocking I know, but that's what a competent company would have done. They've only got 40+ years of experience at this.

Hello to everyone. But this post applies mostly to vets:
I was once addicted to seeing 40k as being dictated by GW. I saw the light and got out. I have enjoyed the 40k universe since 2nd ed and still do but I realised that from my perspective it has been run into the ground. The fact of the matter is that it depends on your perspective as to whether they are doing a good job. For me, as a SW vet player, they have fuc*ed us for some time now. I'm talking about the horus heresy books, the rules for various eds not representing the faction at all, the models, everything. The constant nerfing of the legend of Russ, the replacing of the noble savage Fenrisian princes with trampy looking unwashed thug cun*s, the book 'blood of Asaheim' by Chris Wraight which claims that SW don't actually have acute senses!!! I got fed up with it. So you know what my friends and I did? WE wrote our own codices. It's not like GW make balanced codices/editions anyway. Talk with your friends, write your own dexes, playtest them and amend them. If your friends are di*ks about the rules then you need new friends so that's no excuse. GW have proved now (and not just with SW) that the current staff are not worthy of the IP. You don't need them. If you are reasonable about it you will find writing and playing with your own dex amazingly liberating and more fun than putting up with the trash GW has been producing for years.
Once again, If you are a teen or a 20-something this probably doesn't apply to you but you might still consider it.

EDIT: Just to give you an idea of what you can do: Wolf scouts are vets who roam the wastes of Fenris. They take an elite slot. They should be good at eluding and surviving confrontations with the abundant monstrous creatures that roam the wastes of Fenris. My scouts have monster hunter and the statline of a wolf guard. Because that's what makes sense. It's also incredibly fun to play with but I pay the points cost for them. Just try it guys. Free yourself from these stale rules.

Meh. I'll stick with GW's stuff because I can pick up and play with anyone.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 alextroy wrote:
I'm not White Knight, but you have to love that GW can't win.

GW rushes to get the Codex to the printer as soon as possible because "Where is my Space Wolf Codex? GW hates me!"

GW continues play-testing (if you believe them) and realizes the Warlord Traits are not up to snuff and comes up with better rules. They are even fast enough with the update to get the new rules into the translated versions of the codex. They then release it to the fans before they get the Codex in their hands.

"It is inexcusable for GW to put out rules that need correction before we even get them in our hands. They suck."

I guess they should have just left the bad rules in place and not worked to give us a better product, even if it means we need to print out one piece of paper.

Or maybe they should have save it for Chapter Approved 2018 to make it worth the cost for Space Wolf players

Or maybe they could have printed the rules on time, and printed them correctly? Shocking I know, but that's what a competent company would have done. They've only got 40+ years of experience at this.

Privateer Press, who for a while were regarded as a rather responsive company have done this very thing twice in under a year. It's less that they were unprofessional, and more that you just want to mine more salt.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Privateer Press, who for a while were regarded as a rather responsive company have done this very thing twice in under a year. It's less that they were unprofessional, and more that you just want to mine more salt.

Privateer Press also have a tiny fraction of the resources, staff and experience Games Workshop has.

It's like saying when Volkswagen make a mistake with a part in one of their cars, it's the same as when Joe Bloggs makes a mistake when he builds a car out of scaffolding and superglue.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Privateer Press, who for a while were regarded as a rather responsive company have done this very thing twice in under a year. It's less that they were unprofessional, and more that you just want to mine more salt.

Privateer Press also have a tiny fraction of the resources, staff and experience Games Workshop has.

It's like saying when Volkswagen make a mistake with a part in one of their cars, it's the same as when Joe Bloggs makes a mistake when he builds a car out of scaffolding and superglue.

My point is that PP had a reputation for writing tight rules, and they still did stuff like this.
It's far different. Volkswagen get's considered a good company for noticing and fixing mistakes, while Joe Bloggs gets arrested for endangering drivers. Try to keep your examples relevant.

*shovels away baconcatsalt

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
Privateer Press, who for a while were regarded as a rather responsive company have done this very thing twice in under a year. It's less that they were unprofessional, and more that you just want to mine more salt.

Privateer Press also have a tiny fraction of the resources, staff and experience Games Workshop has.

It's like saying when Volkswagen make a mistake with a part in one of their cars, it's the same as when Joe Bloggs makes a mistake when he builds a car out of scaffolding and superglue.

So in other words you hold GW to a impossiably high standard,
good to confirm that.

I feel less like it's holding GW to a high standard as much as it is excusing everyone else on the grounds of not being GW while calling GW Space Hitler because they aren't perfect.

I really don't get the whole resources arguement. Textbooks have mistakes. Heck, military regulations backed by millions of dollars of resources have errors. Every computer, console with internet access and even my freaking phone isn't perfect despite being made by companies that make millions if not billions every year.

So why exactly is it that GW is being held to a level that I don't see any other company again?

Oh yeah, for the salt mines.

Certainly no reason to burn all our books anyways.

Can we at least try and let the company wear the white hat for awhile and see what happens?