Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Does anybody know if the Blood Angels codex is getting written by Jervis Johnson?

Another jervisified BA codex?
Please not. There are better writers out there at GW.

JERVIS?


DO NOT WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I guess it will be written by Kelly.

Does anyone know when it's out?

Well, there is no exact release date at this moment.
Rumors say March or April.
Brimstone mentioned recently that it could be August.

I doubt Jervis will have too much of a hand in it. Even if he did, I don't see it being anything like the bland free 'dex. GW has moved past that phase of rules design, thank god.

You know just starting within this year, I have no clue who this guy is, anyone mind filling me in on this supposed Douche burg?

I think Jervis' current role at GW does not include writing codices.

wuestenfux wrote:I guess it will be written by Kelly.

I'd like that.

So who is this guy good, bad, the ugly? All I know of is Dan abnett guy.

Kelly usually writes "strong" Codices, which is generally good if you're playing that army.

I doubt that Cruddace will get a hand on the BA codex
since he's responsible for the 'Nids 'dex.
Matt Ward (the writer of the SM codex) would be an option, too.
I'd prefer Phil Kelly.

I should probably just look these guys up. I am curious on each of these guys.

TheTrueProtoman wrote:I should probably just look these guys up. I am curious on each of these guys.

All you need to know is Phil Kelly=Epic and Awesome Codex's and expansions,
Matt Ward=Semi Epic

TheTrueProtoman wrote:You know just starting within this year, I have no clue who this guy is, anyone mind filling me in on this supposed Douche burg?

Jervis Johnson


The most common complaint about him is either about the boring dragged out Standard Bearer articles in the White Dwarf about either the good old days or how fun friends are. The other is how generic, bland and oversimplified he seems to make a Codex and how there always seems to be almost three times as many special characters added.


I don't see what's so bad about him, myself, as long as he doesn't butcher armies it's fine. But, when ever it comes time to complain about something his name is usually not too far behind. IIRC he's also the one who tried to explain the Squats removal so people probably think of him as the one that murdered the Squats.

Jervis has the unenviable job of trying to explain the decisions made by GW's bean counters:
- not subsidizing money-losing Tournaments
- not supporting unprofitable Tournament players
- not running money-losing individual bitz service
- not releasing idiot-proof Codices with Wargear
- not updating money-losing Inquisition
- not releasing money-losing Dark Eldar
and so on.

For this, he is roundly hated by everybody with at least one of the above invested interests.

n0t_u wrote:

TheTrueProtoman wrote:You know just starting within this year, I have no clue who this guy is, anyone mind filling me in on this supposed Douche burg?

Jervis Johnson


The most common complaint about him is either about the boring dragged out Standard Bearer articles in the White Dwarf about either the good old days or how fun friends are. The other is how generic, bland and oversimplified he seems to make a Codex and how there always seems to be almost three times as many special characters added.


I don't see what's so bad about him, myself, as long as he doesn't butcher armies it's fine. But, when ever it comes time to complain about something his name is usually not too far behind. IIRC he's also the one who tried to explain the Squats removal so people probably think of him as the one that murdered the Squats.

Holy crap I remember that guy, I have a white dwarf I won with a bunch of other stuff at a Warhammer online tournament and his article was the worst in it, pretty much Wikipedia how painting is for everyone, bleh I hope to god he doesn't touch anything. Its the White dwarf of 2008 that released new units for warriors of chaos, and all that guy did was just blah blah you need to paint with family blah blah painting is fun if your not me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also thank you for the reply's everyone on who some of these people are.

wuestenfux wrote:Matt Ward (the writer of the SM codex) would be an option, too.

Great. Lets all get ready for a codex that has 12pt per model Marines, and everything has a 4+ invunerable save at least ...

Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:

wuestenfux wrote:Matt Ward (the writer of the SM codex) would be an option, too.

Great. Lets all get ready for a codex that has 12pt per model Marines, and everything has a 4+ invunerable save at least ...

Well, Ward's SM codex is much better playable than the jervisified BA codex.

Considering that Jervis Johnson wrote Epic Armageddon, Blood Bowel (3rd edition), and is currently the guy heading the Warhammer 40k development team - the team that has given us the 5th edition of the game - I think people have a lot of nerve being a dick about him.

Though I don't see why GW would re-write the Blood Angels Codex anytime soon. Maybe as part of a 5th edition Angels of Death dual codex, of similar heft to the Space Marine codex, but otherwise nacht.

Nurglitch wrote:Considering that Jervis Johnson wrote Epic Armageddon, Blood Bowel (3rd edition), and is currently the guy heading the Warhammer 40k development team - the team that has given us the 5th edition of the game - I think people have a lot of nerve being a dick about him.

Though I don't see why GW would re-write the Blood Angels Codex anytime soon. Maybe as part of a 5th edition Angels of Death dual codex, of similar heft to the Space Marine codex, but otherwise nacht.

I'm assuming you mean Blood Bowl, unless Jervis wrote a game based on the unfortunate after effects of eating too many hot wings.
If Cruddace or Matt Ward wrote the new Blood Angels book I wouldn't complain. Phil Kelly has more important books to work on, I'm sure. I really enjoy his work.

Yes, I mean Blood Bowl. My work computer hates me. Fortunately I hate it back, so we're even.

I just hate his face. Jervis writes the most boring things I have evre written. Once my little cousin came over, found my white dwarfs and drew on his face. I gave my cousin some chocolate for that and told his mum his a good boy

Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:

wuestenfux wrote:Matt Ward (the writer of the SM codex) would be an option, too.

Great. Lets all get ready for a codex that has 12pt per model Marines, and everything has a 4+ invunerable save at least ...

Well, at least that codex would not be that boring.
Beware us of the another jervisified codex

What, you mean like the last Imperial Guard Codex? Or the last Space Marine Codex? Maybe you're referring to the Space Wolf Codex. I know, I know, the Chaos Daemons Codex is what you're whining about!

Well, at least Pete Haines is out of the mix - talk about boring and conservative codices! Ugh.

For maximum balance, all codices should be written by the same writer or writers. Some people have a chip on their shoulder about not creating "power armies" (or not caring about balance), and others do not. In a world where either group existed alone, balance would be preserved. It's when they both get a shot at codex writing that we end up with disparities between lists.

n0t_u wrote:

TheTrueProtoman wrote:You know just starting within this year, I have no clue who this guy is, anyone mind filling me in on this supposed Douche burg?

Jervis Johnson "king of gays"

Sexy beast

Droofus wrote:Well, at least Pete Haines is out of the mix - talk about boring and conservative codices! Ugh.

For maximum balance, all codices should be written by the same writer or writers. Some people have a chip on their shoulder about not creating "power armies" (or not caring about balance), and others do not. In a world where either group existed alone, balance would be preserved. It's when they both get a shot at codex writing that we end up with disparities between lists.

Pete Haines wrote in part the 3rd ed CSM codex, possibly the best codex of all time.

wuestenfux wrote:Pete Haines wrote in part the 3rd ed CSM codex, possibly the best codex of all time.

What he said. That was the best Codex in memory. The Orks is a near second.