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.

Is it just me or is it that out of the three main codex writers (Kelly, Ward and Cruddace) that Phil Kelly is the only one most fans really desire to write their Codex? I haven't heard of any other 'main' Codex writers who are still currently working in the Studio, and the majority of the online community hate Ward (if only for his lore) and universally dislike Cruddace. Is Phil Kelly the only game designer left who the fans actually like? It seems to me that GW really need more designers in the studio.

PS. No need for this to become another Ward hate thread

The internet is full of opinionated people who have no clue what they're talking about.

News at 11!

People "really desire Kelly" to write their Codex because of some perception that he writes amazing fluff. He does and he doesn't. When he's doing a project he doesn't really give a crap about(Space Wolves)--he lets things slide without a second thought whilst he operates as the project head. Canis Wolfborn says "Sup", as does an Ork crashing through a Titan's head on a motorcycle.

Ward is "hated" because of some idea that he, and he alone, is responsible to changes to background for some armies which had been left to gather dust. Grey Knights were brought back to their roots, and somehow that's a bad thing?

Cruddace is just bad though. He can't balance things, he copy/pastes old fluff in a vain attempt to please the Old Guard, and what's more he's supposed to be supervised by Kelly--who pays about as much attention to him as one does a ninja in a dark room.

Phil is my favorite, as his Ork and Eldar (both flavors) books are incredible. For the most part I like his Space Wolves codex too. He seems to be the author most people like best, since his codices tend to be the best all around. I agree that GW should bring in another author or two because the design team could use some new (or old!) blood. Things could stand to be shaken up a bit.

Phil tends to be a favorite because his books tend to be very strong with generally good internal balance with good fluff (as long as you overlook Space WolveS), though they do also tend to set new power trends more than other authors books. His 2006 Eldar dominated the tail of 4E, Orks were also incredibly powerful at the end of 4E and the fist year or so of 5E and still are pretty good, SW's are rather self explanatory. The only book of his in recent memory that didn't become a new obvious top tier tournament army was Dark Eldar and it's still pretty solid.

Brother SRM wrote:Phil is my favorite, as his Ork and Eldar (both flavors) books are incredible. For the most part I like his Space Wolves codex too. He seems to be the author most people like best, since his codices tend to be the best all around. I agree that GW should bring in another author or two because the design team could use some new (or old!) blood. Things could stand to be shaken up a bit.

This guy echoes my thoughts, word for word, to the point where I think he is a filthy psyker

But yes, Phil is my favourite, if only because of what he's done for the Ork and Eldar (both Eldar and Dark Eldar) books.

In terms of the gameplay balance aspect, honestly? None of the three match Ward, IMO. So far his weakest codex seems to be Necrons, and even then it's not by any signifigant amount, and none of his codices are as strong as Space Wolves or Imperial Guard. Beyond that they all look fun to play, and have toyed with the idea of starting a Grey Knights army.

In terms of the fluff? It's hard to say. Cruddace doesn't have anything as glaringly bad as Ward, but on the other hand, I honestly can think of nothing he's done I can even attempt to give a gak about. Cruddace also made a few controversial changes to Tyranid fluff, and while I am not really a Tyranid fan, I can see why some longtime Tyranid players would be a little miffed about some of it. Ward, IMO, did a moderately okay job on the Blood Angels codex in terms of the fluff, the only thing that really bothers me is the Sanguinor, that I can think of.

Kelly is the best fluff writer though, IMO. The Dark Eldar book was great, as was Orks (The only thing that really strikes as being too much being the Wazdakka thing Kanluwen mentioned above, that I can think of), and Eldar was also pretty good. His only black spot that I can recall is Space Wolves, which is admittedly a pretty big one for me, as I greatly disliked the book (But I'm also biased as hell against the Space Wolves so take this with a grain of salt).

Overall, would say Kelly>Ward=?>?Cruddace.

This is my opinion anyway.

Phil Kelly does poor work (thank god they shoved him off to do lil' Pirate Ships). His grasp of the rules seems still poor (JoTWW sniping, wound allocation disasters, etc..), his fluff is the most ridiculous (Cyber-Thunder-Wolf-riding-Wolf-Marines.. please?) as his grasp of basic physics and size-relations (Black-Holes-in-a-box?) and his utter disregard for established 40K metaphisics like the Warp (i.e. Decapitator).

Cruddace is better with the fluff than Kelly (though retconning the entirety of the Hive War stuff just to introduce a new Super-Nid felt... unnecessary), but his grasp of balance and rules is equally poor (IG vs. Nids or SoB).

Mat Ward is probably the only one they should entrust the books too. He's the best of the batch by far (which doesn't mean he doesn't make mistakes... just that the competition of the other two is so terribly beyond the pale), which is most likely the reason the internet likes to heap so much scorn on him.

I think the internet hates Ward because they don't grasp his subtractive codex design. In both Grey Knights and Necrons, you see him give them very strong rules elements (Fortitude, Storm Bolter/Force weapon standard, Reanimation against any kind of gun) and then goes and takes away something other codices are very used to easily having (melta, Troops choices with a range longer than 24", melta, multiple sources of long range medium strength guns, and melta). One hand gives, and the other takes away. GK and Necrons both have some significant holes that warp their list design in certain directions, but this isn't immediately obvious. Sure, Grey Knights have psyflemen, but they are almost forced to take them, which constrains their Heavy and Elite options rather badly. Compare to Guard. They get the strong rules elements, but there isn't really any functionality you can't find in Troops or at least two other slots in the codex at a worthwhile cost.

From a fluff perspective Only.
I would have to agree that Kelly is the better writer. I honestly enjoyed reading the dark eldar codex, and I absolutely love the ork codex. I admit I haven't read the eldar codex. Also, the space wolves codex was pretty bad, it got very boring very fast.

With regards to Cuddace, I am inclined to be wary. The guard book was ok in fluff terms, but written really badly. The stories felt very disjointed and lacked depth. Still it was ok. The tyranids were better, the whole book felt far more cohesive and had a real feeling of purpose behind it.

With regards to ward, the only thing I can really complain about is the grey knights which was the worst codex I had ever read. It was so boring I didn't even know that a broken character like draigo existed until he came up in discussions here and I had to go back and check. I didn't know because the book was so boring and badly written I stopped about half way. On the other hand, space marines was kind of fan boy on the unltramarines, but ok to read. Blood angels was pretty good, and the necrons was also fun to read.

Each of the authors seems to have issues. all of them have at least one negative and one positive against them. I would be inclined to say that of them Cuddace is the least remarkable. While the others had really good books, it was tempered by a really bad book as well. Cuddace has been purely adequate, no huge failures but nothing that really stands out.

However, I think we can all agree that Ward manage to make the better rules. What I want to know is why the hell cant they all work together. Have ward write the rules, Kelly write the fluff and use Cuddace as buffer to keep both of them in check?

THEY DO ALL WORK TOGETHER.

How is this so difficult to understand?

The writers do not work in a vacuum. They DO check each others' work and Jervis (who has the Final Say on fluff and rules, by all accounts) checks their work as well.

Ward is my favorite.

Kanluwen wrote:The internet is full of opinionated people who have no clue what they're talking about.

News at 11!

People "really desire Kelly" to write their Codex because of some perception that he writes amazing fluff. He does and he doesn't. When he's doing a project he doesn't really give a crap about(Space Wolves)--he lets things slide without a second thought whilst he operates as the project head. Canis Wolfborn says "Sup", as does an Ork crashing through a Titan's head on a motorcycle.

Ward is "hated" because of some idea that he, and he alone, is responsible to changes to background for some armies which had been left to gather dust. Grey Knights were brought back to their roots, and somehow that's a bad thing?

Cruddace is just bad though. He can't balance things, he copy/pastes old fluff in a vain attempt to please the Old Guard, and what's more he's supposed to be supervised by Kelly--who pays about as much attention to him as one does a ninja in a dark room.

This argument is so hypocritical. You say that Kelly is soley resposnsible for the bad things in his codex and yet anything wrong with Ward's is because of the team he works with.

Second, you cannot say how stupid Canis Wolfborn and Wazdakka and then completely gloss over the mary sue brigade that is Marneus Calgar, the Sanguinor, or Kaldor motherfethin' Draigo

Third, the Grey knights were not "brought back to their roots". To put it shortly: 3rd edition grey knights were Puritans, now they're Radicals.

Honestly, Phil Kelly is the only one I'd ever trust to write a decent codex. He's not perfect, as Space wolves proves, but everything else he has been a part in is solid, and is still a better track record than both Cruddence and Matt Ward

3rd edition was also not the root of the Grey Knights...

3rd Edition Daemonhunters was an abomination best forgotten forever.

New Grey Knights are solid gold perfect.. both in the book and in the models.

Kanluwen wrote:The writers do not work in a vacuum. They DO check each others' work and Jervis (who has the Final Say on fluff and rules, by all accounts) checks their work as well.

I find it hard to believe that they check their own work, much less each others'.

What was wrong with 3rd ed Daemonhunters? I thought it was alright. Though it has been a while since I read it...and no one played DH


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Abadabadoobaddon wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:The writers do not work in a vacuum. They DO check each others' work and Jervis (who has the Final Say on fluff and rules, by all accounts) checks their work as well.

I find it hard to believe that they check their own work, much less each others'.

Yeah, if they did, why are the Necron codex rules so unbelievably vague and convoluted? Why are they so many grammatical errors and plot holes?

CthuluIsSpy wrote:What was wrong with 3rd ed Daemonhunters? I thought it was alright. Though it has been a while since I read it...and no one played DH

They were a really underpowered army with decidedly few effective units and gimmicks. I wouldn't say the new one is perfect, but it's a big improvement over the 3rd ed book.

Phil is the best of the 3 to me. He's a tourny player and a pretty competitive guy too, so he does understand how to externally balance things better than the others. He's only human of corse, and mistakes will always happen...

But let's give him a bit of credit where it's due; Space Puppies have always been a feth-up. Their 3rd ed book, which was penned by Jervis who is the perverbial 'Mr.Nice Guy' and doesn't seem to have a competitve bone in his body, still managed to write an OTT codex... (seriously, anyone else recall Jervis' last fantasy bat rep where he embaressed every dark elf player the world over?!!)
Puppies have always had the 'best of both worlds' because they're a loyalist chapter with all the basic smurf rules, but they also get the 'legion perks' that are typically scene in the fighting styles of chaos marines... (first in 3rd ed to have 'counter-attack', ture grit, super cheap 'hidden' power fists, S5 power toys, the shooty guard tank @BS4 no less!!!)
I don't think puppies will ever be considered a truely 'balanced' book honestly, simply because of the fact their chapter is still a 30k force. That said, I think the internet really goes overboard on the space wolf hate. While they have 2 very cheap/undercosted units in grey hunters & long fangs, they also lack heavy weapon spam from tactical squads, while LF's have 0 ablaitive wounds, and it's a simple matter to remove their ability to split fire! (which btw, codex marines can effectively do the same w/combat squads!)

Eldar was actually re-written on Phil. He'd finished it and then gone on holidays. While he was away was when Jervis came up with his 'simplify it' ideas and the book was heavily changed before Phil got back...

Orks & Dark Eldar are solid books. They're competitive without being really OTT outside of trueborn venom spam. (and really, when bolters can dent your vehicles, you can't afford any mistakes)



Outside of codex Space Marines, I hate Ward's books. Yes, they have excellent internal balance - every unit is usable in a game. But the external balance is a complete mess! Grey Knights is nothing but a giant ****-up for Daemon players... Sure they're daemon hunters, but Ward gave them brutal anti-daemon abilities at every fething turn! I mean, how anyone can claim the book is 'balanced' when it's possible to win a game with just 1 dice roll? Please explain this concept of 'balance' to me, I've obviously missed the memo. Overall, GK's are not a very fun army to face unless you know they're coming and can balance your list to handle the worst of their antics. (such as the bull**** paladin wound-allocation squads or min/maxed purifiyer spam)
BA's also have pretty terribad external balance. Too many lop-sided match-ups with their various power builds... (is there a BA army that doesn't make Tau cry?!)

Then there's the fact that Ward will let his personal feelings towards armies get in the way of his writing... His "Ultrmarines are THE BEST space marines! No really - they are!!!" and how every other marine wishes he could be just like the ultrasmurfs is bad enough, but GK's went beyond OTT and simply read like some 10-year-old's wet dream about how epic awsome 'superz speesh mahreens' are.
Oh, and who can forget the laughably bad, 'I wasn't looking forwards to writting about Orcs'? Of course, it showed too; Orcs sucked balls all of 7th ed... I know that if I had ever taken that attidute towards any product or army when I worked for GW, my manager's foot would've been buried up my arse and I'd be out the door!

And let's not forget, Ward broke the entirety of 7th ed fantasy with the Daemons mess, because of course, "They're Daemons!"
(Dark Elves & VC's were OP as well, but nothing to the extent that daemons were...)

It's a shame too, because there are the odd bright spots with Ward, such as the rules for Codex: Space Marines. Overall, it's a solid book that is fun both to play with and against (only real screw-ups being storm shields are too good, drop pod & land raider transport capacity), and Necrons look like they're pretty decently balanced...
Ward just needs to stop acting like a fething 12-year-old and grow-up, especially in his writing!



Cruddace I'm indifferent. There's some really wierd stuff in the 'nid book, but overall it's alot better than most would claim... (anti-tank has always been a huge problem for 'nid since what, 3rd ed?!)
Guard is extreme, but beatable. Sisters are only a WD 'dex so they don't count really, since no WD 'dex has ever been all that competitive when compared to an actual codex... Tomb Kings are a helluva lot better now and the problems with the humble skeleton isn't Cruddace's fault, but more to do with how bad the core rules have nerfed basic undead. At least the dusty ones can cast spells now without needing to play a minimum 2k game!

Experiment 626 wrote:
Outside of codex Space Marines, I hate Ward's books. Yes, they have excellent internal balance - every unit is usable in a game. But the external balance is a complete mess! Grey Knights is nothing but a giant ****-up for Daemon players... Sure they're daemon hunters, but Ward gave them brutal anti-daemon abilities at every fething turn! I mean, how anyone can claim the book is 'balanced' when it's possible to win a game with just 1 dice roll? Please explain this concept of 'balance' to me, I've obviously missed the memo. Overall, GK's are not a very fun army to face unless you know they're coming and can balance your list to handle the worst of their antics. (such as the bull**** paladin wound-allocation squads or min/maxed purifiyer spam)
BA's also have pretty terribad external balance. Too many lop-sided match-ups with their various power builds... (is there a BA army that doesn't make Tau cry?!)

Many games are won with "just 1 dice roll". It just usually takes a while for that to become apparent.

Ward just needs to stop acting like a fething 12-year-old and grow-up, especially in his writing!

Sigh. Now I gotta reset the "Days without Wardhating on Dakka" counter back to zero.

Kanluwen wrote:THEY DO ALL WORK TOGETHER.

How is this so difficult to understand?

The writers do not work in a vacuum. They DO check each others' work and Jervis (who has the Final Say on fluff and rules, by all accounts) checks their work as well.

Apparently not well enough. At GDUK 2009 Ward came right out and said he "got his knuckles wrapped" for changing the LR and Drop Pod transport capacities, hence they they all got changed back in subsequent books, and that shows that there was a lack of oversight if that made it to print if the higher ups didn't like it as it was a very noticeable change.


EDIT: Sure, the other guys may have some input, just as my co-workers may provide some information or input on my work, but in the end, it's my work and my name on the cover and my ass if it sucks, and from how it looks, it's no different at GW.

For as much as they apparently disliked it, they sure did an expedient job in correcting it back to 10 in the errata.

daedalus wrote:For as much as they apparently disliked it, they sure did an expedient job in correcting it back to 10 in the errata.

GW went out of their way to stop making such changes after 3rd edition, as apparently i caused too much confusion amongst players (reference the 3.5E CSM errata where they changed stuff like toughness stats and the like), though backpedaled on that later with SM wargear to help sales of BT's and DA's since they were tanking and giving them better missile launchers, PotMS and Stormshields helped make them more attractive and got rid of having 2-3 different iterations of all that wargear.

It depends on if you want Fluff or Rules.


If you want fluff, you probably don't want anyone they have now to write your codex.

Ward will do some intense reaserch into your army's original fluff and resurrect it, and there will be nerd rage because people have forgotten the old stuff and then we just have Ward Hate.

Kelly will kinda do a half-assed job that no one will really care about, but he might do a nice job if he really likes the army. overall, you are choosing between mediocrity to poor with a 5% chance of awsome.

Cruddance will live up to his name. lets break it down and define it as per Merriam Webster's Dictionary Crud: a deposit or incrustation of filth, grease, or refuse ---Dance to move or seem to move up and down or about in a quick or lively manner.



For rules:

Ward will write a well balanced codex with a slight trend to the more powerful side. Rules might be slightly complicated, but usually only because people are by-and-large douches. the FAQ always clear things up.

Kelly: Kinda like the fluff, you really don't know what you're going to get.

Cruddance: Well, generally he lives up to his name again. Although if he puts enough units in a codex he is bound to allow some effective lists to be built, but on a percentage basis his codex's are filled with crud.

You find Kelly's fluff bad? The Ork and Dark Eldar codices are incredible, the Eldar codex is solid, and the Space Wolves codex is fitting for the army. I'll agree that most of Cruddace's fluff is too vanilla to really care though.

daedalus wrote:Sigh. Now I gotta reset the "Days without Wardhating on Dakka" counter back to zero.

...does it ever leave zero?

Durza wrote:

daedalus wrote:Sigh. Now I gotta reset the "Days without Wardhating on Dakka" counter back to zero.

...does it ever leave zero?

Was there ever a time people LIKED Matt Ward?

Luke_Prowler wrote:
Was there ever a time people LIKED Matt Ward?

Codex: Space Marines

Brother SRM wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:
Was there ever a time people LIKED Matt Ward?

Codex: Space Marines

I always liked Mat Ward. >.>


Balanced rules and rejuvenating the old fluff with a spice of new toys.

Iur_tae_mont wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:
Was there ever a time people LIKED Matt Ward?

Codex: Space Marines

I always liked Mat Ward. >.>


Balanced rules and rejuvenating the old fluff with a spice of new toys.

I have a few problems with him, but nowhere near enough to justify the overwhelming amount of stupid that gets directed towards him here on Dakka. Codex: Space Marines is probably the last time the unwashed rabble weren't making complaint threads about him or the codices he's written.

Iur_tae_mont wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:
Was there ever a time people LIKED Matt Ward?

Codex: Space Marines

I always liked Mat Ward. >.>


Balanced rules and rejuvenating the old fluff with a spice of new toys.

Yup. Me too. Brought me back into the hobby. For writing good, diverse lists. But most importantly for rejuvenating the 2nd Edition fluff (both in detail and in spirit) that I loved, that first drew me into the hobby and that 40K had lost for far, far too long.

Ward is what makes 40K worthwhile.