My Letter to Jervis...

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.

**Chimera_Calvin**

Just thought I'd share this one. I decided to write to Jervis to suggest the best idea I've heard anyone on this forum come up with (well, nearly, I changed it a bit!)

The problem is I can't remember who put the idea up originally and would like to recognise them in the letter. Can anyone claim this?

Also, what do you think my chances are of:

1. Getting a reply?
2. Achieving anything?

Thanks in advance,

C_C

Dear Jervis,
Although I have been war-gaming for nearly twenty years, including a period spent working for Games Workshop, I have only recently discovered the online gaming community (after signing up for the forums at dakkadakka.com). The discussions I have read and participated in prompted me to write to you for two reasons.

Firstly, I was curious as to whether you, or other game designers, are involved with the online community. If so, how? Do you simply keep an eye on what people consider to be the main issues and try to find solutions ‘in-house’, or do you take ideas from the community and incorporate them into the changes that are made to the game systems? Do you ignore the online community completely in favour of getting feedback from other sources? In any event, I would be fascinated to find out your views – possibly in a future ‘Standard Bearer’?

For myself, I have probably learned more about my hobby in the last three months than ever before, simply by being exposed to so many differing ideas and experiences.

Secondly, whether you are involved online or not, I would like to forward what I consider to be the best proposal that I have seen suggested online thus far.

Some of the most persistent complaints from veterans are about the perceived ‘dumbing down’ of the 40k rules and codices – the loss of the ‘Lost and the Damned’ army list, the removal of legion-specific rules from the Chaos Space Marine codex and the lack of support for Inquisitorial armies. Another issue is inconsistency, particularly where Space Marines are concerned (given their rules are spread over 3 codices, an old codex supplement and a White Dwarf article).

A solution which has been proposed for this is a ‘10+4’ system of codex books. The ‘10’ are the main codices currently in print, Marines, Guard, Chaos Marines, Chaos Daemons, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Orks, Tau, Necrons and Tyranids. The ‘4’ would be a set of large books called ‘Codex Advanced’. Each would cover a different element of the 40k universe in great detail, providing special rules and alternate army lists.

Codex Advanced: Astartes would cover the Space Marines. The first founding legions and the crusader chapters would be covered at length, complete with rules for non-standard units, special characters and alternate force organisation. In effect, this book would replace the Dark Angels, Black Templar and (forthcoming) Space Wolves books and would incorporate the Blood Angels article together with new material.

Codex Advanced: Imperium would cover the remaining loyalist forces. Full rules for the Inquisition and the chambers militant would be in here, as would unusual and famous Imperial Guard regiments. This book would also contain new rules based on the old ‘Authority of the Master of Mankind’ to allow for mixed Imperial armies.

Codex Advanced: Lost and the Damned would cover Chaos. The original traitor Legions would have their own sections, similar to the Astartes book, plus rules for traitor guard, mutants and allied Chaos forces of traitors, Chaos Marines and Daemons similar to the Imperium book.

Codex Advanced: Xenos would be the final book in the series and would cover alien forces. Because of its scope, it may be necessary to release this as more than one volume (perhaps Xenos Threat covering Eldar, Dark Eldar and Tau and Xenos Horde covering Orks, Necrons and Tyranids). In either case it would follow the existing format to expand options for the armies concerned.

These books would have a number of benefits. First, they would revitalise a variety of armies which are either unpopular or have disappeared (thus increasing sales). Second, they would provide more customer choice. Beginners or casual gamers could use a basic codex, while experienced and dedicated gamers would have a range of more unusual options open to them (also increasing sales as long-time players would get both relevant books!). Finally, they would show a genuine dedication on behalf of Games Workshop to cater to veteran players (thus encouraging repeat business).

If done correctly, these books could be fair and balanced (and thus played without restriction in tournaments or against players with normal codices), would boost sales and garner huge respect from the gaming community. In addition, by increasing the available options you would encourage a more diverse gaming community. I don’t know about you, but the more different armies I see, the more inspired I am.

Yours in hope, if perhaps not expectation!

**Lormax**

I can't claim the idea. I like the letter, it's worded very professionally. I also really like the idea, though I'd like to throw another out there that I thought of after reading that. A "master" codex book...remove all the fluff, here are the rules/points/etc for all the armies. Do it in 3-ring binder style and it can be updated constantly. D&D 2nd edition did it with their monstrous compendiums...

**fitzeh**

Well worded and good ideas, but I'm not sure you need to patronise him with the business case for the proposals. Jervis is a pretty smart fella.

**Chimera_Calvin**

Never underestimate the power of money to a soulless corporation...

Damned, we're all damned I tells ye..

....sorry, over it now

**Redbeard**

I doubt anything will happen. Once you start proposing things, he may well have to throw the letter out without finishing reading it.

See, let's say they take your idea and do it. And then, somewhere down the road, you sue them, because they used your idea without compensating you.

That's a risk they cannot take. Most companies have to disregard letters like this. Unsolicited ideas are risky.

Furthermore, let's say they actually planned on doing this before they got your letter. If they take the time to read your letter, now you have a case for a claim against them, for stealing your idea. So, once you put "I've got an idea for you" in a letter, they may well dispose of it without reading the rest, just to avoid that problem.

**covenant84**

I'd actucally 2nd the money point. It does need to show that the business aspect has been considered, but I'd personally put this as a separate paragraph rather than pointing out each area which could improve sales. More along the lines of 'the current average gamer stays with the hobby for three? years, whereas catering for more advanced players would allow progression rather than simply buy a new army until you get fed up with new armies. It's the same principal as D&D. You keep playing becuase you want your character to improve. You don't start a new character every X months because you're bored.

~As for getting a reply, I wrote and reciebed one. Sent my letter by snail mail as I was advised that Jervis is more likly to reply to this rather than just an emial. I would say that I wasn't impressed with the reply, it said what I expected but sections seemed to be standard responses that had been copied and pasted.

Good luck, post the response if you get it!

**CyberShadow**

Actually, Jervis is pretty good at getting back to letters and emails. I have had a couple of exchanges with him. Sure, he does get a LOT of mail, but he does read it all, even if he cant get back to you. However, I dont think that he has the control over product release required. I suspect that Allesio would be the person behind this, backed up by the 'higher management'.

**H.B.M.C.**

Print it. Sign it. Send it in.

Better than an E-mail.

[EDIT]: As an aside, I actually love the idea. It's a kind of 'real' version of the cynical 'future' of 40K where you've got Codex: Marines and Codex: Not Marines.

BYE

**Valhallan42nd**

It might do nothing. But it might spark something. What are you out if it does nothing? A stamp or two. No big loss.

**Phoenix**

Seems like a very valid way to go. The other side effect that it will have is that it will cut down on the number of people asking questions about the lesser played armies since most people will have the expansion codexes.

**yakface**

The codex format you propose sounds good at first glance but it has one major glaring flaw which is why GW would never utilize such an idea:

It requires codexes to share information. GW has clearly learned their lesson about letting rules for an army be spread across multiple codexes and has put the kabosh on this kind of thing.

Anytime a codex has to reference another codex, for any reason, when that other codex is updated you instantly have obsolete references in it.

Obviously big examples of this are the Space Wolves codex not working nice with the SM codex. New players who buy a Space Wolf codex not only have to get two codexes, but they also have to try to decipher a FAQ just to try to make their army.

But even minor references can start screwing things up as with the DH, WH, SM & IG codexes, as both Inquisitorial books reference unit names that have gone away (for example, Land Speeder Typhoons are no longer a separate unit, yet both Inquisitorial books reference them as being so).

I think that's a big reason why you didn't see GW allow Chaos Deamons from the new codex to 'ally' with the CSM codex. I just don't think we'll ever see anymore 'ally' rules outside of Apocalypse because they ultimately are a giant headache a few years down the road.

All of your 'Advanced' books would pretty much have to contain references to the core codex in order to keep their page count anywhere reasonable. And once that happens you end up with a position that everytime GW wants to update the 'core' book they have to consider updating the 'advanced' book at the same time.

Then when you also consider that codex releases along with their corresponding model updates form the core of GW's releases you understand that lumping all of the 'advanced' SM chapters into a single release doesn't make any sense from a production and sales standpoint.

So while it is a nice idea, I really believe that each codex, no matter what it chooses to cover, needs to be a complete stand-alone product, and can never in any way be an 'add-on' to another codex.

**Hordini**

I think it's good. Yakface's points are certainly valid, but I would still send the letter (via snail mail). Not because I think the ideas are really going to happen as presented, but because this kind of feedback is still a good thing, and might open up some positive discourse with Jervis, and at least give you (and by extension, us, if you post his response here) some insight into Jervis' methods and thinking.

Also, sending an actual letter, as opposed to an email, is probably way more likely to be taken at least halfway seriously, and because of that likely to also receive a reply.

So yeah, send it in and see what happens!

**Da_Viking**

If you wanted to send a letter like this you could reword it slightly. See following:

I have a proposal for you. I would like to suggest that a compendium of codecies be put together (insert rest of idea here).

In exchange I would appreciate recognition in the compendium and 1$US (or other small fee as appropriate).

This gives them an Idea and a cheap way to pay for it.

Provided you are not trying to get rich on the idea. Alternately you could state that you do not want any compensation for it.

If you are trying to make a buck then I am sure that there are other routes you should follow to make your proposal.

But this is just my opinion.

**Orlanth**

You could try, but my experience of knowing GW inside staff is that suggestions go straight into the bin. Studio doesn't like being told, remember in their own eyes these guys are the top professionals in their field.

**Noisy_Marine**

Go for it!

I sent Jervis a letter and actually got a reply. I complained about the splitting of chaos. The reply was a form letter with a post script that actually referenced my original letter. Unfortuantely, I did not convince Jervis that the split is a bad idea.

But still, do just to see what you get.

**CaptainRavenclaw**

have you sent it yet??

did you hear back?

**warpcrafter**

It most certainly got wadded up and thrown in the trash. I don't know which GW personna wrote it, but I remember an article in White Dwarf once where they stated in no uncertain terms that they automatically disregard any incoming letters that submit an idea. This way, they don't have to worry about someone popping out of the woodwork with a lawsuit over said idea, trying to get a slice of the GW pie. I'm also pretty sure that they don't lurk on any forums or listen to any other sort of input. They obviously just sit in their corporate headquarters, sniffing glue and scribbling.

**ShumaGorath**

Its corporate policy in almost all companies to disregard letters that contain intellectual properties such as ideas for business models or suggestions. Without a legal disclaimer at the bottom of that letter there's not much they will do with it. Its also unlikely that they haven't heard it all before.

Its a nice thought, but a little misplaced in my opinion. You're better off talking to the guy in person at a sponsored event, where you know your words will at least have a solid chance of being heard.

**Lorek**

Edited: Due to a very well-written PM by grizgrin, I'm opening this back up.

Enjoy!

- Iorek

**grizgrin**

So Calvin,
Did you ever get any kind of reply on this one? I for one would be interested. Let us know, even if no return mail has darkend your doorway yet.

**H.B.M.C.**

He forwarded the responce to me:

Dear Calvin,

You are clearly a tournament gamer (ie. the 40K equivalent of a leper). As I have said at numerous times, we do not cater to people like you, nor will we ever.

Please do not contact us again as you might have germs.

Yours truly,
Jervis ‘Kill Points’ Johnson

The above may or may not be true.

BYE

**holden88**

So let me get this straight: I write a company up and say "I've got a great idea for you". As soon as they read that in my letter they immediatly bin the letter for fear of possible future lawsuits? This sounds pretty stupid to me. How exactly can they prove that they threw out my letter and disregarded my ideas? What if they were already working on a similair project?

I mean correct me if I'm wrong, but lots of companies run suggestion bins don't they. Heck even McDonalds has survey cards. You know "how can we serve you better" kind of things. Lets say I write to Pizza Hut and suggest they start serving hexagonal pizza's. A few years later Pizza Hut does. I can now turn around and sue them because they stole my idea?

I'm sure there are some lower deck lawyers who post on here that can sort this nonsense out.

As for the idea; it does have some merit however, Is anyone really going to want to play with the basic codex when the advanced ones are available? I know I wouldn't bother with them.

**namegoeshere**

40k armies are constantly taking steps backwards - to improve balance and to reshuffle peoples purchasing desires. This doesn't gel with that plan at all.

**Chimera_Calvin**

Holy Threadomancy Batman!!!

I never had a reply (no surprises there) - but thanks for the interest anyway...

**warpcrafter**

namegoeshere wrote:40k armies are constantly taking steps backwards - to improve balance and to reshuffle peoples purchasing desires. This doesn't gel with that plan at all.

That should be proof that they don't listen to what people are saying. If they heard even 1% of the opinions of people who actually played 40K, they game would show some signs of improvement. Instead, they treat us all like there's something wrong with us.

**grizgrin**

Calvin: Thanks for the update. That's all I was really looking for.

**namegoeshere**

warpcrafter wrote:
namegoeshere wrote:40k armies are constantly taking steps backwards - to improve balance and to reshuffle peoples purchasing desires. This doesn't gel with that plan at all.

That should be proof that they don't listen to what people are saying. If they heard even 1% of the opinions of people who actually played 40K, they game would show some signs of improvement. Instead, they treat us all like there's something wrong with us.

Yeah it doesn't seem to be about the love of the hobby anymore - just the business. Though that does have some upsides - better models really.

**Ratbarf**

**insaniak**

warpcrafter wrote:That should be proof that they don't listen to what people are saying.

The fact that so many of the issues debated ad nauseum last edition are specifically addressed in the 5th edition rulebook should be proof otherwise...

**grizgrin**

I'd have to say that I agree with insaniak in that regard. A lot of tuff got fixed, a lot of stuff got tightened up. I dunno how much further they will go with it, though.