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.

Gav Thorpe responds in a candid manner to some gents who take issue with the Chaos Space Marines codex. Interesting discussion. Surprised that it took this long for someone to take it to his blog.

http://mechanicalhamster.wordpress.com/2009/09/10/differences-of-opinion/

Well, what *else* would Gav say?

I agree with some of his stuff but some of it was just a poor attempt to cover his a**

EDIT: p.s. he basically confirmed legions are probably in the works.

Cue the Gav "Put something insulting here" Thorpe posts.

What I got out of this was:
Codexes are guides not rules.
3.5 Legion armies were too inflexible.
It was about Renegades.
Mix codexes if you want cultists/daemons.
3.5 was too complex.

He tries to absolve himself of balance issues by saying he wrote the codex as a "foundation" for building Chaos armies without regard to gaming.

a decent read. some good points, some BS. in the end im always going to play chaos, whether its going to be my current "not so deathguard" deathguard or actual deathguard again if/when we get a legion codex.

To all CSM players that know your not getting a new codex soon:

Fair enough, I suppose - doesn't make sense to make Chaos too regimented. Having a box set which was supposed to contain all the information needed to field several different army types (CSM, Daemons etc.) AND have four different gods as a variable on top of THAT?
Admirable but over-ambitious, IMHO.

Did somebody actually expect him to come out and say "yes, some of the units in that Codex are overpriced/weak/unusable. Sorry, we made a mistake"? He still gets his paycheck from GW.

What Gav wrote is pretty much the way my group thinks. There's a lot to be offered in mixing together the units from different codexes and even using old LATD lists in games.
It can really add layers of enjoyment to games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It really is no great feat of wit, I think for a lot of the posters here to use the new codex in conjunction with the other things written, current and past, to create power specific armies.

I think the best part was when he said that a Codex is just a rough guide that you should use to tell the story you want with your awesomely painted miniatures. This definitely cements my decision to transition over to Hordes and Warmachine permanently.

More fail from Thorpe

*reads*

Hmm... I will respond to this message of Gav's - line by line if I must - later.

For the moment though, this stuck out like a sore thumb RE: Daemons:

"They were only folded into the Chaos Space Marines in the previous version of the Codex."

Daemons - as in God-specific Daemons - have been part of the Chaos Space Marine list in the following editions:

1. Realms of Chaos: Slaves to Darkness
2. Realms of Chaos: The Lost & The Damned
3. Codex Army Lists (2nd Ed Black Codex)
4. Codex: Chaos (2nd Ed)
5. Codex: Chaos Space Marines (first 3rd Ed Codex)
6. Codex: Chaos Space Marines (second 3rd Ed Codex)

Daemons have not been part of the Chaos Space Marine list in the following editions:

1. Codex: Chaos Space Marines (4th/Current Edition)

So either Gav just has a terrible memory, or is out-and-out lying about this, because his book is the only book to not allow forces of God-specific Daemons and CSMs not just in the last edition, but since Chaos Marines first appeared in 40K.

Additionally, his preamble about personal attacks and opinions is a nice "Get out of argument free" card as it allows him to call any dissenting opinion a "personal attack" and ignore it or give the "agree to disagree" cop out.

Huh, I expected a lot more hatred in the comments over there, but only one hateful guy there. And even he posted with some amount of intelligence.

I need to go read this codex and figure out if it's as horrible as you all say. (speaking of, what ARE the other upgrades for possessed? There have to be six and I know one of them is rending.)

Don't like the way your codex was written? Play another codex or find a new game. Blaming one guy for a bad codex is nonsense. He is bound to have proof-readers, editors, and supervisors who tell him to change things they don't like. Of course he isn't going to say that. He wants to keep his paycheck. It all comes down to selling product. Don't like it? Don't buy it.

Ironhide wrote: Don't like it? Don't buy it.

And make GW even more money. I think that was the problem a lot of people had with this book. They had alread bought it, and now the stuff they bought over the past years is useless or not as useful as it used to be. Apparently though, CSM is not the only codex to inspire hatred in the player base, I saw one guy who quit playing Orks (and 40K) totally after the new ork codex came out.

Ironhide wrote:Don't like it? Don't buy it.

I'm sorry, but that's a stupid thing to say, and that argument holds no water.

Y'know, as bad as the codex is, this brings something up that gets my goat, every time.

I understand you're upset about your gaming experience, be it a change to your class on Warcraft, an alteration to an army book, etc.

But why the heck do you resort to doing nothing but ragging on one of many different people most likely, to have worked on the project?

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Ironhide wrote:Don't like it? Don't buy it.

I'm sorry, but that's a stupid thing to say, and that argument holds no water.

I agree with Ironhide in part on this, but I'd expand it a bit to say, "Don't like it? either don't buy it or if you do, modify it or combine it with other codexes.
There is never going to be a way to write a codex to please everyone, and it falls to us to take a number of possible actions. To me, what I wrote seems the most logical.
You're a fairly elequent and intellegent writer and gamer, what are your suggestions?

Gavin Thorpe pretty much iterated why I like the 4th edition Chaos Space Marine codex. Cool.

Use the previous Codex. That's a start.

Kanluwen wrote:But why the heck do you resort to doing nothing but ragging on one of many different people most likely, to have worked on the project?

Well who should we address our concerns to then? The artists? The model makers? The painters? The layout guy? The dude who runs the printer? The Chaos Codex was written by Gav Thorpe, with 'additional material' (whatever that means) by Alessio Cavatore. As all the other people credited either work in the art or modelling side of things, what other avenues are there besides addressing complaints about the rules to the two people responsible for the writing of said rules?

Am I going to blame Phil Kelly because Wolfy McWolfrider is a stupid model? No. He didn't design the model. Same reason I'm not going to blame Karl Kopinski because Spawn are a gakky unit or lambast Brian Nelson because I can't field my Alpha Legion any more.

Now I'm sure that the rules involved more than just two people and I'm certainly not pretending that Gav and Alessio did all the work themselves, but they're the people that get the credit next to their name - written by/additional material by - so where else should my objections go?

starbomber109 wrote:Huh, I expected a lot more hatred in the comments over there, but only one hateful guy there. And even he posted with some amount of intelligence.

I need to go read this codex and figure out if it's as horrible as you all say. (speaking of, what ARE the other upgrades for possessed? There have to be six and I know one of them is rending.)

Scouts, Furious Charge, Fleet, Feel no Pain, Power Weapons

H.B.M.C. wrote:Use the previous Codex. That's a start.

Is there anything in your group that prevents using the previous codex in friendly games?

Relapse wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:Use the previous Codex. That's a start.

Is there anything in your group that prevents using the previous codex in friendly games?

As far as I understand it H.B.M.C. and his friends don't even use the official codices, instead using their homebrewed rules that've been growing over the years.

Neconilis wrote:Scouts, Furious Charge, Fleet, Feel no Pain, Power Weapons

Thanks :3

Hmm, you roll for powers when you deploy them, what if you put them in reserve? Granted, rending is awesome, but the rest of the upgrades seem 'good' (in the words of a friend however, "they just aren't uber") *digs around for an FAQ about putting them in reserve*

Relapse wrote:Is there anything in your group that prevents using the previous codex in friendly games?

It doesn't. But how does that help Mr. 8-Tournaments-A-Year and his Word Bearers? Or Mr. Plays-At-The-Local-Shop with his Death Guard?

starbomber109 wrote:

Neconilis wrote:Scouts, Furious Charge, Fleet, Feel no Pain, Power Weapons

Thanks :3

Hmm, you roll for powers when you deploy them, what if you put them in reserve? Granted, rending is awesome, but the rest of the upgrades seem 'good' (in the words of a friend however, "they just aren't uber") *digs around for an FAQ about putting them in reserve*

NP, and if you're thinking that means you can't Outflank by RaW, then you're unfortunately right. Most people I've seen don't play that way though, giving some love to the possessed if they want to Outflank 1 in 6 games ;-) You're also right that the rest of the powers are far from horrible. It's just random abilities are no way at all to create a balanced game, nor are they fun for the player not knowing what to expect from his unit and its role. Plus, from a points cost there are better and more dependable options in the codex.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Relapse wrote:Is there anything in your group that prevents using the previous codex in friendly games?

It doesn't. But how does that help Mr. 8-Tournaments-A-Year and his Word Bearers? Or Mr. Plays-At-The-Local-Shop with his Death Guard?

Can't say it does for the tournament guy, in all honesty, but are the shops that anal about using a single power army?. At that point it has to be asked what percentage of the customer base is made of these types and if more people are made happier with a freshening of the rules than are not

H.B.M.C. wrote: Or Mr. Plays-At-The-Local-Shop with his Death Guard?

Plauge marines are T5 with FNP, they will survive almost any shooting from normal guns, and as long as the objectives are placed right they can still win. And the tournament guy with his word bearers....hmmm

but didn't you say you quit going to tournaments in your Space Hulk review H? You wrote love things like CoD and planetstrike that do the exact kind of unit mixing and campaign-making he talked about in the article.

Edit: I may have read wrong

The part of his argument where he says that if you don't like something, just modify it doesn't fly either. The group I play with is so large and diverse that trying to use anything that is not in the official rules and codexes would require hours of argument and explanation, and that's if it would not be met with an automatic response of "Well no, it's not official so of course not." Most people, gamers or not just are not that flexible or imaginative. They want everything laid out for them in a rigid framework. I blame video games for this.

Use multiple Force Organization Charts to represent legions.

Word Bearers: Chaos Space Marines & Chaos Daemons
Alpha Legion: Chaos Space Marines & Imperial Guard
Death Guard: Chaos Space Marines & Chaos Daemons