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.

He's a dinosaur who should have gone extinct eons ago. As a casual 40k gamer, more of a hobbyist, I find his handling and opinion about the game to be rediculous.

Meh, I put neutral. The guy made bloodbowl which is good. but everything else is... well you know. I honestly question how much creative control he really has a lead designer.

I actually voted "who?" as I know he's involved in writing rules...but off the top of my head I've got no idea what he's (directly) done.

starbomber109 wrote:I actually voted "who?" as I know he's involved in writing rules...but off the top of my head I've got no idea what he's (directly) done.

Recently he was responsible for the Dark Angels codex.

I'll Say this. He has done more for the hobby than against it. So I doff my hat to the man who brought lovely stuff to us amd smile knowning that with age , people change.

I remember, a while ago, Jervis was off so someone else wrote a standard bearer (i think it was rick priestley) well in the opening paragraph he swore twice and dissed the Germans about the blitz (i apologize for any german people reading this, it wasnt me). So the editor changed his swear word to 'rotters' and at the bottom were two footnotes, they were i think:

1)Obviously i didnt put rotters, i swore, but the editor says "you cant sware it WD, children might be reading this", poor litte bleeps i say.

2)Note for German translator of issue, might want to miss that bit out, forgive and forget, and all that. Not that my Granny ever did.

Hes been around as long as ive been in the hobby, and i really love his attitude towards game play. that and the fact hes made some really great games for the hobby. so i like him. to bad he does get the stick more than he should at times.
My fondest memories of him are the BR he use to do with Andy Chambers.

Meh , I know little of his ups and downs in the history of this hobby , so i put down Neutral ..

Ahhh, once upon a time.....................

I remember when Jervis, Andy, etal were actively nvolved in the online community, posting to email groups (we didn't have these nifty forums back then), making "official" rules interpretations that would then be printed in WD a few months later. I remember the whole UK studio crowd showing up for the first US GT in '97, promoting the competitive aspect of GW games. Sitting at Edgar's in Baltimore with Jervis and others, drinking beer, shooting pool and discussing the rules and what's coming up.

Long ago and far away, those were the days. So for the memories he got a positive vote from me, but if all I had was the past few years, I would likely have voted negatively.

Jervis sure seems like a nice enough fellow, but the guy writes terrible rules. Remember, Jervis is the reason that the Wraithlord went from being an Eldar dreadnought with an AV to a T8 monster that can be only taken down by Frodo and Bilbo with poisoned sniper rifles. Also, he's arbitrary and capricious as hell - remember the Chaos "chainaxe" rule add-on that he admitted he penned simply because one of his buddies loved the old fluff for Khorne?

Personally, I feel he is a hypocrite. He spouts off in Standard Bearer about how this is your game, and in friendly/casual games, make up rules or ignore them as you see fit. He then continues on to say that the rules are for Tournament players, and if you don't like them, don't go to tournaments, as that is what the rules are written for - "competitive play". If the rules were designed for competitive play, there wouldn't be so many calls of "broken" when it come to the rulebook and codices.

He got a neutral from me.

My opinion of Jervis took an uptick when the Dark Angels Codex came out with calls of simplicity and consistency for all. It then took a sharp nosedive when he allowed other Codex writers to violate that consistency and simplicity. We now find ourselves with Storm Shields, Smoke Launchers and other wargear that do different things depending on who's Codex you read... the very situation he claimed to be fixing in the Dark Angels Codex.

My personal take is that most people are voting on what type of gaming style they are in. I for one voted neutral just do to the fact that I don't get to play very often and when I do play I still do play it as a "basement" game just due to the fact that it is a GAME. Don't get me wrong I like the fact that there are some GT and small tourneys at local game stores n such that allow people to play against friends and what not and still have that causal feel but still be able to best your buddy or whatever. But I will agree there are some rules that you look at it and ??? or where a couple of his interviews it does seem he wants to hold the game back but then again too I mean I treat the game for what it is a game and I think he has done an OK job at it I mean we do have to realize that JJ is not perfect nor will anyone who will replace him if he quit or whatever.

Just remember the number 1 rule of Warhammer
HAVE FUN

I voted very negative, because he handed out that abortion called the Dark Angel codex with a straight face like we should be ever so greatful for all his hard work at being lazy.

To further that, since it was "his book" he could have made adjustments for new printings, a proper faq, hell even a pdf would do.

But instead, he does nothing. He writes his crappy monthly article that insultingly states the obvious in a over priced monthly magazine that I probably wouldn't bother to read if it were free. I bought every issue of white dwarf from 1990 up till 6 months ago. I'm disgusted they peddle that crap to us every month and expect us to pay for it. There is nothing to that magazine other than advertisements and recycled painting techniques for new releases.

My main issue with Jervis is the dark angel book. The only time the man has ever written rules with some balls was for space wolves, any other time he got ahold of a codex it was time for that army to bend over and prepare to be Johnsoned.

I sent him my Dark Angel codex to the address in his article with a note saying "Thanks for Vanilla and the lack of support, I won't be needed this trash anymore".

And as far as him verbally spitting on tournament players, thats just dumb. Tournament players shell out for new armys on a VERY regular basis, frequently updating old ones to keep pace with the new books.. I've seen casual gamers using the same minis since rogue trader and 2nd edition. Tournament players do their fair share of spending just the same, shouldn't they be just as entitled to their want for good writing?

Seemed like a dismissive excuse to be lazy.

He is very good idea man but cannot write something clear and coherent enough to save his life if it depended on it.

When i still bought white dwarf (18 months) i found it was a hypocritical promotion for every decision the company makes. All the comments he made about why they went from each edition was opposite of what they did before and contrary to his previous statements.

I think he should be relegated to spokesman and not be allowed to make any decision or write any codex, faq,errata etc.

Mundar wrote:
And as far as him verbally spitting on tournament players, thats just dumb. Tournament players shell out for new armys on a VERY regular basis, frequently updating old ones to keep pace with the new books.. I've seen casual gamers using the same minis since rogue trader and 2nd edition. Tournament players do their fair share of spending just the same, shouldn't they be just as entitled to their want for good writing?

Seemed like a dismissive excuse to be lazy.

This.

I would consider myself a tournament gamer, almost to the point of not playing casual. Its not that I cant have fun, but tournaments have become addicting. I find that I constantly buy new stuff, testing out new ideas etc. I know people who are casual gamers, hell my LGS has this guy who has used mostly the same eldar models since 2nd edition. He has a 3rd edition fire prism and falcon, the same models out now. Thats it. He never plays in events, and is purely casual. Me, I have to keep up with the flavor of the month. So I am spending much more money. However since GW took their new attitude of spitting on tournament games I buy my stuff second hand or used. My store has a used bin where you get models for cheap, and I have used winnings in this.

I have acquired in the last three months.
5 TH/SS terminators
3 wave serpents
2 fire prisms
3 war walkers.

For about 60 bucks in cash, plus some old models I havent used in years, and tournament winnings. Frankly I am unhappy with GWs mentality anymore, and do not support them.

As a casual gamer, I have no personal issues with him. I don't play competitively. I like his fluff and conceptual stuff, but I hate the idea that there's only one way to play the game. If tournaments are more fun to some people than basement games, and those people support GW with money, then GW should do everything in their power to make the rules as airtight as possible. It's just absurd to claim that one genus of gamer is superior to all other types. It just reeks of absolutist BS at best, or plain laziness at worst.

I'm a fan of the way he used to support Blood Bowl even though it was off of the main line. He set up the LRB and the community that keeps Blood Bowl alive, so I can't fault him for not personally supporting it more.

Also, I think he is a terrible player. In all of the years of writing battle reports, he never once won a game.

i like him from my younger days of dreaming of having enough money to play warhammer but inste4ad having to settle with the WD

I know a lot of 'power' gamers hate him but thats ok as most people hate power gamers lol

but i do think that by now we should have a set of rules that will last forever and only need changing when they are needed due to new models

i vote positive because of all that he has done for the hobby although i do think it is time he dissapeared

legoburner wrote:the man ... gave us blood bowl

That just means he peaked early.

40K is what it is today because of him. And that's not a compliment.

I voted "Who?" due to wishful thinking.

Don't like playing competitively? Don't bother buying any rulebooks and sit in your basement going "pew pew" with your little army men.

I'd much rather go to a place where I can strategize, compete, learn, and grow from it. All the while I STILL get to go "pew pew" with my toys, and go for beer and pretzels afterwards.

The fact that this guy is still at GW says something about how good he is at sucking d... er... how dedicated this hobby is to taking care of it's own, even if they are legally slowed. Honestly I think Jervis couldn't think his way out of a wet paper sack, and hopefully he will soon be forgotten altogether.

It's funny how JJ has such a low opinion of competitive play nowadays. He used to be the Big Event Eyebrowdude and was very passionate about it too. He ran the Grand Tournament and the Mighty Empires (warhammer multi-player map-campaign) weekends. Does he still do that?

I honestly don't know (or care to know) anything about the dude. I have my hobby, I try to enjoy it as much as possible, and think about the people produceing the products that go along with it as little as possible.

Very negative, he had his part in my long break from anything GW related a couple of times. I'm sure my 5 year old kids game he designed at school has clearer rules

Very negative from me, mainly because of what he has done to my beloved Dark Angels, as well as a number of other armies that where at one time interesting.

I do love how he claims he hates the tournaments, but takes away the rules that are meant to tell the story in a casual game, and instead strip away any individuality with a "Add this named character, get this special rule for army form main rule book" crap.

I have a full list of things, some Im not even sure hes even responsible for, but blame him for none the less.

And just because you gave away some puppies to people and made those people happy does not mean Im going to forgive you for the other 5 your killed in front of me.

If you asked me this 10yrs ago, he's have been one of my fave if not my fave Games designer for Blood Bowl alone.

Some bad calls in 40K, a bad codex or two, and a fair few almost shameful Standard Bearer articles means he's now a Neutral for me.

Can't mark him Negative mind you, he gave us Blood Bowl as someone has already noted.

Redbeard wrote:I spoke to him at the GT in Chicago last year. Any hate directed towards him is well justified. I put down very negative, as a result of that conversation. He told me, to my face, that by wanting clear rules, I was not the sort of person that he was writing rules for. (In those words)

For a developer of a imagination-based game system to be so willfully opposed to making any progress in game design is despicable. GW has progressed by leaps and bounds in terms of miniature design, and manufacturing. New molds and sculpts are amazing.

But their game design is stuck in the 80's and they refuse to make any advances. In talking to him, his approach was that they deliberately make ambiguous rules, because they do not believe that the game should be played in a competitive manner, and by writing ambiguous rules, it reinforces the 'basement game' approach.

Utter BS. I believe that it is he, and other old-guard GW designers, that are holding the Games in Games Workshop back. The sooner he retires and they get someone in charge who can see that it is possible for a game to appeal to beer&pretzel players, while still being written well enough for competitive players, the better.

Pretty much this. He might not support competitive play but to deliberately make the rules ambiguous is just downright stubborn on his part. As another poster pointed out: It's easy to make competitive rules casual but not the other way around.

I have a very negative opinion of this guy. The sooner GW gets rid of him the better.

Overall he seems to focus on the off-spins ot the hoby rather than the three main ones (WHFB, 40K, LoTR), thats not too bad, i suppose its nice to have a break for army commanding for a nice, bloody, death filled game of American Footie in the form of Blood Bowl(i know our footie is called soccor and Ameriacan football is the football, but hey soccor will always be foot ball to me). That said, however, it is the three main that get most attention and he cant be bothered with them.

I voted negative, based on a conversation I overheard at GD UK '08, the one where SM were the new shiney toy to be had.

I was waiting with a crowd of people to have a chat and a handshake, the usual, when the person in front of me, who must have been about 12, asked him if the time spent redoing the marines yet again could have been better spent on DE. He replied, and I quote:

"No, because then we wouldn't have got to release Sternguard Veterans and the Thunderfire cannon and cool stuff like that"

He then directed his attention to someone else, leaving this kid with no real answer. I thought that was a stupid answer made by a fanboi, rather than the supposed creative lead of the company.

That said, the work he's done with the specialist games is pretty good, so I only gave him a 'negative'