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.

theHandofGork wrote:Yes, he is.

"In March 2008 I departed GW to concentrate on my freeelance writing. So far, so good."

http://mechanicalhamster.wordpress.com/about/

He's still permanently employed by the Black Library.

Which is a branch of GW.

So no. He's not.

He's gone from the design studio, but not the company as a whole.

I don't hate Jervis, hate is a strong word.

I do not like many of the things he's said in his standard bearer commentary and he tends to write in a dismissive manner about things he doesn't care for in the customer base, such as tournament gaming, the internet, cohesive rulesets etc etc and this has come across as arrogant and patronising.

He's a fellow nerd and gamer, that alone sets him up as having some redeeming qualities and common ground. In the same manner as fallings out I've had here on the forum with people, I think sitting down with a pint and having a chat would lead to a liking of the guy.

I've always reserved my own ire with the company for it's sales tactics, relationship with it's customer base and corporate morality.

AND



KTHXBYE

Since I don't read WD regularly, I wouldn't know who Jervis was if there wasn't so much nerdrage about him.

It still doesn't make me care about him at all, one way or the other. I wish him all the best.

I don't play GW games, he seems like a nice bloke.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I like Jervis, but then, I like a "cleaner" game system.

In general, I think that complexity, like cholesterol, comes in 'good' and 'bad' flavors. In general, core mechanics should be clean and 'bolt-on' systems need to work with these mechanics, not completely override them.

For example, a 'Sniper' rule that enahnces the base rules is OK, especially if it's clean. If it requires new stats or unusual math of old stats, that might be a problem.

This is all subjective, of course.

Kanluwen wrote:

theHandofGork wrote:Yes, he is.

"In March 2008 I departed GW to concentrate on my freeelance writing. So far, so good."

http://mechanicalhamster.wordpress.com/about/

He's still permanently employed by the Black Library.

Which is a branch of GW.

So no. He's not.

He's gone from the design studio, but not the company as a whole.

Ugh, here we go:

Gav states he is a freelancer (http://mechanicalhamster.wordpress.com/about/)
Black Library says he is a freelancer (http://www.blacklibrary.com/Authors/Gav-Thorpe.html)

Definition of Freelancer
1. A person who sells services to employers without a long-term commitment to any of them
2. A medieval mercenary


As I see it either you're wrong or Gav is a medieval mercenary.

theHandofGork wrote:As I see it either you're wrong or Gav is a medieval mercenary.

... or perhaps BOTH!

So, because Gav Thorpe may or may not have left, Jervis is hated?

Is this the message I should be getting from the thread?

Jervis was hated before Gav left, to be honest.

The problem is just that people want someone to focus their ire on.

Jervis could be throwing $100 bills into a crowd of GW fans, and people would complain that they're too bland.

Kanluwen wrote:As I see it, either way I'm right.

This kind of thing makes it hard to defend you, my friend.

Manchu wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:As I see it, either way I'm right.

This kind of thing makes it hard to defend you, my friend.

It would make him very easy to defend, if he actually was right. But I'm really trying not to be baited by trolling this year- it's a resolution doomed to failure.

What did he do to the DA Codex? Well, the DA codex is essentially a test-run for the 5th Edition Codex: Space Marines. All of the special rules like Combat Squads and free grendades were tested in DA, and costs were increased as a result. Plus, the codex was pretty bland and uninspiring. This might have been ok, but then they released C:SM, which had all of the fancy new rules and abilities but with none of the downsides AND with newer, better 5th edition rules. It was just last month that GW finally released an update to bring the old Space Marine books back up to near-par. To be fair, I don't know for sure if this was JJ's fault. It's just one of the things that he takes flak for. I had no experience with his Standard Bearer articles, but I've heard more than a few negative comments regarding them.

So I can still hate Gav Thorpe? Sweet! He's so much more hatable than Jervis!

Time for some ugly Gav Thorpe rumours:

Gav Thorpe likes his steaks well done.

Gav Thorpe always installs his toilet paper underhand.

Gav Thorpe has a subscription to the Daily Telegraph.

Triggerbaby wrote:So I can still hate Gav Thorpe? Sweet! He's so much more hatable than Jervis!

Time for some ugly Gav Thorpe rumours:

Gav Thorpe likes his steaks well done.

Gav Thorpe always installs his toilet paper underhand.

Gav Thorpe has a subscription to the Daily Telegraph.

Assuming you're following Kanluwen's train of 'reasoning' yes.


... Wait?! The Daily Telegraph?! That's not on. I'm going to burn my copy of Path of the Warrior now.

Alphapod wrote:What did he do to the DA Codex? Well, the DA codex is essentially a test-run for the 5th Edition Codex: Space Marines. All of the special rules like Combat Squads and free grendades were tested in DA, and costs were increased as a result. Plus, the codex was pretty bland and uninspiring. This might have been ok, but then they released C:SM, which had all of the fancy new rules and abilities but with none of the downsides AND with newer, better 5th edition rules. It was just last month that GW finally released an update to bring the old Space Marine books back up to near-par. To be fair, I don't know for sure if this was JJ's fault. It's just one of the things that he takes flak for. I had no experience with his Standard Bearer articles, but I've heard more than a few negative comments regarding them.

So where's the blame for Andy Hoare? His name's on the DA Codex too. Gav worked on it, Alessio worked on it.

No one person is responsible for a codex. It's sheer ridiculousness to pin the blame on one person.

At lest its not the Mirror, the Daily Mail or Sport.
I've never really liked JJ ever since I first saw him leering at me in a WD (1995 I think).
It was just some thing that makes me want to smash...do nasty things that would earn me 5 to 10 years in prison if you know what I meen
I blame him for the loss of Rick Priestley and Andy Chambers (he may not have had any involvement in it but I still blame him ).

Triggerbaby wrote:So I can still hate Gav Thorpe? Sweet! He's so much more hatable than Jervis!

Time for some ugly Gav Thorpe rumours:

Gav Thorpe likes his steaks well done.

Gav Thorpe always installs his toilet paper underhand.

Gav Thorpe has a subscription to the Daily Telegraph.

Do yourself a favor and don't punch my clock, 'cause I'm a Pantera's box you do not wanna open.

George Spiggott wrote:

Triggerbaby wrote:So I can still hate Gav Thorpe? Sweet! He's so much more hatable than Jervis!

Time for some ugly Gav Thorpe rumours:

Gav Thorpe likes his steaks well done.

Gav Thorpe always installs his toilet paper underhand.

Gav Thorpe has a subscription to the Daily Telegraph.

Do yourself a favor and don't punch my clock, 'cause I'm a Pantera's box you do not wanna open.

....
I was watching that movie today while painting.

It's a glorious example of Greg Kinnear's aptitude for douchebaggery!

I met him (Jervis) at a Toronto GT in...1999 I guess it would have been.
He was friendly enough, but was clearly a very lucky nerd. I was chatting with another attendee about warhammer historicals and how he was thinking of giving it a try using (I may be misremembering the specific details) Brettonians as stand ins for 100 year war French cavalry until he decided if he liked the game. Jervis said that was unacceptable. We said, well, we know they don't _really_ look like historical medieval cavalry but they'll do as stand ins, he refused to accept that. This went back and forth for a little bit getting increasingly awkward until the subject was changed. It was never an argument per se, just weird.
He also kept mentioning how long he'd been gaming for.

I met JJ at Games Day Last year, was an okay bloke, said hi to me and my mate (who was dressed as a "true Scale" heretic, complete with Sack mask) He seemed nice.

On the simplification of the C:CSM well I read it, then sent a massive and aggressive letter to Gav and Alessio complaining about it all. I got a really snidy reply from Gav saying destroying the fluff was all good (Sorcerer with Mark of Slaanesh in a unit of Berserker...), So I can understand the Gav Hatred.

JJ on the other hand makes me giggle with the way he writes in Standard Bearer. It could be a lot worse, not all of us are competitive gamers after all.

Whoa for a minute there I thought I wandered into YMDC by mistake.

On topic, rage needs a target to rage on, and as the most visible GW face nowadays JJ picks up the tab by default.

Also, rage begets more rage, I had no opinion on the guy before I came to Dakka, but after hearing 'Jervified' over and over again I was subliminally influenced to dislike the man.

Lastly, with a name like Jervis really what can you expect. If you had to pick on someone, would you choose A.) Gav B.) Alessio or C.) Jervis? Its puerile and politically incorrect, but names do matter, some attract more negative attention than others, which is why I'm gonna give my kids totally cool / awesome names so they're the most popular kids on the playground.

I want to clear things up for a number of people here, and especially the younger forumites who don't have the benefit of having seen some of the history of JJ, and are just basing their assumptions on a few confused posts on this thread:

First of all - Alessio Calvatore has already claimed responsibility for the last CSM codex, so the finger pointing can stop for that one.

- He is not generally 'hated', and the only people who do so are angry little internet warriors who need something worthwhile to happen in their lives. His 'standard bearer' article is probably the only reason many people still buy WD as sometimes it's the only bit of actual writing that isn't sales-pap in the entire magazine. I would hazard a guess that he probably isn't even being paid to do it, if the rest of the magazine is anything to go by, and he probably only does it out of his regard for the hobby and those of us who have been part of it for any significant time and recognise the heritage of that magazine. Many of the criticisms regarding what he has to say (regarding lack of heed of the tournament scene etc.), well.. of course he is going to cater for the populist demand of readers. People reacting to leaf-blower lists written by a handful of writers on BoLS need to reconise that theirs is not a significant part of the demographic.
- He was instrumental in the development of GW from it's early days and the transformation of the company from a couple of guys putting together rules when they got home from work, to it becoming a massive company (I could say institution) which is a part of millions of peoples lives. For that, I feel he should be deserved some respect.
He helped design so many of the classics: Necromunda, Mordheim, Blood Bowl, even Space Hulk. You also have to think he is one of the only people keeping those games 'alive' in the specialist games section of the website.
- He was Andy Chamber's whipping boy in WD battle reports for many years, and many of us I think will think fondly of him for that reason

In the new hyper-effecient world of Games Workshop, where every new major release is measured against it's benefits to the share holders and even game system rules are being perverted to that effect, he is one of the last relics of what many will say was the golden age of the company. I really hope he keeps a hand in things - kind of like a Games Workshop 'House of Lords' where some of the more extreme and undesirable changes that are being pushed through can be mitigated by someone who I think is a genuine hobbyist, and represents us in that regard.

Pacific wrote:I want to clear things up for a number of people here, and especially the younger forumites who don't have the benefit of having seen some of the history of JJ, and are just basing their assumptions on a few confused posts on this thread:

First of all - Alessio Calvatore has already claimed responsibility for the last CSM codex, so the finger pointing can stop for that one.

Could you link? Gav took responsibility for it and very publicly defended it on his blog, including against posts and criticisms by Dakka members.

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

Pacific wrote:- He is not generally 'hated', and the only people who do so are angry little internet warriors who need something worthwhile to happen in their lives. His 'standard bearer' article is probably the only reason many people still buy WD as sometimes it's the only bit of actual writing that isn't sales-pap in the entire magazine. I would hazard a guess that he probably isn't even being paid to do it, if the rest of the magazine is anything to go by, and he probably only does it out of his regard for the hobby and those of us who have been part of it for any significant time and recognise the heritage of that magazine. Many of the criticisms regarding what he has to say (regarding lack of heed of the tournament scene etc.), well.. of course he is going to cater for the populist demand of readers. People reacting to leaf-blower lists written by a handful of writers on BoLS need to reconise that theirs is not a significant part of the demographic.
- He was instrumental in the development of GW from it's early days and the transformation of the company from a couple of guys putting together rules when they got home from work, to it becoming a massive company (I could say institution) which is a part of millions of peoples lives. For that, I feel he should be deserved some respect.

Standard Bearer has drawn both compliments and criticisms. His tone has seemed unnecessarily dismissive and unfriendly to some segments of the game's audience, which seems inappropriate for a standard bearer, around whom theoretically the whole passel of us should be able to rally. Perhaps that's me being too idealistic, but IMO he has often seemed out of touch with a fair percentage of gamers, and not open to some other priorities in playing.

He has been legimately criticized for absolutely terrible design in several codices; including the original 3rd ed Chaos Space Marines and Dark Angels books, and the current Dark Angels book. Players of both of those armies in those time periods had legitimate bones to pick with him.

Pacific wrote:-He helped design so many of the classics: Necromunda, Mordheim, Blood Bowl, even Space Hulk. You also have to think he is one of the only people keeping those games 'alive' in the specialist games section of the website.
- He was Andy Chamber's whipping boy in WD battle reports for many years, and many of us I think will think fondly of him for that reason

Completely agreed in this area. He came off very sympathetic in the old WD battle reports, and his involvement in many of the specialist games is his real solid redeeming feature. His work with the fan community on Blood Bowl in particular, letting them gradually take over the Living Rulebook and virtually perfect what was already one of GW's best games, is his crowning achievement as far as I'm concerned. And what keeps me from thinking of him as a jerk or a bad person, as I would be tempted to if I only played 40k.

I think the reason he is so hated is because he is a very public figure in the GW circles, and for this he is ragged on alt. But i do agree he does come out with some shockers!

Mannahnin wrote:

Pacific wrote:I want to clear things up for a number of people here, and especially the younger forumites who don't have the benefit of having seen some of the history of JJ, and are just basing their assumptions on a few confused posts on this thread:

First of all - Alessio Calvatore has already claimed responsibility for the last CSM codex, so the finger pointing can stop for that one.

Could you link? Gav took responsibility for it and very publicly defended it on his blog, including against posts and criticisms by Dakka members.

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

It was in a interview Alessio gave recently on BOLS, talking about his new game and things like that
He then did a response to some of the comments made in another article explaining that he pushed for the streamlined approach and that Gav took the flak for it, when it was actually his idea

I think that the internet drama queens and those seeking attention are the Jervis haters.

I've met him in person several times. He came across as an EXTREMELY nice guy - with incredible passion for the game. Where he gets a lot of grief from is that he is totally into the fluff, panorama of the game, story, and total immersion into the 40K universe. He wants the games to be like being part of a movie. He seems to like the tournaments - but for him it's more about getting a bunch of gaming guys together and talking about the 40K world and universe. These are solely my opinions.

He doesn't strike me as being a competitive gamer or into making a set of rules that are competition solid. That goes against the above. Which brings him a lot of flack. I think that the market has room for both - and think GW's missing the mark a little there.

The old WD battle reports between JJ and AC are classics - some of the best reads of battle reports you'll ever find (especially the Orks/Space Marine one for second edition) - part of what built the tapestry of the 40K universe and in many cases the start of what has become a hugely successful series of novels ala Black Library.

I'm sure he's pretty much a corporate guy. Honestly, what's wrong with that - GW's paid him to design and play games for close to 30 years. I'd be singing their praises pretty loudly if they did that for me as well. Nothing wrong with corporate loyalty - his choice. You just have to filter a lot of what he says with that in mind. Besides, who's going to pay you for saying bad things about them???

Give the dude a break - without him the gaming geek world we love so well wouldn't be what it is today. We wouldn't have Blood Bowl. He was a big part of Necromunda, Gothic, etc. Man's done a lot for our hobby.....

And btw - I play Dark Angels - and still think this way (although before the FAQ they had been gathering dust for some time).

Jervis was a leading writer on Bloodbowl and Epic Armageddon. Bloodbowl is absolutely GW's best game, by a long way, and Epic Armageddon isn't far behind. They are fairly simple systems, though, and I think it's in designs like that where Jervis' heart lies. The problem comes when you get a guy like that, who wants a clean system where rules interactions produce a range of tactical considerations, and you have them redesign 40k.

Because a significant portion of 40K players really, really like the idea of picking and choosing all kinds of options for their character models and troops, and consider those choices a really important part of design. I don't agree with those people, but it's their hobby too and I understand them being annoyed at the game being changed on them.

Thing is, GW then changed direction, a whole lot. In part because of the hate, but mostly I suspect it was because 'an interesting tactical system with armies with a collection of interesting units that interact in interesting ways to produce an interesting range of tactical considerations' doesn't sell models as fast as 'totally sweet new dreadnaught with mega-powerful new close combat abilities'. So now we're in a bit of a mess, with a couple of codices designed under the old, simple design goals, a couple designed under a halfway point (and I think C:SM and Orks are among the best codices GW has ever released) and everything since released with as many new rules and new models as possible.

It isn't as big a mess as the game was in for, well, the whole of third edition, but it's certainly a mess. It's wrong to point the finger entirely at Jervis, because all I can see him doing was bringing a design philosophy across to 40K that served him well in the other games he released.

But hey, the haters have to blame someone.

Kanluwen wrote:So where's the blame for Andy Hoare? His name's on the DA Codex too. Gav worked on it, Alessio worked on it.

No one person is responsible for a codex. It's sheer ridiculousness to pin the blame on one person.

I've always found that a really funny idea, that seems to be repeated constantly with no-one questioning it. As if one guy could sit down and write a whole codex, without any overview to make sure it fitted in with other armies.

AS A NOTE, MOST OF "THE GREAT GAV THORPE EMPLOYMENT STATUS DEBATE" HAS BEEN DELETED FROM THE THREAD AS OFF TOPIC AND POINTLESS.

ANY FURTHER POSTS ON THAT SUBJECT IN THIS THREAD WILL RESULT IN SUSPENSION FOR THE OFFENDER/S.