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.

Hey guys,

This is NOT a Matt Ward hate-thread, though I am not overly keen on the guy myself, I don't want any pointless bandwagoning or bashing... merely an answer to this question.

I'm still relatively new to 40k so I'm not entirely school'd up on GW's Codex Authors, but I know for a fact there's more than one... So why is Matt Ward rumoured to be writing the Necrons' next 'dex as well as the Black Templars'? I mean the guy already has C:SM and BA and GK under his belt, what are GW's other authors doing? Why is Ward getting a 'Codex spree' so to speak?

Also, who wrote the SW 'dex? I bring that up because, off the top of my head, that and Codex: Dark Eldar are the only codieces he hasn't written of late? What are the authors that wrote those two doing now?

I guess that it's easy to see that my motives in asking this question are anti-Ward, but as I said before, I just want an honest answer, thanks.

I would prefer him to just do SM codexs.

He doesn't need to do Necrons or Tau

I really have no idea why Ward is writing so many codex.


If memory serves:

Phil Kelly has written the current Eldar, Dark Eldar and Space Wolves codex

Robin Cruddace has written the Tyranid and Imperial Guard

They all seem pretty hit or miss. The Eldar and Dark Eldar codexes are both really good while the Wolf codex is a travesty.

Cruddace did a great job on the Guard but the Nid codex is considered by many to be extremely lacking.

Ward... obviously has written a few "gems".

Interesting that, as far as I know at least, the Wolves codex didn't result in petitions asking for the author to be fired...

Henners91 wrote:Interesting that, as far as I know at least, the Wolves codex didn't result in petitions asking for the author to be fired...

Pretty much every codex written since the start of the internet has resulted in petitions asking for the author to be fired. Lack of perspective is an awesome thing to behold at times.


The thing I find interesting is how ready people are to blame all of a codex's faults on the listed author. The codex is designed in the studio, so I would strongly suspect that the entire team has some feedback. The guy with the author credit is just the one who writes it all down.

Phil Kelly also wrote the current Orks codex

As it stands most of the past Codex authors have either resigned, moved to freelance Black Library status, or moved into more Corporate roles within GW.

With this in mind, and without bringing in new talent GW has available for codex writing:
Matt Ward
Phil Kelly
Robin Cruddace
People they can pull from other divisions or fantasy.

As to why Ward has more than the others...I cannot even begin to speculate...Internal office politics, personal preference, etc.

I think in many ways Ward has become the next Gav Thorpe. I seem to remember a way back when, when Kelley and Ward were the main guys who did the playtests that showed up in WD, and granted my memory is commonly suspect. Back to the Thorpe thing, Gav was deeply involved in many of the 3e codexs across all races and the BRB. Ward and to a lesser degree Kelley may be replacing this role as they roll out codexes with some ridiculous pwnage with an eye towards writing 6e. That's my working theory, I can only hope that in the vein of Thorpe, Mcniel, and Hoare that this does not turn into him becoming a BL writer.

akaean wrote:Cruddace did a great job on the Guard but the Nid codex is considered by many to be extremely lacking.

Heh? He did the same poor job on the Guard as he did on the Tyranids. There's plenty of useless or flat out bad choices in the Guard book, just like the Tyranid book, and the book makes one or two builds that are simply better to run from the book, just like the Tyranid book. The only difference is the Guard book fits right in with the mech heavy metagame while the Tyranid book doesn't, so its powerful builds are very powerful, and Cruddace threw so many options into the Guard book you get the illusion of not as much of the book sucking, while he cut most of the options out of the Tyranid book, so the bad choices are more keenly felt.

Cruddace is an all round bad codex writer.

-Loki- wrote:

akaean wrote:Cruddace did a great job on the Guard but the Nid codex is considered by many to be extremely lacking.

Heh? He did the same poor job on the Guard as he did on the Tyranids. There's plenty of useless or flat out bad choices in the Guard book, just like the Tyranid book, and the book makes one or two builds that are simply better to run from the book, just like the Tyranid book. The only difference is the Guard book fits right in with the mech heavy metagame while the Tyranid book doesn't, so its powerful builds are very powerful, and Cruddace threw so many options into the Guard book you get the illusion of not as much of the book sucking, while he cut most of the options out of the Tyranid book, so the bad choices are more keenly felt.

Cruddace is an all round bad codex writer.

You may consider him a bad codex writer, but Cruddace did a great job with the Tomb Kings book for fantasy. It's perfectly balanced and the army performs well together. There is a lot of synergy in it. Then again, all of the 8th edition army books have been balanced (to each other). Well, except Beastmen, who were written with 8th in mind and suck hard. Written during 7th as an 8th ed army book. But yes, back to Cruddace-he did well by the dead, sandy guys.

timetowaste85 wrote:

-Loki- wrote:

akaean wrote:Cruddace did a great job on the Guard but the Nid codex is considered by many to be extremely lacking.

Heh? He did the same poor job on the Guard as he did on the Tyranids. There's plenty of useless or flat out bad choices in the Guard book, just like the Tyranid book, and the book makes one or two builds that are simply better to run from the book, just like the Tyranid book. The only difference is the Guard book fits right in with the mech heavy metagame while the Tyranid book doesn't, so its powerful builds are very powerful, and Cruddace threw so many options into the Guard book you get the illusion of not as much of the book sucking, while he cut most of the options out of the Tyranid book, so the bad choices are more keenly felt.

Cruddace is an all round bad codex writer.

You may consider him a bad codex writer, but Cruddace did a great job with the Tomb Kings book for fantasy. It's perfectly balanced and the army performs well together. There is a lot of synergy in it. Then again, all of the 8th edition army books have been balanced (to each other). Well, except Beastmen, who were written with 8th in mind and suck hard. Written during 7th as an 8th ed army book. But yes, back to Cruddace-he did well by the dead, sandy guys.

As I said, he's a bad codex writer, and only gave examples of his codices, since this is the 40k forum. I've seen his Fantasy army books, and he seems to understand that system - I can even forgive Beastmen, since it's not easy writing a book in one edition but intending its use for a new edition when you have no idea how the metagame will shape. Those books tend to be too good or overly bad. However, they should keep him there where he produces better books. He doesn't seem to understand 40k, and should be kept away from it.

Sadly, a lot of people on here tend to mash codexes and army books together, so I thought I'd defend the one saving grace I've seen from him. I agree, his codexes leave much to be desired. If you could do multiwound shenanigans with warriors and carnifexes, or kept carnifex costs the same...the book would be okay by me. But he didn't. As for the IG...I really don't have beef, other than "oooo, look-it's a parking lot." Boring and easy to deal with.

akaean wrote:Cruddace did a great job on the Guard but the Nid codex is considered by many to be extremely lacking.

He did a terrible job on both. Both books are awful for internal balance, the IG book simply has so many options that you end up having more than enough to work with to make very effective lists. All of Cruddace's ideas range from wtfsuperpwnage to lulwhutincredibad.

lol@IG players saying their codex is well done. If the new BT codex has that much cheap fire power and variation I'll love it regardless as well.

Cruddace's books tend to be like MTG sets, there are good stuff and there are bad ones. Personally I am fine with that.
Nids being bad and IG being good is more of a meta game thing.
Ward's more consistent within a book, but all the books he wrote are marines, it's not that hard to balance out marines with few differences. (And it's not like he never has useless units in his books, see Legion of the Dammed and BA Tacs) His meta balance is somewhat questionable consider the recent tourney results.

And if we are considering WHFB, Cruddace is certainly better than Ward, 7th ed DoC is a monstrosity that should have never existed, while 8th ed TK is a very well done book.

Either way, I am happy as long as we are not getting Gav Thorpe.

As will I be if he's kept away from the new Chaos. I'll be more than happy if, say they get Ward to do the rules and maybe Abnett to write the fluff...

Get Aaron Dembeski-Bowden to write the next CSM books fluff and everything will be allright practically regardless of who writes the rules.

Well, not really, but close


That said, I'm not super enthused about any of the current authors doing the CSM book. Cruddace has had rather awkward internal balance abilities (evident in both the IG and Tyranid books, though I think the greater issues with Tyranids are more related to time availability for development than anything else), Ward tends to create lists that feel like internet fandex's aimed at 12 year olds (fine for C:SM I guess if GW must have one of those, but not really for the Chaos Space Marines...), and given the way Space Wolves turned out I'd be afraid with Kelly doing it that either they'd turn out like SW's and become the new easymode bandwagon codex, or he'd overcompensate to try and avoid a repeat of that abomination of a codex and it ends up like the current Tyranid codex.

I'd be wary of Cruddace. It seems it's rather hit or miss with him, so it's best to have a large number of units. Of course, with five potentially powerful Troops choices, this mightn't be a problem.

Funny how no one's mentioned how Cruddace butt****ed the Sisters just a month or so ago. It's like it was so bad we've repressed our memory of it.

I think the main reason Ward has authored more books than anyone else in 5th Ed. is that they've all been Space Marines and variants thereof. That's the easiest gig of any of the writers in 40k or fantasy.

I get the feeling Kelly prefers to challenge himself with more unique armies. As for Cruddace, I don't know what's up with him. I'm beginning to suspect he secretly hates 40k and wants to undermine it.

TutorialBoss wrote:Funny how no one's mentioned how Cruddace butt****ed the Sisters just a month or so ago. It's like it was so bad we've repressed our memory of it.

Probably because it's about what most expected of a WD dex, much like the get-you-by Warriors of Chaos list and the Blood Angels dex. Nobody was expecting an super great army list.

I think the main reason Ward has authored more books than anyone else in 5th Ed. is that they've all been Space Marines and variants thereof. That's the easiest gig of any of the writers in 40k or fantasy.

I get the feeling Kelly prefers to challenge himself with more unique armies. As for Cruddace, I don't know what's up with him. I'm beginning to suspect he secretly hates 40k and wants to undermine it.

Eh, that's probably taking it a bit far, it sounds like he's off on what he thinks stuff is worth.

Ak, I didn't realize how negative people really felt about the guard codex!

truth be told I hadn't really taken a deep look at it, and other than thinking Vendettas were a tad rediculous had heard generally positive reviews from all the Guard players I knew.

Of the three I definitely like Phil Kelly's stuff the best. The new Dark Eldar codex is strong but still balanced, and both the Ork and Eldar codexes are holding up despite their growing age. I guess I can forgive space werewolves.

I like the Guard 'dex... but I'm not a competitive guy, I just run a big swarm of infantry. It's flavourful enough for me. Mind you, I started 40k with 5th, so I have no idea what they used to be like.

How about /tg/ writes all new codices?

akaean wrote:Ak, I didn't realize how negative people really felt about the guard codex!

truth be told I hadn't really taken a deep look at it, and other than thinking Vendettas were a tad rediculous had heard generally positive reviews from all the Guard players I knew.

There's a lot of cool stuff, don't misunderstand, but there's also a lot of stinkers too, most of the Elites slot for instance, most leman russ variants (e.g. vanquisher, punisher, etc), the Basilisk, much of the FA slot units, most HQ options, many of the Veteran options, Platoon units/options, Penal Legion, Deathstrike, etc.

There's lots of good stuff, and lots of stuff in general, which makes up for the stinkers, but there are a lot of stinkers.

How about /tg/ writes all new codices?

No please

I agree, akaean, Kelly's my personal favourite.

I think we'd have a lot better codices if they were either all written by one person or all written by a group with the same members each time. Everyone's seems to be singing from a different hymnsheet at the moment.

The biggest problem I see in the IG book is points. Some things like ogryns, and storm troopers are way over priced, and veterans are too cheep and the FA options totally blow. Though as a guard player I have happy over all with it.

I think Kelly has the most talent out 3.

One thing everyone here has over looked is Jeremy Vetock. He will be haveing a bigger presence over the next few codexes. So we will have some more diversity on the way, just be patiant.

Mr. S Baldrick wrote:The biggest problem I see in the IG book is points. Some things like ogryns, and storm troopers are way over priced, and veterans are too cheep and the FA options totally blow.

Hrm, not necessarily always points. Stormtroopers for instance have gear that their statline just doesn't support the effective use of (though yes, are also drastically overcosted). Vets aren't particularly underpriced at all, and most of their options like Doctrines are awful, notice that nobody takes them without a transport and almost never with doctrines, they only become good when paired with a chimera or Valk/Vend. The oft-seen triple melta squad would never get much time if it didn't have a chimerabunker or speedy delivery system. They're not much different than they were last edition (traded infiltrate/DS for scoring basically) and in fact many of their options are more expensive, it's just that their delivery methods became more effective.

Vaktathi wrote:

Mr. S Baldrick wrote:The biggest problem I see in the IG book is points. Some things like ogryns, and storm troopers are way over priced, and veterans are too cheep and the FA options totally blow.

Hrm, not necessarily always points. Stormtroopers for instance have gear that their statline just doesn't support the effective use of (though yes, are also drastically overcosted). Vets aren't particularly underpriced at all, and most of their options like Doctrines are awful, notice that nobody takes them without a transport and almost never with doctrines, they only become good when paired with a chimera or Valk/Vend. The oft-seen triple melta squad would never get much time if it didn't have a chimerabunker or speedy delivery system. They're not much different than they were last edition (traded infiltrate/DS for scoring basically) and in fact many of their options are more expensive, it's just that their delivery methods became more effective.

I don’t know; ten guys with shotguns and carapace are a bargain for 100 points, compared to some other armies troop choices. I only say they are too cheap because they are so cheap you hardly ever see infantry platoons anymore. I agree that they should be troops, because in last edition they were elite and crap so nobody ever took them. However they should be a little more expensive or give infantry platoons something more to make them worth taking again. It does get boring to see all the guard mech melta spam lists, where nobody ever puts a troop model on the table.

Mr. S Baldrick wrote:
I don’t know; ten guys with shotguns and carapace are a bargain for 100 points, compared to some other armies troop choices.

hrm, 100pts for 10 S3 T3 I3 Ld7/8 4+sv dudes with S3 Ap- 12" guns isn't exactly stellar by any means, most wouldn't consider that a great buy, you can have double the number of 5+sv BS3 guardsmen that put inflict a greater number of average wounds and will stick around longer because there's twice as many of them. For 2pts more you get stuff like Dire Avengers and Sisters which are markedly superior for only a minor increase and still aren't seen as exceedingly great.

I only say they are too cheap because they are so cheap you hardly ever see infantry platoons anymore.

I run them routinely, I think the greater issue is that Vets are cheap in terms of $$$. A small sized infantry platoon is going to run probably $100, $200 if mechanized (probably roughly ~350-370pts), whereas 3 squads of mechvets (~475pts) help fill an armies points quicker for about the same amount of money.

It's also fewer models to build and paint. Makes creating the army easier and faster. I run mechanized platoons in almost all of my games and never really have an issue.

Cruddance's quality is all over the map, and the chance a codex will be better is directly related to how many units can be squeezed into the army list section.


Ward, at the very least, is consistant in his quality. Name one unit that is truly useless in the GK codex?

We really can't count the SM codex because Ward didn't write that by himself.

TutorialBoss wrote:Funny how no one's mentioned how Cruddace butt****ed the Sisters just a month or so ago.

Yeah, it's just shameful how they're cheaper marines with magic?

Grey Templar wrote:
Ward, at the very least, is consistant in his quality. Name one unit that is truly useless in the GK codex?

Culexus assassin, GK Techmarine

We really can't count the SM codex because Ward didn't write that by himself.

Who co-wrote it? IIRC he's listed as the sole author. He had enough autonomy that he changed the Land Raider transport capacity and got in trouble for it, but only post-release (hence why no others have the higher transport capacity).

DarknessEternal wrote:
Yeah, it's just shameful how they're cheaper marines with magic?

without the staying power, Ld rules, range of weapons and vehicles, CC ability, etc