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 everybody!
I've noticed everyone I've met who plays 40k more or less has a favorite author for assorted reasons, personally i like Mr.Cruddace (because i love guard and tanks) and Mr.Vetock (tau <3 , as well as being a great author in general)
And so this brings me to ask, who is your favorite codex author and why? Oh and um..if anyone likes/hates Mr. Ward lets just keep it civil ok?

~Ashley

I like Ward the most , his codex are good . People say the fluff he writes is bad , but I find his fluff just as good as the fluff in other books .

Cruddace is way too hit or miss for me. IG is an amazing book, but his work on Sisters and Tyranids is shameful.

Ward's books tend to have decent rules that last well (see: Necrons), but sometimes his fluff writing makes no sense in the universe (see: Blood Angels and Necrons brofisting it up after fighting off Tyranids).

Kelly's work on Space Wolves was okay, kind of lopsided in things like Grey Hunters vs Blood Claws, but overall a solid book if a little over the top on the theme. His work on Eldar turned a back burner army into a hell of a force.

Aside from Vetock's work on Tau I can't name anything he's done, and some of the things in that book are more than a bit unbalanced. (2 MLs to get rid of all cover regardless of value? Really?)

Overall? I'd have to go with Kelly. His books can compete, have decent enough variety (even if some things are still hurt by the edition), and even if his "theme" gets a little overdone, his fluff doesn't usually leave you think you're reading a comic book.

Dude needs to lay off the random tables though.

I can agree with all that Such a shame tyranids didn't work out, would've been an interesting army to jump into!

Most of my armies come from Phil Kelly's work, so I'll go with him. Even his worse work is still playable with a strong builds possible.

Mat Ward far and away.

Great rules with many different builds. Codex/Army-Book-spanning stories. Willingness to cut old ties and take an army into a new direction, rather than just copy & paste.

His books are what's keeping me in the hobby atm.

Matt Ward.

Kelly is just... awful.

Makumba wrote:
I like Ward the most , his codex are good . People say the fluff he writes is bad , but I find his fluff just as good as the fluff in other books .

Blood Angels card played.
Who has ever said that a deep striking Land Raider is an example of proper codex-writing?

 soomemafia wrote:

Makumba wrote:
I like Ward the most , his codex are good . People say the fluff he writes is bad , but I find his fluff just as good as the fluff in other books .

Blood Angels card played.
Who has ever said that a deep striking Land Raider is an example of proper codex-writing?

Forge World



The ability to have that kind of imagery of Land Raider being dropped into the "hot-zone" without needing to buy a 1000 pound FW kit is absolutely genius.

 Jayden63 wrote:
Most of my armies come from Phil Kelly's work, so I'll go with him. Even his worse work is still playable with a strong builds possible.

Agreed. Orks are the oldest codex out there and they are still somewhat valid choice.
Space Wolves have one of the best marine troop choices and at least decent internal balance.
Let's not talk about C:CSM.
I actually liked the new Eldar fluff and the codex is powerful, but I wouldn't call it OP.
Okay, it may not have the best internal balance, but that is only so because of two units: Jetbikes and Serpents.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zweischneid wrote:

 soomemafia wrote:

Makumba wrote:
I like Ward the most , his codex are good . People say the fluff he writes is bad , but I find his fluff just as good as the fluff in other books .

Blood Angels card played.
Who has ever said that a deep striking Land Raider is an example of proper codex-writing?

Forge World

Spoiler:

The ability to have that kind of imagery of Land Raider being dropped into the "hot-zone" without needing to buy a 1000 pound FW kit is absolutely genius.

Then a single Guardsman Billy gets under the huge metal bawks with weight of several tons, and which one gets destroyed?
Ridiculous.

 soomemafia wrote:


Then a single Guardsman Billy gets under the huge metal bawks with weight of several tons, and which one gets destroyed?
Ridiculous.

Which is true for every deep strike... not sure what that's got to do with the Blood Angels Codex?

 Zweischneid wrote:

 soomemafia wrote:


Then a single Guardsman Billy gets under the huge metal bawks with weight of several tons, and which one gets destroyed?
Ridiculous.

Which is true for every deep strike... not sure what that's got to do with the Blood Angels Codex?

Most deep strikers aren't huge metal bawkses with weight of several tons as forementioned.

 soomemafia wrote:


Most deep strikers aren't huge metal bawkses with weight of several tons as forementioned.

There is no deep-striking unit in the entire game that wouldn't squash Guardsman Billy though. That's what upsets you, no?

Fluff is easily negotiable. Rules are not. For that reason, I favor Ward. I like his use of subtractive design, even though many people don't even notice it's there and whine without considering it.

Kelly's books suffer from atrocious internal balance. Things like Long Fangs so utterly dominate their book's force org that other options in the slot may as well not exist.

Cruddace makes Kelly look like he knows what he's doing. Costing in the 5e Tyranids and IG books look like he was tossing darts and multiplying the value of the shot by a die roll.

For all the whining about Ward, Guard and Wolves were more consistently bitched about.

 soomemafia wrote:

Makumba wrote:
I like Ward the most , his codex are good . People say the fluff he writes is bad , but I find his fluff just as good as the fluff in other books .

Blood Angels card played.
Who has ever said that a deep striking Land Raider is an example of proper codex-writing?

Have you ever used it or were forced to use deep striking LR as the main tactic of your army ? never ? well then it is not a problem .
DoA armies were ok casual lists , razorbuilds were good builds too . GK , BA , Necron were all very good books that made it fun to play them .

 GreyHamster wrote:
Fluff is easily negotiable. Rules are not. For that reason, I favor Ward. I like his use of subtractive design, even though many people don't even notice it's there and whine without considering it.

Kelly's books suffer from atrocious internal balance. Things like Long Fangs so utterly dominate their book's force org that other options in the slot may as well not exist.

Cruddace makes Kelly look like he knows what he's doing. Costing in the 5e Tyranids and IG books look like he was tossing darts and multiplying the value of the shot by a die roll.

For all the whining about Ward, Guard and Wolves were more consistently bitched about.

You clearly were not around (or selective memory) when GK and BA were first dropped. Atrocious use of creating things that just have no right to exist in the first place. Ward books set a prescient in power that forever changed the power curve of 40K. Bubble effect buffs, MC stats on infantry sized models, pretty much everything GK.

I can see why Ward books for game play were popular even if the inside fluff was so horrible. There was a time when the only way to have a fair game between equal generals was to pitch a Ward book vs Ward book because everything else didn't have a chance.

 Jayden63 wrote:

There was a time when the only way to have a fair game between equal generals was to pitch a Ward book vs Ward book because everything else didn't have a chance.

Except for Cheese-Falcons, Ork-Nob-Biker wound-allocation-abuse, IG-Leafblower, Long-Fang/JoTWW-Spam, TWC- wound -allocation-abuse, Venom-Spam, Heldrake-spam, Screamer-Star, Tau-Dar, etc.. , etc..

IG wasn't ward , neither were SW and both did well against ward dexs.

Phil Kelly. He wrote the 5th edition Dark Eldar codex, the best codex in the history of 40k.
A close second would be Matt Ward. He is one of the best rule writers, despite his sometimes atrocious fluff.

Between early 2010 and late 2011 there were four codex releases. 3 of them ward books. Necron, BA, and GK. All of which had a step over SW and Guard. DE while a fun book, has never been dominating, especially when pitched against the books that came around it. GK and Necrons being the most powerful of the bunch.

Yes, the whole escalation thing began with Guard. Valk squadrons and Vet spam was highly abusive (still is actually). And everything since then has had to be scaled up to compete. Its only since the release of 6th edition codexs where the power levels have been dropping some. Or at least it hasn't been a constant ramp up.

I honestly feel that looking at the 6th ed codex only and as stand alone and discounting the abuse of allies, they are all actually on pretty even footing.

Jeremy vetock has written 2 great codexes so far.

 Jayden63 wrote:
Between early 2010 and late 2011 there were four codex releases. 3 of them ward books. Necron, BA, and GK. All of which had a step over SW and Guard.

Grey Knights, absolutely. Blood Angels and Necrons? Pass the weed, I want some too.

 sing your life wrote:
Jeremy vetock has written 2 great codexes so far.

Dark Angels, the Codex with awful internal balance, and Tau, the Codex with awful internal AND external balance?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 sing your life wrote:
Jeremy vetock has written 2 great codexes so far.

Dark Angels, the Codex with awful internal balance, and Tau, the Codex with awful internal AND external balance?

Could you please think before you post things?

 Jayden63 wrote:
Between early 2010 and late 2011 there were four codex releases. 3 of them ward books. Necron, BA, and GK. All of which had a step over SW and Guard. DE while a fun book, has never been dominating, especially when pitched against the books that came around it. GK and Necrons being the most powerful of the bunch.

Yes, the whole escalation thing began with Guard. Valk squadrons and Vet spam was highly abusive (still is actually). And everything since then has had to be scaled up to compete. Its only since the release of 6th edition codexs where the power levels have been dropping some. Or at least it hasn't been a constant ramp up.

I honestly feel that looking at the 6th ed codex only and as stand alone and discounting the abuse of allies, they are all actually on pretty even footing.

So you are discounting the entirety of the Eldar Codex? With its Wave Serpent Spam, and Jetseer Spam, along with Tau, both of which alone broke the meta for every army and are the standard for which everyone needs to compete?


They don't need allies to care about doing damage.

 sing your life wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 sing your life wrote:
Jeremy vetock has written 2 great codexes so far.

Dark Angels, the Codex with awful internal balance, and Tau, the Codex with awful internal AND external balance?

Could you please think before you post things?

That's what I was going to ask you too. How are they examples of two "great" Codices?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 sing your life wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 sing your life wrote:
Jeremy vetock has written 2 great codexes so far.

Dark Angels, the Codex with awful internal balance, and Tau, the Codex with awful internal AND external balance?

Could you please think before you post things?

That's what I was going to ask you too. How are they examples of two "great" Codices?

He wrote 2 good books in fantasy...Maybe that's what he means.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 sing your life wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 sing your life wrote:
Jeremy vetock has written 2 great codexes so far.

Dark Angels, the Codex with awful internal balance, and Tau, the Codex with awful internal AND external balance?

Could you please think before you post things?

That's what I was going to ask you too. How are they examples of two "great" Codices?

And how might these be example of "awful" codexes? The quality of you posts and lack of qualms about making statements that dyed in the wool historical players could see are incorrect with a glance depresses me.

I like to be excited by the prospect of using a new codex and for me this happens when a codex has a variety of builds that are not only effective on the table but also tie in with the fluff which should be rich and suitably updated but without steam-rolling over established and well-loved canon. I like new units/characters and I like updates in fluff and in existing units but in order to make those updates good they need to abide by the above. The truth is imo all the authors are hit and miss to some degree in their competency and its a matter of personal opinion but mine is that kelly is the best of the bunch for despite some of the trash he put in my wolves dex both eldar codices are right up there for me. He added more good fluff than bad unlike other authors and nothing galaxy shatteringly stupid unlike other authors. To sum it up- assuming the final products are entirely their work- some are better than others with kelly at the top but actually they all suck with one of them sucking so bad he should be sacked because he clearly doesnt understand the 40k universe at all. Peace.

Ward is really good.

I like Vetock's fluff, and I have to say, I really like the ideas of both units and wargear in Codex: Dark Angels.

The Tau codex without supplements, without allies is a very good book, but not dominating. I really don't think that individual codexs are written with any of the other things in mind that GW has thrown into the game. Which is where a lot of the problem comes from.

The Tau codex and the Eldar codex when standing by themselves are strong but have limitations and weakness that can be exploited by most other armies. Its only when you add in GWs "Here take whatever the hell you want" approach that things get wonky.