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.

Maybe they want you to buy three copies, so you can each one open to a different section, that way it's never confusing?

BYE

Nurgleboy77 wrote:"Waaaaa... I have to flip pages...waaa, I can't just memorize the rules of my own army and therefore not have to even pick up the book...oh wait..."

Quite crying, at least all the rules are in one BOOK, unlike in 2nd edition. Can you say "Codex Imperialis" I knew you could.

Sorry, I can't tell if you are kidding, or being asinine. The sarcasm might be lost to the warp.

Still, just because the layout was horrendous oh so many years ago, does not mean that the current layout is ok. It is very poor, and really substandard. What makes it worse is that it was pretty good in the last codex. Having to bounce back and forth between pages when designing one unit of your army is silly and unecessary. The new codex design makes planning and building your army more difficult than it needs to be, and indeed more difficult than it was. It is absolutely correct to point this out.

Stop defending what is mediocre at best on the grounds it could be worse. It could and should be better, and in fact has been.

On the bright side, at least it gives page references when you find one of the things you need.

And not being funny, but if it is so stressful during a game, make a note of the page numbers on your army list for each entry. Or is that being too proactive?

MDG: I am not saying it is impossible, and that is a fine solution to help move things along. My point is that it is a solution that should not even be required. There is no excuse for not only having poor formating, but worse formating. No one is cutting their wrists for having to use the codex, but it still is shamefully put together.

I mean, really, can anyone even give a good reason why they would switch to this new version? What benefits does it provide?

I can see some of the thinking behind it.

Having items *only* available to a particular unit, it makes some sense to put said rules into units entry, particularly when each entry has it's own page. Uses up space.

Ergo, it seems a little pointless to just repeat them later on, and indeed, when they have done this, mistakes and disceprancies as things change during playtesting sneak in. However, for playtesting this makes sense. For the finished product, I'm sure a quick cut and paste would suffice.

HBMC has it right, in so far as my Tyranid Codex being awesome.

My Chaos marine codex is painful.

And noone like someone stroking their own ego by putting down others who voice negative opinions.

Yes it helps, but the fact that you need to have a page reference taped to a page that should already have that information is evidence of bad design.

And I like my special characters having named weapons with neat rules. Master-crafted is a generic, boring descriptor for a weapon of already generic, mass produced design.
Now if there were a character with a thunder hammer in the shape of a fist, and it were named "Face Puncher" I would be more interested than if it was simply This weapon, while possessing ofa different name and design,is simply a master crafted such and such.

So what is the alternative?

Instead of a 2 page spread of about 8 named HQ special characters, with references to another part of the book which has their fluff and details their rules; we're wanting a single page for each and every unit entry in the whole army list?

So if I'm building an army and want to review the HQ special characters I have to flip through 8 pages? (4 spreads) instead of 1 spread?

I agree with the idea that if you've played Marines before you are likely to know what certain rules mean. And if you're a new player you'll pick it up in a few games. Either way, feel free to make up a cheat sheet (summary sheet) if you wish. If you need to throw in a book mark or a sticky-note on a particular rules page you have to look up often, so be it. But I believe after a few games you will have a better grasp on these rules and won't constantly need to refer to them in a game. Or as it was already stated, once in the game you might only need the special rules pages (in the middle) and not the 'army building' pages at the back of the book.

While I too have some issues with the layout, graphic design is my career after all, I really don't think it is as horrible as many of you seem to consider it. (*the trend of codex' not the new Marine one in specific.)

I agree that only Special characters should have access to master-crafted items, artificer armor etc. i.e. Rare = rare. et al.

Initially I like the idea of named Chapter-specific characters that unlock chapter-thematic capabilities. However the suggestion of upgrading combat tactics to various Chapter-thematic Chapter Tactics for a points cost seems like an interesting idea to consider. Of course, what's done is done.

Enjoy,
Jon

Fist of Dorn = Facepuncher!

jon23516 wrote:
So what is the alternative?

Instead of a 2 page spread of about 8 named HQ special characters, with references to another part of the book which has their fluff and details their rules; we're wanting a single page for each and every unit entry in the whole army list?

So if I'm building an army and want to review the HQ special characters I have to flip through 8 pages? (4 spreads) instead of 1 spread?

I agree with the idea that if you've played Marines before you are likely to know what certain rules mean. And if you're a new player you'll pick it up in a few games. Either way, feel free to make up a cheat sheet (summary sheet) if you wish. If you need to throw in a book mark or a sticky-note on a particular rules page you have to look up often, so be it. But I believe after a few games you will have a better grasp on these rules and won't constantly need to refer to them in a game. Or as it was already stated, once in the game you might only need the special rules pages (in the middle) and not the 'army building' pages at the back of the book.

While I too have some issues with the layout, graphic design is my career after all, I really don't think it is as horrible as many of you seem to consider it. (*the trend of codex' not the new Marine one in specific.)

I agree that only Special characters should have access to master-crafted items, artificer armor etc. i.e. Rare = rare. et al.

Initially I like the idea of named Chapter-specific characters that unlock chapter-thematic capabilities. However the suggestion of upgrading combat tactics to various Chapter-thematic Chapter Tactics for a points cost seems like an interesting idea to consider. Of course, what's done is done.

Enjoy,
Jon

Much as I agree with your sentiments, I think the main problem is when playing an opponent who is a stickler for rules, new, or simply not familiar with said army. Granted, Space Marines being the most popular aren't really a great example for this, but even so. It can be irritating when you have to show each and every rule to an opponent, regardless of reason, but having to hunt through your book just adds to this when it need not be so complex.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:On the bright side, at least it gives page references when you find one of the things you need.

And not being funny, but if it is so stressful during a game, make a note of the page numbers on your army list for each entry. Or is that being too proactive?

Or EVEN BETTER, buy two copies (front and back of each page) cut them up and past them on pages in a binder you made!

Divvent be daft man!

That costs extra money, and probably is more effort.

I don't see why special characters could not have their own page each. They are, after all, special. Alternately, as stated, they could have a "fluff" section that details every unit entry, including special characters (or special examples of units in universe even), and then have a "rules" section that lists all the crunchy stuff you need to know like points costs, options, special rules, stats, etc.

See, this way, when you are on the can and just want to read some nifty stuff, you have that section. When you are building a list or playing a game, and you want to show your buddy that "Yes, the unit does that" it is right there in one place.

Now, yes, you could make your own cheat sheet, or photocopy pages and the summary to make your own little binder for play use. At that point, however, one has to wonder why they payed 20-30$ for the book. Further, one should be wondering about why, if it is so easy and obvious to devise fixes for the problem, why the designers didn't fix it for them. It isn't as though it should be surprising that the books are going to be used for rules reference purposes.

It wouldn't surprise me if part of the thinking is to get people to read the whole Codex.

Is what I do, and I rarely have problems with the rules. Least not with the armies I use regularly.

Since fluff is irrelevant to the game, players don't need to read the whole codex. They only need to read the bits that are actually rules.

I honestly don't know why people are still complaining about this; yes the layout sucks but this layout has been in the last FIVE codexes! I expected a review of what was read in the codex not the layout.

And of course you lost auspexes, holy relics, and artificier armor- haven't you read the DA and BA codexes? you're lucky you still have teleport homers (jervis didn't see fit to give BA players any...).

P.S. No offense to you kid kyoto, i'm just amazed that the layout is such a hot topic.

It's a hot topic because people care.

There's a Russian saying that you can get used to anything, even hanging, if you just hang for long enough.

Maybe that's not a good motto for developing new products.

Wraithlordmechanic wrote:I honestly don't know why people are still complaining about this; yes the layout sucks but this layout has been in the last FIVE codexes! I expected a review of what was read in the codex not the layout.

And of course you lost auspexes, holy relics, and artificier armor- haven't you read the DA and BA codexes? you're lucky you still have teleport homers (jervis didn't see fit to give BA players any...).

P.S. No offense to you kid kyoto, i'm just amazed that the layout is such a hot topic.

To tell the truth I haven't read the last few codexes what with being in Guyana and then China. I got the Eldar book and found it annoying but didn't really use it enough to note all the problems.

I will be using this book.

I decided early on not to comment about the rules since I have not used this army list and well, there's far too many opinions out there, we can argue them forever. I wanted for focus on how good a rule book it is, rather than how good the rules are.

For the fluff, the big frustration was how much of the art and fluff I had seen before. With 1000 marine chapters GW could have easily decided the book would have tons of material on new chapters rather than tell us, for the 5th time, about the Ultramarines stand against Hive Fleet Behemoth and how the whole first company was killed defending the defense lasers below the polar ice caps of Ultramar.

What about inventing a new chapter and giving them that kind of space? How about spending time on the heroic battles of the Crimson Fists? Or focusing on the chapters that fought against the 13th Black Crusade?

So as a fluff book and as a rule book I was disappointed in it. As for the rules themselves, not too excite either but I won't feel qualified to judge for a while.

Layout wise it makes sense to me...

If a unit has its own special rules its in their entry
If a unit has a shared special rule (hellfire rounds) its in the wargear section.

If it needs to be- there is a page number to direct you to the right page.

The alternative is to put ALL of the rules on every page- which would quickly remove the background and any artwork.... which i'm sure people would also see as a bad thing.

And the question would be where would it end... would you need all the special marine rules, all the weapon stats for every weapons option and anything else you might find useful- on every single unit entry?>

Or just go retro and do it right. Here is how it should be done:

Front cover
Table of contents
Fluff
Army specific rules
Wargear section
Vehicle wargear section
Unit entries, INCLUDING STAT LINES AND UNIT OPTIONS!!!
Painting and model showcase
Fluff
Index
Summary page
Back cover

Moz wrote:Or just go retro and do it right. Here is how it should be done:

Front cover
Table of contents
Fluff
Army specific rules
Wargear section
Vehicle wargear section
Unit entries, INCLUDING STAT LINES AND UNIT OPTIONS!!!
Painting and model showcase
Fluff
Index
Summary page
Back cover

I agree with this with the added requirement that all units special rules be in the "Army Specific Rules" Section especially character specific ones and all wargear be listed in the Wargear Section especially unique or rare items like Iron Halos. I should not have to look in the Chapter Master entry to find out what an Iron Halo does if I am looking up a Captain's info.

I can't wait for the next codex so we can harshly rate it based on its layout then spank ourselves while dreaming up wonderous layout schemes in our heads.

What a good time that will be.

Yes, God-forbid people have an opinion that goes against yours Shummy. How dare they!!!!!!!!!! The nerve of those people... those... those... spankers!!!

BYE

ShumaGorath wrote:I can't wait for the next codex so we can harshly rate it based on its layout then spank ourselves while dreaming up wonderous layout schemes in our heads.

What a good time that will be.

Much better than tirelessly scouring the boards, fingers poised over the keyboard, ready to strike a moment's notice of reading a snarky comment!

H.B.M.C. wrote:Yes, God-forbid people have an opinion that goes against yours Shummy. How dare they!!!!!!!!!! The nerve of those people... those... those... spankers!!!

BYE

Actually as I've said like three times now. I think the layout is rubbish.

I just also dislike the "ME TOO!" Discussion of all the people taking another round to pat themselves on the back because they can agree that a clearly bad layout is bad. Again. For the fifth time in a row.

Much better than tirelessly scouring the boards, fingers poised over the keyboard, ready to strike a moment's notice of reading a snarky comment!

You sir, gravely underestimate just how much I enjoy trolling trolls and trollish conversations.

Post modified by the Dakka Inquisition.
Please remember kids use the forum and a certain level of language has to be avoided.
Waagh_Gonads

I find that these new formats (for me the orks) are very difficult to get used too at the beginning, with getting to know your army, but once you have it down, it is nice, as counting out your lists goes very quick. This is also due to the fact that they don't believe in making options something different than a multiple of 5, besides maybe grenades for 1 point each. In these new codexes, I have to really try to get a list that is not a multiple of 5. That seems unbalanced to me, as you need more definition between different options, or else one will automatically become better.

ShumaGorath wrote:I can't wait for the next codex so we can harshly rate it based on its layout then spank ourselves while dreaming up wonderous layout schemes in our heads.

What a good time that will be.

Yes wonderous layout schemes, like those in the previous Tyranid, marine, and IG codexes. Yes...almost impossible to achieve.

Far and away the most aggravating example of this for me was looking at the Librarian entry, seeing the Epistolary entry and then having to flip back to the entry to find what exactly that upgrade did... only to see it's not included on the Librarian's "bestiary" page. Nor is it bolded, underlined, highlighted or in any other way made to stand out from the rest of the text as an important definition, instead it's buried in the middle of a general paragraph on the Psychic Powers page.

When I first read the book, I thought that Cassius didn't have a crozius or rosarius, since it's not listed under his rule section.

Knowing that couldn't be true, I eventually found it listed in the army list. But boy was that confusing!

the one im really digging in the orks codex is this example. "squad can have said weapon. turn to page whatever for details. *flip pages* said weapon is a blah blah blah with fun fantasy detail. for rules on weapon goto page whatever in THE RULE BOOK"
my brother has the rule book most of the time.(we split the cost) so that annoys me to no friggin END! granted i pretty much know the rules for most wargear but the rules have changed. i dont know for sure if they are the same or not. that one bugs me