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.

Or will you move on to the new one, despite the trainwreck monobuild that it is? Apart from Libby, and Dreadknight and the psilencers, pretty much everything got wrecked.

But this isnt a discussion about the GK dex itself, because there's plenty of threads on dakka already for that.

My question is - if you are a non competitive player sticking to a gaming group, are you gonna continue playing with the old dex or move on to the new one to keep with the times? Assuming you are among a circle of friends where nobody coerces you into buying the new one, that is.

I.e., are you the kind of person who voluntarily says "no man, when a codex gets old, it gets old - it is time to embrace the new", or are you the kind of guy who appreciates the old GK dex for what it is (+ errata) and votes no with his wallet regarding the new one?

Well, in our gaming group we always stick to the newest codices.

From my point of view (pure GK player) the new Codex is what I wanted; more reasons to take Terminators over Strike Squads, better Dreadknights, and the special CAD allowing some interesting shenannigans. I feel for the people who ran combined armies, and I'm a tad annoyed at the removal of Mordrak, but other than that I'm not too fussed about it.

Oh lord, is it already time for the 'my army changed'-whine threads? Dex isn't even out.

Short answer: I will go with the new dex and so will my friend who mainly plays them.

Long answer:
I love the fact that Codex: GK will finally be Codex: GK, instead of Codex: inquisition.
They already 'wrecked' the old dex by removing all their unique powers and putting them into deamonology and removing half the special rules GK used to have.
What I've seen so far, I like, Apart from making the Dreadknight an even bigger 'autopick'.

That's not really legal to do...

 Dalymiddleboro wrote:
That's not really legal to do...

Yes it is. There's no laws preventing you from doing so.

In my gaming group we use the most recent codexes for every army. So, yes, I will be using the new Grey Knight Codex

I'll be sticking with the old one. Why? Because it works, and allows me to use the models I spent money on. If it ain't broke, it doesn't need fixing.

It's nothing to do with power levels, I'm not going to pay to replace something that already does what I bought it to do. Same reason I pretty much stopped buying books with the last SM codex and won't be touching 7th. I have, between 6th and various codexes, a ruleset that allows me to play the game, what more do I need?

Who would be ok with that outside a very friendly game? What next I get to play a Eldar 4th edition Falcon with the unkillable holo field? Jeez you haven't even played a game yet. Relax before assuming the codex is awful.

Case in point. Tyranids awful codex yet have over a 50% win rate at the BAO. Astra Militarum awesome codex yet have a 34% win rate at the BAO.

 lobbywatson wrote:
Who would be ok with that outside a very friendly game? What next I get to play a Eldar 4th edition Falcon with the unkillable holo field?

Half the Eldar codex wasn't removed so it's not a very good comparison. If it wasn't to exploit cheese and din't have any glaring edition based problems I wouldn't care in the slightest.

We have been examining these issues in our game group - deciding which bits to take and which bits not to from 7th Ed etc............which units to tone down and which to help. Most of us don;t play tounreys so don;t really care about the "legaility" however there are always going t eb some who prefer the current edition - which is fair enough as they want to be able to play what they would if they just walked into another club or a tourney.

I think taking the Inquisiton out of Gks was good but only if they had actually put some effort into both making the stand alone GK codex better and also not just cut and pasting stuff into the Inq one (and dropping Valeria) The other way of doing it would have been to have a bigger Inquisition Codex (say SM size) and including the Deathwatch and Grey Knights as their Chamber Millitant plus other stuff like Inq Storm Troopers.

Instead we just get more Baby Carriers - at least they didn't give more variants or giant versions of them as I feared,

Yonan wrote: If it wasn't to exploit cheese and din't have any glaring edition based problems I wouldn't care in the slightest.

precisely, me to.

It's our game, we shouldn't feel obliged to buy whatever GW puts out just to keep playing. To compare it to a hypothetical video game, would you stop playing Alien Shooter 1 if Alien Shooter 2 came out with a few minimal changes and less content?

lobbywatson wrote:Who would be ok with that outside a very friendly game? What next I get to play a Eldar 4th edition Falcon with the unkillable holo field? Jeez you haven't even played a game yet. Relax before assuming the codex is awful.

Case in point. Tyranids awful codex yet have over a 50% win rate at the BAO. Astra Militarum awesome codex yet have a 34% win rate at the BAO.

Like I said, it's nothing to do with the codex being awful. It's the fact I see no point in paying to invalidate a nearly-identical-but-more-useful product I already own.

Also, I would expect most non-tournament players to sympathise with anyone who used assassins or inquisition units in their army and would now have to buy three new books, and let them use the current one. Surely game against an old but still valid codex is better than no game at all?

Not only will I be picking up the new codex, I'll also be starting a small GK army to go against my much larger Daemons collection.

The last book was nothing but Codex: Crutchhammer. Good riddance it's finally dead and buried as it ruined the game for so many players.
The new book from a read through looks solidly middle of the road. The really heinous stuff got dropped, the Nemesis weapons are much more sensible, and the pts costs have been re-adjusted. There's still plenty in there that worries me as a primarily Daemon player, (god damn those Psylencers are scary!), but I can now look at a game against GK's as an entertaining challenge, rather than the utter waste of time it used to be.

Sure it sucks for anyone who ran =I= stuff and/or Assassmo's that you now have to fork out for the digital rules. I'm not thrilled myself as it means "there goes any chance of playing a Radical Inquisitor now" as I don't own a tablet or e-reader device.
But overall, it's not a huge deal as I can just count him as something else in the end... (I'm honestly much more peeved by Chaos & IG now being CtA allies which makes Traitor Guard an absolute b**** to try and play!)


I find it hilarious overall the amount of nerd raging and QQ'ing from GK players over this book. You want to see what "OMG!Nerfed!1!!!1!" really looks like? Try having run a Tzeentch or Khorne DoC army and then seeing what the 8th ed book did to it...
Or having been an Undead player at the beginning of 8th edition, where TK's became 100% unplayable and VC's literally were shoehorned into 1 build.

Grey Knights will come out okay, and even PA Psycannons will have their place. Just because something's no longer godly doesn't make it useless.

The problem with keeping to old rules is the death spiral it creates. You get very few new players coming to a group because they have no access to the rules (OOP codex/rulebook) so you're stuck with your existing group. Any losses to that group dwindles it beyond repair. It won't go anywhere but down.

It happened to my 20+ regular group in college with the advent of 3rd ed.

To compare it to a hypothetical video game, would you stop playing Alien Shooter 1 if Alien Shooter 2 came out with a few minimal changes and less content?

Yeah but its not a video game - you have to have opponents that also want to mox up editions - we used to have a player that used to take stuff from several Codexes for his Dark Angels - it was ok at first but then it became obvious that some of the combos were just dodgy and exploitiative.

If you can get the player base to stick to it - thats cool - but we have several players who have said they only play current edition (for varied reasons) and the Gaming player base is not that big to start with............

its similar to how mnay people let you play them with a fandex?

Not a GK player, but I'd actually prefer playing someone who had torrented all the relevant sub-books they felt they needed to play their army as updated than play against an out of date book.

Azreal13 wrote:Not a GK player, but I'd actually prefer playing someone who had torrented all the relevant sub-books they felt they needed to play their army as updated than play against an out of date book.

Why? What difference does it make? The old GK book iis still compatible with the current rules and functions perfectly well.

Mr Morden wrote:

To compare it to a hypothetical video game, would you stop playing Alien Shooter 1 if Alien Shooter 2 came out with a few minimal changes and less content?

Yeah but its not a video game - you have to have opponents that also want to mox up editions - we used to have a player that used to take stuff from several Codexes for his Dark Angels - it was ok at first but then it became obvious that some of the combos were just dodgy and exploitiative.

If you can get the player base to stick to it - thats cool - but we have several players who have said they only play current edition (for varied reasons) and the Gaming player base is not that big to start with............

Valid points, I only play with a very small group and so we have a lot more freedom in what we do. I guess, as with everything, you have to rely on player integrity to some extent. If someone is playing and older book just to exploit something I have no time for them at all, but if it's because they can't afford/see no reason to pay for what they already have, then it's all good.

But then, that's just the same as trusting someone not to bring a tourney list to a friendly game or not to bring a LOW at 750 points. A game of 40k relies on a social interaction as much as a rulebook, so it dots depend on what kind of situation you're playing in.

I prefer to play the new book. I wasn't happy about the Black Templars getting rolled into the SM codex, but life goes on. I dealt with it, you can too.

If your group lets you play with the old book, fantastic for you and your gaming group!

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
The problem with keeping to old rules is the death spiral it creates. You get very few new players coming to a group because they have no access to the rules (OOP codex/rulebook) so you're stuck with your existing group. Any losses to that group dwindles it beyond repair. It won't go anywhere but down.

It happened to my 20+ regular group in college with the advent of 3rd ed.

It's only an old codex, not an old edition. An old edition causes similar problems to map packs, DLC, etc in video games - fragmentation of the community which yeah can cause problems resulting in a reduced playerbase. Using an older codex doesn't do that so long as it works fine still - which it does.

Saying that you're only going to use the old codex is just whining that you didn't get your way. I own the new codex, and it is fine. Like most other armies over the past 2 years it's our turn to adapt.

I would be ok with playing against a player who wanted to keep their old book on 2 conditions, regardless of army.

1: They don't get to add any new-shiny-stuff from the NEW book.

2/. I get to do it too.

Allowing mix-matching across several editions of codex is even more heinous for rules abuse.

Hell, i still play my GK as Daemonhunters, as i found the 'current' (not the brand new one) GK book to be a steaming turd (albeit a pretty overpowered turd in 5th, and still pretty potent in 6th).

If you can convince someone to accomodate you, go for it. If you are expecting a complete stranger to play your outdated codex, ask them. Don't be surprised/surly if they say no, though.

 Yonan wrote:

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
The problem with keeping to old rules is the death spiral it creates. You get very few new players coming to a group because they have no access to the rules (OOP codex/rulebook) so you're stuck with your existing group. Any losses to that group dwindles it beyond repair. It won't go anywhere but down.

It happened to my 20+ regular group in college with the advent of 3rd ed.

It's only an old codex, not an old edition. An old edition causes similar problems to map packs, DLC, etc in video games - fragmentation of the community which yeah can cause problems resulting in a reduced playerbase. Using an older codex doesn't do that so long as it works fine still - which it does.

as we have discussed its going to depend almost entirely on the player base:

In my experience

Some will be fine.
Some will simply not play against it - they might just want to play the current Codex to not confuse them - esp if competative players preping for games.
Some will say if you can do X I can do Y yeah which may lead to arguments abouts whats approrpiate / fair?

 greyknight12 wrote:
Saying that you're only going to use the old codex is just whining that you didn't get your way. I own the new codex, and it is fine. Like most other armies over the past 2 years it's our turn to adapt.

Saying you're only going to use the new codex is just whining that other people are using the old one. They own the old one and it's fine. Like most other armies over the past 2 years it still works fine as the changes are so minimal that they *should* just be errata.

I would ask my opponent to play the new book and then give him a Tricorne if he wants to include the Assassins/Inquisitorials.

I have exactly 3 friends who still (reluctantly) play 40K. We decided when 7th Edition dropped to stick with 6th and our existing codices. I don't play tourneys anymore, and I don't play against randos at my FLGS. This works for us, and given that I've been unimpressed with the new Orks and GK 'dexes (both armies I own), I'm glad we made the choice when we did.

 Paradigm wrote:

Azreal13 wrote:Not a GK player, but I'd actually prefer playing someone who had torrented all the relevant sub-books they felt they needed to play their army as updated than play against an out of date book.

Why? What difference does it make? The old GK book iis still compatible with the current rules and functions perfectly well.

Because what other reason is there not to other than cost?

If someone could get the extra books they needed for no extra cost to replace the units that have been taken out, but still insisted on usin the old book, I'd question their motives.

Personally, I would always use the new book for my armies, good or bad, because the whole thing is a massive set of swings and roundabouts and if one is invested in winning at 40K then you're in for a hard, or expensive, time. I would hold my opponent to the same standard.

Enforcing purchase of the new 'dex on players when it's basically GK 5.1 lite only rewards GWs bad business practices. When GW pulls stunts like this - cutting 15 of the 38 units form a codex and selling them separately, then selling the new book at a higher price still - you really should push back imo.

Hey, if my opponent chooses to use an older version of the rules, does that mean I can have Broadsides with Strength 10 AP 1 weapons and the ability to move and shoot at full BS? My Hammerhead could have Shrouded and still get to shoot at full BS if it moved 12 inches too.

Or a Lone Wolf that doesn't give up victory points if killed and Scouts that outflank from my opponent's table edge?

Maybe I'll go back to main book rules that let my Space Wolves assault out of their transports, that'd be cool.

We always play with thine new dexes.

 Yonan wrote:
Enforcing purchase of the new 'dex on players when it's basically GK 5.1 lite only rewards GWs bad business practices. When GW pulls stunts like this - cutting 15 of the 38 units form a codex and selling them separately, then selling the new book at a higher price still - you really should push back imo.

The counter argument is that say a new Tyranid player comes up with his new codex but its not very great - stuff that should have been in it was spread into dataslates - same with the new Ork Codex - now if they have splashed out on all this but then you say - hey well I'll just roll with my old codex - its all fine and balanced as it has twice the unit selection and different rules and such, hey you should have done that - don;t you feel a fool? then they may well be confused /annoyed / refuse to play you ?