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.

So, once I bought the Chapter Approved 2018 Edition I went through whatever codex needed changed and updated it with a simple eraser and pencil. Now that the 2019 edition is fast approaching, I noticed that the writing is difficult to see, and the eraser and pencil tip are damaging the paper in the codex. Would anyone have any tips for updating a codex in a more effective and less damaging way?

I wouldn't worry about it - just use the separate points book when making a list as it has every value in it now. It's even better since you can have the Codex open to the unit's datasheet while adding up wargear instead of needing to flip back and forth.

kenney84 wrote:
So, once I bought the Chapter Approved 2018 Edition I went through whatever codex needed changed and updated it with a simple eraser and pencil. Now that the 2019 edition is fast approaching, I noticed that the writing is difficult to see, and the eraser and pencil tip are damaging the paper in the codex. Would anyone have any tips for updating a codex in a more effective and less damaging way?

I did sticky notes in the back with the points.

There's usually a bit of empty space and you can put sticky notes with "Chapter Approved 20XX pg <whatever>" there.

I started doing that for AoS with the General's Handbook and it works great for me. If someone questions it, I can point them towards the book pages.

Well, Chapter Approved 2019 will have all the points.

Take a look at the battlescribe app. It's a free and great app for list building that automatically updates points without you needing to spend a penny. It's not a full replacement if you are deep into the competitive scene, but outside of that it will do the job as it is very accurate, albeit not always perfect.

Took a scan of the pages, saved them each as an image, updated the points on the images, printed them out, cut to size and keep them in the book as a reference. Works for my AM codex as its only 2, facing, pages - not sure how well it'd work for others.

Best option, as above, is to keep the point book handy. Otherwise, I would suggest chopping up price stickers and pasting them over the problem areas. You can then write on the sticker paper and replace it without too much issue down the line as things change again.

Or just go electronic.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Well, Chapter Approved 2019 will have all the points.

Yeah, so there really is not need to update you codex. Heck, you could take a black marker and block out ALL your Codex's points entirely and just use the Munitorum Field Manual for points movinf forward

-

Memorize the point value of every unit and piece of equipment in the book. Most armies it takes maybe 3-5 read throughs.

If you're a space marine player, just focus on things that you frequently use.

chapter approved 2019 will include ALL the points, so there's no reason to take pencil to your codex, just consult CA 2019

Until GW errata CA19. Already several typos found.

Also just use Battlescribe like everyone else.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
Until GW errata CA19. Already several typos found.

Also just use Battlescribe like everyone else.

true, truthfully, I've been considering when CA 2019 starts creating a spreadsheet for my armies points, it'll make point adjustments, long term be a snap.

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
Take a look at the battlescribe app. It's a free and great app for list building that automatically updates points without you needing to spend a penny. It's not a full replacement if you are deep into the competitive scene, but outside of that it will do the job as it is very accurate, albeit not always perfect.

NEVER do this.

Battlescribe is often full of glaring errors that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the book should be able to spot. To this frigging day I have people still trying to argue with me that they can have a Cadian Primaris Psyker, "because they saw it in a tourney list".

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
Take a look at the battlescribe app. It's a free and great app for list building that automatically updates points without you needing to spend a penny. It's not a full replacement if you are deep into the competitive scene, but outside of that it will do the job as it is very accurate, albeit not always perfect.

NEVER do this.

Battlescribe is often full of glaring errors that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the book should be able to spot. To this frigging day I have people still trying to argue with me that they can have a Cadian Primaris Psyker, "because they saw it in a tourney list".

And what does that have to do with Battlescribe?

speaking of battlescribe has anyone heard when they'll update it for the new sister's codex?

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tibs Ironblood wrote:
Take a look at the battlescribe app. It's a free and great app for list building that automatically updates points without you needing to spend a penny. It's not a full replacement if you are deep into the competitive scene, but outside of that it will do the job as it is very accurate, albeit not always perfect.

NEVER do this.

Battlescribe is often full of glaring errors that anyone with a cursory knowledge of the book should be able to spot. To this frigging day I have people still trying to argue with me that they can have a Cadian Primaris Psyker, "because they saw it in a tourney list".

And what does that have to do with Battlescribe?

I don't know but I assume it's because Battlescribe had the option? Otherwise, yeah totally irrelevant of someone being a TFG and not the app being inaccurate.

BrianDavion wrote:
speaking of battlescribe has anyone heard when they'll update it for the new sister's codex?

I was wondering this too. It's been out for a while now, perhaps those that normally update the data sources couldn't get their hands on a copy? Technically the codex doesn't release until next month at some point so it might not be until then.


Anyway, back on topic - I've always just photocopied the relevant pages of the points updates (usually it's only 1-2 pages for each faction, probably a bit more now that it includes all points) and just stick that in the back of my codex. It will very rarely come up in a game post-list writing but if anyone questions it I've got it handy.

NurglesR0T wrote:I don't know but I assume it's because Battlescribe had the option? Otherwise, yeah totally irrelevant of someone being a TFG and not the app being inaccurate.

You say it's "someone being a TFG". It's not. It's someone who followed the advice constantly given out by the "dOn'T pAy fOr iT!11!" brigade, where they never buy the book and they just netlist and rely on Battlescribe/"totally legal" pdfs.

Never suggest Battlescribe to anyone who doesn't own the book. Never suggest Battlescribe to anyone who has no clue how to build a list.

Never suggest Battlescribe, period.

I just went to check, and Battlescribe will allow you to take a Primaris Psyker in a Cadian detachment (which is legal), but does not give that psyker the [REGIMENT] keyword, which means it cannot be Cadian.

So I don't know what Kanluwen's talking about, but Battlescribe appears to have the correct information. If you should find an error- and I have- you can submit it to the project's Github page.

I recommend Battlescribe, especially for new players, simply because it's far easier to use Battlescribe than to negotiate 5+ FAQ PDFs to ensure you are following the most up to date rules.

 catbarf wrote:
I just went to check, and Battlescribe will allow you to take a Primaris Psyker in a Cadian detachment (which is legal), but does not give that psyker the [REGIMENT] keyword, which means it cannot be Cadian.
So I don't know what Kanluwen's talking about, but Battlescribe appears to have the correct information. If you should find an error- and I have- you can submit it to the project's Github page.

That's cool and all, but does it prevent them from taking Relic of Lost Cadia?
A few years ago, a list with a Primaris Psyker in a Spearhead won an event. The list was repeatedly shared as an example of how "OP" Guard could be, and thanks to Battlescribe, people continually pointed out how "flexible" the army was. That list has resurfaced a few times on Reddit as well.

I pointed out here on Dakka that it was invalid because there was a Primaris Psyker with Relic of Lost Cadia. Battlescribe, at the time, was allowing for <Regiment> Relics to be taken in <Regiment> armies on non <Regiment> units.

I recommend Battlescribe, especially for new players, simply because it's far easier to use Battlescribe than to negotiate 5+ FAQ PDFs to ensure you are following the most up to date rules.

It's also easier in the long run to actually show someone how to write a basic list using a pen and paper.


Never, ever, ever, EVER recommend Battlescribe for new players. Because they WILL view it as a definitive go-to, and they WILL become like certain posters on here who constantly argue about "bad writing" from GW and other trash thanks to viewing the rules not from the actual books but from crowdsourced nonsense.

So, if he had written the list by hand and made the same mistake, you'd never recommend writing lists by hand?

 Kanluwen wrote:
That's cool and all, but does it prevent them from taking Relic of Lost Cadia?

Yes. Relic of Lost Cadia can only be given to a Cadian model. The only relic available to the Primaris Psyker is the Deathmask of Ollanius, as the other relics can only be given to Officers.

People will netlist and copy illegal builds whether or not apps like Battlescribe exist. People will write illegal lists to begin with all on their own without Battlescribe.

 Kanluwen wrote:

NurglesR0T wrote:I don't know but I assume it's because Battlescribe had the option? Otherwise, yeah totally irrelevant of someone being a TFG and not the app being inaccurate.

You say it's "someone being a TFG". It's not. It's someone who followed the advice constantly given out by the "dOn'T pAy fOr iT!11!" brigade, where they never buy the book and they just netlist and rely on Battlescribe/"totally legal" pdfs.

Never suggest Battlescribe to anyone who doesn't own the book. Never suggest Battlescribe to anyone who has no clue how to build a list.

Never suggest Battlescribe, period.

Ridiculous and I disagree, your opinion though.

Battle scribe is the best man. I've saved like a 100 bucks on not buing the new marine codex, supplements and CA.

For my armies I created AOS style datacards for the units which eliminated the need for me to use the codex once it was redundant. Chapter Approved will cover the rest.

So, here's a goofy thing I did one time when I had a bit of time on my hands.

What I did is made an overall spreadsheet for all the units and saved it, with all their points for weapons underneath. I even have a reference for what page the entry is on, and where that entry update is located, etc.

I print this out and keep it in a binder, in a document protector. I can also make my lists on this (or in Battlescribe) and just print those out and put them in the binder as well.

This book comes in very handy, because I use it not only for those points- but I print out FAQ's for my armies, additional missions from WD, downloaded profiles, etc.

Also, the Imperial Armor Index is only like $25.00- but for me, that's a bit steep for a book that has 3 models I use. Especially after each of those models cost me $130. I think Forge World got enough money from me already... so you can bet I have a printed off datasheet for these models.

I even got to a point where I would actually just have the specific datasheets printed out and sectioned off for the list I was using, to make reference easier.

I always keep the page references around,

Originally I had 1 book. Now I have 4 of them- one for Necromunda, one for 40k, one for Kill-Team, and one for Blackstone Fortress.

Binders are like 3 dollars and the document protectors are about 8 bucks (or free if your office supplies at work aren't well-guarded). It's worth taking the time to sit down and organize all these gaming things, and you'll find it's honestly kind of relaxing to sort all your stuff out. Better than writing in a book with a pencil.

I used to extol the benefits of digital copies, particularly if you have an iOS device, but, whilst GW used to update the books after errata/FAQs, they seem to have stopped bothering.

Which is annoying.

People in general make way more accurate lists with BS than without. Without the app, people miss out points for wargear and setup illegal combos with alarming regularity.

Yeah, occasionally there are errors. If you see one, report it.

Maybe your lists are super accurate, congrats. But most people aren't so vigilant or savvy at finding all the errata.

I don't care about point errors in battlescribe - you build the list with best intentions in mind, and it's not like GW created a flawless game in the first place.

What does annoy me is wrong rules in battlescribe, especially if people didn't bring their codex.

Don't listen to the nay sayers, BattleScribe is great. It's not perfect, and it has errors. Don't use it alone. Always check with CA2019, and report errors, help making it better.

The only issue with Battlescribe is that for me and a lot of folks I know, the app tends to crash. And it's annoying to hunt down something specific on a phone screen. Easier for me to just print everything out. I'll build my lists on there and make an overview, but I keep my reference materials on hand.