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.

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

 Marmatag wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

This is a broader discussion on the value of print codexes, not on whether or not they corrected the mistake. No one disputes that they're correcting this in the best way they can.

The point here is that printed codexes are a fixture in this game, yet no one can defend this really, other than with "but I like a physical book." The logistics behind a codex are constantly called into question. This is just the latest example.

If customers like the physical book, that should be reason enough to sell a physical book. That's pretty simple business sense. Any real issue comes from possibly having to pay money for a correction, and in this case it appears to be a non issue.

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

Yeah but the way I'm looking at it as a force multiplier, and giving everyone in a 6" area an extra attack seems better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's area. Unless the space wolves have a really good aura that I'm not aware of.

But you're right, I do see a little more merit in it than I did before, however I still think it's one of the less competitive ones.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

Well I see more merit in it than I did before, but I still think, as a force multiplier, the +1 attack or wound options are better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's aura.

Primortus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

Yeah but the way I'm looking at it as a force multiplier, and giving everyone in a 6" area an extra attack seems better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's area. Unless the space wolves have a really good aura that I'm not aware of.

But you're right, I do see a little more merit in it than I did before, however I still think it's one of the less competitive ones.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

Well I see more merit in it than I did before, but I still think, as a force multiplier, the +1 attack or wound options are better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's aura.

yeah it all depends how you wannt run. a Primaris hellblaster and Longfang gunline? saga of majesty'll be damned good. Mass blood fangs an wulfen? less so

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

Considering it was 12" of Ignore Morale....

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

Yeah but the way I'm looking at it as a force multiplier, and giving everyone in a 6" area an extra attack seems better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's area. Unless the space wolves have a really good aura that I'm not aware of.

But you're right, I do see a little more merit in it than I did before, however I still think it's one of the less competitive ones.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

Well I see more merit in it than I did before, but I still think, as a force multiplier, the +1 attack or wound options are better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's aura.

yeah it all depends how you wannt run. a Primaris hellblaster and Longfang gunline? saga of majesty'll be damned good. Mass blood fangs an wulfen? less so

why would you want to run SW hellblasters when DA ones are superior in every way

Karol wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Primortus wrote:

 Polonius wrote:

Justyn wrote:
I understand mistakes happen. I'm glad they tried to fix it. There are however two issues. First this is going to cause TONS of confusion. Second some of these are significantly worse than what they replaced. Saga of majesty is utter garbage. I'd consider it a downside to any named character forced to take it. This is an un-needed nerf to an already mediocre Codex.

I think that people are pretty hip to the fact that rules change. I see more people relying on Battlescribe than codices these days.

And Saga of majesty is really good on a character with any re-roll auras. Going to 9" gives you a lot of flexibililty.

Except to trigger Majesty's aura effect you have to kill the enemy warlord with your warlord. How often does that happen?

You need to kill the warlord to turn the trait itself into an aura, but the Warlord himself still gets the benefit of the trait even absent the Deed.

So, if your warlord kills the enemy warlord, then other characters will have expanded auras. But my understanding is that from the beginning of the game, the warlord himself gets the buff to his aura.

Yeah but the way I'm looking at it as a force multiplier, and giving everyone in a 6" area an extra attack seems better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's area. Unless the space wolves have a really good aura that I'm not aware of.

But you're right, I do see a little more merit in it than I did before, however I still think it's one of the less competitive ones.

An extra 3" on an aura doesn't seem worth it to me compared to +1 to wound or +1 attack.

depends on what you're running it for. if you wanted a warlord to sit in the back and buff a gunline? TOTALLY worth it. if you wanted to toss your warlord at the enemy as a beat stick? yeah a waste.

if you want a beat stick run another Saga

Well I see more merit in it than I did before, but I still think, as a force multiplier, the +1 attack or wound options are better than a 3" increase to your reroll 1's aura.

yeah it all depends how you wannt run. a Primaris hellblaster and Longfang gunline? saga of majesty'll be damned good. Mass blood fangs an wulfen? less so

why would you want to run SW hellblasters when DA ones are superior in every way

because not everyone changes their chapter based on whatever rules are best? *shrugs* I'm not saying it;s great just I can see a use for it. and a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

But is it better than 6" of re-rolls and 12" of Ignore Morale. Because that is the actual difference.

Justyn wrote:

a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

But is it better than 6" of re-rolls and 12" of Ignore Morale. Because that is the actual difference.

Morale rarely impacts small squads, which most people run to maximize CP gain.so yes I think this is a net gain.

 Marmatag wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
Salt mine OP.

Mistake was made, then corrected in a timely fashion. Some would call that "proffessional".

This is a broader discussion on the value of print codexes, not on whether or not they corrected the mistake. No one disputes that they're correcting this in the best way they can.

The point here is that printed codexes are a fixture in this game, yet no one can defend this really, other than with "but I like a physical book." The logistics behind a codex are constantly called into question. This is just the latest example.

Physical books don't require batteries, are easier to thumb through at a moment's notice and are less wince inducing if your opponent accidently drops them after you let them use it to read a rule for themselves.

I mean, sure, digital media has some good things for it, but considering the mistakes GW makes there as well, I wouldn't say it's quite made it to being in superior in quality to print versions yet.

A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

You know, when I was a teenager you paid one internet bill and got unlimited access. Now you pay for data. Think about that and how that applies to books. No one trusts GW to write rules, why do you think paying for bit packets would improve that? If anything digitalization of codices would lessen the proverbial pressure on GW to actually proofread and edit. Why would you care about getting a codex right the first time when you can just slap a PDF on the screen? Would you even need to play test anything when you could just sell rules subscriptions and "update" them based on fan feedback? People seem to think we don't need books, physical copies, but we aren't doing away with books by going digital we are simply changing the medium. We are turning our cellphones into books, basically, but without one fundamental freedom; property. Will you actually own your copy of the rules when access to them requires an intermediary device and the approval of a third party? No, you won't, all you'll be paying for is the right to access information. Given that GW has had some very shady dealings in the past (chapterhouse, staff disputes and creative licensing issues) does anyone really trust GW to have such control over how we interact with the hobby?

I think an oversaturation of technology in our daily lives has had far reaching impacts on how we view ourselves and the world around us and the next few decades will be spent figuring out how to live in a technological era. I mean, let's face it folks. To live in these times is to be a guniea pig in the lab of new technology. We only just really figured out the internet, and even that seemingly normal life necessity still sparks debate about ethics and human nature that simply was not possible ten years ago. We have a magical repository of all human knowledge to date that can be accessed at the click of a button, but we can't see the intrinsic value of a printed book.

Knowledge is power, and power can only be weilded by those who have it. Just so happens it's nerd knowledge, but still...




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, when your phone dies mid game and you don't have a book to point to, how can I be sure that Storm Shield gives you a 3++? Does your FNP really trigger on a 5+? What about that proxy you had? Was the plasma gunner in this squad or that one? Who had the Powerfist again? No list? Oh dang huh? Back in my day if you wanted to write a list you had to go to a store and get a notebook and a pencil!

 darkcloak wrote:
A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

You know, when I was a teenager you paid one internet bill and got unlimited access. Now you pay for data.

When I was a teenager, I paid per minute for internet access. Now it's unlimited. What's your point?

My experience with GW's digital codexes is that they're updated with errata, but that a new edition is a new product.

What a useless thread. The only reason this thread exists is to give unsatisfied bitter people another outlet for their vitriol.

Have you ever had a real job in your life? Now in that job did you ever make mistakes? I bet you did, you are human. So are GW employees. They made an honest mistake and admitted it with an explanation, which is really stand up behavior in my eyes.

But no. You guessed it, it's GW, the company that can't get anything right. They mess everything up and sell a product that is subpar and just inferior crap in every imaginable way. What an utter load of tripe.

phydaux wrote:
Games Workshop - Staffed entirely by interns recruited from the Gender Studies department of the Nottingham Evening College, Cheese Bakery & Muffler Shop.

I think your politics are showing, where they shouldn't.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

phydaux wrote:
Games Workshop - Staffed entirely by interns recruited from the Gender Studies department of the Nottingham Evening College, Cheese Bakery & Muffler Shop.

I think your politics are showing, where they shouldn't.

Not really a political thing. It's an utterly useless degree with no real world applications. Most of the worst employees I've had to deal with are of similar graduates.

BrianDavion wrote:

Justyn wrote:

a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

But is it better than 6" of re-rolls and 12" of Ignore Morale. Because that is the actual difference.

Morale rarely impacts small squads, which most people run to maximize CP gain.so yes I think this is a net gain.

I think SW are actually one of the few armies that might prefer large squads, and it's nice to at least have the option to do so.

Thankfully I think one of the relics let's you ignore morale?

Karol wrote:
Well considering most of GW designers are know supporters of labor party, or other type of leftists it is not like he is wrong. One of the main traits of the left is that they are very bad orgnisers, if they can't write good rules to govern countries, one shouldn't expect them to write perfect rules for a table top game. You would need conservatives for that. The problem with conservatives though is that, unlike those on with left leanings, they aren't very good with inventing new stuff like fluff etc. A conservative w40k would be a game of 400pg long tables of stats, weapons, skills etc.

That is all.

Yeah they have crappy proofreading (still remember squid armor boyz and rest of the pearls).
But error was discovered and corrected very early.
Necron had lychguard and deathmarks as troops till FAQ.

 Weazel wrote:
What a useless thread. The only reason this thread exists is to give unsatisfied bitter people another outlet for their vitriol.

Have you ever had a real job in your life? Now in that job did you ever make mistakes? I bet you did, you are human. So are GW employees. They made an honest mistake and admitted it with an explanation, which is really stand up behavior in my eyes.

But no. You guessed it, it's GW, the company that can't get anything right. They mess everything up and sell a product that is subpar and just inferior crap in every imaginable way. What an utter load of tripe.

Sorry but 20 years and zero improvement means they don't get a "everyone makes mistakes" card to play.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 darkcloak wrote:
A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

You know, when I was a teenager you paid one internet bill and got unlimited access. Now you pay for data.

When I was a teenager, I paid per minute for internet access. Now it's unlimited. What's your point?

My experience with GW's digital codexes is that they're updated with errata, but that a new edition is a new product.

The point is that the internet used to be quite a bit cheaper and based on the same monthly usage/billing setup as say, cable TV. You paid the bill and got access based on a set amount of time. Now they sell internet by the bit. If you have Shaw hi-speed you get x amount of data per month and pay for any overages. So GW now gives you an option, book or digital. That's fine and that's how it should continue, but what if GW were given complete control over what data you accessed and when? Do you really trust them to treat you fairly? Digital copies are fine, but at the end of the day you are trusting GW with your property. It's stewardship of information.

 darkcloak wrote:
A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

Well they could fix this with seson passes, And if you would want to also get legacy rules, those could be broken up in to legacy subscriptions. They could even add a w40k legends for OOP models or even armies, they would have rules for narrative play.

But no. You guessed it, it's GW, the company that can't get anything right. They mess everything up and sell a product that is subpar and just inferior crap in every imaginable way. What an utter load of tripe.

I think the problem is not that GW makes crap stuff, but that the stuff they make has mountain sized differences in quality of player expiriance. If your, lets say an eldar or Knight players, GW product are great for you. Historicly, although am not basing this out of my own expiriance, for eldar players this was always the case. Now on the other hand if you ask a GK players about the quality of GW products you would get a totaly different response. Add to this the whole we make a luxury top end hobby no other company can stand up to, and you will always get unhappy people. This is as if two people bought two Mizuno golf club sets, both costing the same money, and for one dude the clubs break durning the opening swing.

because not everyone changes their chapter based on whatever rules are best? *shrugs* I'm not saying it;s great just I can see a use for it. and a 9 inch radius of my re-rolls are IMHO better then a 12 inch fearless. which was what majesty was before

That makes no sense at all. Hellblasters weren't good for SW when they just had an index, and the DA codex that actually did have good hellblasters came out way before codex SW. Unless time travel is involved, it would be impossible for someone who wants to play hellblasters in their army to pick SW.

That is all.

What part of what I say you disagree with my friend. Because Labor support of GW employees that write books and rules can easily be checked on social media. And conservatives being more industrious, and leftiest being more creative was established durning the 5 big traites studies, and those were done like in the 70-80s.

Digital only codexes would be good for Dakka. Just think of all of those rage filled threads once someone's device dies while playing on a tournament top table. Did he do it deliberately? or did the TO sabotage him by denying him a plug to recharge?

Lots of juicy drama potential.

Yes! Haha! That part would be fun!

I think there are a few things GW could do to tackle this issue:

A very fair and simple solution would be when you buy a physical Codex for ~£25 you should get the digital version included. With the current model of regular FAQs, balance changes, not to mention mistakes like these it makes purchasing a physical Codex (I love having a physical book in my hand) a slightly doubled edged sword and definitely takes some shine off the purchase if/when it is out of date or inaccurate. Especially if this occurs Day 1 or very early in the release cycle of the Codex.

GW don't really lose anything here because I'm sure there can't me many people at all who buy a physical Codex and the digital version? Seeing as books are put together digitally anyway the conversion from whichever software they use to digital copy for the public requires very little work.

This way you get to buy your physical copy, without the potential 'buyers remorse' if/when you have to reference the digital version.

They could even do something cool in this specific Space Wolf situation of printing off the freely available PDF 'Saga' update page, doing so in a fairly decent standard. Making them available in store if you show your SW:Codex and proof of purchase. I assume this is what plenty of people will do, print it off themselves and insert in to the Codex, but it'd be a ncie gesture from GW - although equally might set a precedent they wouldn't want to have to follow in the future if they mess up again lol!

Back to the origonal topic of why did GW change the benifits with what most people see as making them worse.

I am wondering if they have finally started testing CA 2018 changes given the lead time for the books and realised that Codex Furries plus CA 2018 points changes (presumably-20% for marines) resulted in some extremely powerful furrie hero hammer.

I must admit I 2as hoping for something a bit more original than just least seen units get massive points cost and call that balanced but I'm not gonna hold my breath.

I suppose the biggest clue will be when if the 2nd big FAQ even attempts to address soup/allies or not.

phydaux wrote:


The lie, of course, is that they did ANY play testing. Ever. That would require a Game Designer with a clue on how to do his job and a company that gave a damn about its customers. GW has/is neither.

Not here to argue anything else being said, just this part - how can you say this when there are people who are active in the community who have also made it clear they are playtesters for 40k?

Eh, errors aside, at least they're trying to fix/update their codex. It is odd that they've taken this long to get the damn thing out just to have a day 1 errata.

That being said, I do like the way the warlord traits are more unique and have a bonus effect. But it seems like the utility varies wildly.

For example - the saga of majesty seems crazy difficult to accomplish the deed of legend. I very, VERY rarely have my warlord kill the enemy warlord (or even vice versa), and it seems like the buff you get for accomplishing it is pretty lackluster.

But then saga of the hunter and bear (bear especially) are stupid easy to accomplish and have pretty damned solid buffs.

Still, I like their attempt to make warlord traits a bit more interesting. Just wish they'd do their homework BEFORE printing codexes. Like, say, one with little green men.

crzylgs wrote:
I think there are a few things GW could do to tackle this issue:

A very fair and simple solution would be when you buy a physical Codex for ~£25 you should get the digital version included. With the current model of regular FAQs, balance changes, not to mention mistakes like these it makes purchasing a physical Codex (I love having a physical book in my hand) a slightly doubled edged sword and definitely takes some shine off the purchase if/when it is out of date or inaccurate. Especially if this occurs Day 1 or very early in the release cycle of the Codex.

GW don't really lose anything here because I'm sure there can't me many people at all who buy a physical Codex and the digital version? Seeing as books are put together digitally anyway the conversion from whichever software they use to digital copy for the public requires very little work.

This way you get to buy your physical copy, without the potential 'buyers remorse' if/when you have to reference the digital version.

They could even do something cool in this specific Space Wolf situation of printing off the freely available PDF 'Saga' update page, doing so in a fairly decent standard. Making them available in store if you show your SW:Codex and proof of purchase. I assume this is what plenty of people will do, print it off themselves and insert in to the Codex, but it'd be a ncie gesture from GW - although equally might set a precedent they wouldn't want to have to follow in the future if they mess up again lol!

They'd never do this. Even if the digital copy was only given if you ordered directly from the GW website they wouldn't do it. They'd be too worried about people reselling the physical codex or code for the digital if it came with a download code.

 darkcloak wrote:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 darkcloak wrote:
A rules subscription? What are you people crazy?

So 9th comes around and it's digital only, or better yet on an app. Now when 10th comes out and invalidates my army and I want to play 9th? Go to the library like a schlep and print out everything?

You know, when I was a teenager you paid one internet bill and got unlimited access. Now you pay for data.

When I was a teenager, I paid per minute for internet access. Now it's unlimited. What's your point?

My experience with GW's digital codexes is that they're updated with errata, but that a new edition is a new product.

The point is that the internet used to be quite a bit cheaper and based on the same monthly usage/billing setup as say, cable TV. You paid the bill and got access based on a set amount of time. Now they sell internet by the bit. If you have Shaw hi-speed you get x amount of data per month and pay for any overages. So GW now gives you an option, book or digital. That's fine and that's how it should continue, but what if GW were given complete control over what data you accessed and when? Do you really trust them to treat you fairly? Digital copies are fine, but at the end of the day you are trusting GW with your property. It's stewardship of information.

Overblown paranoia. I can get PDFs of Battletech TROs with the long-removed Unseen mechs with no difficulty at all. Don’t even get me started on the conversion from 8-track (yes, I’ve been around since the days I had the Star Wars soundtrack on 8 track) or LP to cassette to CD to MP3 and having to rebuy the same damn music each time the media changed.

And as for internet access “being cheaper”, I recall the days of it taking 24 hours to download the trailer for Phantom Menace - and if you wanted to rewatch it, you had to download it AGAIN. Now, I can download something like that in seconds (or stream it) and a couple hundred gigs of other stuff to boot before coming near any sort of cap. Internet access, speed and data caps have gotten better, not worse.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
I have called a waaahmbulance.

No kidding, the level of salt in this thread is higher than that of a McDonalds Cheesburger.

Mistakes happen, either accept that people aren't perfect, or go find some other hobby to entertain your mind and take your hard earned cash.

The codex isn't invalid, it has a mistake in it, one that has now been corrected.