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 basically, I have to spend at least half an hour prior to every game for the opponent to show me all their current rules so that I have an understanding of what their army can do. Great

Because there is no way I'll be able to own 20+ Codices at $40 each. Owning 5 Indexes made it easy to get an understanding of every faction.
I have played this game for over 4 editions now and only knowing what your army does is never enough for a successful game. You need to know what your opponent's army can do.

This single edition has absolutely ruined competitive play for me (which is saying something considering how bad 7E was). Win or lose, a game is not fun when everything your opponent does is a "surprise". It is ok in casual games where both players have the time to talk about their armies, but in a TIMED tourney it is just unfair.

Just to clarify, my single biggest complaint is that the release of each Codex makes the rule set as a whole increasingly inaccessible and complicated. Especially after the glimmer of hope that the Indexes gave at a CONDENSED ruleset.

-

 Galef wrote:
So basically, I have to spend at least half an hour prior to every game for the opponent to show me all their current rules so that I have an understanding of what their army can do. Great

Because there is no way I'll be able to own 20+ Codices at $40 each. Owning 5 Indexes made it easy to get an understanding of every faction.
I have played this game for over 4 editions now and only knowing what your army does is never enough for a successful game. You need to know what your opponent's army can do.

This single edition has absolutely ruined competitive play for me (which is saying something considering how bad 7E was). Win or lose, a game is not fun when everything your opponent does is a "surprise". It is ok in casual games where both players have the time to talk about their armies, but in a TIMED tourney it is just unfair.

Just to clarify, my single biggest complaint is that the release of each Codex makes the rule set as a whole increasingly inaccessible and complicated. Especially after the glimmer of hope that the Indexes gave at a CONDENSED ruleset.

-

So you owned every rules source in 7th? While I agree with the difficulty in knowing all the rules, this has always been true. I do wish codices were available in paperback for less. Really the biggest issue I see along the lines of surprise will be strategems because there are so many, and they may not come up often. Unit rules will be easy, especially with apps like battlescribe already having most of the rules available.

Breng77 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
So basically, I have to spend at least half an hour prior to every game for the opponent to show me all their current rules so that I have an understanding of what their army can do. Great

Because there is no way I'll be able to own 20+ Codices at $40 each. Owning 5 Indexes made it easy to get an understanding of every faction.
I have played this game for over 4 editions now and only knowing what your army does is never enough for a successful game. You need to know what your opponent's army can do.

This single edition has absolutely ruined competitive play for me (which is saying something considering how bad 7E was). Win or lose, a game is not fun when everything your opponent does is a "surprise". It is ok in casual games where both players have the time to talk about their armies, but in a TIMED tourney it is just unfair.

Just to clarify, my single biggest complaint is that the release of each Codex makes the rule set as a whole increasingly inaccessible and complicated. Especially after the glimmer of hope that the Indexes gave at a CONDENSED ruleset.

-

So you owned every rules source in 7th? While I agree with the difficulty in knowing all the rules, this has always been true. I do wish codices were available in paperback for less. Really the biggest issue I see along the lines of surprise will be strategems because there are so many, and they may not come up often. Unit rules will be easy, especially with apps like battlescribe already having most of the rules available.

I owned every Dex upto 6th - and then I gave up - the indices seemed to indociate a better way until they came out immediately and send no we will screw it all up with Codex's.

Just because something has "always been true" and it patentely has NOT - only in the last fewe editions does not make a thing to encourage, celebrate or endorse.

 Galef wrote:
So basically, I have to spend at least half an hour prior to every game for the opponent to show me all their current rules so that I have an understanding of what their army can do. Great

Because there is no way I'll be able to own 20+ Codices at $40 each. Owning 5 Indexes made it easy to get an understanding of every faction.
I have played this game for over 4 editions now and only knowing what your army does is never enough for a successful game. You need to know what your opponent's army can do.

This single edition has absolutely ruined competitive play for me (which is saying something considering how bad 7E was). Win or lose, a game is not fun when everything your opponent does is a "surprise". It is ok in casual games where both players have the time to talk about their armies, but in a TIMED tourney it is just unfair.

Just to clarify, my single biggest complaint is that the release of each Codex makes the rule set as a whole increasingly inaccessible and complicated. Especially after the glimmer of hope that the Indexes gave at a CONDENSED ruleset.

-

This wasn't really different in past editions either. Especially if you played against one of those armies that had a supplement or, god forbid, datasheets from different sources. My nids required at least three books (the Rulebook, the codex, and at least one supplement) and sometimes one or two datasheets back in 7th edition. And that's just if i only wanted to play vanilla Nids. If I wanted Forge World, Genestealer Cult, or other obscure stuff I'd have to lug around a full library of documents. Not to mention 7th edition created half a dozen new codexes and three times as much supplements. And then there were datasheets scattered in WD and in web bundles. And if owning more than 5 books is really that much of an issue, this edition had the least amount of books since perhaps Rogue Trader; even 3rd edition had more than 5 codexes.

Not to mention your opponent should be able to give you a quick rundown of his army anyways. If he lies, you weren't gonna get a good game even if you owned all of the codexes. Plus it's not like tactic discussions don't exist, and a lot of websites give a quick rundown of what each thing does and sometimes even give basic stats. Also it's not like the Indexes were gonna be the last edition of 40k ever. As long as you play this game and as long as GW exists, you'll, sooner or later, have to buy new books (unless they give the rules out for free). GW will never create the "final" version of this game.

This is nothing new. Not even remotely. If anything this is a good thing since it gives legacy units rules that at least exist. My chaplain got all of one game in before he got invalidated by the 4th ed Dark Angels codex, which no longer permitted DA Chaplains to take lightning claws.

In 2nd Edition, my army required a ton of really irritating and bent-as-gak wargear cards, as well as Citadel Journal 11.

In 3rd Edition, my army required a WD copy, a codex, Chapter Approved, and the main rule book.

In 4th Edition, my army required a .pdf, a codex, and the main rule book.

In 5th Edition, my army required three books plus the main rule book.

In 6th Edition my army ceased to exist as a viable army for a while, then required 3 books and the MRB.

In 7th, my army required 3 books and the MRB.

In 8th my army requires 1 book and the MRB.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
In 8th my army requires 1 book and the MRB.

That's with an Index?
If the codexes land as predicted, how many then?

 Skinnereal wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
In 8th my army requires 1 book and the MRB.

That's with an Index?
If the codexes land as predicted, how many then?

Still probably 1, as I doubt Baneblades will be radically different. Just need to trade the index for the codex.

 Galef wrote:
So basically, I have to spend at least half an hour prior to every game for the opponent to show me all their current rules so that I have an understanding of what their army can do. Great

Because there is no way I'll be able to own 20+ Codices at $40 each. Owning 5 Indexes made it easy to get an understanding of every faction.
I have played this game for over 4 editions now and only knowing what your army does is never enough for a successful game. You need to know what your opponent's army can do.

This single edition has absolutely ruined competitive play for me (which is saying something considering how bad 7E was). Win or lose, a game is not fun when everything your opponent does is a "surprise". It is ok in casual games where both players have the time to talk about their armies, but in a TIMED tourney it is just unfair.

Just to clarify, my single biggest complaint is that the release of each Codex makes the rule set as a whole increasingly inaccessible and complicated. Especially after the glimmer of hope that the Indexes gave at a CONDENSED ruleset.

-

So - and this is an honest question - the only place you ever learned about your opponent's army was from his codex? You didn't watch/read Battle Reports or read tactica posts on this forum? You didn't keep up with the tournament scene to keep an eye on what lists were doing well and what they could do? This seems disingenuous and more targeted at 'I don't want to spend money' rather than 'I need to know what my opponent is capable of'. There are a multitude of ways to be aware of the various capacities of all the armies without owning the codex.

Further more - how has 8th done anything that previous editions didn't do? They also had codexes that you would have needed to buy plus additional source material (WDs, campaign supplements, etc). That argument holds no weight because nothing has changed, codexes aren't a new development.

And finally GW acknowledged from jump street they'd be putting out codexes moving forward - they made no promises regarding the game being Index only nor even did they sell the Indexes as a product with any longevity.

 Galef wrote:
So basically, I have to spend at least half an hour prior to every game for the opponent to show me all their current rules so that I have an understanding of what their army can do.

Or you could do research online, ask around waht various units can do and what the army rules are, etc.

Hell, 1d4chan actually has a fairly good tactical advice section.

Oh! In my above posts I damn near forgot to add something to 4th and 3rd editions:

One more book for each please.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

Can I combine units from the index and a codex into one army?
The datasheets in the new codexes overwrite the same datasheets in the index books. You can certainly use units with updated datasheets alongside units from the index that have yet to be updated. Once a unit has been covered in the codex though, we assume you’re using the latest version.

This line means anything covered in the codex overwrites the index entry, thus making the index entry entirely invalid. The only index entries you can use are the ones that have "yet to be updated." This line means anything covered in the codex overwrites the index entry, thus making the index entry entirely invalid. The only index entries you can use are the ones that have "yet to be updated." So if you were hoping to use the index to keep your dakka venerable dreads, you're SOL. It also means for things like Wolf Lords that link to another index datasheet, you're forced to use the index datasheet for Captain instead of the codex one, because it's the latest rules for "Wolf Lord".

There are a few options that are missing in the codex that appear in the index: why is that? Does that mean I can’t use these models in my army anymore?
While the indexes are designed to cover a long history of miniatures, the codexes are designed to give you rules for the current Warhammer 40,000 range. There are a few options in the indexes for some Characters and vehicles that are no longer represented in the Citadel range – certain Dreadnought weapons that don’t come in the box, or some characters on bikes, for example.
Don’t worry though, you can still use all of these in your games if you have these older models. In these instances, use the datasheet from the index, and the most recent points published for that model and its weapons (currently, also in the index).
They still gain all the army wide-bonuses for things like Chapter Tactics and can use Space Marines Stratagems and the like, so such venerable heroes still fit right in with the rest of your army.

Same source, just the other part of it that you often seem to miss.

In 5th/6th I came really close to owning every Codex, but then had to give up because of the introduction of $50 hardback books released like every other week.
The indexes showed a glimmer of those days returning.

The issue with using BatReps and reading online tactics is that people get stuff wrong all the time. I cannot tell you how many times I was able to SUCCESSFULLY point out to my opponent that they were using their own army's rules wrong because I had read their faction's Codex/FAQ backwards and forwards.
This became harder and harder to do in 7E and I eventually had to give up trying, often finding out AFTER a game that an opponent was not properly adhering to the rules.
I actually lost a tourney because of this.

When the rules are overly complex and require multiple sources, it becomes too easy to accidently overlook something. I have no doubt that my experiences were accidental, but that doesn't make the outcome of the games any less frustrating.

-

Seems pretty straight forward to me.
You have the index.
Where the Codex has the same datasheet it overwrites it.
Where it doesn't mention anything it doesn't.

So if in the codex the points cost or stats has changed then you should use those. If the unit isn't mentioned just use the index.

If you are paranoid about your opponent getting rules wrong just insist they bring their codex along. I think that has always been a reasonable expectation.

If reading your opponents codex when needed is too difficult for you you might just be in the wrong hobby.

I actually like the Codex and Index system.

As I see it, I can buy the Codecies for my main armies and then have the Indecies for armies I play irregularly or only ever as attached allies to my main forces.

Indecies have the advantage that I'm more likely to diversify and buy some models I like that aren't members of my main army, since I can ally them in and have the rules without having to actually start another army. Codecies have detail, stories and pretty pictures, and they're entirely dedicated to the armies that I like.



And, as far as things go, I just accept what my opponent tells me his or her army does. If they have it a little wrong, it's not a big deal. I think it's pretty obvious if they're trying to cheat.

Tyel wrote:
Seems pretty straight forward to me.
You have the index.
Where the Codex has the same datasheet it overwrites it.
Where it doesn't mention anything it doesn't.

So if in the codex the points cost or stats has changed then you should use those. If the unit isn't mentioned just use the index.

If you are paranoid about your opponent getting rules wrong just insist they bring their codex along. I think that has always been a reasonable expectation.

I agree with that rules layout and it is indeed a reasonable expection....

However, what if a player does not have a copy of their Codex, or even knows that there is one out for their faction? What if I just don't buy mine when it is released?
These are situations that may happen. That is my issue with the current Index/Codex system (and also I plainly stated that I didn't want to buy a bunch of extra books, so I was not being disingenuous)

It will also suck when GW eventually discontinues production of the Indexes once enough Codices are released. Builds like Autocannon Dreads and Bike Librarians that are "legal" will cease to have accessible rules for players who are just getting into that faction. How long before those builds become "illegal"?

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
As I see it, I can buy the Codecies for my main armies and then have the Indecies for armies I play irregularly or only ever as attached allies to my main forces.

This is what I thought at first too. I was actually really excited about it. I knew that rules would be added, but I thought that at least the basics would remain the same. But it is starting to look like each new codex may change the rules to such an extent that units overwritten from their Index may be so unrecognizable, that my purchase of said Index was pointless.
Hopefully I am wrong and this is just me blowing off some hot air. Wouldn't be the first time, probably not the last.

-

 Mr Morden wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
So basically, I have to spend at least half an hour prior to every game for the opponent to show me all their current rules so that I have an understanding of what their army can do. Great

Because there is no way I'll be able to own 20+ Codices at $40 each. Owning 5 Indexes made it easy to get an understanding of every faction.
I have played this game for over 4 editions now and only knowing what your army does is never enough for a successful game. You need to know what your opponent's army can do.

This single edition has absolutely ruined competitive play for me (which is saying something considering how bad 7E was). Win or lose, a game is not fun when everything your opponent does is a "surprise". It is ok in casual games where both players have the time to talk about their armies, but in a TIMED tourney it is just unfair.

Just to clarify, my single biggest complaint is that the release of each Codex makes the rule set as a whole increasingly inaccessible and complicated. Especially after the glimmer of hope that the Indexes gave at a CONDENSED ruleset.

-

So you owned every rules source in 7th? While I agree with the difficulty in knowing all the rules, this has always been true. I do wish codices were available in paperback for less. Really the biggest issue I see along the lines of surprise will be strategems because there are so many, and they may not come up often. Unit rules will be easy, especially with apps like battlescribe already having most of the rules available.

I owned every Dex upto 6th - and then I gave up - the indices seemed to indociate a better way until they came out immediately and send no we will screw it all up with Codex's.

Just because something has "always been true" and it patentely has NOT - only in the last fewe editions does not make a thing to encourage, celebrate or endorse.

Sure when many books took 5 years to get updated and cost $25 it was much easier to own them all. But even the most competitive players I know never actually owned all the books, they just had access to the rules. I agree that a switch to hard back books made know all the rules harder because of cost, but as soon as events began allowing FW, and GW started publishing Digital only content in 7th all that was out the window anyway. So I'm just unclear how 8th was the final straw. Because you thought it would only have 5 books? My only wish is that they would release gamers edition codices with not fluff, and just rules in soft cover format. That would be super affordable and better for most people that just want the rules.

 Galef wrote:
It will also suck when GW eventually discontinues production of the Indexes once enough Codices are released. Builds like Autocannon Dreads and Bike Librarians that are "legal" will cease to have accessible rules for players who are just getting into that faction. How long before those builds become "illegal"?

Long enough for them to make it into Forge World as 'relic' entries, just as they did with the 2nd and 3rd edition Chimeras with autocannons. (Chimeraxes? I forget what they were called by GW. Forge World just lets them be chimeras with autocannons.)

 Galef wrote:

Tyel wrote:
Seems pretty straight forward to me.
You have the index.
Where the Codex has the same datasheet it overwrites it.
Where it doesn't mention anything it doesn't.

So if in the codex the points cost or stats has changed then you should use those. If the unit isn't mentioned just use the index.

If you are paranoid about your opponent getting rules wrong just insist they bring their codex along. I think that has always been a reasonable expectation.

I agree with that rules layout and it is indeed a reasonable expection....

However, what if a player does not have a copy of their Codex, or even knows that there is one out for their faction? What if I just don't buy mine when it is released?
These are situations that may happen. That is my issue with the current Index/Codex system (and also I plainly stated that I didn't want to buy a bunch of extra books, so I was not being disingenuous)

It will also suck when GW eventually discontinues production of the Indexes once enough Codices are released. Builds like Autocannon Dreads and Bike Librarians that are "legal" will cease to have accessible rules for players who are just getting into that faction. How long before those builds become "illegal"?

-

This is not exactly a new problem (or really a problem at all). It's just like how a new player would find out about their army's new codexes in past editions; they go to GW's website and see which codex or index is advertised for their army. A player using a 5th edition Necron codex during 7th edition is no different than a SM player using the Imperium 1 Index. And when the indexes are discontinued, they will still be legal. It's not like the indexes will all simultaniously vanish from existence the moment GW pulls them from print. The only drawback is new players won't have access to these unless they pay for a second hand copy of the index, but again this isn't a new issue; how many people used the Skyhammer Annhilation Force before it was printed in Angels of Death despite not buying the actual bundle?

For years we wandered in the wilderness, beseeching the almighty GW for guidance and insight into the deepest mysteries of the BRB.

Then, a new age dawned, a golden light from heaven came in the shape of official word and reactive discussion, ambiguity became a thing of the past as GW actually answered specific questions with specific answers.

However, nobody could have predicted the coming of the even denser and more intractable hobbyist...

 Galef wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
As I see it, I can buy the Codecies for my main armies and then have the Indecies for armies I play irregularly or only ever as attached allies to my main forces.

This is what I thought at first too. I was actually really excited about it. I knew that rules would be added, but I thought that at least the basics would remain the same. But it is starting to look like each new codex may change the rules to such an extent that units overwritten from their Index may be so unrecognizable, that my purchase of said Index was pointless.
Hopefully I am wrong and this is just me blowing off some hot air. Wouldn't be the first time, probably not the last.

-

Having seen and faced the Space Marine codex, I don't think it's a big deal. A few things were added, but datasheets are available in the unit boxes, and a few costs were adjusted for balance reasons.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Spoiler:

 Galef wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
As I see it, I can buy the Codecies for my main armies and then have the Indecies for armies I play irregularly or only ever as attached allies to my main forces.

This is what I thought at first too. I was actually really excited about it. I knew that rules would be added, but I thought that at least the basics would remain the same. But it is starting to look like each new codex may change the rules to such an extent that units overwritten from their Index may be so unrecognizable, that my purchase of said Index was pointless.
Hopefully I am wrong and this is just me blowing off some hot air. Wouldn't be the first time, probably not the last.

-

Having seen and faced the Space Marine codex, I don't think it's a big deal. A few things were added, but datasheets are available in the unit boxes, and a few costs were adjusted for balance reasons.

I have not yet. and I am glad to hear that it is mostly points changes. That is what the Codex should be used for: to adjust points, add <Chapter Tactic> equivalents, stratagems, traits etc.
What worries me (again, hopefully for no reason) is the actually rules changes, like the Horrors change in the CSM Codex.
First of all, why are Daemons in the CSM codex? Does this mean there are 2 valid entries since most would assume Daemons get updated in the Daemons Codex?
Secondly, the points did need to change, but they also changed the way they cast Smite for Horrors. It's not a big change, but it sets precedent for further changes that a player may not be aware of if they merely have the Index.

-

Presumably the Daemons that appear in Codex: CSM will be subtly different from that of the one in Codex: Daemons, just like Daemon Princes were before.

I haven't looked into the CSM dex yet, but in the Chaos Index there's two separate entries for T-Sons and Plague Marines, one in the normal CSM section and one in the Legions section. There was only a subtle difference; the ones in the Legion section were locked into their legion's keyword rather than have <LEGION>. This might mean that GW is intentionally separating the two depending on which army it's being fielded in, and thus the unit might have different bonuses. Gameplay wise they will still broadly be the same role, but have subtle differences in the coming future.

 Galef wrote:
In 5th/6th I came really close to owning every Codex, but then had to give up because of the introduction of $50 hardback books released like every other week.
The indexes showed a glimmer of those days returning.

The issue with using BatReps and reading online tactics is that people get stuff wrong all the time. I cannot tell you how many times I was able to SUCCESSFULLY point out to my opponent that they were using their own army's rules wrong because I had read their faction's Codex/FAQ backwards and forwards.

When the rules are overly complex and require multiple sources, it becomes too easy to accidently overlook something. I have no doubt that my experiences were accidental, but that doesn't make the outcome of the games any less frustrating.

-

Right but you've said 8th ruined competitive play with Codexes which still makes no sense because they existed in previous editions. I still cannot grasp that you'd rather do no research because it COULD be wrong than at least using the available free resources to prep yourself for competitive play. I'll be 100% honest, what I see isn't a competitive attitude to begin with. If your goal is to be a competitive player you balance your time and resources to do the best preparation you can. You check with the local gaming store and check out their open copies, you watch battle reports, read articles, you do what you have to.

Farseer_V2 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Galef wrote:
In 5th/6th I came really close to owning every Codex, but then had to give up because of the introduction of $50 hardback books released like every other week.
The indexes showed a glimmer of those days returning.

The issue with using BatReps and reading online tactics is that people get stuff wrong all the time. I cannot tell you how many times I was able to SUCCESSFULLY point out to my opponent that they were using their own army's rules wrong because I had read their faction's Codex/FAQ backwards and forwards.

When the rules are overly complex and require multiple sources, it becomes too easy to accidently overlook something. I have no doubt that my experiences were accidental, but that doesn't make the outcome of the games any less frustrating.

-

Right but you've said 8th ruined competitive play with Codexes which still makes no sense because they existed in previous editions. I still cannot grasp that you'd rather do no research because it COULD be wrong than at least using the available free resources to prep yourself for competitive play. I'll be 100% honest, what I see isn't a competitive attitude to begin with.

I agree it's the same as 7E, but the difference is that you only had to do the research on the "flavor of the month" faction that got released. Wiping everything away and starting fresh (while needed) makes it incredibly more difficult to "stay updated". The Indexes were a great answer to this. Only 5 books and your back on track. But how many Codices are they releasing at a time now? Like 4 a month. How am I supposed to keep up with that if, *IF* the changes are dramatically divergent from the indexes?
To clarify, I do not think competitive plat is ruined in 8th, but the experience is ruined for me because of the increased level of uncertainty that never existed (for me) before.

-

You play with the latest books.
In order for "pick-up" games to work correctly, you need the latest and greatest.

Failing that, come to some agreement with your opponent for using what you do have.