40K Rumors: Few Codexes Remain


An old rumormeister chimes in on the end of the line for codexes.

We’ve heard little peeps over the last year that GW may be wanting to get out of the grimdark codex business.

Back in July, Hastings chimed in with bit, which he had been told well before then:

“I remember being told to expect 40k codexes (codices?) to be a thing of the past within 2 years, and that the rules would be in the box for each model/unit, but there would still be a core ruleset which the in box rules would obviously add to.”



One venerable and reliable industry professional chimed in to BoLS with the following info:

  • There are only THREE “codexes” remaining.
  • Codexes will leave the stockist list for retailers in Q1 2017

Putting it All Together

There are a lot of moving parts here, but we have the steady drumbeat of the next 40K Edition arriving in Q2 2017, with a splash of Age of Sigmar rules and datasheet reform coming with it.  We have all the talk of Sisters and the steady drumbeat of the Black Crusade working it’s way to Terra for some kind of final showdown with primarchs on both sides involved.

If we did see GW moving to an Age of Sigmar model with a 40K app containing all the “40K-Warscrolls”/unit stats, and a set of faction books pushed out quickly along the lines of these:


…then in theory I could see the need for standalone codexes to pass into history.  You could see the game’s narrative be updated with continual campaign-dual book slipcover books that GW loves to kick out so much. Units would then be added to an app or pushed into occasional stats only books like the ones above – basically the Age of Sigmar release model.


The future of “codexes”?

We will have to wait a few months to find out, but with a new edition around the corner, look out for change ahead!

~ What three codexes do you think they would be?

  • Aezeal

    I’d go for Codices.

    • orionburn

      That’ll change right around the time they stop using decurion 😛

  • Munn

    I’d want all the rules and points on an app. Put them behind a paywall if you must but live updating of rules would be amazing. For my 3 codexes I want the sisters of battle codex to come out 3 times.

    • Troy G

      My main concern is that GW sees very little reason for updates usually. FAQ’s are free to publish, and don’t take much time, and yet we go years between releases.

      Digital Only codexes like SoB could easily have new units added like the new named cannoness, but they generally don’t do that sort of thing, or take a long time doing it.

      GW is going to have to update their procedures if they are going to move to a living ruleset.

      • ZeeLobby

        Man, but I’d kill for a living ruleset. I think we’re more likely to get Generals Handbooks. A once a year new book to purchase that kind of re-balances things and tweaks rules. I’m not totally against it though, as it’s pretty affordable.

        • Shawn

          But once a year? Over time, that’s still too much, I think. And I very doubt GW will settle with selling only 1 game book/year for 40k. Sales would plummet, I am thinking.

          • ZeeLobby

            I think it’d be like AoS though. Thered still be faction books, and fluff books with formations, etc. But only once a year we’d get a book that was necessary to play matched games, with match play rules updated and points values revisited. Sure it’d be the only book I’d ever buy, but people must buy the other AoS stuff.

          • Tom Higgins

            Yeah we just get to spend it all on mini’s instead! 😀

    • orionburn

      I like the idea of live updating, but there would have to be method to the madness. It would be confusing as all get out having one or two rules randomly revised. Maybe quarterly updates? Cause really, if you have to update more often than that you’re doing it wrong.

      More than anything I’d like to see Forgeworld do this. Having 50% of vehicles in one book, and then the other 50% scattered to the winds is annoying af.

      • Muninwing

        quarterly updates.

        free printables, like FAQ/Errata, for those who do not have a portable device that can be used for game rules.

        there’s the real issue… access.

        not every one who plays has access to a device that can be easily used for rules. not everyone can adapt, has the money for it, or wants to use that method — i’m partial to physical copies of books myself. and the publishing industry has shown that e-books are not taking off in certain markets with certain customers — people like the tangibility of books.

        it sucks from a business perspective to straddle two different means of release. one (digital) is clearly superior for making instant changes and addressing issues — they could in fact completely redo the game by doing one massive rules update, modifying the points all at once on every unit in every book, and thus improve gameplay and balance.

        but it means peeling longtime players and bibliophiles from their physical copy dependence.

        • LordKrungharr

          My iPhone is dwindling as I can’t replace the damn battery. And I don’t want to spend hundreds of dollars on another phone just to have the damn Sigmar app. So yeah, they need free printable PDFs, or some sort of annual website club membership to allow access to them, and let them be printed (without sharing their IP all over the place of course).

          • Muninwing

            if they opened up to all sorts of devices, it’d be better.

            you can get a simple tablet from Kindle at $40… less if you catch a sale.

          • Kenneth Portner

            You’re like one in a thousand people, a dinosaur. You’re irrelevant.

        • jeff white

          print on demand. update as version 8.1, 8.2, 8…

          • Munn

            that also means buying 60$ books whenever there’s an FAQ.

          • jeff white

            or just printing the extra pages and inserting them into the old print edition… these print on demand would only be for those people like myself who want a physical paper bound text. others can have their apps and whatnot immediately and freely updated.

          • Muninwing


            they could do one better though… account codes and registries. for those who buy online, they could have accounts that establish players as having rights to the material, even if it’s not digital material. and then they could have access to updates as printable redo pages or additions.

            i’m a big fan of the idea that GW could have some great online tools for people with accounts through them, from registering for major seasonal events to army managers. this could dovetail well into that.

            or you could buy a new one via the Chapter Approved coming back.

            there’s ways of making this efficient and affordable.

          • jeff white

            thanks for that. yours sounds like a great idea. i like the chapter approved format, frankly, then roll into a new edition every four years like the olympics.

    • jeff white

      i like books…

  • Red_Five_Standing_By

    Obvious that this would happen.

    I think 3 is a bit heavy handed. Its basically, Imperials, Chaos and Xenos at that point.

    With the keyword rules, GW could easily just release 3 books and not have to worry about all of the Xenos armies mixing.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      I doubt codexes are disappearing, they will just become Battletomes – books with pretty art and stat blocks.

      The core rule book will likely be released once and updated via errata. There will be a General’s Handbook released every year that will update points and the points based format.

      • Wolfman UK

        Yup I’d be happy to pay £15 a year for updated points, rules and missions! (that’s the cost of the generals handbook in case anyone comments…). Put all the units into a nice free app like aos and I’d be happy!

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          My thoughts exactly. The groundwork AoS has laid is perfect for 40k. The only thing I think will be different is that we will need to buy a normal rule book.

        • euansmith

          £15! It didn’t occur to me to check out the price; assuming it would be the usual £45-50. I think you might just have made a sale, young man.

          • Muninwing

            a model i could get behind…

            yearly subscription at tiered levels
            – $15 for core rules via app, free updating
            – $20 for core and x “codex” access, with free printable warscroll/dataslate information
            – $30 for the deluxe model — all access to all codex/dataslate entries. maybe throw in an army organizer online with it… replacing battlescribe or armybuilder with a with-the-codex updater and an internet-accessible account function.

            meaning that the subscribed player could pay less than they would for all products, guarantee revenue for GW, and standardize play all at once.

            sell campaign books at $30 a pop with missions and other info, and a hard copy of rules errata/FAQ/additions in the old yearly “Chapter Approved” format

          • Vladamyr

            This makes complete sense, but it is not what I am expecting. But I would firmly stand behind this. But I feel that if they did adopt this model they would likely charge too much for the subscription to be worth it.

          • Muninwing

            depends… if they did biannual or quarterly updates, consistently, it would probably work out.

            and if they are not printing the rules, it’s cheaper for them, keeping the subscription fee down.

            they could still sell fluff books, and have all the lore and painting guides in those.

          • Vladamyr

            They will be wanting to print though, they just invested in their own printing press in order to bring down the costs of their books while maximizing profit.

    • Munn

      I think he meant there are 3 more codexes coming out before the switch over to the new format.

      • Red_Five_Standing_By

        Oh… Ewww. That sucks. Unless they are formation based or re-prints, like the last two.

        • Munn

          Or sisters of battle. If they have to redo everyone anyway give me at least a few months of relevance.

          • vlad78

            Mmmmmh…. no.

          • BT

            They haven’t done Guard yet in 7th ed either.

      • orionburn

        Yeah the wording is confusing as crap. Nids really, really, really, really, really, really need a new dex. What would the other two be? SoB and DE?

        • kingcobra668


          • orionburn

            That’s what I was thinking. I wasn’t sure when their last update was.

          • DeadlyYellow

            Nids are a safe bet.

            What about IG though? Aren’t they still running on 6th?

          • Severius_Tolluck

            That is more likely than orks.

          • Inquisitor Valeria

            The IG book still has unit description pages in the front, points costs in the back. Not dataslates. Let alone formations. lol.

            That being said, we did just get the Cadia update in Mont’ka so I don’t know if that resets the clock with the current rules release model.

          • BT

            Yes. Nids were the 1st 7th ed codex, Orks were the 2nd. I think IG was the last 6th ed Codex.

          • DeadlyYellow

            IG was the last 6th ed codex, but was preceded by Tempestus and Tyranids.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Orks were first 7th ed book, so no, not getting new one no matter how we feel about it.

          • BT

            Nids were first… they have no formations. Orks were 2nd and got 3 formations.

          • BT

            Orks were one of the 1st 7th Ed Codices. Nids were the First. You can tell by the progress of formations in 7th Ed. Nids had none, Orks had 3… then Marines blew it up.

        • Muninwing

          well, if they are really gearing up for the 8th edition craziness to be all about the 13th black crusade, then Orks and Nids play a big part. SoB keeps being rumored, but at this point i’ll believe it when i see it. and DE really really need an update which factors in exactly zero for what GW will actually do.

          so my bet is on Nids, Orks, and Space Marines. because marines. because screw us.

          • BT

            Guard is still a 6th ed Codex, Chaos Marines are still a 6th ed Codex (Unless Traitor’s Hate is the new Chaos Space Marine Codex, I do not own it yet). Chaos also has like 4-5 supplements out.

            Nids were the first 7th ed codex, Orks were the 2nd… both got screwed on formations (nids have none and Orks have 3). Orks do have a supplement or 2 out though.

          • Muninwing

            … and true as it is, none of that matters to the design/sales teams. they do what they want. so i’ll stand by my predictions.

            if i were the one in charge, the redo would be Sisters (as a fully-functional army), DE (as an updated force that could hold its own) and either Orks or Nids (to properly update them to be able to fairly compete in the current ruleset).

            then again, i’d almost rather see what 8th brings… because if it’s not deadly to hordes, having those two redone properly after the design shift would put them in line for terrifying efficiency.

        • BT

          Guard is still a 6th ed Codex. The basic/core Chaos Space Marine Codex is 6th Ed, even though they have like 4-5 supplements out that are 7th ed. Unless Traitor’s Hate is the new replacement for that. I wonder if that is counting Imperial Agents as well.

      • jeff white

        me too. that is how i read it.

    • Thomson

      Yep, if this rumor is true I would be *very* surprised if the spilt is different.

      But they would have to do a lot to give Chaos a similar weight as the others…

      • Muninwing

        i’d love to see the split being Ecclesiarchy (Inquisition, SoB, some IG, and the more zealous SM chapters), Stability/Authority (knights, most SM, some IG, maybe Eldar in the mix), Chaos (including DE, daemons, and CSM), and anarchy/destruction (nids, orks, necrons)

        it doesn’t evenly divide. but it could be rectified with cross-codex formations…

    • jeff white

      order chaos death

    • BT

      You are misreading the 3 Codices left part. For example, Imperial Guard (AM) were one of the last 6th ed Codices, they do not have a 7th Ed Codex yet. They are probably one of the 3 last Codices that GW will make.

      I believe there is no 7th Ed Chaos Marine Codex either. There is 4 supplements out I believe that are 7th ed (Crimson Slaughter, Black Legion, sorta Khorne Demonkin and Wrath of Magnus … am I missing one yet?). There is a possible 2-3 Codices there alone (if they make a core 7th book, Nurgle and Slannesh base). Then Imperial Agents, unless that one is already considered released.

  • Tigirus

    Both options have their own merits, a perfect example of the campaign-based release system is with warmahordes. The upside is that all books have *some* amount of content for all factions so everyone can get excited about them. However, this means that each book has only a small portion of it relevant to your faction (assume you only play one) so it makes the books themselves kinda unfortunate to buy with some being like 50-60$ for only 10-12 pages of relevant rules.

    If they do go the AoS route and have unit rules download-able separate that will help alleviate a lot of the issues the campaign-based system has.

    Personally I believe the future is the way companies like Corvus Belli does it and have all the rules for free and just make people pay for the fluff if they want but I digress.

    • Wolfman UK

      I agree I’d be happy to pay for fluff as long as it isn’t the same fluff as now if that makes sense. Every Codex I have had over each edition only has minor changes in the fluff section when it changes and would be nice to not have to pay for the same info each time!

  • Bryan Ruhe


    Do away with the steep price of entry!
    Make big beautiful frilly coffee table books that aren’t required to play the game!

    Looking forward to codices disappearing!

    • Leo

      Do you really think that that’s the reason? Look what they did with AoS.

  • J Mad

    If DE and Nids dont get some loven i’m going to be very mad. They are much lack luster books, they are basically remnants of 5th ed and that doesnt work in 7th.

    • Nyyppä

      5th ed. nids are better than the current ones in fluff games.

      • J Mad

        Honestly 5th ed DE is better too 🙁

        • Nyyppä

          True. Imagine that. GW saw it necessary to nerf these codices that were already on the weak side.

          • euansmith

            They take pleasure in your pain. 😉

          • Nyyppä

            Mine, personally. Absolutely! 😀

          • ZeeLobby

            As a DE player, I support this message.

  • FranklinsteinSr

    If 40k becomes Sigmarized our group will do the same thing we did with Sigmar… trash can it.

    • Nyyppä

      Oh noes. The game gets a better version. Better ditch it.

      • Hawt Dawg

        Ha ha ha… Touché!

        • ZeeLobby

          Just as crazy as those Skorne players!

      • vlad78

        This point is highly debatable.
        Is AOS better than WFB?
        Simpler, less bloated, but not more tactically challenging, no pretense to simulate battles with swords and spears anymore and above all atrocious fluff and minis.

        According to the rumours, the new 40K will be simpler, streamlined, less bloated, but will GW finally be able to write a modern ruleset which gives the feel to lead firesquads with futuristic weapons and not 16th centuries arquebusiers. (pls bring in alternate activation)
        Will the fluff be of the same quality like old times, and what about the minis? TS and magnus are spectacular but those last years GW has also released horrible things. What is to come?

        If it’s just simplification with an 8th obsolete ruleset and bad stories, they can shore it up their…

        • Ross Allan

          I’d say AoS does a far, far better job of simulating ancient battle tactics than WHFB managed. Sure, you don’t have rank and flank as it was, but instead you need to use the melee range of weapons – and this can lead to a greater variety of formations, and ways to channel enemy units to minimise their ability to pile-in, whilst maximising your own attacks. Hell, played well I can leave you in range of two or more units during melee, without you being able to attack more than one.

          • ZeeLobby

            It definitely has some potential. I’m not sure how critical the “melee range of weapons” was historically without ranked units. Spears and halberds were only really effective when used in ranks. Most brawls (which most historical conflicts turned into when ranks weren’t concerned) really only benefited the sword.

          • Muninwing

            yeah… this is why it keeps being compared to skirmish games instead of army or force-based games. it’s also why GW should have released AoS as their replacement for Mordheim, not WHF — it’s just not a real successor to WHF no matter how hard they try to shoehorn it.

            a unit in an army needed to function as a unified body, or they were ineffective.

            sure, there were battles and eras and styles of fighting that were different. certain time periods were often just a scrum in the middle. but even many of those were dependent on the size of the force and the tech of the time…

            the second-bloodiest period of warfare in human history (only displaced by WWII) was in China in the Three Kingdoms period. certain nobles had armies of over a million soldiers (at least in the beginning… many of the larger armies were gutted by superior tactical minds, and decades of war left armies smaller and smaller as time went on). even smaller battles in that context would be bloodbaths if the trained and unified units came across a scattered mob. which often happened.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            you know that except in most metas no one took spear men. They shunned cores of armies, especially when 8th brought back %

          • vlad78

            One again 8th was probably the worse wfb edition.

          • vlad78

            I think this is more a gamey side of things and has nothing to do with simulating real brawls.
            The questin here is not to answer whether wfb was a good simulation, it’s rather to realize dropping ranks and files removes the foundation of ancient warfare.
            There’s a reason why phalanxes dominated the fields, then the cohorts of the legions then cavalry with bows.

        • Nyyppä

          Well, the tactics of WHF werepretty much limited to flanking moves and broken spells. The rest of the “tactics” were just rule abuse.

          • ZeeLobby

            That was really just 8th edition though. 7th didn’t have those broken spells. You’re also missing charge redirects, counter flanking, etc. WHFB had a lot of nuances that people never used (or chose to see). I think a lot of that is lost in AoS (now everything is 360 vision, moves anywhere it wants, etc.).

          • Muninwing

            and 6th was even more involved with the actual tactics.

            the era of “codex creep” and over-the-top rules trying to boost sales of target armies (Necrons, Grey Knights for 40k, and DElves, Daemons, VC, HElves for WHF) points to a change in design philosophy that cheapened the game and undermined the rules.

            my pet theory is that that’s the real reason why Ward gets such a bad rep (which, to be fair, he does deserve some of). He was a major voice and creator during the era of steadily worse rules, and did actually attach his name to some of them. But, really, whoever was in charge of coordinating and unifying the design team at the time is really the one at fault.

            if you want quality WHF, look at the non-OTT books after 6th, but use 6th rules. it’s obvious that they suffered the most during the “we’re a model company not a game company” era of bad priorities.

          • Nyyppä

            I believe that people who relished that feel cheated. I never played WHF because all of the cheap tricks it trove on. If you can retreat through terrain that you can not be followed through I call it BS. Same goes for all he things that could be “tactically” used to lead to the opposing block out of the table. It does not stop there but these aline, in my opinion, make AoS a better game. AoS is a hon st bash fest with tacktical elements while the latest WHF was a cheap trick fest with tactical elements. Cheating, even if allowed by the rules, is not my thing if it’s directly against the spirit of the game.

          • ZeeLobby

            But many of those WFB tactics were ACTUAL tactics on the historical battlefield. Redirecting charges and retreating through forests to prevent pursuit (or even ambush) are legit tactics.

          • Nyyppä

            Many and those were fine. The cheap trick department were not and yet still were inseparable with gameplay.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            yep, as much as random charge distance brought a little guess work to the game to remove the same maneuvers, I feel it got rid of the tactical initiative of surprise charges and feints which was my bread and butter. Especially for my dwarves that needed to counter charge in order to go first. The whole making init matter charge or not ticked me off. I was not a fan of 8e, read the changes and never played a single game. I Know 6e was kinda boring and magic was kinda broken then, but that was I think my preferred edition for tactics.

          • jeff white

            depends on who you played with…

          • Severius_Tolluck

            especially with that closing the door crap to maximize damage, and removal of panicking units you out flank or rear charge. Also got rid of feints really.

        • SupPupPup

          I am having more fun with the system (AoS) than I have had with fantasy in the past decade.

          Now, whether that is because it allows me to try out lots of different armies, or that it has more monsters I don’t really know. Its a very personal thing.

          AoS might not be thing you’re looking for. I’d say they are both about as tactically challenging. I cannot see an argument that would put fantasy ahead in the ‘tactical challenge’ department. Both require the same skills, but concentrates them in different phases/aspects.

          It (AoS) however is not a simulation game, it uses abstract concepts, that can and will break immersion. If what you are looking for is a strict reenactment its going to suck.

          A cannon shoots out of combat, shoots two dice worth of shots to separate targets, and wounds a goblin and a demon prince both on a 2+. It works fine in game, but its hardly a realistic simulation.

          I don’t think comparing minis is really a reasonable argument. The old fantasy models range from amazing to down right embarrassing. Its more of a personal taste thing. Fantasy had a larger range with 30 years worth of minis.

          There is still quite a lot of overlap of models, so you could always pick some of the greats from the Fantasy range.

          I have a ancient 80s-early 90s dwarf force on rounds, they look great.

          The Old world was an unquestionably better narrative, but had its limits from a game system standpoint.

          • Muninwing

            this is a fair and honest assessment. thank you.

            you might be the first AoS fan i’ve seen who has admitted that “this might not be for you” and why, instead of going zealous and trying to scream their “my likes are better than yours” message louder than any valid misgivings…

          • SupPupPup

            It comes from both sides really. I think its a problem of having such a large change in a system.

            If the new game is fun and profitable, old players feel that it was a legitimate move to destroy something they love. That feels rubbish.

            If not everyone loves the game, the players who weathered the storm feel that maybe the game wont last, and they have invested in a sinking ship. That also feels rubbish.

            Gut reactions really. I think its forgivable. We just have to be aware of how it effects us. I’m sure I’m guilty of falling into it on occasion.

          • Muninwing

            the worst thing for me is that i put in so much work for an army i cannot functionally use.

            (insert someone’s blah blah “just play an earlier edition” gamersplaining…)

            i don’t like the new. if i did, nobody near me plays it. even if neither were an issue, it’s harder to find players for a game out of cycle.

            and i can’t even sell it on ebay because there’s still no market.

            so i have a case that’s effectively worthless despite the time and cash i sunk into it, which i don’t want to let go of unless i get some sort of compensation for it because it could have theoretical future value.

          • SupPupPup

            I do like the term gamersplaining.

            Ultimately I would say to that.

            Sorry. Your investment didn’t pay off. It happens.

            Look on the bright side. What you got out of it was the experience of painting and building, and planning. That experience is 90% of this hobby, so you got some of your moneys worth.

          • Muninwing

            well, *i* know this. and that’s really how i look at it. this spring, in my new nerdcave, i will probably finish up certain units and actually put my old Beastmen on display.

            but it’s hard for some people (and some people’s partners, who see the spent money…) to not feel regret or anxiety over the lack of use for something that cost so much time and money.

            the people who actually think that unpainted models should be cheaper? how do you think they feel? all that time wasted painting and now they can’t even play reliably anymore.

            like anything else, it’s complicated.

          • SupPupPup

            Sure feel all the feelings, but then ‘you’ have to take responsibility, otherwise it will just happen again, when another thing you start to collect drastically changes.

            Can you imagine how awful all the beanie baby collectors felt when they found out they were really just collecting small worthless representations of animals that they didn’t enjoy.

            I still play fantasy with my friends, we still love it, still buy models for it. My collection is worth every penny I spent on it.

            I had so much fun collecting and buying it and painting and playing, but it started to die off towards the end of 7th Ed.

            Now Im enjoying AoS. It feels like Warhammer did when I was a kid. Fresh, lighthearted, fun!

            I still miss the old world, but I REGRET NOTHING.

            I feel like Im defending GW, when really they have absolutely sucked as a company for a decade. I just cant stand babies.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Oh there is a market for your old stuf believe me… As for no one plays out of cycle games is also hogwash. If you have friends who want to play they will play. To this day I can still play Silent Death, a game more than 20 years out of print! As well as Bloodbowl, battlefleet, inquisitor, and necromunda. I know it is hard to find new blood but the old blood is out there being all archaic using sites like access denied, or yahoo news groups!

          • Muninwing

            yeah, some of our groups out here still play 1st ed Exalted for the fun of it. and even 2nd ed AD&D.

            but that’s more for the nostalgia, not regularly.

            and it’s harder to find people who want to do so consistently. virtually impossible for pickup games.

            keep in mind that i live in a pretty rural area. anywhere i want to game is a drive. and with a young kid at home, still unpacking from a move, working a career job, and being in the middle of a masters program i don’t get out much. so when i do, i want to use my time well.

            as with anything, your mileage may vary.

            i might see if there’s interest. i have near-on 10k points of stuff for WHF that i probably will not use, and someone should get some enjoyment out of them. then again, i could probably repurpose my Beasts as Tzaangors and buff up a Thousand Sons list…

          • Severius_Tolluck

            There ya go. I mean It sucks believe me. But when in doubt sell it, or like me keep it nice an pretty on the shelf. Maybe one day when your youngin is old enough you can learn him some WHF

          • Severius_Tolluck

            I just play both forms! My mates and I will bust out the old rule books and armies hwen we want a rank game, and when we want a skimirsh game we play AoS. All my fantasy armies I dual run now. I find myself able to run things I didn’t in fantasy because I don’t need a gazillion anymore.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            I try to go his route, problem is, the opposition often just told me I am a fan boy and want what they want, etc. So it goes back and forth. I just stopped trying to defend it and just kept playing. There like any games are pros and cons. I tried several comps and several ways to compete in tourneys and narrative, and open. I really liked doing narrative campaigns and I like you can test and have fun with many models. It also makes me more likely to purchase thigns all over the place as I can run just 5 of this or five of that to get a feel and or shore up any flaws my army has!
            What tugs my beard in frustration was removal of Brets and TK, as both had a distinct feel, and TK have amazing AoS rules, especially if you apply GH to them!
            Had GW actually bothered to update TK beyond the over priced weird kits in 8th and always focused n good core rules it would have done so much better as an army

          • Muninwing

            yeah, TK were one of the best, unique, flavored armies in the game. they got slight after slight that drove players away, and then got cut.

            it’s almost like deliberate sabotage. like GW has done to certain others, like Sisters. it’s just sad.

      • Muninwing

        “better” is subjective here…

        i’m for streamlining. i’m for making the model easier. but i’m not for tricks that make people think it’s easier but are really not.

        AoS: now with only four pages of rules! and a cluster of others, scattered in a decentralized location, making someone who likes to read about other armies pull out their hair while they read the same things over and over and see inconsistencies… but the simple player can see all of their rules at once — if they take up tablespace and spread all their warscrolls out instead of looking everything up in one section of two books… which is somehow hard for people?

        sorry… it’s a non-advance.

        it’s like tofu bacon. or a split-level house — looks like a larger colonial, is actually a really tall ranch. fools people into buying it through fooling perceptions, when in reality it’s no better than what you can get for cheaper.

        • DeadlyYellow

          A little forethought and they could have designed their warscrolls to be about the size of playing cards like PP’s systems. Unobtrusive, cheap, and displays near everything outright.

        • Nyyppä

          Less “legal cheating” alone makes it better.

          • Muninwing

            that’s a community thing.

            besides, with “only four pages of rules!” doesn’t that mean that there are less definitions for discerning what is a rule-break? that could be a recipe for more exploitations, not less.

          • Nyyppä

            There is less abusable material in AoS.

          • Muninwing

            there is less material. which is its own benefit and its own flaw.

          • Nyyppä

            Well, sure.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          Actually you can buy the 4 Alliance books and have 90% of all the warscrolls in the game. The rest you can supplement with the App. The only thing you won’t have is all the formations (but that is true of 40k too).

          Also, question, why are you spreading you warscrolls out on the table? Why not keep them in a pile? Takes up the same space as a book.

          • Muninwing

            because i’m a messy, disorganized person.

            having everything in a book with bookmarks means that it never changes position.

            having warscrolls printed means that they scatter, turn, get moved. even on a clipboard, it means they get shuffled around. or taken out when i need them and then misplaced.

            i actually wonder if this is one of the factors in the acceptance/rejection of the warscroll format.

            when i played a couple test games of WWX, we just laid out the necessary cards and then could grab them as needed by sight. warscrolls being on cards would have that advantage. but they are not. warscrolls being in a bound book to leaf through (like the faction book, as you say) might work alright… but if you need formations too suddenly you are in the same issue that people complain about with 40k, the “too many books” problem.

            which i think is a minor issue. but sure.

            i guess that’s the issue. if it was a well-considered change from a system that organically grew out of an old business model (codexes), to a far more optimized system that was both consistent and streamlined, then i’d be all for it. but it’s in many ways a lateral change that does not necessarily add more efficiency or organization, one that is not the best available option nor the most consistent one.

            it’s like GW was a farmer who upgraded from a Model T to a Pinto for use as a utility vehicle. a lot of money was spent. they could at least have done it well. or even achieved their broadcast goal.

      • danbond

        calling AoS a better version than WFB is bullcrap quite frankly

        • Nyyppä

          Depends on stuff and things. If you like less balanced armies, less honest gameplay and more broken rule set then sure, WHF is better. Otherwise it’s not.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            The only thing WFB did better was having rank and file troops.

            The game was trash, sadly.

  • carnifex49 .

    I like the way Age of Sigmar handles it. No need for Codexes to start playing (free stats). But if you want to get to the deep stuff (relics, formations, decurions, spell tables) then you get the Army Books. No barrier for new players but still enough content for more committed players to get more depth out of the army.

    • Munn

      A great way to sum it up, Kudos!

      • ZeeLobby

        It was only a matter of time until we were all “squat”ed in favor of more shelf space for Space Marines!

    • Iconoc1ast

      I havent played AoS but im sure this was the way 2nd and 3rd ed did things too.

      • Iconoc1ast

        Minus the formations stuff of course….

      • Brian Griffith

        Sort of.

        3rd edition had to re-release all the stats in the corebook because there was a genuine statline change from 2nd, so none of the old books worked anymore.

        Age of Sigmar got around it because releasing Warscroll Compendiums online for free was actually an option, which it definitely wasn’t when 3rd came out.

      • Munn

        *whispers* try AoS, it’s crazy good and you can pick it up in half a demo game.

        • vlad78

          *Whisper* No it’s too butt ugly with idiotic fluff.

          • SupPupPup

            *Shouts* HOW DARE YOU HAVE AN OPINION

            (but really, its probably the most fun I’ve had playing fantasy in years)

          • ZeeLobby

            Haha. I’ll need to take a dive in at some point. The games I’ve watched just haven’t dragged me in yet. That and I’d want to start a new army, and have way too many projects going as is (well and hopefully the fixing of 40K is on it’s way).

          • SupPupPup

            I think to best enjoy it, you really need a new army. The new releases, or even the updated ones (like Flesh Eaters or Pestilens) have a lot more interesting synergy and combo opportunity. Essentially they are more interesting to play.

            Legacy armies, while still enjoyable, don’t ooze as much flavour as the new ones.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, and I wouldn’t be shocked if GW eventually phases them out like tomb kings. I know they included them to help players transition from one game to the next, but I honestly would have MUCH preferred them to start AoS by saying “here’s 4 brand new factions that we’ll be trickling releases for over the next year” rather than just starting with 2 (that I personally find rather uninteresting) and expecting those who want to play something different to wait for new stuff, or buy old stuff from a dead game :/.

          • SupPupPup

            Yeah, I think the release was handled poorly.

            But it seems like GW as a company is learning from its mistakes, hopefully 40ks new system will be handled better.

          • ZeeLobby

            Yeah, sadly a year and a half later and I’m not sure our local community has forgive them for how bad the release was, haha. I guess we’ll see moving forward, or I guess I could move, haha.

          • Muninwing

            ours hasn’t.

            the retailers feel angry at being forced into dealing with the changes… and have pushed back. one even just stopped carrying the models.

            the players tried it and just didn’t like it. or, not enough liked it to buy in instead of playing something else.

            there’s now more Malifaux, X-wing, and Bolt Action players than ever.

            and some players felt so slighted by GW’s change that they unloaded their whole GW army collections. purged 40k too.

          • SupPupPup

            babies be babies tho

          • Muninwing

            customers. fans, even.

            one of the biggest rules in business is that a loyal customer is worth more than a new one. someone who has proven to spend is a source of revenue if your business is functional. someone new might not come back.

            the utter failure of the AoS debut on so many levels has left an impression on many people.

            look how reactionary any talk of “sigmarizing” 40k gets. people who have invested time and money into a hobby they enjoy are anxious that they will lose what they enjoy about it. like many did with the AoS transition.

            heck, i was even willing to give it a try… but nobody anywhere near me plays. so even if i was a fan, my fun went away through two tiers of the decisions/preferences of others. i dont want to see that happen again.

          • SupPupPup

            Babies, babies, babies.

            In regards to your business rules:

            That really isn’t as cut and dry as you would expect. A loyal customer is worth nothing if you are not getting many new customers.

            If the problem is that your product’s market has stopped growing, loyal customers are worth very little.

            In contrast, if you have problems with retention of customers, loyal customers are worth more than their weight in gold.

            An established brand like GW doesn’t rely heavily on the loyalist income of a small section of its worst preforming system(fantasy). It needs to show profit and growth in that area, rather than stability. It needs new blood and more change.

            Now that AoS is out, it needs loyal customers to help support the new brand. That’s why the community engagement is working so well, it builds trust and loyalty. (Its worth noting also needs new players as well, ultimately it needs a healthy balance)

            On AoS startup:

            I don’t think you could call AoS an utter failure on its debut. It was handled poorly, but It wouldn’t be doing well if it hadn’t gotten off the ground at the start. It somewhat succeeded, it seems to be selling better than the product it replaced.

            On the topic on babies:

            This is my own ranting, and is purely very opinionated drivel.

            The players who you speak of, and who crop up to needlessly bash AoS, in my mind are childishly lashing out at a company that is trying to improve its business. Their behaviour is what you would expect from a bawling toddler who finds that they can’t have the latest hulk action figure.

            This hobby comes with risks. You can lose what you enjoy about a system, you can have your favourite models discontinued, these are real fears, but you have to understand that going into it. If you don’t realise that, it is your problem.

            Nothing lasts forever. GW never promised to keep making Bretonians in 20 years when you bought your first starter set.

            I think a big problem is that GW provide a great deal of community support even in the days of terrible community engagement. (with their brick and mortar stores). It builds a naivety of their clients. If anything blame GW for exploiting that. We’ve all seen hobbyists trying to fill voids in their life with plastic. GW are enablers.

            While salty salty babies need not be thankful for that, they should recognise that the product they loved had a good run, rather than bleat and moan that its over. (In this case, its not even over!, no one took away their toys, or took down their minecraft server)

            Ultimately it bothers me that people are not taking responsibility for their investment choices.

            Gamers who feel salty that their collection is now no longer supported need to face the fact that maybe they invested poorly.

            They can never play again, buy models, whatever, but its on them.

            If Malifuax goes under, or Starwars stops being popular, you will see the same self entitled children bickering that multi million dollar companies owe them the world. That their selfish happiness/hobbyness is worth more than the jobs of the companies employees.

            They don’t take responsibility, they don’t learn from their mistakes.

            They act like babies.

            I buy into AoS knowing that it could cease at any moment, that the games I enjoy and the models themselves are what I am paying for. I am not paying for a contracted 30 years of support. I take responsibility.

            When I leave the shop, its on me, not GW.

          • Karru

            There is a slight problem in your way of thinking here that I should point out. Why would GW stop producing a certain product? Because it didn’t sell well. Why didn’t in sell well? Bad rules? Bad looking model? Hard to get?

            It was a mix of those. Why is AoS so well received compared to WHFB? Because AoS doesn’t really have a scale. You can start playing with literally just the Start Collecting! Box and you will find yourself playing the full game. The experience won’t change in any major way no matter how big games you play or who you are playing against. This is both a massive downside but also a very good thing about the game.

            WHFB 8th edition was designed very badly from the get-go. It was released during the dark period of GW design logic, which was maximise profit, ignore good game design. They made it so that those who had the money to buy large collections always had a massive advantage. Large units dominated and only way to get those was to pay more. This led to people buying more alternative models for their armies, recasters, second hand or from other companies.

            Now this is where your thinking becomes problematic. You said that those that keep whining that their beloved game is gone should just accept it. It’s gone and nothing they do can bring it back. They shouldn’t be happy, but they have to accept that it is not coming back.

            Wrong. They should voice out their opinion and show GW that there is still a market for it. Of course they could always do it in a more POLITE manner instead of bashing every AoS player there is. As someone who still dislikes AoS for its childish design choices, I will always defend those that are getting bashed by a raging WHFB player who is hating on them just because they happen to like the game. The blame is not on AoS players, it’s on GW. It was GW decision to REPLACE Fantasy with AoS.

            GW should be made aware that people still want to play Fantasy. It’s not the case of “moving on” to AoS, since AoS is not Fantasy. They are as much the same game as Warmachine and Infinity are. GW only looked at the profits when they decided to cut Fantasy and replace it. Now, all they really need to do is make some basic products and gaming accessories like the Modular Movement Trays and provide Square bases with their products. Then give Forge World the go ahead to write rules for it. They release it as a free PDF or a starter set.

            Within the ruleset is mostly based around 6th/7th edition style. All unit types are useful and larger unit sizes have their disadvantages.

            If this is “too much” they could just take War of the Ring approach. Round bases, but movement trays that support them. You still have rank & file, but now you can play both AoS and Fantasy!

          • SupPupPup

            I think a problem with your argument is that GW know that fantasy is still somewhat popular. They see 9th age, they see KoW, they see Total War.

            They probably would have kept fantasy going if they could. Having it lurch around Warhammer World in its undead, slowly decomposing state for 10 years shows it.

            It died many, many years ago.

            I also don’t think you can say GW only looked at the profits when they designed the new system.

            Its clear that they made something to fix their profit problems, but many people involved in the creation of AoS were involved with fantasy for many years.

            They took inspiration from the previous world, and tried to at least include nods and winks to previous bits of fluff.

            Really I think you’re missing my argument’s point. Is that I’m going after those who are babies.

            Not the people who thought fantasy could have been better run these past 20 years. That is a completely different argument. Which in all likelihood I’d probably agree with.

            The people who cannot take responsibility for their investment. People who build up false expectations of a company and scream when the said company does not honour them.


          • Muninwing

            in response to the “market has stopped growing” comment (the rest i might get to later…)

            in other fields or for other companies, the immediate question would be “…but WHY have our regular customers stopped buying?”

            with WHF, GW came out with 8th after 7th was already getting bogged down by the same “codex creep” and OTT build issues that were plaguing 40k (Crons/GK in the latter part of 5th). so they make some shifts. they added more universal magic items, which was genius. they added bonuses for more ranks and more width, which were mediocre but created an arms race for large units and was branded as a cheap sales trick. they changed magic, which was hit or miss and often either not worth the expenditure or way too powerful. they gutted large monsters (6s always wound).

            and it didn’t really work. people got bored fast. and when the game is boring to play, changes need to be made. customers stop buying, because play often drives purchase even just at the level of “well, i might play this someday.” and community drives positivity.

            instead, GW decided to use their worst decision ever, the “we’re a model company not a game company” line. they killed a ton of the community and goodwill and fanbase enthusiasm that had kept them going in leaner times.

            so sales dropped off. people started playing other things, figuring that maybe GW would have a “posterior craniotomy” with the next edition and it would be fun again.

            but rather than figure out why sales dropped — meaning that they took ownership and responsibility for the failures of the game and tried to fix the problem — they instead blamed the customers for not wanting to buy a flawed subpar product.

            that’s the thing about collectors. give them a reason and they keep collecting. give them a reason to not want your product anymore, and they will feel like fools for burning money on you, but then burn their money on some other product.

            they tried to ride their “established brand” through a horrible, unprofessional release. they got backlash. and they deserved it. uncontrolled rumors that prove to be completely wrong are akin to broken promises. they might be lies of omission, but not correcting the misconception that 9th ed was coming was taken by many as a slap in the face because they felt that GW’s lack of denial until it was too late was akin to allowing them to believe a falsehood. and they are not totally wrong.

          • SupPupPup

            Top bit really is a problem with the handling of fantasy in general. I believe this is a separate argument, that I probably agree with you.

            I am more concerned with arguing with that the people who behave poorly in response to their investments and a companies actions should be called out, and they are babies.

            This bit irks me. ” uncontrolled rumors that prove to be completely wrong are akin to broken promises”

            I think I’ve heard this line exactly somewhere before in the comments section. Is it from an article?

            My Question would be. How would GW control these rumours without making the disastrous business decision of saying they were stopping a system a year or two before hand?

            By openly saying GW were stopping fantasy, they would allow their competitors time to create or promote a rival system that will be ready to adopt and poach the unhappy players that come from the change, which will severely hurt the transition period and adoption of a new system.

            It is vital that the new system is a surprise, the change is needed to break away from the old brand.

            It also can prevent players from buying new models (knowing that the system is going out of date), and while not particularity ethical is vital to keep income going as the investment for new system is very high.

            Can you think of a collectable or gaming company that has managed to announce a release while preventing the problems that I brought up.

            I cannot.

            Also why do you believe that it is not the players own responsibility that they fall for their own hype? This hits again at the fact that these babies do not take responsibilities and blame GW for it.

          • Muninwing

            the problem is the timeline.

            now… i’m actually of the suspicion that GW released AoS well before schedule as a panic maneuver. it was incomplete, rough, and had some real issues with the concept (as evidenced by the still-existing huge holes in the fluff). if the execs panicked and shifted ideas, then that would be an explanation for why there was a change.

            but even a month from release, there were still rumors about what exactly was coming. 9th ed speculation was rampant up until about two weeks or so from launch of AoS.

            there were rumors from people who claimed to have seen the new rules. then again, there were also a couple rumors about the new Bretts book, and that was used as evidence by people who refused to believe that WHF was being scrapped.

            GW could have been a bit more transparent. they could have stated that they were intent on drastically changing the format and structure of the game. they could have made it clear that the new game was going to be a different style and flavor (high vs low fantasy) and that the push was going to be a clearing of the slate.

            but even now, they attempt (and at times in heavy-handed or sloppy ways) to establish AoS as a successor when it is really a new and separate game. that’s not constructive, and it creates friction.

            they had stated that they wanted to release a third line (to replace LotR) for awhile. they had made it clear that, with End Times, there was a major shakeup coming for WHF — a reboot was predicted and mentioned by the designers. what we got was not a reboot, but as if someone decided to replace D&D’s Dragonlance setting with a GURPS supplement in the same world.

          • Muninwing

            and you are right… it might have stopped people from buying models.

            but people who bought models in preparation for WHF 9th, and instead got AoS… how happy were they with their purchases?

            or those people who invested time and money into making an army for End Times… who then got to use it for a couple months (or even a couple weeks, given the speed of releases… another huge mistake by GW) only to have to rebase and maybe not even be able to use their new stuff?

            the disregard for customers here is pretty big. especially for a game that requires a community to be useful.

          • SupPupPup

            I’d come back to my point that it was a risk on their part. To view it like an investment that paid off badly.

            They got the raw materials, but the concept behind them, and the value did not pay off as intended.

            Really that is only the responsibility of the person taking the risk.

            yeah it sucks, and from a PR standpoint GW could have handled it better.

            But I don’t believe it to be a disregard for the customers. GW never said, we’ll keep this system going for you forever when it isn’t doing very well.

            They also created a fantasy system that was supported allowing players to use their raw materials (models).

            What would your solution be?

            Mine would have, if we go back 10 years: GW should have sigmarised fantasy, kept the law and invest in video games, it would have been in much better shape. But that seems to be a different argument.

            But then again this is all with the benefit of hindsight, so I look pretty smart compared to the previous ceo.

          • jeff white

            call some of us babies, one more time pup. one more time…

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Could not tell you how much that happened with so many games I bought over the years. Some that I enjoy more even so then WFB or 40k. However, life goes on. I sell what I don’t want, and display what I like looking at. Now that might work different for you for sure as we have diferent mindsets and personalities. However I went through this so many times in my life that well I expect it. Change is inevitable, and eventually something is not going to go your way. I raged at 8e, refused to play the game. I reacted as many reacted to the change to AoS because I whole heartedly believed the rules of 8e were a joke (which I still feel they were) but I got over it, and played other games, or kept playing older version of the game with my friends.

          • Muninwing


            i’ve found in my experiences that most people think others are babies/whiners/losers/etc right up until they are affected in the same way and at the same magnitude.

            sure, the same thing happened to you and others with the same game. but different people do different things for different reasons.

          • SupPupPup

            I would turn you argument against you and say that.

            In my experience I have been guilty of being a whiner and loser and ultimately a big baby over stupid things for selfish reasons. Probably at times being the biggest baby of them all.

            I really hated the move from sillyhammer 40k of the 80s and early 90s and the removal of Squats. I thought my army had been unfairly destroyed. I thought GW were idiots.

            How wrong I was. 40ks fluff now is amazing. Its really grown and modernised and come away from Tolkien in space.

            I have the understanding. I am very guilty of being an idiot on occasion. I was young once too!

            These newborn babes act in the same way I did. I criticise them knowing that they will grow up and mature. But more importantly I criticise them more knowing that some of them are in their 30s and 40s… and frankly as leaders of the hobby, they should have developed a long time ago.

          • jeff white

            why don;t you understand the history that left some people behind and opened up room for your ‘magic combo’ card tricks.

          • SupPupPup

            Are you telling me the meta of 5th edition hero items wasn’t just like deck-building.

          • jeff white

            go back to the beginning, and start over… remember where white dwarf came from. then think about what your are even arguing about.

          • SupPupPup

            Im really confused by what you’re saying here. Are you arguing that a specific wargaming and roleplaying magazine that has changed massive over 30 years is the authority on wargaming?

            Why not go back to HG Wells Little Wars?

            There was quite a few wargames before warhammer.

          • jeff white

            yeah, but we/you are not talking about those games, now are we? what we are talking about is the tangent on which the games W40k and WFB started, and the apparent u-turn taken contrary to loyal player (or in contemporary financialized parlance “consumer”) expectations that had been established on this originary tangent.

            you are not able to follow or just looking for a way out?

          • SupPupPup

            Still I dont see why that isn’t anything but your own personal experience and expectations of the company.

            The game of Warhammer Fantasy 8th was a substantially different game than the one I started playing 20 something years ago.

            2nd Edition I think it was.

            While still a Wargame set in the Old World, the scale, the mechanics and fluff are somewhat different to when they started.

            As you mentioned, the lack of a roleplay element went, as did many secret mechanics, and the lack of a game master.

            I think looking back, we can say that Warhammer (including the specialist products like bloodbowl or warhammer quest) has been anything but consistent.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            And then there are hordes of kids that swarm the local GW store every week end to play AoS.

            Change happens, some times you will like it and sometimes you won’t.

          • Muninwing

            yeah, depends on the area.

            i know the US, particularly the east coast, AoS is limping. but certain areas have differing trends.

          • SupPupPup

            Ill never understand that type of thinking.

            It feels like an addict getting angry that their dealer starts seeing other people. Sure he drank beers and watched the game with you (while selling you coke), but he wasn’t your friend.

            It was an illusion. You deluded yourself that GW cared about you.

            If the models look nice, if the system if fun, play it.

            I think the future Magic the Gathering crash (it has to happen someday) will make this hiccup seem like nothing.

          • ZeeLobby

            Well. Except that I had the privilege to know some of the higher ups working at GW before their purge and slow decline. And they really did care. Heck my best friends father was head if sales for the entirety of the east coast, and yet would frequent tournaments often to get games in and talk to players. Sure GW have their cross-fading social media team now, but their employees used to be out their with us. To say they never cared is just a lie.

          • SupPupPup

            It might be worth defining what I meant by caring in this case.

            I mean that they have your best interests at heart. That they value what you say above others, and that they will go out of their way to support you.

            That they look after you (by making sure YOUR hobby continues despite profits)

            I think that’s a decent enough definition of caring in this case.

            To say Games Workshop cares about what Suppuppup does with his hobby when he leaves the shop is misguided.

            Employees can care, companies cannot. They are collections of ideas and actions and investment.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Yeah that was rough, and it still taking them forever to add more to anyone but order … Which is boring. Or all the chaos up to this point was pretty much Khorne snooze. However I have hope they may redo TK with a slight new image, because really they made those rules awesome and synergy driven! The legacy armies do suffer against sigmar though.. they are marines…
            But they can and still do get beaten. Also the battle plans are fresh, as they are purposely not always fair, and give interesting ways.. IT isn’t just always my side, your side lets bash in the middle! Like one was where you start on the back foot, completely surrounded and have to break through. All you have to do is get off the board! There is neat tricks with using retreat to slide around and go forward!
            Brings back the narrative really.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            If you want to push an agenda, go for it. But GW has put effort into Nurgle, Tzeench, Mortals and Skaven, all of which have been updated.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            What agenda am I pushing? Just stated so much khorne was boring for the longest time that is all really aos got for baddies. Nurgle did have newer stuff as they were one of the last armies done with end times along with skaven, So I am not arguing that. However some of the older ranges suffered further. Which consequently lead to a weird highly khonre and sigmar release schedule.They decided what wasn’t working for them and made the proper cuts they felt as a business were necessary. Not that all of us agree, but they did what they felt was right. Which is why I felt bad for brets, and tks, because they both were neat, but year were easy to do away with. I just found it funny that the stop gap rules for TK were better than their last 8th ed release. Had as much consideration along with new sculpts been applied they might not have had to cull them completely, just mostly! However, I am not there, I don’t see what they see. I can only scratch my head and guess as any of us else do.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            The idea that GW only focused on Khorne and Sigmar is not really true. Lots of people push that narrative but GW released new and repackaged models for lots of armies over the course of their first 6-12 months.

            Brets and TKs were culled because they were too generic. It was too easy for other companies to make knock off material for the two armies. it sucks that both had to be culled but… C’est le vie.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Fair point on Brets, but I don’t find TK that generic, I find their normal undead generic. As for the narrative that is the perception many people share. For the first what seemed first 6 months it was sigmar this or khorne this. You got sprinkles of dwarves which was exciting, but was order. Then they bounced back and realesed repacks of chaos that was not khorne so nothing new per say, just rules. Terrain for sure.. which was all terrain that was supposed to be out during the treachery book period. Then we got repacks of undead, and mostly repacks of stuff until we got Orruks which was a great addition, wont deny that. However again, it was a unit or two of khorne or sigmar sprinkled in between each of the other releases. You got Sigmar, Sylvanneth, and Dwarves all for order. Then you got Khorne khorne and more khorne, buildings and eventually archaon end times stuff for Chaos, and lastly we got Orruks for Destruction. It wasn’t really.. balanced out. So even if you are right and it was spread out it sure as heck did not feel that way.
            Most of the battle tomes they released for skaven and death and so forth were simply repackages and re submission of those models warscrolls in a central location, but were not really new. What I mean is I wanted to see new ,new stuff rather than stop gap. I want to see what crazy cool new stuff they got hiding! I mean I like the look of the new dwarves and sylvanyth. I want to see what they do with death and other gods for chaos, and so forth! But yes I am not pushing an agenda. I am merely stating my observation, wrong or right. I get it, it will take time to redesign the other forces. Just thought they would be slightly more sprinkling a little bit for everyone. We do have new stuff for AOS via Silver tower and the new Magnus launch for Tzneetch though! So that is awesome. Looking forward to what comes next!

          • jeff white

            these were not supposed to play like card games. this is not supposed to be magic, the splattering. it was supposed to be a large scale rpg essentially, with the player the warlord of a small army and with the characters constituting the army more or less made out. now, there is this over-riding sense that this world of wargaming should suit people who’d rather be playing a card game, or a phone game for that matter…

          • SupPupPup

            Wait, who said that?

            Do we have it in writing?

            Or it is another case of yourself imposing your own narrow view on what something is, then getting mad when it doesn’t live up to it.

          • jeff white

            again, go back to the beginning. it was rpgs like d&d and traveler crossed with mini war simulation games. nobody played magic cuz magic was a generation later.

          • Munn

            *whispers* I love the minis and don’t read fluff so I should be fine.

        • Iconoc1ast

          I really want to but too much 30k/40k stuff has left me penniless.

          I really like the silver tower game too.

          Maybe the nhs can help me live with no kidneys….

          XD http://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/1fd30e181034848131142e63235e5df90cf42f2571b0af55d2bc748d5c4d86e8.jpg

    • ZeeLobby

      Eh. I’d rather have just the fluff in the books. But I understand that will reduce sales, so we’ll never see it.

      • SupPupPup

        You get the fluff and rules in the battletomes. TBH some of the earlier ones are a bit too much fluff, and not enough content.

        • ZeeLobby

          Yeah. I mean it’s definitely a way to catch all. Fluff players want the fluff. Competitive players want the rules. I get it. I’m just a big fan of all-free rules available online/digitally (and therefore easily updated).

          • SupPupPup

            Yeah, free online fluff would be the best.

            The layout of the GW makes it annoying to get all the rules easily.

            Scrollbuilder.com (my army list builder of choice) would do well to have a updated link to all the rule pdfs

  • Nyyppä

    Well, the GHB model is genius. It would be better if it was receiving online erratas adjusting the points for units that are either too cheap or too expensive compared to their value. This way the blatant mistakes could be corrected “on the fly” instead of making a new version of those mistakes every 1-4 years. Then just annually release the fixed core book for some reasonable costs.

    40k could actually be fixed with something like this. At least made better.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      It will probably be like AoS mixed with 40k. Online app for all unit warscrolls. All errata is immediately uploaded to the app.

      The core rule book still requires a purchase and is updated via errata.

      We get a yearly General’s Handbook that updates points, overarching rules problems and gives us new missions

      • Nyyppä

        This would be acceptable. It’s way better than what we have now anyway.

      • Munn

        I hope they do ‘three ways to play’ as well. I’m sick to death of getting the ‘well ask your opponent’ response when talking about tournament play.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          Yes. That will definitely come a long for the ride. It is an easy way to satisfy everyone.

        • TenDM

          Yep. I’m a big boy, I can make my own house rules if I want. In the mean time I’d like a set of written rules so all players start on the same page.

      • Severius_Tolluck

        I know it is no where to scale, but so far Bloodbowl is doing this. They have the core box game mechanic in it, and you cant do league or other teams unless you do a small pay, but so far they are fixing it as they go and slowly adding features and art for the upcoming factions. Hopefully this will continue and you do not have to re-purchase, only pay for new features. Further the addon was a small enough cost you are not going to fret too much over 4-5 usd.

  • Valeli

    On the one hand I do understand the appeal of doing this without codices…..

    But on the other hand, I genuinely don’t see how anybody could /not/ miss them if they were gone. They were always such a concrete part of my army, and the first “step” into any new project.

    Downloading it or getting the rules with a mini might be cheaper for me, and more conducive to miniature sales for GW, so it would seem like a win-win. But I’ll really miss these “relics” of the 20th century once (if) they go.

    (I’ll also be a little bit weirded out if my sisters – finally – get a codex right before GW says “OK team, that codex thing? We’re done with it.” )

    • Munn

      I’ve always resented having to buy a codex. It’s why I don’t find the use of alternative means of acquisition to be out of the question.

      • J Mad

        I have a few of the digital DL’s and I MUCH rather have the codex honestly. And no i’m not old fashion, i mean i do all my word docs work and excel etc.. with google docs or on my phone, but the paper codex are like reading a book, its not the same on pc/phone.

        • Muninwing

          yeah… it’s something tangible.

          and it’s not really hard to look stuff up. post-it tabs on rules pages means that the time taken to flip open the book is the same as the time it takes to thumb through your warscrolls.

          then again, i’ve said for awhile that what GW really needs to streamline is not presenting the rules differently, it’s a list-access app/program. think Battlescribe/Armybuilder, only with all the rules on the printout in easily-findable fashion. the list with points and stats go in section one, the weapons summary goes in section 2, and the rules summary (with exact text right there) goes in section 3. bring one list, one product, to your game and have everything right there in one packet or on one clipboard. no need for a codex anymore.

          GW could produce that kind of program. they have chosen to allow others to do so.

          moreover, GW could immediately update such a program, retain control over its usage, add in access options (and freebies, and easter eggs, and rumors/hints) to various codices/rulesets by using such a method. and they have chosen not to.

          they could actually subcontract it to a company that already does it.

          yet they just don’t.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            They did once, didn’t go so hot as it was steaming poop. Plus rules changed too quickly for whatever team it was back then. Plus everyone just chose army builder over it back then. They are trying with BloodBowl right now, and it is promising, I know it is no where as intricate or as large, but it is a start.

          • Muninwing

            yeah, the “Armies of the Imperium” programs?

            it would help for GW to actually do it well, not just throw in a sloppy token effort.

            look at what Bolt Action has done with their summer campaigns. then look at how much lower-quality and exploitable the GW systems have been. there are people who do it right and people who do it wrong.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            I think as years passed they just felt it was not worth the investors money to spend on a campaign.. and I get it. IT just sucks because the creativity isn’t there. I mean the old campaigns were just as rigged but they felt like you were doing more! Plus they were great excuses for some of us to try whole new themed armies as they presented seasonal things. We were ok knowing that they would phases out after the campaign. These days people do get a bit salty when they can not continue to use “middenheim” etc. But that is probably more anecdotal. It is working for the smaller companies, warlord does it mainly for their Antares and seems to be working. Warmachine does it year after year, and it is all small stuff really, mainly shapes fluff and has temp rules for specific models. Mainly gives rewards like coins and patches. Which honestly that would be more than enough for me!

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      We still have Codices in AoS, they are just fluff books with warscrolls now.

      • SupPupPup

        They also have flavourful scenarios in them, which I think is a great little addition.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          That too 😉

    • SupPupPup

      I don’t think codexes/armybooks will go anywhere. But I feel they might become something similar to Battletomes (AoS)

      They provide a nice option for a collector, providing fluff and all the rules in once place, but are not essential to start playing an army.

      The Flesh Eater Courts, and Beast Claw Avalanche Armybooks has been my favourite one in years.

  • sjap98

    codices: Sisters, Nids and ,,,wait for it…Chaos!

    • William Jameson

      While those would be the ones you want, they should be the ones you hope not to get if a new edition is on the horizon.

      Imagine this – Chaos updates, everything is great, then 8th drops and you’re stuck playing an outdated 7th ed codex for another four-ish years.

      • Nyyppä

        Oh, you mean like previously when the first codex was CSM and it’s been bad from the day one. A year or 2 later nids had a pretty similar fate.

        • William Jameson

          A codex for the current rule set is still usually (note the word usually) better than using one from the tail end of the previous design philosophy (what rules do, unit types, points cost etc) in that you get less rules or in your book for things that potentially no longer exist or universal special rules which have changed in such a way as to make them useless to your army.

          This is only my opinion of course.

          • Nyyppä

            Usually, sure. Some releases were designed to be bad, though.

          • Severius_Tolluck

            Kinda what happened to sisters tail end of second and again tail end 3e

  • Spacefrisian

    Just go with Stattcards and codexes/codicies (and e variant) already and make veryone happy.

  • Noveltyboy

    Isn’t this basically just like the traitors hate vs legions book. You buy the former and bar fluff it’s all in the latter. New codex release to then invalidate it would upset a lot of people. I like AoS but it’s hard to play a new army with a huge book to keep flicking through for stats unless you make your own quick reference sheets.

    • Nyyppä

      Well, if they are making a new codex they are going to have to do better than double fearless and triple hatred, casting buffs on summoning for things that can not summon without dying, fear for a faction in a game of fearless units and bonuses for weapons that the holder of the bonuses has no access to.

      • BurpinforDayz

        Or they could just not to that and make it like the deathwatch codex, the grey knight codex, the skitarii codex, the cult mechanicus codex, the imperial guard codex,the khorne daemonkin codex or the space wolves codex and not piss anyone off.

        • Nyyppä

          Essentially reprint what already is there? Nah.

          • BurpinforDayz

            Um what?

  • BurpinforDayz

    I like codices but I wouldn’t mind a chaos book and an imperium one, it’s the all xenos in one book idea that has me shaking my head.

  • Frank O’Donnell

    Well as a new dex is out on Saturday, it’s either BS or GW ripping people off, I’ll let you decide for yourself.

    • ZeeLobby

      I do wonder sometimes whether GW thinks we (their customers) know how to use the internet.

  • Roughneck

    Well that’s not true as the tau empire codex has just gone from hard back to soft back with independents this week my mate who owns one told me yesterday

  • Heinz Fiction

    I’d really prefer to have all the rules in one place…

    • SupPupPup

      ….The internet!

  • Chris

    It’s about time. For summoning daemons with a Deathwatch Team with a combined allied I need 4x Books!
    – Codex Deathwatch
    – Codex Daemons
    – Codex for Allies
    – Rulebook 7th

    • Kritarion

      ….summoning Daemons as Deathwatch? What is coming next? Grey Knights allying with Inquisition and Tau? …Oh.

      • Chris

        Yes, the Scriptor/Librarian got Access to Demonic Section of Psy & there is no FAQ or Update who change this! Or saying, that he has to use the brave Ones. And for strange allies: Perhaps U remember the time, where Space Marine were “Battle Brothers” with Tau!

    • Muninwing

      it’s not GW’s fault that you’ve chosen to run a cheez build…

      • Chris

        What is a “Cheez Build”?

        • Muninwing

          pick-and-choose min/max build.

          it’s possible, sure… but it’s really non-fluffy and pretty drastic.

          i could see it if you were trying to represent a certain kind of army (like the Exorcists SM chapter), but if you are choosing to borrow from multiple sources, complaining about needing multiple books is pretty ridiculous.

          but hey, everyone plays their own way.

          • Chris

            I know, but this is just a list for a summoning CSM playing friend of mine. This list is very, very, very heretic & I must know it, I have got Grey Knights as 1st 40k Army 😉

  • TenDM

    Wait, who is being quoted here? It starts out with a Hastings quote from July 2015, then a summary of a vague insider source, then it’s just a few paragraphs of speculation.

    Hastings got a few things right there but he was way off on other stuff. Horus Heresy was a standalone boxed game, but it didn’t kick off an entire range that replaced Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit.

    Whether he’s had a proper source or he was just making an educated guess, it’s pretty clear that GW has changed their plans quite a bit since that post was made. I mean it he’s talking about conversations he had before Age of Sigmar even launched.

  • Muninwing

    the warzone model seems a bit more expensive…

  • DeCold

    I think it is obvious that 3 codexes are Sisters, Nurglekin and Slaaneshkin.

  • Erik Giersdorf

    Age of Sigmar was going to be digital and they were adding quite a lot to new print codices right before shifting back to 40k. Shenanigans.

  • Randy Randalman

    The problem is, Hastings has NOT been as reliable in recent memory, and that rumor was well before GW adopted this fans-matter mentality.

    The fewer books worked for AoS because it’s an entry game with an entirely new rules system. 40k won’t be getting an entirely new rules system, because the game doesn’t need to be pitched for a new product (as WHFB did). I think we’ll see full unit rules on a single page – one of the great AoS designs in terms of rules clarity – to avoid book swapping and page flipping. I think we’ll also get an app and less oddball points costs for individual wargear items, but not an elimination of the codex. Even game systems that claim you don’t need faction/Alliance books to play end up making them anyway.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      I don’t know if we will have wargear points in the future. They could go full AoS and just let you take whatever you want while at the same time getting rid of fiddly options (like digital weapons).

      So a tac squad would allow you to kit out your Sergeant with any of the melee and ranged weapon options, then the squad could take a Special and a Heavy Weapon.

      • Munn

        Which would require a full overhaul of the rules or a complete rework of all points costs across every army to not be broken into the stratosphere.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          We’re already talking about GW streamlining the game and eliminating codexes, so I don’t see a reason not to rewrite all of the units. For normal squads, it basically means the servants will have a nice melee weapon and a good pistol; the troopers will have whichever special and heavy weapon they want, which is not a big deal, really.The fiddly stuff will disappear (like digital weapons). For tanks, I could see them giving us a warscroll for each main turret (so we have a page for the predator with TL Lascannins, another for the Autocannon, etc.).

  • Kaylum Dicks

    Having the full codex let’s you plan out what you want to buy next. It also gives players an opportunity to proxy their minis in a friendly game to see what works best for them.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Which you can’t do with an app, how?

      • Kaylum Dicks

        Because not everyone likes staring at a screen. Some people actually prefer having a hard copy of a book to thumb through.

        • Red_Five_Standing_By

          Name a big wargane company that is 100% digital.

          AoS and Warmachine have apps but they still produce books and cards with unit stat blocks on them.

          • Kaylum Dicks

            You just prattle on with whatever comes to mind, regardless of whether or not it actually pertains to the topic. I never said anything company was 109% digital did I? No, the topic at hand, was my preference of full codexs vs only having data sheets with the minis. Then youstart down this digital app path.

            I’m not sure if you just like to troll, or your lot in life is to constantly be contrary.

          • Red_Five_Standing_By

            I am not sure where you are getting this hostility from but I do not appreciate being called a Troll when I was trying to have a reasonable conversation.

  • Bayne MacGregor

    i like books (so much i buy limited ones). I also don’t want to have to buy a big book that i’ll only use part of either or change my phone brand in order to use an app then have people squabbling over the power outlet midway through the game when peoples phones are going flat. These things have their uses, but i’d rather they didn’t cast off the idea of codexes too fast either.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      They still have “codexes” in AoS, in the form of the army books and Alliance tomes.

  • SupPupPup

    Its worth saying that with GW releasing leaks themselves (in a more open manner)

    Hastings’ word is not worth much. He/she? Has not been reliable and provides no pictures, or documents or anything of note.

  • If this rumor is true then I’ll give 8th a shot no matter how effed up it seems to be. I have an army sitting on the shelf that I’m not willing to pay the codex tax to use. It would make some of the start collecting boxes a lot more attractive as well.

  • Brett Thompson

    Chaos Marines might have received a buff via Traitor Legions, but they are still play from that old run down 2012 codex which is full of flaws to begin with. I’ll be a bit disappointed if Chaos Marines isn’t 1 of the 3.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Let’s be honest, Chaos was not changed that much between their 4th and 6th edition codexes. They got Dinobots and Cultists.

  • Thatroubleshootah

    If only gw would make an app like the one for Infinity I would be much more likely to buy a random start collecting box. The infinity app won’t let you make an illegal army because it has all the army construction rules within it. Then when you are done it let’s you save the army and print it out including a handy one page list of all the weapons stats and ranges.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      Or instead of making a game that requires an app to build a list, you could simplify list building to the point where it become difficult to make a mistake…

      • Thatroubleshootah

        Either would be fine. As long as I don’t have to factor the cost of an expensive book into the upkeep of an army or the purchase of a new one

  • Deathwing

    AOS style is great… for AOS.
    I hate it. It will only result in the vast dumbing down of the system. There is no way to do rules for so many armies with so many units with so many options in the AOS format. If they go this rout we will see a titanic dumbing down of Warhammer 40k, and it does not fit the previous information that GW was targeting AOS as the starter game for younger players, and then pushing them to grow into 30k then 40k as they get older. 40k is the adults game. I want complex options to taylor my army to my style of play. AOS to me is a child’s game
    I can see a consolidation of multiple codecies for actual units, then maybe data sheets for formations with special benefits in each of these new campaign books, but to get rid of codecies all together? Even consolidating them down you still end up with 6 or 7 codecies and you still end up loosing a huge amount of the flavor for each army doing so.

    • Red_Five_Standing_By

      By your logic, Warmachine is a child’s game because it has few ways to modify units.

      • Deathwing

        I played war machine for several years and came back to 40k because I had more flexibility and choice in designing my army.

        Same reason I don’t play malifaux, but i enjoy armada and X wing. There are ways to customize and taylor your army to your wants. This is even more critical in 40k than x wing because it affects how you build and kit out the model if your playing wysiwyg even loosely

    • Munn

      So wait, paying 15 points for a plasma pistol is what separates children from adults? lol. Age of Sigmar is tactically just as complex as 40k, simplification happened in army building (which in 40k is bloated and cumbersome, and as far as equipment options go, there’s almost always a clear choice, same as sigmar.) And getting rid of tedious nothing rules like difficult terrain. As far as it being a gateway game…sure? I mean it’s got a good amount of similar mechanics to 40k and using it as a learning game could work but I personally think most people who start with sigmar would stay with sigmar unless they really like the sci-fi setting. Sigmar is cheaper, easier to learn, easier to set-up, much more balanced (though it is still a GW game) and just as tactically complex, if not more so than 40k.

      • Deathwing

        lol compared to warhammer 7th AOS might as well be checkers. The amount of skill required to play the game now is less than a 10th of what it was, and by design so children could learn and play and have a genuine chance of winning a game against a tournament player. That doesn’t even happen in chess. List building is part of the strategy and dynamic of both AOS and 40k, its just a 12 year old can make a horrifying error in building a list and still roll like they were a dice god and beat an experienced player in AOS. By comparison if you make a huge error in your list in 40k your far more likely to loose the game before you ever start. The more complex the list building is with more options the more it becomes part of the strategy of the game. That is one of the highlights for 40k you don’t get in many other tabletop games. you would be hard pressed to find one that gives you more options and more flexibility. You apparently think that’s a bad thing. I think that is part of the reason why I play this game more than any other.

      • Karru

        The lack of list building in AoS is my biggest reason not to touch it. I like to customise my units. I like to give my Sergeants Power Swords and my units different special weapons and pay for those. There are many problems in AoS when it comes to list building.

        There is mostly one choice for all armies, once you figure it out you have no need to go with any other build. Depending on the army or the rules they have you go with maximum amount of attacks, wounds or saves or a mix of the three. You look at the Keywords that match the most, you look at the buffs you get and there you go. You have your list, no real skill or strategy involved.

        I don’t optimise my lists, I don’t care for it. I like to make my units unique and this is something AoS lacks greatly. Even characters lack… character. There is only the relics or traits you can give them, outside that they are just Jim Johnson the First, Second and Third. When I say that 40k has strategy and skill involved in list building, I don’t mean the boring spam lists that we see in Tournaments. I’m talking your standard list with variety of different units from your army. Tactical Marines with different loadouts to fill different battlefield roles, Sternguard equipped for anti-tank and anti-infantry.

        What about AoS? I take unit A, it’s a meatshield and only a meatshield. I take unit B it’s a hard hitting unit with loads of attacks and only that. I take unit C and it is a tanking unit and nothing else. If I take multiple of the same unit, there is no way to modify them to fit different roles. The game itself doesn’t encourage that, it encourages spamming maximum number of attacks and wounds. Some units gain benefits to their attack when in large numbers, some get benefits from standing next to other units and some get it from other sources.

        I might as well name my units Unit A, B, C and D because they have nothing that would make them different from their fellow warriors if they are from the same scroll. I also have absolutely no reason to take any other weapon outside the one that gives the me the most number of attacks. Why would I? Why would I take a sword that hits on a 4+ and wounds on a 4+ that re-rolls 1’s to hit when I can take the other that gives them 4+ to hit and 3+ to wound with -1 Rend and then give them a Character that lets them re-roll ALL failed to hit rolls? Absolutely no reason. In AoS there is so many units and weapons that you NEVER want to use since they are so bad compared to other options. Unit D does the same job a lot better than Unit B because it has better weapon to hit or wound with.

        This is something that 40k doesn’t suffer from. Sure, there are useless units and weapons, but not against everyone. Flamers are not good for Space Marines, so I will take Grav. Oh, I am playing Orks that I will wound on a 6+ instead of getting 3 Flamers that would massacre them. I have reasons to switch my weapons around. I have a reason to take other units. I have reasons to modify my list.

        AoS has none of this. I can bring my Warriors of Chaos army against any other army and it will perform exactly the same against everyone. Only difference is how my tactics work against the other guy. It doesn’t matter if I am fighting Giants or Goblins. I am always hitting with the same number and wounding on the same number. I make sure I get as many extra attacks as I can and as many re-rolls as I can and I can bring down anything in the game. It’s just wounds that matter. The only difference is to see one model or 10 models being removed.

        To me, this is extremely dull and bad game design. This is why I have yet to touch AoS. The day they fix that problem, is the day I might start it.

        • Munn

          If you’re good at 40k and you play good lists, you’re going to take the exact same weapon options, and avoiding around 3/4ths of all the wargear in the game which are unusable garbage. Tac squad in a rhino? Grav Cannon. Bikes? Grav Gun. Tac Squad in a Pod? Melta. Centurions? Grav Cannons. Equipment loadouts have 1 clear ‘best’ option most of the time in 40k. The only time you’d deviate from that is if you were list tailoring. As for everything else, every one of the problems you listed as ‘bad game design’ is the same or worse in 40k once you get into an even semi-competitive environment. Most good armies have so many rerolls to hit, rerolls to wound, boosts to BS, boosts number of shots, etc; that missing/failing with anything is very rare. Now on the flipside you have so many defensive boosts that certain units become completely impossible to interact with outside of ‘well I’ll pick up these 3 units I guess’. So it becomes a game of ‘I hit and wound with all my shots but it doesn’t matter because you make all your saves.’

          • Karru

            You missed my point. Because AoS has no upgrades and everything hits/wounds on a fixed number, it makes certain weapons and even entire units completely obsolete.

            Let’s say I take all Grav weapons on my entire army with my Space Marines. Now I face Green Tide and I find myself lacking in firepower. All those points I spent on those Grav weapons are going to do very little to those 200+ boys coming my way. Now, if I had a flamer for every 5pts I spent of those Grav weapons, I would murder that army.

            My biggest reason why I don’t play AoS is this. It doesn’t matter who I am facing or what type of list they are running, my army will still perform the same from my PoV. My weapons still do the same amount of wounds on average, they still save the same on average and so on. I barely have to adapt my strategy to better fit my opponent. I don’t have to come up with new ways to use certain weapons more effectively or look for some other more “in between” weapon that would be able to fight different situations better than other weapon that is useful against one unit but not the other.

            It’s what I call the “Magic: The Gathering syndrome”. It all boils down to having more luck and better understanding of your list than clever strategy. I sent my meatshield unit forward, my opponent charges it and murders it. I counter charge and in turn kill his unit. Then he charges that unit and the cycle repeats unless one of use gets lucky and manages to “upset the balance”.

            In Magic: The Gathering this would be the “perfect draw”. I get exactly what I want from the deck to play my combos and I make sure that this happens. The more I rely on them, I place more cards that allow me to search for things or manipulate my deck to make sure that happens. If my opponent manages to get the perfect draw as well, it will boil down to whose deck counters the other better or which one can burn down the other first.

            In AoS this is reflected with the Keywords. You want to maximise the synergy between units and you want to make sure that you get those synergies. You take as many situations as you can into consideration when making your list. “What if this character dies or what if this unit breaks before this happens”. You make sure that it is extremely unlikely to happen. Then it happens and boom, you are now at a massive disadvantage for the rest of the game. Your army is now crippled, while your opponent still has his combo working.

            “Isn’t 40k the same thing in this situation?” No. Like I said, you have so many options and so many ways to make your list that when it comes to facing your opponent, it is impossible to counter every scenario. At this point, I go with whatever I like. I usually run some general units that have nothing special assigned to them. They have special weapons that can be used against multiple targets even if it would turn out to be overkill. Then I take some very specialised units that are suited to take down specific targets. Tank Hunters, Horde Killers and Anti Heavy Infantry units.

            All of those weapons are massively different depending on the foe. I can still use a flamer to nice effect against Marines, but it’s not guaranteed kill. Taking a Plasma Gun against a Cultist might not be the most optimal solution and I can’t even damage a Wraithlord with my Bolters. This is what I love about 40k. You have to think which weapons to take. AoS doesn’t have this at all. I just take the ones that maximise the amount of attacks and wounds I can do, since it doesn’t matter what my opponent is bringing. A Horde of Goblins or a Single Giant, my Great Weapons don’t care. They still hit and wound the same and they have no additional attacks behind them, so taking something that might give me re-rolls to 1’s or maybe increase my save by 1 would be idiotic to take since I can easily get myself re-rolls to all failed hit rolls and even improve my save.

            I hope that I made my point a bit better. I am not talking about “making super optimal lists” to both, I’m trying to say that weapon choices and upgrades in 40k actually matter. In AoS it doesn’t, due to fixed numbers and not having any upgrades to begin with.

    • Admiral Raptor

      40k for adults? Surely you jest. Needless complexity for it’s own sake doesn’t make a good game, or even a mediocre one for that matter.

      The adults that I know more often play AoS, X-wing, or Bloodbowl. They enjoy games that are actually fun, and don’t take forever to play.

      • Deathwing

        x wing sure, no hobbying there. My friends are more likely to do x wing, armada, and twilight imperium. Kingdom Death as well. None of us stayed with AOS for very long. My two warhammer armies are permanently retired now.

  • Emperor’s Champion

    Part of me likes this just because I’d be interested in learning how you’d collect rules.
    Compiling the rules for imperium and the 3 eldar factions would definitely be something I’d go for.
    However another part of me enjoys having codices, it’s a bit of a motivator for the army at times, get bored, have a read and that sparks your passion again.
    The only hate I have for the codex system is the stupid frequency of updates and not even getting a year out of some books.

  • Christian Zajac

    I’d rather have a codex with all the units in one place so I can plan my army out than a stack of papers with rules from the boxes. Not to mention codices are the best source for lore and introducing new players to the universe.

  • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

    Nids, Guard, and CSM, obviously. Everyone else has been updated already.

    • Nyyppä

      Orks, wolves, BA, daemons….I’m sure there’s more.

      • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

        But only 1 of those isn’t a 7th ed codex… and that one just happens to be a top-tier codex.

        • Nyyppä

          None of those are 7th edition style codex.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            They were all published after 7th ed dropped, except for Chaos Daemons. And each one got the Decurion treatment later on, so a pre-8th rewrite isn’t necessary for them. In contrast, Guard could use an Angel’s Blade-style supplement to add back in some famous Regiments, as could Nids for their various Hive Fleets. And all 3 are below average right now, supplements aside, so a baseline shift in their mechanics could get them off of the bench. Making the orthodox builds for those armies at least viable would be a plus, as if that would actually happen, but the real need is to get them out of mono-builds, especially Ally-dependent mono-builds, as well as lists that don’t run the baseline Troops choice for the faction, which each of those Codices has trouble with from one degree to another.

          • Nyyppä

            The release date is meaningless. The style of the book is not.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            None of the books you list, except for Chaos Daemons, use the split Bestiary and Army List format that was the model for Codexes up until Militarum Tempestus. So, just what do you mean by 7th edition style, because clearly, layout has nothing to do with it.

          • Nyyppä

            Look at the Necrons codex, the first 7th edition style codex, and compare that to CSM or any of the other 6th edition stile codices. If you can spot the difference you have your answer. Otherwise this discussion has no reason to continue because I’m just not good enough at explaining self explanatory things to people.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            Read 2 of my posts up. All of the Codexes you listed got the same Formation Detachment treatment later in the edition, to the point that some of them got published again with their Decurion and Formations added into the main codex, the way the Tau codex was. In fact, by that logic, Grey Knights should also be on that list, as all they got was a kitchen sink Formation, the way most of the early 7th ed codices did.

          • Nyyppä

            It’s not in the codex and obviously the additions are designed without any relation or consideration towards the parent codex.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            I have the most recent prints of Chaos Daemons, Blood Angels, and Tau. Their Decurions are included. The only Decurions that you could say weren’t really designed with their parent codexes in mind are the ones in Traitor Legions and the Cadian Battlegroup Detachment, as both are either unwieldy and full of tax, or mired in redundancy and limited usefulness. Daemonic Incursion wasn’t so bad because it was fluffy and most of the taxes had alternatives, whereas, apart from a few specialized Formations, each TL Detachment is almost identical as far as what is needed to play.

          • Nyyppä

            So, essentially if they released 8th now and made a new print of each of the codices with a picture that was never before seen in any of the GW releases it would make them all 8th edition style codices no matter what the design philosophy they’d use with the actually new iterations? Well, I disagree.

            Also the power level or utility value of a faction specific formation or detachment is not really proof for or a gainst it being designed for the current codex.

          • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

            No, that’s ridiculous. Stop evading my question, e.g.: what makes a codex a 7th ed codex to you? Clearly, what’s obvious to you as a point of distinction from 6th ed, or whatever your heretofore inadequately explained point of comparison would be, is either something I don’t pay attention to or really isn’t material to our discussion (like whether or not the codex in question is competitive). Really, what is the difference between a codex introduced chronologically after the change to 7th ed and what you would consider a 7th ed codex?

    • Munn

      Sisters of battle say Hi!

      • 301stFeinminsterArmoured

        Assuming that they are already being updated.

  • knightsanguis

    Just bring out free rules, they’re easily obtainable and easier to update should they need rebalancing. I’m all for still buying books that add to the fluff, though.

  • Admiral Raptor

    Who cares what the last three are?

    Honestly I’m not sure who would go out and buy a codex at this point with 8th edition around the corner. I suppose some people might not care about only getting a few months use out of a $70 book, but I don’t know any of them.

    • Karru

      I personally might get them to get some ideas for fixes when I play 5th edition games with my friends. More rumours that we get about 8th edition makes me certain it won’t be any sort of fix. It will be the opposite. It will make the game not 40k and just turn it into worse 28mm Epic.

    • Munn

      SoB players.

  • Three more codexes, so that means that in 8 short years we will have a new Chaos Space Marine Codex…

  • Deathwing

    whatever the “codecies” that are left are, they must be from some faction that already has a large model/kit count, because we have seen nothing crazy previewed or leaked from the model design studio. If it was a subfaction like eldar exodites you’d think we would have seen something eldar-esque. If it was an ork Kult book, maybe they could get away with that with no new models or very few that they could keep under wraps. If they are bringing back primarchs I would say Dark Angels to kick off with the return of the Lion, followed by Space Wolves to bring back Russ, then Space Marines to cover Vulcan, The Khan, Papa Smurf, and Corax, (possibly Dorn as well, we do just have his hand lol)
    That would please the bean counters too, power armor = sales.

    • Munn

      Those models could be 10 years away from production for all we know.

  • Wampasaurus

    2 of the Codices I think are fairly obvious. The Tyranids and Astra Militarum both still only have 6th Edition rulebooks they are functioning on. Chaos also does not have a 7th Edition codex, but they are getting some late 7th Edition love here with Codex Supplement: Traitor Legions. My guess on the third? Chaos Daemons NOT named Khorne.

    • Nyyppä


    • Munn

      Sisters, Nids, Orks, BA, CSM, AM in order of most need to least. As bad as the base CSM book is, traitor legion was a pretty solid whack of content and put them just barely above the bottom 4. Changing Chaos Demons would be kinda silly. They’re already pretty much the second best army in the game.

    • DeadlyYellow

      Daemons got a digital update after War Zone Fenris dropped. Last book is likely going to be something underwhelming, like Tempestus.