Wednesday, January 11, 2012

What we can infer from what wasn't in the codex?

My work weeks are spent at a small manufacturing company in a Sales capacity working with the types of customers I do has taught me many valuable skills.  One of the most important ones is to read between the lines of what is said, or often not said. That can often lead to ways to find solutions and solve problems.

I, like most 40k players, spent an hour or so digesting the leaked 40k rules that blood of kittens and dakkadakka seemingly simultaneously posted links too.   From what I hear the links are already down and a lot of folks that were away from their keyboards last night got left in the wind.  There are some interesting summaries of the rules out there, and one of the better I have seen is at

Assuming they are legit (and it looks to me that they do) these rules are a radical shift in the way we play the game.  Mostly good changes, and if anything, at least it would be a shakeup to the status quo in the competitive scene, which is always a good thing.  With the rulebook leak came a "codex update" sheet.  This is really, in a around about way, where GW is flat out saying what the next codex is.

There is a lot of talk lately about rumors if it is going to be the Black Templars or Tau.  I hope it's the Tau, as I've been wanting to do them for a while, though the codex update would suggest otherwise....

What is interesting about the codex updates is not what is there, but what isn't.   Three codexs are not represented.

  • Necrons
  • Sisters of Battle
  • ....and Black Templars
I mentioned my professional life because a lot of what I do is putting pieces of information together.  So lets put these pieces together. My understanding is the dates in the file are around fall of last year.  This would make sense why Necrons were not included, as they were still under development and anyone who wrote the rules most likely wouldn't want anyone play testing an old codex with radically different rules. Not worth the time. If the files were written in the fall, the logic could have been, "lets do the codex update after the Necron codex is released" as to not confuse play testers with new codex and new rules.

The Sisters absence I think we can chalk up to classic Games Workshop just ignoring them. It is possible that they were left out for the same reason as the above.  Either way, it makes sense to me.

The strange one to leave out is the Black Templars.  Why leave them out except for one of the above reasons?  They didn't have a recent codex, so does that mean they are next?   Why put the time into the codex update if at the time of the release of the codex update it won't be valid anymore?   Not wanting to waste play testers time with playing an outdated codex?

I don't know which one of the reasons the Men in Black were not included in the codex updates,but if I were a betting man I would double down on seeing the marine crusaders before my favorite mecha army gets a codex. 


Post a Comment