# Rant! Robbin Cruddance is the new Gavin Thorpe



## MaidenManiac (Oct 2, 2008)

Rant incoming!
Ive had a revelation.



Robin Cruddance is the new Gav Thorpe of the design team:ireful2:
He doesnt do anything completely right.
Its either a really solid book with a few way too good entries (IG w Vendettas, Hydras, Psyker Battle Squads) or almost decent but with too many hooks and wonky point values that prevent you from making a solid army out of it (Tyranids, SoB).
This could be compared to 3d ed Blood Angels and Craftworld Eldars (extremely, bordering on retardedly, good) and CSM, CD but most of all 6th ed Dark Elves* (way to shitty) books.

The only forgiving factor here is that Cruddance hasnt been allowed to rampage freely amongst too many books yet and seems to be on a shorter leash than Gav ever was. Lets hope it stays that way:secret:



*There is frequent major whining about CSM being the worst production ever. This is not true. Gav could never surpass his master degree of failure in codex writing that was 6th ed DE, even when he tried hard with CSM. 6th ed DE was so bad that GW actually errata'd almost every single entry in the whole book to make it remotely playable. Thats right, back in the days of 6th WHFB GW produced a book called Warhammer Chronicles 200x (there was a 40k version too, Chapter Aprroved) that contained various scenarios and other fun stuff but also Erratas for all released books that was deemed in need of such.
Thats something eh? GW actually bothering about released things:hang1:
Wonder if/when that might happen again. I, for one, hope that 6th ed brings some new (read old) light and ideas back to Willow Road...


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Yes, Cruddace is inexperienced and makes mistakes in everything he does. In the short space of time he has worked on codices, he has managed to write both the most op (guard) and the worst, least playable (nids) codex.

Which is why I'll never buy anything that has his name on it, until GW gets actual editors (a promotion for Phil Kelly would be best) that actually adjusts and police what the other bad writers write (Cruddace and Ward) to bring all codices to an even playing field.

Right now, editors at GW are nothing but text copy/pasters and layout polishers. Faff.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

My nids beat guard on a regular basis. 

Maybe you need to get better?


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Serpion5 said:


> My nids beat guard on a regular basis.
> 
> Maybe you need to get better?


Or your opponents do?

If you are carving through transport/meltavet spam list with your measly (and unfluffy) Hive Guard list, there is something wrong. Maybe loaded die?

EDIT: Well, now that I think about it, Nids are pretty decent against Guard. Try playing more against DE or even Tau, which aren't top notch armies at any rate (well DE is competitive-able at least) which are armies nids consistently lose against if played in their more typical builds.

But the point isn't that it's impossible to win with nids, it's that in order to do so you have to sell your soul to the devil and build a list so batshit bonkers insane (think 1500pts GK army with 7 models type of insane) that the whole point of playing this game goes right down the toilet.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Not at all. 

Nids run as a swarm in this edition and their play style is akin to the eldar rather than their usual ork aligned tactics. 

I use several large broods of hormagaunts, several more of termagants. One brood of zoanthropes in a drop spore and a hive tyrant (sometimes swarmlord) protected by tyrant guard. With whatever points I have left over I can usually fit in the required tyranid warrior brood and sometimes a trygon or a carnifex for heavy hitting. No Hive Guard in sight, no DoM and no genestealers of any kind. 

The guard lists I come across are typically either mech heavy in which case my thropes usually get through two or three tanks before being brought down, or inantry footslogger in which case my swarm is immediately superior in cqc. 

I don't claim to win every game, but I give as good as I get and this is against three different players. Against other armies the nid success rate is about the same, slightly better against eldar and tau than DE or orks and roughly on even terms with most SM variants. BA maybe a bit harder than the rest. 

People are too quick to blame a codex.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Serpion5 said:


> People are too quick to blame a codex.


and the writer


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

bitsandkits said:


> and the writer


Bang on correct. Especially given that these guys work in teams, it's not as though Rob wrote the whole thing himself.


----------



## LordOfAbsolution (Jul 22, 2009)

my mate plays guard and I love it when I'm in a battle with him cause it is hard and I'm playing a game over the past week where I'm trying 5th nids for the first time, and with only 600 points I still threw a fex in ( it felt dirty and so many points lost if/ when it dies but its still fun) 

my two thoughts when it comes to ward and cruddace...

firstly - GW have millions or loyal players and out of them all they found ward and Cruddace and hired them to write codices, I'm sure they're not the worst out there but they are no where near the best either. if people think they can do better, see if you cna submit stuff in to GW and see if they take notice. :rtfm:

secondly - do you think these two guys know of all the hate towards them and cut themselves and night over, or get off on all the attention? :shok:

LoA


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I think they're mature enough to not give a shit if they even know.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Serpion5 said:


> I think they're mature enough to not give a shit if they even know.


exactly, they go to work like the rest of us to get paid, the opinion of the faceless critics online wont loose them any sleep, but i imagine the if they did the people asking for codexs autographed at various games days will give them a smile and some self worth back.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

Serpion5 said:


> Bang on correct. Especially given that these guys work in teams, it's not as though Rob wrote the whole thing himself.


I can promise you - if Phil Kelly was being accredited a part in the Nids codex he would blow his brains out in shame. Well, that may not be true, but damn - look at the DE codex Kelly wrote. It's one of the most beautifully done piece of paper that has ever slipped from the GW printing presses. It's a masterpiece next to anything written by the other two. And I dare say, even the Space Wolves codex, albeit a notch above Kelly's usual power level, also stands out as a genuinely well written book. Compare them to Nids (Cruddace) and Blood Angels/ GK (Ward). They don't hold a micrometer of a candle to Kelly's work.

Phil 4 editor-emperor.


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> I can promise you - if Phil Kelly was being accredited a part in the Nids codex he would blow his brains out in shame. Well, that may not be true, but damn - look at the DE codex Kelly wrote. It's one of the most beautifully done piece of paper that has ever slipped from the GW printing presses. It's a masterpiece next to anything written by the other two. And I dare say, even the Space Wolves codex, albeit a notch above Kelly's usual power level, also stands out as a genuinely well written book. Compare them to Nids (Cruddace) and Blood Angels/ GK (Ward). They don't hold a micrometer of a candle to Kelly's work.
> 
> Phil 4 editor-emperor.


Look on the summary page of the 5th ed Nid codex. He's listed under Game Development along with Cruddance and Ward, so he gets credit.

I'd also like you to explain how the DE and Wolf codex are "better" (vastly "better" it seems) then the BA, GK, and Nid codices.


----------



## aboytervigon (Jul 6, 2010)

Tomb kings.....Nuff said. I rate the writers as such.

Fluff raped but powerful rules = Ward 

fluff ok but horrible rules = Cruddace

fluff amazing with nice balanced rules = Kelly.


----------



## Loli (Mar 26, 2009)

aboytervigon said:


> fluff ok but horrible rules = Cruddace
> .


I dunno the Guard dex seems pretty solid


----------



## Doelago (Nov 29, 2009)

aboytervigon said:


> Fluff raped but powerful rules = Ward
> 
> fluff ok but horrible rules = Cruddace


Cruddace does Fluff + Ward does rules = Profit?


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

Loli said:


> I dunno the Guard dex seems pretty solid


If you by "solid" mean terribly bloated where the majority of the units are wonky or completely worthless and the rest borderline imba (which of course, lends itself to a good tourney dex) then I agree. It is the hallmark of Cruddace. If you want Vendetta quality be prepared for Deathstrike Missile uselessness.


----------



## moswantd407 (Jul 7, 2011)

I wonder what these guys are like in real life.............

I picture Cruddace as a raving drunk

other opinions on this?

Ward?

Kelly?


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

aboytervigon said:


> Tomb kings.....Nuff said. I rate the writers as such.
> 
> Fluff raped but powerful rules = Ward
> 
> ...


So Canis Wolfborn, Lord of the Wolfkin, riding his Thunderwolf with his Wolftooth necklace, Wolf tail talisman, 2 Wolf claws, and his Sage of Wolfkin, while being accompanied by 2 fenris Wolves (as is his right as the Wolf King) is the hallmark of amazing fluff? 

and as for Ward having "powerful" rules, why is it that the IG codex and SW codex (which came out before BA) were considered better/stronger then BA. Wards only codex that even ranks next to those 2 is GK, which is built for 6th edition. If he really had "powerful" rules wouldn't all his books be considered the "most powerful?"

If Kelly really had "balanced" rules wouldn't SW and DE be equal in terms of "power?"

Edit: I can poke holes in this logic all day.

End of the day, books are done by teams. If you're going to complain about 1 writer you gotta complain about them all.


----------



## aboytervigon (Jul 6, 2010)

Doelago said:


> Cruddace does Fluff + Ward does rules = Profit?


I would just rather we clone Phill and have him write them all.


----------



## Warlock in Training (Jun 10, 2008)

Wusword77 said:


> So Canis Wolfborn, Lord of the Wolfkin, riding his Thunderwolf with his Wolftooth necklace, Wolf tail talisman, 2 Wolf claws, and his Sage of Wolfkin, while being accompanied by 2 fenris Wolves (as is his right as the Wolf King) is the hallmark of amazing fluff?
> 
> and as for Ward having "powerful" rules, why is it that the IG codex and SW codex (which came out before BA) were considered better/stronger then BA. Wards only codex that even ranks next to those 2 is GK, which is built for 6th edition. If he really had "powerful" rules wouldn't all his books be considered the "most powerful?"
> 
> ...


So how does Wards known books have such raped and extreme fluff? Just like to know as you seem to have all the answeres. I mean they ALL written the fluff together right? Same with Rules... I mean the fact it has one MAIN writer on the Dexes doesnt mean a thing right? They all had a "even" hand in it. Ofcourse.:suicide:


----------



## The Dog Boy (Oct 6, 2011)

Y'know, I hear this same argument every time a new codex comes out, every time a new BRB comes out, and every time an updated FAQ come out. Fellas, fellas...these books are broken on purpose. As has been said, these guys do not write books in a vacuum. They are edited, reviewed, and playtested by the staff of GW and approved by the writers' bosses. The best comparison for GW products is Magic:The Gathering. Every new edition breaks all those before it so that new players have an edge, and so old players have to buy a new army if they want to stay competitive. That's just the business model, and it works.

As for fluff, it's meaningless. It has no effect on the game, the armies, or the rules. As such whether it is awesome or crappy makes no difference. No one at GW cares if the canon is screwed or abandoned, they just want it to be uber-awesome for all the new players that year, not protect your favorite blahdi-blah character/Chapter/Hive Fleet/Traitor/Craftworld/Race from getting bloopity-blooped. They wont ever let "canon" get in the way of a new release because it's not OUR canon, it's theirs and they can do whatever they want with it.


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

Warlock in Training said:


> So how does Wards known books have such raped and extreme fluff? Just like to know as you seem to have all the answeres. I mean they ALL written the fluff together right? Same with Rules... I mean the fact it has one MAIN writer on the Dexes doesnt mean a thing right? They all had a "even" hand in it. Ofcourse.:suicide:


Except Wards books don't have such "extreme" and "raped" fluff, at least no more so then any of the other codices.

Lets take Space Wolves as an example for "extreme". Their codex has them allying with a Radical Inquisitor who they let escape Imperial Law, blowing up an Ecclesiarchy Fleet (and later 3 SoB Orders), and becoming allies with Eldar (only to have negations break down due to translator issues). If Ward had put stuff like that in his books, I can't IMAGINE the shit storm that would happen. Oh wait, I can. In Wards books he had GK's kill a handful of SoB (not 3 full Orders) and people wouldn't shut up about it for months, yet SW can kill (or be lenient and say they crippled) 3 full Orders and no one cares.

As for the "raping" of the fluff, what about the fact that the current Nid dex has several named characters? Their old fluff used to be they were a swarm of insect like beings that consume all Biomass, now we have specific individual creatures who do very specific stuff. We now have a single Zoanthrope that destroyed an entire craft world by itself (Doom), a single Carnifex that seemingly can't die and travel through space(Old One Eye), a single Lictor that crippled an entire worlds military through fear(Deathleaper), a single Harpy that can create unlimited Ripper swarms(Parasite), and the Swarmlord who is the avatar of the hive mind. Ward does something similar with the Necrons and people jump all over it as the worst thing ever, but Cruddance can give personality to Nids and it's cool.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

> Ward does something similar with the Necrons and people jump all over it as the worst thing ever, but Cruddance can give personality to Nids and it's cool.


:goodpost: 

+20 for commonsense.


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

Wusword77 said:


> Except Wards books don't have such "extreme" and "raped" fluff, at least no more so then any of the other codices.
> 
> Lets take Space Wolves as an example for "extreme". Their codex has them allying with a Radical Inquisitor who they let escape Imperial Law, blowing up an Ecclesiarchy Fleet (and later 3 SoB Orders), and becoming allies with Eldar (only to have negations break down due to translator issues). If Ward had put stuff like that in his books, I can't IMAGINE the shit storm that would happen. Oh wait, I can. In Wards books he had GK's kill a handful of SoB (not 3 full Orders) and people wouldn't shut up about it for months, yet SW can kill (or be lenient and say they crippled) 3 full Orders and no one cares.
> Wow, your arguments seem so much better when you leave out information discrediting your point. Seeing as you fail to mention that the GK apparently bathe themselves in blood in order to defeat Khorne. That is something of a brainfart as it makes no sense whatsoever.
> ...


And for the record, I wasn't much for the Necron personality change with the new dex, but I must that Ward did a decent job with it. Some of the "we control the universe" fluff is a bit silly, but overall it's a vast improvement over the abomination that is Grey Knights.

But my personal opinion: I don't think Kelly is god, nor do I think Ward is worthless. I rate their works on a codex to codex basis (those I read btw) and note the things I like and those I hate. And I am of the opinion that Kellys codices tends to have better fluff, Wards tend to have entertaining rules (and pretty good internal balance) and Cruddaces tend to be bloated, not very well balanced (mostly internally), but have a sense of humor and some hidden gems.
I neither consider these to be hard and fast rules or only the credited writers fault, but tendencies are tendencies. If Kellys books tend to have better fluff it might be because he makes sure his team pay more attention to that part. If Cruddaces tend to have a lot of weird units its because he makes his team brainstorm for that and he don't mind if they aren't all equal. I don't think any of the writers are retarded or incompetent. But I must admit, I rank Cruddace as the least experienced/professional. I would like to see a codex with his name on it that didn't look like the last two.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

X = (Necrons + Blood Angels) * Bumsex²
Y = (Tyranid Codex - Choice) * Marketing New Models By Eliminating Old Ones From Use²

A hint to the solution to each equation: Phil Kelly is Z.

And don't give me the "all the writers work together" bullcrap, because that is simply not true. It takes many hundred man hours to write the first test edition of a game rule book, and GW always write 3 at a time, because that is how many lead designers they have. When Cruddace/ Ward write something, nothing stops them from asking Kelly for advice, or Kelly to ask the others for advice, but don't for a second think that they spend much time hanging over each others shoulders.


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> Wow, your arguments seem so much better when you leave out information discrediting your point. Seeing as you fail to mention that the GK apparently bathe themselves in blood in order to defeat Khorne. That is something of a brainfart as it makes no sense whatsoever.
> Now I haven't read the SW codex apart from the rules (and I agree, the amount of wolfiness is retarded) so you may be right. Not the greatest fluff ever written. But it doesn't seem completely nonsensical, much unlike some of Wards fluff.


It's one ritual to counter another, it's not a new concept. It would have been worse if the GK's just showed up and were invulnerable to the Bloodtide just because they were Grey Knights. That being said, I don't think it's any worse then the Space Wolves killing members of the Ecclesiarchy and Sisters of Battle while facing no repercussions just because they're Space Wolves and everybody fears them it seems. It sounds like the "fan-wank" everybody accuses Ward of putting in his books.



> No, it's not particularly cool. Especially because Cruddaces Nid fluff is either boring, lame or decent at best. But Nids having characters is nothing new. Guess what? Old One Eye was also a special character in the 3rd edition Nid dex. And Deathleaper is essentially a new version of The Red Terror (also from 3rd). So no, it's not Cruddace did not add personality (only "attempted" to expand it.) and noone said they found it cool. I for one, find it boring as hell.


I didn't mean "cool" as in good, I meant "cool" as in no one cares.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

It's funny because the joke's on the GK. Do you have ANY idea of how badly blood damages metal?

Midnight


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

Wusword77 said:


> It's one ritual to counter another, it's not a new concept. It would have been worse if the GK's just showed up and were invulnerable to the Bloodtide just because they were Grey Knights. That being said, I don't think it's any worse then the Space Wolves killing members of the Ecclesiarchy and Sisters of Battle while facing no repercussions just because they're Space Wolves and everybody fears them it seems. It sounds like the "fan-wank" everybody accuses Ward of putting in his books.
> 
> With this I agree. It does not seem like Kellys finest work to be honest.
> 
> I didn't mean "cool" as in good, I meant "cool" as in no one cares.


I care. Does that count?

In any case, I suppose a lot of the flak Ward gets comes from the fact that 1D4chan has made hating Ward the new black (when it really is Jervis Johnson we should hate ).


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> In any case, I suppose a lot of the flak Ward gets comes from the fact that 1D4chan has made hating Ward the new black


No, actually people hate Ward for being a fluff rapist.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

I think people blow these kinds of things out of proportion, but anyone that says all codexes are equal is just as irrational.

Fact is every writer at GW will make lemons, and apples kinds of codexes. New IG are a strong solid tournament army, as are DE, and most modern SM books. Other books like nids are solid, but flail frailly and the highest level of play.

However at casual play level all codexes are sound.


----------



## LordOfAbsolution (Jul 22, 2009)

many player's have different opinions some love kelly, some love ward. like I have pros and cons about all of the writers;

Kelly - pro - helped build the Eldar as we know them today (Craftworld Eldar) and generally does well thought out and nice fluff.
cons - like anyone can get carried away, and until the 5th ed DE codex a lot of the game rules feel bare, don't get me wrong the eldar codex has a really nice balance amongst units but comparing the Eldar to the Dark Eldar just feels like the craftworlds are stagnate with their armoury.

War - pros - they may seem more powerful on paper but his armies are generally balanced with anything else.
cons - his spelling and wording seems like its written by a 12 year old fan boy too much, that gets carried away with how awesome he thinks things are (even though when he writes the rules for them they're not any worse than anyone else)

Cruddance - pros - both his armies are generally sound (even the nids if worked right) and the fluff isn't absolutely terrible
cons - he seems to get carried away with new things, the deathstrike missile and harpy for example just weren't needed for a standard dex if at all.

again these are all just my opinions, pick them apart with a thin-tooth comb, take it with a pitch of salt, or agree with them fully. up to you.


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

LordOfAbsolution said:


> Cruddance - pros - both his armies are generally sound (even the nids if worked wrong)


Fixed that for you!

Nids played "right", i.e. these days "to win", is per the Cruddace way a completely wrong army line up from the way Nids are supposed to work.

He designed a million new units and made sure they, or formerly bad units from the previous codex, were the competitive ways to play, thus making all existing armies wank.

Cruddace is a villain.

Plus, Guard is the most OP army. There is no excuse for his erratic experimentation.


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> No, actually people hate Ward for being a fluff rapist.


Which means what exactly?


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> He designed a million new units and made sure they, or formerly bad units from the previous codex, were the competitive ways to play, thus making all existing armies wank.
> While I agree that the move to make fexes useless and generally nerfing nids long range firepower was exceptionally lame, I don't think you can call him out just because the army plays different now. I think it's not a total failure as the dex requires quite a bit of finesse now. Unlike the old book where you simply ran nidzilla and won because noone could kill all those fexes before they reached you. Yawn....
> 
> Plus, Guard is the most OP army. There is no excuse for his erratic experimentation.


While I agree that the Vendetta is probably the most overpowered unit in the entire game, what besides it is so imba about guard?


----------



## HOBO (Dec 7, 2007)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> While I agree that the Vendetta is probably the most overpowered unit in the entire game, what besides it is so imba about guard?


Read his tag...Ranty ranter speaks volumes.


----------



## Durandal (Sep 18, 2011)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> Fixed that for you!
> 
> Nids played "right", i.e. these days "to win", is per the Cruddace way a completely wrong army line up from the way Nids are supposed to work.


Whats, in your opinion, the winning nid lists? And how do they differ from how nids 'should' work. I kind of thought nids were this hyperintelligent collective of bugs, so like, they would evolve and adapt and do whatever it takes to survive. So if say, they end up fighting marines with lots of tanks, Aldaris might go all 'SPAWN MORE HIVE GUARDS'



> He designed a million new units and made sure they, or formerly bad units from the previous codex, were the competitive ways to play, thus making all existing armies wank.


This is true



> Plus, Guard is the most OP army. There is no excuse for his erratic experimentation.


Oh man, really, people still whine about guard? I thought the bad kids all hated grey knights now, I must be behind the times.



aaargh said:


> While I agree that the Vendetta is probably the most overpowered unit in the entire game, what besides it is so imba about guard?


Uh, vendetta isnt overpower, and has been pretty tame since the faq requiring you to move over 6" when you move onto the table. Something about this giant av12 tank in the sky screams 'SHOOT ME, SHOOT ME'.

So then, you shoot it with like, 1 cyclone launcher, and its not shooting you for a turn. Didnt everyone know this?


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> While I agree that the Vendetta is probably the most overpowered unit in the entire game, what besides it is so imba about guard?


Spammable cheap as nails meltagun veterans holed up inside the best dedicated transports in the game, which they can, in fact, shoot out of???? Have you EVER played against Guard???



Durandal said:


> Oh man, really, people still whine about guard? I thought the bad kids all hated grey knights now, I must be behind the times.?


The bad kids do, in fact, hate on GK now. I however, am not quick to forget though, and GK isn't half as bad as Guard. GK is a picnic to handle compared. "The bad kids" as you put them usually play against other "bad kids", which means the Guard players they used to be angry at have now switched to playing GK, thus muting the rage over Guard.

In a competitive environ like mine though, people tend to stick to their armies rather than follow the cheetos-smelling wave of codex hoppers.


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

Durandal said:


> Uh, vendetta isnt overpower, and has been pretty tame since the faq requiring you to move over 6" when you move onto the table. Something about this giant av12 tank in the sky screams 'SHOOT ME, SHOOT ME'.
> 
> So then, you shoot it with like, 1 cyclone launcher, and its not shooting you for a turn. Didnt everyone know this?


So because an already formidable unit, conveniently placed in the FA slot, suddenly can't shoot all of it's guns when arriving from reserve it's now bad? And here I was thinking that it's low, low price, heavy firepower, great accuracy and almost cheese speed (cough*scout*cough) and versatility made it good. Silly me. I completely forgot that only firing one weapon when arriving from reserve makes it total crappe. Excuse me, my mistake.

But I do agree with you, the Vendetta is rather harmless when you are toting autohitting, and autopenetrating (or glancing) cyclone launchers that ignores cover. But then again, so is everything else. Tell me, in what codex can I field that?




MetalHandkerchief said:


> Spammable cheap as nails meltagun veterans holed up inside the best dedicated transports in the game, which they can, in fact, shoot out of???? Have you EVER played against Guard???


Quite a bit, yes. And I have won my fair share of games against them. Although my DE always find it to be a taxing matchup it's not all that hard. Pop the transports and those veterans are mostly useless. The only thing I really can't stand is the Vendetta (seriously, compare it the Ravager. WTF?). The rest of the army seems fairly 5th dex powered. Hell, I have even beat them with my chaos marines. And when I don't, I know it's because I played the bad codex, not because IG are imba.


----------



## Durandal (Sep 18, 2011)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> So because an already formidable unit, conveniently placed in the FA slot, suddenly can't shoot all of it's guns when arriving from reserve it's now bad? And here I was thinking that it's low, low price, heavy firepower, great accuracy and almost cheese speed (cough*scout*cough) and versatility made it good. Silly me. I completely forgot that only firing one weapon when arriving from reserve makes it total crappe. Excuse me, my mistake.
> 
> But I do agree with you, the Vendetta is rather harmless when you are toting autohitting, and autopenetrating (or glancing) cyclone launchers that ignores cover. But then again, so is everything else. Tell me, in what codex can I field that?


Im going to assume that English is not your first language, and so you simply didnt understand what I said. Which is ok, learning a 2nd language is difficult. The alternative of course, to you having missed nuances of a foreign language, is that youre just retarded. 

Where, did I say the vendetta was 'bad', 'crappe', or 'harmless'. I said it was pretty tame, like, anyone with a good army should be able to do serious damage to 3 of them in a single turn of shooting. This was known like 2 years ago, why dont you understand it yet?


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

Durandal said:


> Im going to assume that English is not your first language, and so you simply didnt understand what I said. Which is ok, learning a 2nd language is difficult. The alternative of course, to you having missed nuances of a foreign language, is that youre just retarded.
> 
> Where, did I say the vendetta was 'bad', 'crappe', or 'harmless'. I said it was pretty tame, like, anyone with a good army should be able to do serious damage to 3 of them in a single turn of shooting. This was known like 2 years ago, why dont you understand it yet?


Why bother sounding your opinion in a discussion when you consider it a fact? FYI calling people retarded for disagreeing with you is not considered debate.

Seriously, I'm not doing this. If you want to engage in childish berating and namecalling, please go somewhere else.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> So because an already formidable unit, conveniently placed in the FA slot, suddenly can't shoot all of it's guns when arriving from reserve it's now bad? And here I was thinking that it's low, low price, heavy firepower, great accuracy and almost cheese speed (cough*scout*cough) and versatility made it good. Silly me. I completely forgot that only firing one weapon when arriving from reserve makes it total crappe. Excuse me, my mistake.


I think what he's saying is that since the Vendetta can't fire at full effect the turn it comes onto the table it gives you a chance to do something about it before it gets to start really tearing into your army with its guns. I don't see where he said it was a bad unit, just that it isn't an unstoppable flying death machine.



> But I do agree with you, the Vendetta is rather harmless when you are toting autohitting, and autopenetrating (or glancing) cyclone launchers that ignores cover. But then again, so is everything else. Tell me, in what codex can I field that?


Statistically speaking, how hard is it to get a single glancing hit on an AV12 model that can't use terrain as cover? Not too hard, which makes the Vendetta a lot less dangerous than it would otherwise be.


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Katie Drake said:


> single glancing hit on an AV12 model that can't use terrain as cover? Not too hard, which makes the Vendetta a lot less dangerous than it would otherwise be.


About 33% roughly for a Marine toting a Missile Launcher. So about 7% Chance to Explodify it. If you had 4 Marines all with Missile Launchers and it had moved Flat Out for the cover save makes it about 24%, if you went slower and had no cover save about 28%


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

Katie Drake said:


> I think what he's saying is that since the Vendetta can't fire at full effect the turn it comes onto the table it gives you a chance to do something about it before it gets to start really tearing into your army with its guns. I don't see where he said it was a bad unit, just that it isn't an unstoppable flying death machine.
> 
> Statistically speaking, how hard is it to get a single glancing hit on an AV12 model that can't use terrain as cover? Not too hard, which makes the Vendetta a lot less dangerous than it would otherwise be.


Never said it was "unstoppable", "indestructible", or "a one man army". I merely pointed out that it's an inexpensive and highly efficient unit and that I consider it the most "imba" unit in the game.

I don't think the Vendetta single-handedly wins games. But I can't think of any other vehicle which, point for point, brings so much to the table for so little.
So when I say I think it's "imba", I don't mean "End of the World" broken, I merely mean "better than anything else of it's type that I can think of".
Makes sense?


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

And if it goes Flat Out, it might get into Melta range, making its death almost assured.

I, however, would like to rein in all this Kelly-love.

Don't get me wrong, I like his work OVERALL.

However, the current Eldar book is largely copy/pasted from the previous, which was largely copy/pasted from the original 2e book, iirc Rick Priestley's work. So, credit where it is due, not fucking something up much further =/= great writing.

As for Space Wolf fluff...shoot me now. Wolves turning against the Allfather, and joining Super-Pirate? Nonsense.

Also, have you ever stopped to consider their recruitment methods vs attrition rate? Not only should they be a Legion that struggled to found a Successor Chapter, but there is no legitimate way they could still exist at all.


----------



## Durandal (Sep 18, 2011)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> Never said it was "unstoppable", "indestructible", or "a one man army". I merely pointed out that it's an inexpensive and highly efficient unit and that I consider it the most "imba" unit in the game.
> 
> I don't think the Vendetta single-handedly wins games. But I can't think of any other vehicle which, point for point, brings so much to the table for so little.
> So when I say I think it's "imba", I don't mean "End of the World" broken, I merely mean "better than anything else of it's type that I can think of".
> Makes sense?


ig book-manticore, hydra

grey knights-psyfleman dread

blood angels-autolas predator

etc etc etc


----------



## AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH (Apr 17, 2009)

Those units don't even come near the Vendettas versatility, but they are certainly "up there" as examples of really powerful units.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> Never said it was "unstoppable", "indestructible", or "a one man army". I merely pointed out that it's an inexpensive and highly efficient unit and that I consider it the most "imba" unit in the game.


Yeah, I worded that poorly. I guess I more meant to say that it's not such a hyper efficient unit that it's actually too good for its points due to its fragility in my opinion at least.


----------



## SavageConvoy (Sep 21, 2011)

I think an easier way to look at it would be "if the Vendetta was offered in the FA choice for your codex; would you take it? would the people you play against take it?"


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

SavageConvoy said:


> I think an easier way to look at it would be "if the Vendetta was offered in the FA choice for your codex; would you take it? would the people you play against take it?"


I don't think that's a good way to judge a unit at all.

Assault Marines are kinda bad, for vanilla Marines at least. I would imagine that Tau would love to have them however. Does that make Assault Marines a good unit? No.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

TheKingElessar said:


> As for Space Wolf fluff...shoot me now. Wolves turning against the Allfather, and joining Super-Pirate? Nonsense.


Preceded in Gav Thorpe and Alessio Cavatore's butchery of a Chaos book, where 90% of the book is about a shit character that no one gives a fuck about. Don't blame Kelly for the _Wolf of Fenris_ shite.


----------



## Durandal (Sep 18, 2011)

AAAAAAAAARRRGGHH said:


> Those units don't even come near the Vendettas versatility, but they are certainly "up there" as examples of really powerful units.


Pair of hydras with heavy bolters are harder to kill than 1 vendetta, not only because there are 2 of them, but they can almost always get cover. They shoot farther, pump out more shots, etc. Manticore you can hide and do some serious damage with. The vendetta is very killy, its also extremely vulnerable. I cant remember the last time I saw vendettas shoot beyond turn 1. Im really not understanding your vendetta hate. Maybe, maybe if you always go 2nd against 3 vendettas and dont bring any kind of tough anti tank weaponry sure, but thats your fault.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

mcmuffin said:


> Preceded in Gav Thorpe and Alessio Cavatore's butchery of a Chaos book, where 90% of the book is about a shit character that no one gives a fuck about. Don't blame Kelly for the _Wolf of Fenris_ shite.


He could have retconned it.

But I don't blame him, in the sense that I'm trying to make out he's awful at fluff - just that they're equally good/bad.

Anyway, GW will trample all over their own canon all they want, they don't give a fuck, and why should they?

Oh - and Huron was cool in 2e.


----------



## Kreuger (Aug 30, 2010)

The Dog Boy said:


> . . . As for fluff, it's meaningless. It has no effect on the game, the armies, or the rules. As such whether it is awesome or crappy makes no difference. No one at GW cares if the canon is screwed or abandoned, they just want it to be uber-awesome for all the new players that year, not protect your favorite blahdi-blah character/Chapter/Hive Fleet/Traitor/Craftworld/Race from getting bloopity-blooped. They wont ever let "canon" get in the way of a new release because it's not OUR canon, it's theirs and they can do whatever they want with it.


I beg to differ. GW have certainly made questionable decisions over the years, often sacrificing 'coolness' for some sort of wider appeal or sale-ability, but that doesn't mean that don't care.

I would in fact counter that Games Workshop is fairly fluff obsessed. I don't mean the canon is sacrosanct, but it is integral to the brand, and the brand boys and girls GW takes very seriously. I do agree they wouldn't hesitate to make changes if it makes sense for their product line, even if it might seem questionable in the context of the world.

All of that business about IP infringement, after market parts, and used/secondary market (which Finecast - other than saving money on pewter, is largely designed to kill) - all of that, GW is concerned about because it effects their sales, the brand, and their bottom line.

So . . . how do Ward and Cruddace compare to the travesty that Nigel Stillman wrote in the original Bretonnian book?

Cheers,
Kreuger


----------



## experiment 626 (Apr 26, 2007)

TheKingElessar said:


> And if it goes Flat Out, it might get into Melta range, making its death almost assured.
> 
> I, however, would like to rein in all this Kelly-love.
> 
> ...


Don't be so quick to blame Kelly for being lazy with the Eldar codex... For starters, his original draft had alot more to it from the bits of info I gleened from him during one of the last games days held over here. He'd finished writing the book and then went on a 3 month sabatical. (including seeing one of my fav bands in concert and rubbing it in my face as only friends will do when knowing full well that I myself can't ever attend any kind of concert - git!:friends

While he was away was when Jervis decided to impliment his moronic _"let's simplify the crap out of everything and play a gentlemanly game of blandhammer instead of this complicated tripe poor Little Timmy won't understand"_ design philosophy.
When Phil got back, his original document has been utterly gutted and made into the first of the short-lived design model that also destroyed Chaos Marines & Dark Angels.

He did get some stuff put back around, but I could tell he wasn't overly thrilled about how things were going at the time.
In the end, it doesn't really matter what Kelly, Ward or Cruddance want as the end product, but rather what Jervis & the bean counters decide would be 'better'. I'm sure for example if Ward *really* wanted too, he could easily have turned his beloved Ultrasmurfs into another '7th ed Daemons' book, but he didn't. Probably because Jervis would have just changed things up if Ward had, if only to avoid another near-riot by the gaming community.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

I have always wondered if a deeper understanding of the process would allay the hate. 

If gw actually detailed the entire process from start to end of writing an army book or a codex. They wouldn't need to detail the specifics of what they were working on but a good coverage of who did what and in order would probably clear up some of this misplaced hate mongering.


----------



## The Dog Boy (Oct 6, 2011)

*Perhaps overstated*



Kreuger said:


> I beg to differ. GW have certainly made questionable decisions over the years, often sacrificing 'coolness' for some sort of wider appeal or sale-ability, but that doesn't mean that don't care.


Well said. Perhaps I went a little too far. Naturally they do have a concern to protect the brand. I was perhaps too frustrated by the circular arguments whenever a thread like this gets started, as if no one has ever heard or made all of these same arguments a million times before, or that anyone at GW gives a flying rat-f**k what any of us thinks. Anyway, directly to your point is that GW's business model is aimed directly at 12-14 year old males. I say this not lightly but quote directly from the sales staff at US GW HQ. As such, like a cyclist on a high wire, it must keep moving forward to work. That is to say that the business model depends on its new customers more than it's existing ones. Although existing customers spend more per person, most players drop the hobby after two years and they are dwarfed by the numbers and the money spent by new players. Even if most of them eventually drop it, that's where the revenue stream is and that is where the fluff is targeted. All GW needs to do to make money is increase the number of new players per year because they need the BRB ($90), the army book ($30) and an army ($100-$300). Older players that continue to play and buy are important, but not critical like new players because new players outnumber older ones by a significant margin and the number of older players is consistently shrinking.

Alright, now for my point: Although no one at GW wants to destroy the brand by messing with the fluff too much, ultimately the primary revenue source (new players) don't know anything about the Horus Heresy other than what's in the current book. GW writers are thus less constrained about continuity to satisfy older players. If older players are pissed and drop the hobby altogether because they don't like a book or an author than there is no concern because the business model doesn't require their continued loyalty. It requires new players freshly awed by the GW universe and pretty models to lay down the initial funds to get started.


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

Serpion5 said:


> I have always wondered if a deeper understanding of the process would allay the hate.
> 
> If gw actually detailed the entire process from start to end of writing an army book or a codex. They wouldn't need to detail the specifics of what they were working on but a good coverage of who did what and in order would probably clear up some of this misplaced hate mongering.


No, cause Haters are gonna hate anyway. Because it's not a matter of who writes "better" fluff, but who's fluff matches up best with the specific player's perceived notion on how the fluff should go.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Wusword77 said:


> No, cause Haters are gonna hate anyway. Because it's not a matter of who writes "better" fluff, but who's fluff matches up best with the specific player's perceived notion on how the fluff should go.


It's not the specific player's notion that you need to worry about... it's the internet hivemind that's the problem.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

experiment 626 said:


> SNIIP


Oh, I readily believe that - but it's less that aggravates me than the points costs. If you compare them across all three books, I think only 12 units have changed more than like 20 points since 2e. I did count it up exactly, but have forgotten. In that time, Marine have halved their price, Rhinos massively changed etc. Just annoying.

Overall, I wouldn't have anyone but Phil write the next Eldar book.

...Except ME, of course!


----------



## normtheunsavoury (Mar 20, 2008)

Wusword77 said:


> No, cause Haters are gonna hate anyway.


I'm really starting to dislike this term, its just as annoying as the 'Matt Ward is Derp!' hate that goes around. Some people have a genuine dislike for certain things, personally I dislike the Draigo fluff intensely, to me it makes no sense and is a prime example of some of the less well thought out stuff Ward has put in dex's. On the other hand, Mr Ward does seem to write OK rules so he doesn't completely suck and clearly has his place at GW doing what he does.

But that's just my opinion, I'm entitled to it just as you are entitled to disagree but instantly accusing people of bandwagon jumping is a little short sighted. Of course, this being 'teh interwebz' there will be a degree of bandwagon jumping going on, its just the way things are but just hitting back with 'haters gonna hate' is just as narrow minded and unimaginative.


----------



## experiment 626 (Apr 26, 2007)

normtheunsavoury said:


> I'm really starting to dislike this term, its just as annoying as the 'Matt Ward is Derp!' hate that goes around. Some people have a genuine dislike for certain things, personally I dislike the Draigo fluff intensely, to me it makes no sense and is a prime example of some of the less well thought out stuff Ward has put in dex's. On the other hand, Mr Ward does seem to write OK rules so he doesn't completely suck and clearly has his place at GW doing what he does.
> 
> But that's just my opinion, I'm entitled to it just as you are entitled to disagree but instantly accusing people of bandwagon jumping is a little short sighted. Of course, this being 'teh interwebz' there will be a degree of bandwagon jumping going on, its just the way things are but just hitting back with 'haters gonna hate' is just as narrow minded and unimaginative.


Ward's rules are amazingly well balanced internally within that specific book.

But the external balance of his books is shockingly awful and all over the place... Codex marines is brilliant and right up there with dark eldar. GK's is horrendous, 7th ed Daemons only ruined fantasy in it's entirety!

We at least tend to know pretty much what we're getting with the other two. Kelly's books are competitive with some likely OTT builds possible. Cruddance is all over the place with his internal balance, but his books are typically 'balanced' and very fun to play outside of super-competitive play.


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

normtheunsavoury said:


> I'm really starting to dislike this term, its just as annoying as the 'Matt Ward is Derp!' hate that goes around. Some people have a genuine dislike for certain things, personally I dislike the Draigo fluff intensely, to me it makes no sense and is a prime example of some of the less well thought out stuff Ward has put in dex's. On the other hand, Mr Ward does seem to write OK rules so he doesn't completely suck and clearly has his place at GW doing what he does.
> 
> But that's just my opinion, I'm entitled to it just as you are entitled to disagree but instantly accusing people of bandwagon jumping is a little short sighted. Of course, this being 'teh interwebz' there will be a degree of bandwagon jumping going on, its just the way things are but just hitting back with 'haters gonna hate' is just as narrow minded and unimaginative.


The term is unimaginative but then so are the people who hate on things just because Ward wrote them. I have no problem if people dislike aspects of a codex, but to write off an entire codex while using /tg/ logic is bandwagon jumping and stupid.



experiment 626 said:


> But the external balance of his books is shockingly awful and all over the place... Codex marines is brilliant and right up there with dark eldar. GK's is horrendous, 7th ed Daemons only ruined fantasy in it's entirety!
> 
> We at least tend to know pretty much what we're getting with the other two. Kelly's books are competitive with some likely OTT builds possible. Cruddance is all over the place with his internal balance, but his books are typically 'balanced' and very fun to play outside of super-competitive play.


GK is no more powerful then SW or IG. No one at my club play Deamons so I can't speak to how good they are. Ward has written 4 books this edition (SM, BA, GK, Cron) SM, BA, and Cron are all considered balanced with only GK being considered "high tier."

Kelly gave us DE sure, but he also gave us SW which people consider one of the 3 strongest books (SW, IG, GK). Cruddance gave us Nids, considered the worst codex in 5th, and IG, which plenty of people still complain is OP.

Man, this whole thread is gonna make me out to be some kind of Ward fan boy.


----------



## experiment 626 (Apr 26, 2007)

BA's are just as solid and competitve as SW/IG/GK.
All those fast vehicles + army-wide FnP and the ability to take min/maxed melta squads in even cheaper razorbacks puts them in that top bracket.

When you look at what is generally considered the power scale by many, you get;
SW/BA/GK/IG/DE = top contenders with all of them recieving cries of being OP.

Orks, Eldar, Codex Marines, Templars, Deathwing, Duel Lash/oblit Chaos Marines, Fatecrusher/fiend & Necrons = middle ground, with the 'crons being at the higher end of the group and fate'whatever' towards the bottom.

'Nids, Tau, Sisters, non-death/ravenwing DA, non-Fatecrusher/fiend daemons, non-optimised Chaos Marines = bottom feeders.


That gives both Kelly & Ward 2 top contending books each, and Cruddace 1. The main differences being that each has 1 book with fairly specific builds with only a bare minimum of unit variance, while Kelly & Ward both have a book that's far more flexible with multiple competitive builds.
Grey Knights however tend to be the far more obnoxious book that leaves a bitter taste in your mouth as it's such a massively rock/paper/scissors imbalance.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

I would say the brackets are more like:

BA/IG/SW/GK/DE/SM
Deathwing/BTs/Necrons
Tau/non-Deathwing DA/Plague Marines/Fiend-based Daemons/Nids
Eldar
Orks/Sisters


----------



## MetalHandkerchief (Aug 3, 2009)

TheKingElessar said:


> I would say the brackets are more like:
> 
> BA/IG/SW/GK/DE/SM
> Deathwing/BTs/Necrons
> ...


BS.

DE does not belong in the top flight, in fact they're as middle-of-the-tree you can get, and NO WAY is Eldar worse off than Tau! HAHAHAHA!


SW/ GK/ IG <--- Extremely overpowered
BA <--- Almost top flight but not quite
SM, Necrons, DE <--- Not ubiquitous at all, but powerful in the right hands
Eldar, Tau, Orks <--- Inferior but has a mono-build that is quasi-competitive
Chaos, Daemons, Sisters <--- generally "crap"
Tyranids <--- Completely worthless

That is the factual power ladder.


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

The very fact that you think anything is 'overpowered' makes your post obviously opinion.

As both an Eldar and a Tau player, let me assure you, Eldar are worse.


----------



## Durandal (Sep 18, 2011)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> BS.
> 
> DE does not belong in the top flight, in fact they're as middle-of-the-tree you can get, and NO WAY is Eldar worse off than Tau! HAHAHAHA!
> 
> ...





MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.





MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.





MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.





MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.





MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.





MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.





MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.





MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.


I FEEL THE WARP OVERTAKING ME, IT IS A GOOD PAIN


----------



## Wusword77 (Aug 11, 2008)

TheKingElessar said:


> The very fact that you think anything is 'overpowered' makes your post obviously opinion.
> 
> As both an Eldar and a Tau player, let me assure you, Eldar are worse.


I would have though him putting Nids below everything would have made the post obviously opinion.

or maybe this gem 



MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.


----------



## Katie Drake (Nov 28, 2007)

Wusword77 said:


> I would have though him putting Nids below everything would have made the post obviously opinion.
> 
> or maybe this gem


Then there's the part where that particular group plays a 4th and 5th edition hybrid where Victory Points are used instead of Kill Points and all infantry can score instead of Troops choices.

Changes like that tend to change the balance of power just a bit which can lead to some interesting ideas of relative power level.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> BS.
> 
> DE does not belong in the top flight, in fact they're as middle-of-the-tree you can get, and NO WAY is Eldar worse off than Tau! HAHAHAHA!
> 
> ...


Could you elaborate on this? I'm pretty sure you are wrong but it would be nice to at least know why you think this. 

So what is your source for coming to this conclusion?


----------



## TheKingElessar (Mar 31, 2009)

I didn't know that Katie... If that were the case for me, I would not feel qualified to comment on the game everyone else played.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Ah yes. Missed that post. Thanks for letting me know. 

Maybe if he played with the actual rules he would have a better idea of actual power levels? And how fuzzy they actually are?


----------



## elmir (Apr 14, 2011)

MetalHandkerchief said:


> That is the factual power ladder.


You should work for the Vatican.

I heard they are still looking for a guy who can just generate factual evidence out of thin air without the need to base it on something specific... :laugh:


----------



## Samules (Oct 13, 2010)

Actual power levels:

Experienced competitive players
Experienced Casual Players -about equal with- Competitive players
Good Casual Players
Average Casual Players
Poor players
Anyone using a S&G list
Little Johnny's paint caked marinez


----------



## Durandal (Sep 18, 2011)

Samules said:


> Actual power levels:
> 
> Experienced competitive players
> Experienced Casual Players -about equal with- Competitive players
> ...


I disagree, real power levels are.....

Me
Experienced competitive players
Experienced Casual Players -about equal with- Competitive players
Good Casual Players
Average Casual Players
Poor players
Anyone using a S&G list
Little Johnny's paint caked marinez
20 year veteran grognard
katie's flesh tearers


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

Durandal said:


> I disagree, real power levels are.....
> 
> Me
> Experienced competitive players
> ...


I fixed it for you!


----------



## experiment 626 (Apr 26, 2007)

Samules said:


> Actual power levels:
> 
> Experienced competitive players
> Experienced Casual Players -about equal with- Competitive players
> ...


Well, not to rain on your parade or anything, but the *REAL* honest-to-god power levels in this game are;

Amazing Dice Rolls
Above Average Dice Rolls
Average Dice Rolls
Below Average Dice Rolls
'The Dice Gods have forsaken me!' Dice Rolls. <---- insert my name here:blush:


----------

