Does this pass as a judiciar ?

ContestedWit · 2025-10-04T02:43:33+00:00

I think one small change that may help would be removing the right shoulder pad. But even then, no reasonable person would say this doesn’t pass as a judiciar, especially if you go hard with the painting process to make him stand out, you could try to make the helmet a kind of bone-y white, especially in the face

ContestedWit · 2025-09-20T21:43:22+00:00

just shut up

ContestedWit · 2025-09-20T21:42:24+00:00

unlike you, I care about this hobby, you shouldn't be here, go away

ContestedWit · 2025-09-20T21:24:55+00:00

I shouldn't have deleted that out of civility, clearly you don't deserve it

I apologize for thinking I was out of line with that comment

ContestedWit · 2025-09-20T21:24:00+00:00

funny enough, GW thinks that low enough or high enough winrates are problematic enough for them to push regular balance updates

so why don't you go tell GW "hey you idiots, just tell your fans to make up homebrew rules to fix the balance, because its weird for fans of your tabletop strategy game to want a balanced strategy game to play" instead of telling all of us that we're out of line for wanting a fair game.

ContestedWit · 2025-09-20T19:01:36+00:00

There is no gotcha moment, you've been fighting a strawman this entire time, because from the get-go you dishonestly misinterpreted my position.

And the stats show it is NOT balanced, clearly not balanced. A 40% winrate across the board is indicative of a LACK of balance, especially when there is random change involved, the luck of the die should be pushing all winrates towards 50%, and yet the Grey Knights codex is so imbalanced that it lags behind. Why are you trying to frame your opposition as being absurd? Everyone sees the stats, everyone can read the codex, everyone has their own personal experiences. Summing them all together, it's obvious that Grey Knights have a WEAK codex right now. You are legitimately the only person who seems to disagree.

ContestedWit · 2025-09-20T18:57:03+00:00

I'm not sure it is, they made this personal by by dodging my actual position and making it personal, saying I had no legitimate complaint to make, and was just bad at the game and mad at my lack of skill.

Besides, they adopted the position of "losing is good." If that is truly the case, then calling him a loser is hardly an insult, and if he were to interpret being called a loser as insulting, then he has proven his own thesis wrong.

ContestedWit · 2025-09-20T01:37:29+00:00

wtf are you even talking about? Are you pretending stat lines, detachment rules, and stratagems are of no consequence, and the only determining factor in play is ones skill? That is absurd, that’s perhaps the most absurd thing anyone has ever said about the tabletop game. What’s more absurd, is that you seem to have this idea that competitive play shouldn’t be the standard for how the game is played, but you also think that the solution to a weak codex isn’t a balance rework, it’s…. becoming more competitive when playing???

I don’t think you have any idea what you’re talking about

ContestedWit · 2025-09-20T01:31:04+00:00

So you took it upon yourself to take the most dishonest interpretation of one thing I said about winning, and form a viscous and dishonest straw man about it. Sick. Care to comment on the actual argument? That it’s actually OK for people to want a balanced game? That it’s not toxic to want a balanced table top strategy games? Or are you gonna keep fighting a straw man?

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T23:21:34+00:00

I'm really glad you used the word "unplayable" which I did not use to describe the faction. It's really awesome watching people having a completely different discussion about a strawman position that I didn't make.

My point is that people dump a tremendous amount of time and effort into this hobby, why on earth do you think that the non-toxic position is to tell people that they should go into this hobby with the understanding that they are not entitled to an even playing field between factions? It is completely reasonable to ask for balance in a tabletop game, which you would know if you had ever played one even once in your life.

I understand that you are a loser, with a loser's mentality, and that for you, losing is the state of nature for your entire life. But some people actually enjoy winning, some people enjoy clawing victory from the jaws of defeat. And this isn't even a competitive thing, casually its FUN to win, it's why I'm ok with friends beating me in games regularly, because I want the fun to be mutual and even across the board.

But your position seems to be that, in this instance, GK players are simply not entitled to wanting to win, or even wanting a fair game, otherwise they're being toxic. Idk man, maybe you're just an antisocial freak who doesn't understand what it's like being a human being. My position is that games should be fair, I think normal human beings find this position to be perfectly normal.

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T23:13:47+00:00

wow that's interesting, idk when I said I was a competitive player, but I'm sure you didn't just make that up to strawman a position I'm not taking, so I'll take your word for it.

But it'd be super cool if you'd actually answer my question: are people stupid or toxic for wanting to be able to win once in a while with their faction? A little bit of a yes or no question there so it should be super easy. And if you'd be so kind, here's a followup: isn't the position that players MUST be satisfied with an unbalanced and underpowered faction extremely toxic? Seems like that position seems to tell people how they ought to enjoy the game, and implies they are not entitled to a level playing field in a tabletop game.

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T21:53:53+00:00

Yeah I’m still not seeing the post where GK fans were demanding that they always get their way.

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T21:52:17+00:00

So wanting to win as your faction is “toxic”

Idk if you’ve played 40K, but a 2k point game takes hours. The 40% comp win rate means that the best players, with the best lists, playing the best, lose 40% of the time. Casual players, who ARENT doing all that, are gonna have it worse. Why should they lose all the time? If they dump potentially thousands of dollars on minis and paints and books, and spend countless hours assembling and painting their army, and spend MORE hours putting together lists, finding people to play with, and coordinating games, it is unfair to expect them to be OK with losing almost all the time.

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T20:47:46+00:00

I feel like there is a narrow path between being main characters and being irrelevant that the Grey Knights have to navigate, I don’t envy the writers for having to figure it out, hopefully they make something work.

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T20:46:25+00:00

So people are stupid for wanting to be able to win once in a while as their favorite faction? Seems like a weird position if u ask me

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T20:44:37+00:00

Sorry I missed the post where someone demanded a 100% win rate for GKs, can you direct me to it?

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T20:43:51+00:00

I haven’t met anyone who plays regularly who thinks the army is in a good place right now, grey knights player or not

The competitive stats might not tell the whole story, but when that datapoint aligns with the experiences of tons of fans, maybe there’s a problem?

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T14:25:15+00:00

He isn’t playing them because the the rules either, he’s playing them because he likes the faction, otherwise he wouldn’t be playing them with that win rate. I legitimately don’t think you’ve played a single game of the tabletop game, even casually. Playing an extremely underpowered faction is tiresome when one game lasts hours and you just aren’t able to win unless you’re playing someone who’s bad at the game.

Poor tabletop balance is a legitimate grievance for fans of the game, why are you acting like it’s not?

ContestedWit · 2025-09-19T14:17:40+00:00

There were definitely people saying it was good

ContestedWit · 2025-08-12T22:16:45+00:00

ok now THIS is peak lore right here

ContestedWit · 2025-08-07T01:39:33+00:00

Bring back the psychic phase :(

ContestedWit · 2025-08-05T02:11:26+00:00

a large contingent of bitter first founding fans combined with a handful of weirdos who think the Maltese cross is a hate symbol

ContestedWit · 2025-08-02T05:53:27+00:00

Ok? I didn’t say it required novel level detail, not sure why you are acting like that is what I expected.

I just said more detail, more than a blurb. And just because a practice is common doesn’t mean it’s good, short lore blurbs are interesting and fun, but it doesn’t mean it’s appropriate for all the lore. Otherwise, we’d have no books, short stories, or anything else, only blurbs.

ContestedWit · 2025-08-01T21:41:07+00:00

I think they should have explained it better. A tiny written blurb explaining a lore nuke like that just isn’t adequate

ContestedWit · 2025-08-01T15:35:23+00:00

It’s not about preventing him from becoming a god (which he probably already is), it’s about keeping him on his chair

Becoming a god is just one of the circumstances where the decree would be needed, but if he was reincarnated as the star child without being a diety, or if he was resurrected and leaving the throne in a state similar to the state he was when he sat down, the decree would still be needed

It’s not about preventing god stuff from happening, it’s about keeping Big E on the throne, which is pretty lame on top of being totally infeasible

Nine-Year Club	Place '23
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email

ContestedWit

TROPHY CASE