Over at Blood of Kittens, author TastyTaste is now claiming the 6th edition leaked rule set is a fake! This news has a lot of people questioning the new claim by BoK because GW has supposedly gone ballistic and is sending legal letters to sites telling them to take them down. GW has also told their stores that the leak is not real. The reaction from GW has a lot of people believing these are in fact early play test rules. And certain people are questioning BoK's motives in claiming it is a fake.
So are they real? Most people simply say this is too elaborate to be a hoax. Who would put in that much effort just to pull the wool over people's eyes? I tend to agree with this.
And some good support for this not being a hoax was written by Jeff Stuckey, "Stucarius" in the comment section where he states:
“The work that has gone into this set of rules is legion. There are not that many designers in this community who could do it and I cannot imagine anyone who would and then not take credit.”
To be honest there is absolutely no evidence I have seen so far that points to this not being a leaked copy or a near final draft of the rules. Very much the opposite actually. All the circumstantial and logical evidence, not to mention history (see the leak of 5th ed) point to this being the rules.
This is pretty interesting. Other comments say pretty much the same thing. Most importantly, the over whelming approval for the rule set tells one that it is real. Dakka Dakka has a poll up and the approval of the leak rules is overwhelming. Players like these rules, maybe because they are a bit more complicated and sophisticated.
Personally, I am leaning towards these being real, while at the same time hoping not, since I really like 5th edition and don't see a need for a new edition. But one way or another 6th edition is coming out this summer according to all sources and the only question is how close these leaked rules are.
Personally, I am leaning towards these being real, while at the same time hoping not, since I really like 5th edition and don't see a need for a new edition. But one way or another 6th edition is coming out this summer according to all sources and the only question is how close these leaked rules are.
Alec
5 comments:
This argument would be more appealing if it where not based on logical falacies almost exclusivly. I see wishfully thinking, bandwagon, post hoc, and pro hoc just to name a few.
Which argument? And English this time.
It has GW's proprietary header font. That's good enough for me.
The Dakka Poll and mentioning of other comments is a bandwagon appeal.
"There are not that many designers in this community who could do it and I cannot imagine anyone who would and then not take credit.”
This is forcing a dilemma. Either it's real or by someone who is intentionally not taking credit. It denies other possibilities.
The argument about GW using legal force to take down the rules violates several causal fallacies. There is a spurious relationship between the events. The rules where a leak and therefore GW is forcing them down. It can easily be that the document violates GW IP therefore GW is forcing them down.
There are few others. I'm not arguing the evidence, I'm arguing against the arguments. I think the evidence is circumstantial both for and against. I like to take a skeptical position in those circumstances.
CaulynDarr,
I've worked in video games. I've programmed computers. I know how much effort goes into good design. From my experience I can see how much work went into this thing. Based on that I don't see how a faker would benefit from this much work. Real fakers do the minimum needed for the desired effect.
The header font can be bought (it's Caslon Antique), the dates can be faked, etc. But the work is there for all to see.
Post a Comment