Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Liking Or Disliking 6th: It Doesn't Mean Much

by SandWyrm


There's been some angry backlashes from the competitive community lately regarding the 'Leaked' 6th Edition PDF. Mostly based on disliking the changes in it. But liking or disliking the 'leaked' PDF does not mean anything when talking about it's validity.

The cohesiveness and balance (or not) of the rules can weight opinion in it's favor or damn it. But that doesn't mean that even perfectly written rules will be 'fun' for a given group of players. Candyland, for instance, is balanced (everybody randomly sucks the same). But it's not fun for anyone who wants to try and improve their game.

A lot of the angry/dissenting opinions that have been voiced by the competitive community concerning this 'Leak' seem to be focused on the more radical changes in the PDF to things like the turn structure. But GW has shown it's willingness to to radically change core game mechanics before. Witness 8th Edition Fantasy. While I and many others would call 8th a huge mistake, we have no way of knowing GW's internal thoughts on it's success. So all we can do is guess as to whether they were encouraged by the experience or took it as a dire warning not to mess with something that works.

But... Does 5th Edition 40K still work? That can be argued too. From GW's standpoint, that will depend on how the rules and models are selling compared to a few years ago. They've got long term goals and plans for the system. Which may or may not include competitive balance of the sort we got used to in 5th under Alessio. GW has shown again and again that it cares little for the competitive community, which makes up only a small percentage of their sales. Remember that most 40K and Fantasy players never leave the basement for the store. 

Now look at Jervis' Throne of Skull tournament. See how convoluted it was? The guy that set that up is now in charge. Alessio and Priestly are gone. The design studio is only 3 guys plus Jervis writing rules now. That means the character of the organization has changed. So who knows what Jervis/GW have in mind. It's not as if Tom Kirby is likely to have a game design opinion past pushing model sales. Merge Apocalypse and 40K? SURE!

So I guess what I'm saying is... let go of your assumptions and your hopes. Assume whatever build you're playing now is going to have to change at least as much as the change from 4th to 5th Edition required. Accept that as fact. Then...


READ THE PDF!

Really. Read it through. Every bit of it. From the basic rules to the Stratagems and Apoca-crap. Then you'll be able to form coherent arguments about it. Either for or against it's validity. You can also decide if it's likely to be fun, which is a different thing entirely from whether it was faked.

Because if all you do is get 5 pages in and start ranting... Well, that's not productive, now is it? I'd like to hear some well reasoned and thoughtful arguments against the validity of this ruleset, but it seems like the only people who have fully read it are also coming down on the side of "Hmmnnn... not bad.".

13 comments:

  1. Not trying to be rude....really not.....I promise I'm not....

    BUT I DON'T CARE!!!!!!

    Until it comes out we will see. What it the point in arguing something that is still undetermined? Play the game the way it is now and change when it comes. This reminds me of a conversation I had with someone in a car sometime when we discussed being able to adapt our minds to different situations. Some people can change their thought process easily while some simply can't. Either way, both people will eventually get to the same point. They will just get their at different speeds. I think some people are really LOOKING for an argument.

    Respectfully,

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. THIS!

      I don't even care about official rumours at this stage, 5th edition is what is here and what everyone has to play with still so I don't even care if people want to speculate about 6th ed. Speculate all you want I'm still going to kick your arse in 5th ed as you try and predict how 6th ed is going to be and subtly alter your army composition for things that may or may not happen.

      The other point I'd like to make is that some people are tired of 5th ed or complain about it a lot, and sure, there's some validity there (hordes not working as well as they should, mech being dominant et al), it's the games system as it stands. Argue and whine all you want, it's what is here and what every store tends to play, so deal with it and get on with it so we can all have fun. :)

      Delete
  2. I've got to say I'm in the same boat as Spags.

    It's NOT REAL until it's REAL.

    Until it's real. I don't care. Much like I don't care about most fandexes.

    besides, I think some parties are using this to... STIR CONTROVERSY? *gasp* not in teh blogosperes!

    in the meantime, I think the leak is a lot of tilting at windmills. in both directions.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, I like to think I'm not tilting at anything. But when I see bad reasoning at work, then I feel like I should say something. I prefer that folks think instead of just reacting blindly or parroting others.

    Truth is, we won't know until we see the new edition drop if this PDF is real or not. There simply isn't much evidence either way. And even if the PDF is a real test document, it's not going to be the same as the final product anyhow. The best it can be is broadly similar.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm WAY more excited about FoW 3rd edition....
    Aren't you guys?
    :D

    ReplyDelete
  5. As is, the document is crap. Reading through all the typos and ambiguous rule explanations is a bit painful and occasionally leaves more questions than answers.

    Nonetheless, I think it is 'real' in the sense that GW 'leaked' it. Just like they did 6 months before 5th edition hit. That document was different in some ways, but GW wants the same thing now as then: to test the waters and see how the internet responds to some of the more radical changes. Perhaps based on response, they may keep (if positive) most of the rules with few changes, but if most responses are negative, don't expect the final product to be remotely like this 'leaked' version.

    Having said that, I don't think the 'leaked rules' is all crap....in fact, if they didn't make the game so much more lethal and tweaked some bits, I would be happy with them. But I feel the game will not be fun as it stands now (Evasion is stupid as is, but could be fine if tweaked, strategems are retardedly too good, thus no point in bidding, etc).

    So just like the 5th ed. 'leak' I am sure this will change when the final rules are released. I just hope its changed for the better. Trying to speed up the game by making players remove models by the handful, because everything is far more lethal, is a terrible design decision, and I just hope that doesn't remain.....

    ReplyDelete
  6. The document is claiming to be an early test version of rules from last year. Surely goofy weird rubbish is par for the course in any beta test?

    You can't really claim you know either way unless you've seen 6th ed docs. Stelek's in the no camp and he says he's got them.

    Of course, take that for what it's worth!


    It's fine to chip in with concrete positions I guess. I prefer to give odds. For me it's a straight 50/50 atm. The documents are rough in a lot of places and could have been faked but the number of little things that keep coming out that fix/explain weirdnesses in the more recent 5th ed codices really goes some way to make me believe in it.

    Frontline gaming recently did a playtest vid where they pointed out the Monolith gains a single structure point. People were complaining the new 'lith sucked but were puzzled by it having a "Heavy" unit class. This makes the unit REALLY tough and totally worth its points (default -3 on the damage table until someone rolls a natural 6? yes please!!)

    ReplyDelete
  7. As I said earlier...everyone is getting butthurt on teh intarwebz over something that could or couldn't be a game. Although I gotta agree with wyrmy here. If you are gonna get into a discussion on it.....keep it frickin civil.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @SinSynn

    Yep! I can't wait until I can go pick up my free mini-rulebook. I'm also waiting for my PSC PzIv's like a kid who can't wait for Christmas to come. :)

    ReplyDelete
  9. So, anyone else excited for the new edition of DnD?

    ReplyDelete
  10. There's a 6th ed. Necrons vs. Tyranids battle report on Youtube...seems the rules play pretty good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoszJvO-rkI

    ReplyDelete
  11. For all the faults, 5th edition is the current one, and I'll keep playing it till they pull it out from under me. and maybe after that as well.

    @TheNeverThere
    ya, I had heard something about a new edition of DnD. They seem to actually care that they have upset half of their player base. There are somethings I liked about 4ed, like skills and saves, but for the most part I've stuck to 3.5

    ReplyDelete

Recent Favorites

All-Time Favorites