Jan 12, 2012
I should have known better, but the heat of the moment got the best of me. Typically I get double verification for a rumor or leak, but this time I took a leap of faith and decide to take a risk and capture the moment and jump on the 6th pdf leak bandwagon. So I posted the leak on my site roughly the same time it was appearing on other forums and sites. I even begged the question, “too good to be true”, giving me cover if I was wrong. I wanted to believe, the PDF took some of the best ideas from other games and mashed them into 40k. The biggest clue I should have seen right off the bat.
I couldn’t shake the feeling that something wasn’t right. The changes were just so big, the mixing of the phases, evasion to name a few. Still though I just couldn’t image close to 200 pages of FAQs and rules being a hoax. A hoax that big just didn’t seem worth the hassle for its creators.
Either way it is time to make it official the 6th ed leak codex is a…
It took 48 hours of investigation, but now I can say that with almost 99% certainty that the leaked 6th ed pdf is a total fake.
Now this certainty doesn’t just come from my usual sources, it also comes from other people in the know and trusted confidants. So unless this is some ploy by GW to deflect the leak, I cannot see how it is anything, but a fake.
Good thing with rumors and leaks is no one dies and everyone has something to talk about. Who knows I might still give these fake rules a try they certainly look fun.
pathtyphon
TastyTaste
Frank Austin
fluger
Brent
Dethtron
newsun
AbusePuppy
nyhil
That Teri Girl
reecerobbins
badtaste
I agree they do look like fun…
Told you so.
Well, the “leaked” BA Codex had to have taken a lot of work too… in a lot of ways it was better than the actual Codex.
Ah, well.
Any details on the confirmation that this is a fake? With a vague explanation like that, I’m as uncertain as I was before the retraction.
I still find the rules interesting, fake or not. I’m actually a little disappointed that they are fake, because they certainly sounded like they would make 40k more fun (to me at least).
Look making a comment like this with out any supporting information is meaningless. If GW got to you and is twisting your arm to renounce the validity of the rules I get it man. You are in a really tough spot as the primary original source for most of the community I am sure posting the link to the download is not a comfortable place to be right now.
However, to think anyone with a brain who is looking at this with a clear head and taking note of GW’s response cannot figure out the truth here is a little insulting to those of us who know better.
We only need one piece of proof that these are real. That is GW’s reaction. If these were not the actual document in the actual language GW would not have grounds to do take downs. GW is spending a huge amount of money with their legal department sending instant takedown notices for this.
GW has NEVER responded like this and could not legally do so unless this is the document they are releasing. The IP violation is a copyright one not a trademark one.
Were this not GW’s soon to be released rules this would be just another fandex type project like the millions of others.
There will no doubt be some changes before printing but GW’s reaction alone establishes the validity of the rules.
I tell you what. Since “GW” seems to be denying this is 6th Ed. Here is what I am going to do because these are great rules and from what I see the vast majority of the 40K community LOVE them. I am going to strip all the GW references and any names they have Trademarks on and go to print with these rules next moth with my games publishing company.
All of the mechanics are old well established mechanics and nothing about how 40K plays is “protected” so there is no reason not to publish these outstanding rules. No one out there is laying claim to them “Unless you count GW’s reaction” ….wink….wink….So why should I not make some scratch off these excellent rules?
-STUCARIUS-
There’s a flaw in your logic here. GW would absolutely have grounds to take down fake “leaks”. It makes them look bad if they allow the stuff to circulate, especially now that they have a new policy clamping down on rumours and the like.
You do not understand IP law at all. It is not merely posting copyrighted material which can be legally disputed, but also to post fake material posing as official copyrighted material and claiming it is real. Fandexes that say “this is made by fans” are derivative works, which GW’s legal bits page expressly allows, as long as they’re non-profit.
However, claiming something as coming from GW when it doesn’t really, gives them the right to defend the integrity of their IP, and force the impostor to either stop claiming it as GW official stuff, or to stop disseminating everything altogether.
The rest of your post is pointless due to your error regarding this.
DUDE!!!!!
unfortunately for GW their online legal “bits” page is not law. I also understand fully the law pertaining the need to protect their content or trademark from damage. What I do for a living requires I register and protect my IP all the time.
However, this is a copyright issue. These rules are not yet published and are not covered by copyright protection. At the very least it is a marginal call. There is no 6th Edrule set in publication so there is no 6th Ed rule set to protect. Your case is that they are protecting their over-all IP and unfortunately that is not really at issue here.
GW is responding with extreme aggression to something that in terms of damage is minor compared to other releases recently.
By The Way. Nothing you have to say means anything because you are afraid to post using your name. I posted with my 20 year old online name and posted my name in my email. If you do not have the courage to use your name than why should anyone give your thoughts a second thought.
The moment you put words to paper, it is copyrighted in the US. Not sure about the UK. This content belongs to SOMEONE.
Unless it is un-attributed. Which so far this is. That really is the whole point you know.
I wish that were as true as it seems to be on the surface Adam. I recently lost copyright on a set of rules becauseI was not first to print and one of my play testers leaked the rules to another publisher who was first to print.
It is an issue of who did what when. As of right now these excellent rules have no author.
Granted we all know they are GW’s rules but they do have to claim them to protect them.
WAIT!!!! All these take down legal actions…Those would be them laying claim right? well duh……
(That was just for the folks who did not get the subtext of the entire commentary)
Stu, you’re making the assumption that GW was in fact behind the takedown. My Mediafire link from yesterday is still up, along with the FrontlineGaming links that went up presumably around the same time TT posted his news post.
If GW were so hellbent on keeping this under wraps, surely they’d take all the links down, right? Not just the first one.
Trust me, I would like many of these changes to be real, but I believe the safer bet is that it’s a hoax, and the original troll took his file down himself to appear “legit.”
“The moment you put words to paper, it is copyrighted in the US. Not sure about the UK. This content belongs to SOMEONE.”
That is the truth and it being unattributed does NOT change that. The person who wrote this is owner of the IP so you can’t just print and sell it.
I realize that since your hide behind “Anonymous” I should not expect much but I guess I have to spell it out for you.
The only way for the actual copyright holder to stop me from printing the rules is for them to come forward and establish that they do in fact hold the copyright. THUS by going to print with them you force the owner to establish their rights.
Really? I had to spell that out for you? It makes me feel sad….
That might be true (I’m not so much into copyright, frankly I’ve been working mostly with patents but in US it’s first to invent while in the rest of the world it’s firtst to file reg. patents) but if the fake rules are unattributed it will be quite hard to prove that “you” own it so it’s more or less in the Public Domain right now. I guess.
That’s the rub. You can claim whatever copyright you want, but you have to establish that you own it. Now that this document has been circulated, unless someone was able to demonstrate some kind of date of creation prior to the document being made public, there’s no way to prove ownership.
I agree that any attempt by GW to prevent protectible copyrighted material from being distributed effectively indicates that the company is asserting the exclusive rights of a copyright holder.
I’d have to disagree with you there, if people think 5th is coming to an end that can hurt sales. New players won’t want to buy blackreach sets/rule books. So it is in GWs best interest to “hide” the new edition as long as possible. So they wouldn’t want this up if it was real or fake as either way it could hurt sales.
Here is a quick check for everyone. GW has a custom font they use in all their publications. Look on the first page of the 6th Ed Rules and open your 5th Ed rules to page 9. You will notice here and through out all the headers in 4-5 and now 6th Ed. It is the exact same custom font GW uses in all their publications.
It is a custom font and you cannot buy it off the shelf anywhere. Believe me I have looked becauseI wanted to use it for my fandex. This document originated from GW. To be using this font the author had to have access to this font package.
Also the use of “Heck” and some other markers are the exact things GW has been using for a while to mark copies of the organization. Had those instances of german language not been in the document it would have been a sign it was faked. Although even then geeezzzzz…..
A person who has training in developing and saving fonts could easily copy the letters from another GW book. I made my own fonts via Photoshop letters in high school. It actually does not take a long time if you’re computer savey.
Sorry dude, but that isn’t a custom font. It’s called Caslon Antique and you can get it here: http://www.fontspace.com/alan-carr/caslon-antique
I hope this is real, but who knows? Seems to well done to be faked. I’m keeping my fingers crossed.
Hey,
That is the correct font. It is an old typesetters font that in the last few years has been made available digitally. I may be wrong and it is possible some one might be able to get the font now. I just downloaded it and I am comparing the letters in the doc to the font right now. GW has been using this font for a lot longer than it has been publicly (or readily) available. It is possible it was licensed with some font packages I did not get.
If all the letters match up I will confirm that. Thanks for finding that font though. I had been looking for it for years.
I’ve been using that font since I worked on the Lustria setting for Games Workshop which is over 10 years ago. That font has been around forever. You might have just missed it. It’s definitely the right font. If you have Acrobat Pro, it tells you the fonts that were used. It’s the same one they used in the old issues of Town Cryer.
Hi Stucarius
1) I agree with you, and BoLS considers this case still open. We have not seen any evidence presented to us that proves hoax. For every statement that says Hoax, there is an equal or even more weighty one that points to real – the waters are extremely muddy at this point. As you said, we have seen quite a strong reaction from GW across all departments, so something is definitely going on that merits all the use of expensive manpower.
Finally, a gift for you. “GW’s custom font” is Caslan Antique, and it not even theirs. You can find it easily online and your fandexes will look just like their codices. It was the font originally designed for the title credits of Les Miserables.
-bigred
What strong reaction from gw across all departments are you talking about?
You’re the fake.
AM NOT (sticking out tongue)T!!!!
Yep you sound exactly that mature. You will notice I posted all my necessary info right into a comment box…Will you do the same?
It occurs to me based on the tone of your comments that I might be talking to a kid. If so I apologize. I do not make it a habit to pick on children and you should not post your ID. You never know what kind of anonymous perverts could be lurking….
I was replying to TastyTaste, not you, silly head.
LOL sorry
It was just brought to my attention that the email I thought was visible for anyone is not. I am Jeff Stuckey “STUCARIUS” and the email is jeff@jeffstuckey.com
I cannot stand it when people hide from their own comments using anonymous or never let people know who they are behind a screen name.
Imagine where we would be today if the founding fathers signed the Declaration of Independence with a screen name or anonymous. Unfortunately we live in a world today where people are not even willing to own up to their own comments about a game company of all things.
We stride in the shadows of such Giants of Courage like “anonymous”
Stu the way you are reacting to this makes it seem that you are the writer of this fake rulebook and do not want your months of work dismissed before you have fun with it. lol
Regardless it is not hard to find a similar font and that is kind of a bad basis to rely on. You may just not have found the exact font they use. If you do know they are the only group to use a specific font how can you prove that they are?
I can assure you that knowing and having worked with Stu for a few years now, he did not write these rules.
He is just saying that they are too good and well received to just let die. With a little clean up they would be an excellent game system.
Kevin,
I have published rules and still own a game design company (although we have not been producing stuff since selling our miniatures devision off) I can tell you first hand and there are other I know who are saying the same, “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.”
Seriously, just the type of personality who would create and do the work on this is not the kind that would do it for a few days of controversy. I have my own skirmish design I have been working on for a long time now. I think these rules are light years better than what we have now and as a 25 year fan I am excited that GW has finally created a good set of rules for the best gaming universe there is.
That said these are not the kind of rules I would design. I really dislike bucket of dice D6 systems and have not designed one myself in at least 12 years. There are people who might be reading this who know me personally and would confirm that.
My conviction that these are close to the final version of the actual 6th ed rules is not based on the font. That is just a small, or was if I turn out to be wrong, thing pointing to them coming from GW’s studio. 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.
I sure hope it’s the rules because I am after 25 years really close to leaving 40K as a game if they do not release something like this to replace what we have had to deal with since 3rd Ed.
Are you the Jeff Stuckey that frequents TMP as well?
Only time will tell…
Remember the statements (on Faeit 212) that due to being shown inside information for “The Hobbit” and in turn being forced to up their security by the production company as a condition for that?
What if those rules are real, but now because of the Hobbit and the leak that should not have been, they can’t admit that these are rules they planned for 6th ed. Now they would’ve to change the rules for 6th ed. and because of their release schedule already set, they now have to make massive changes without much playtesting time.
Then, by releasing it, we would’ve ruined the original, nice ruleset and will now get something made without much time and care…
Just a thought
I wouldn’t worry too much about that. GW needs to get the 6th edition book to the printers really soon in order for it to be ready by July.
I have actually had the same nightmare. It is completely with in the GW corporate culture to do exactly what you are saying.
Hopefully it is too late but who knows. They made last minute untested changes to the GKC after it was leaked and look what happened.
Hey there,
My two cents if yo udont mind. First Off Stucarius my name is Matthew Stewart from Vancouver, B.C. Canada and my email is trumpet_rms@yahoo.ca
I read through all 129 pages word for word and actually (geeky moment here) played out on my graveyards a small 1000 point game with paper and cardboard cut outs..using the new rules( i was bored ok..) anyways the game is interesting but becomes extremely complex..but after reading through this “rules edition” and after talking to my friend who have played for 15 years just as long as i have starting with 2nd edition, my friends all said..fake fake fake..but then i thought said the same thing you had said about the fonts, and why woudl someone spen 129 pages of “what looks to be official 40k rules and writing and verbal judo” in the books for fun? Alot of the new rules actually work well int othe game and bring back old rules from the 2nd edition.
I have to agree with you after some digging it does seem that Games Workshop is Actually working hard to bring these links down with their legal department. What I dont understand as well is ..Why? They didnt bring the Grey Knights leak down and it was Word for Word picture for picture exactly the same..also the second necrons leak was word for word and also the Blood angels 3rd leak was the official word for word picture for picture so why did GW do nothign to bring ANY of those leaks down??? And remember when 5th edition came out and GW Denied for months and there was 5th edition leak that was esseiently the small “5th edition rules” for the “Assualt on Black Reach box…but AGAIN GW did not try to bring it down or dispute it..they stayed quiet.
So lets assume that these are the play test rules that were leaked. If you had worked so hard on something liek this (Even if these arent the official END ALL rules” I wouldnt want it leaked and it appears that Games Workshop Doesnt want these rules leak here either. So Stucarius I am on your side 95% for this argument except for one part of this that I have to to dispute
From a legal point of view if you read Games Workshops Copyright and Trademark laws, there are alot of words, wordings, phrases and names that are coyrighted and trademarked. Technically and legally because the “6th edition rules leak” has some of these copyrighted items that would hold enough grounds for them to technically shut down the leaks as it would be technically “infringing their product or creation” Other then that i think you have a very sound argument Stucarius and I support it!
Thank you for listening.
reagrds,
Matthew
Print them… print them fast. If GW’s 6th edition release IS this then you will teach them a lesson… YOU will hold copyright over them and will have evidence that they public acknowledge the rules are NOT theirs!
You can even send them an e-mail questioning them flat out. “Are the leaked rules yours?”
When you get the reply “no” then use them to your hearts content!
PS: GW have informed all of their stores that the leak is fake.
…and risk
- getting sued by an international company without owning the copyright (because the whole internet is proof that you did not write them yourself but stole them from someone else) and
- ruining the hobby you enjoy (remember GW not releasing the tervigon-model because of that other company making one – which is getting sued right now)
- and not even making a profit – you don’t really believe that you will sell even a fraction of what GW sells without connections to retailers, without using the 40k-trademarks etc.?
Have fun
SIGH……..
Of course not….SIGH…….Who ever wrote the rules…in this case GW……will have to acknowledge them before publication because despite what some one above said they do not yet have the copyright on the language of this document because thus far they are not claiming it. If they knowingly allow it to go to print….well…..they just cannot do that……
Anyway while I like these rules they are no where near as good as my own or several other sets that have been around a long time.
I am excited that they are the best rules GW has written for the game so far.
Finally some one who gets it….
Wow this response thread is full of humanity’s cream LOL
LOL
Matthew, my faith in humanity is redeemed. Thank you so very much.
What impresses me about these rules is what you said. They are complex rules. Not complex in the sense of technically but they are complex to execute. That results in a much tighter more tactical game that is truly difficult for the list builders to break.
I do think this copy that was leaked is not the absolute final copy but I could be wrong. I worry about GW over reacting like was pointed out above. They are spending a lot of money and time to shut this leak. pointless to try but they legally have to.
Are these the same sources that told you the DE info before the codex release. The same ones that said they would have new/better harlequins then Eldar?
No supporting evidence.
I think they could be real and tasty is just nervous about gw’s legal team. I was told they sent out some cease and desist letters. If he got one, he is probably trying to protect himself. I haven’t seen tasty with any moral character of note, so he is probably lying to your digital face. “Owwww shit, its hot in this kitchen, better get the hell outta here” (possible tasty taste quote)
nail….head….
Perhaps you could refer him to the lawyer you retained for your immoral activities? Kind of like the Matt calling the Tasty black…
Sorry about that, didn’t realize I wasn’t logged in, don’t like to post anonymously…
My immoral speeding ticket his being handeled by Bill s Preston, esq.
Were they sending out cease and desist letters, or takedown notices? This is relevant – if it’s cease and desist, they aren’t asserting copyright, but the penalty for ignoring them is much less (forfeiture of profits only). If they’re sending down takedown notices, they’re asserting copyright (which means that, at least legally, they’re claiming the rules are legit), and the penalty for ignoring the notices is much greater (profit forfeiture, flat fine, possible jail time).
[Citation Needed]
I have to side with this leak being an early Alpha-Level test copy of the actual rules. GW has good reasons to disavow it, and Tasty hasn’t kept his nose clean enough to be safe from their lawywers.
Look….here is what GW needs to do.
release a press statement to this effect.
” Yes this is a copy of the new rules at a late stage of development. We are thrilled that the community is embracing the exciting new direction we are taking 40K. The completed version will be out soon and just wait! If you think you like what you see now just wait till you see the completed rule book!”
You see, that is what a forward smart looking company does. They take something that a poorly run company sees as negative and turn it into a positive.
I think I would be more excited to see the company acting in so enlightened a manner as I am for the rules themselves.
Stu… Exactly right. Why cant gw embrace the community it has created…
It’s because they were born in a grim dark future and they came back in time in a warp bubble. They fight for copyrights because there is only war.
Indeed. It isn’t as if the leaked rules are going to kill sales of the published rules. And it isn’t as if players having access to rules, for whatever reason, has hurt model sales for a miniatures company.
Attacking the situation only makes GW seem shortsighted and inept.
Formatting problems, inappropriate levels of white space at various points in the document, large sections of copy-paste from 5th edition, beyond awful grammar and wording throughout. *sigh*
My thoughts exactly.
It’s an early draft of a working copy. Why would it be error free? There is a lot of copy paste from 4th to 5th, why would they reinvent the wheel.
When did the company let monkies type their rules for them ? Was this rubbish outsource to Timbuktu ?
Because everyone seems to expect a working draft to look just like GW’s finished books for some reason. Mike, just imagine it as a video game in alpha. Feature complete but not a release candidate (beta) yet.
The designer is working within a Word template that approximates the final look. He’s making quick edits to a document that others have touched before and is trying to roughly gauge where example pics and such should go. Once it’s final an editor will go over the whole thing and clean up the language. Then the graphic designers will step in and redo the layout completely.
I agree; this could for all we know be a Layout draft of the rule book.
No need to have the exact word by word text if you try to find the flow of the layout and figure out what images will go where.
Remember this is a large company where some people do the actual rules, other work on the text, some guys try to figure out what images to use and then some have to fit it all together.
If I had to put my life on this being the genuine thing I am actually not so hesitant to do so…
Wow Stucarius, you keep opening your mouth, and eventually your stupid might run out. every one of your agruments have been based upon fallacious logic, most notable false dichotomy. how about taking a course on rhetoric before posting such crap and tainting the rest of us with your stupidity.
BTW, Not gonn buy into your trolling attempt at getting my e-mail so you can bomb my inbox. I am a bit smarter than that.
All I can say is your name is appropriate….Well I could say more but obviously you would not understand it either….sigh…..
Would you care to explain further? I’m curious.
I don’t think it is a false dichotomy that the rules are either genuine or fake. I will qualify by adding that I would consider a mix of the two to be a hoax. For example, if part of the document is leaked rules, but other parts have been added or altered by a third party, on the whole I’d say that makes the document “fake.”
Are you saying that Stu’s argument about GW’s reaction is a false dichotomy? I don’t think that was what Stu was arguing in the first place. I think Stu’s opinion is that given what we know about the situation, the most likely scenario is that the document is a leaked version of the 6th ed rules. It could have been beamed down by aliens to make us post comments on this blog, but that is a terribly unlikely scenario.
The fact is that Games Workshop is reacting aggressively to this document. Why is that? I don’t know, but certainly one explanation is that the document is genuine and Games Workshop is consequently interested in removing it from circulation. I personally think that explanation is compelling, especially in the face of alternate explanations.
The document could be an elaborate hoax. That’s a theory, but in order to believe that you’d have to believe that someone would spend the significant time and effort to create the document for the purpose of lols. I don’t think that makes much sense. Then there’s still Games Workshop’s reaction to it. Why, if it is a hoax, would it spend so much effort to squash it so quickly. It could be that Games Workshop is offended that someone would “infringe” its intellectual property in such a manner. Still, I think that the reaction is a little too severe for that explanation.
It could be that Games Workshop feels that if customers get excited about these rules, they could be disappointed when 6th ed actually come out. That seems reasonable, but that type of reaction implies some consideration on the part of the company; consideration of the document, its contents, and its implications. The document would need to be reviewed by employees to whom it was completely new. There would need to be discussions about what it was, where it came from, and what it meant. Then there would have to be discussions about what legal basis the company could use to force removal of the content.
If the document is genuine and was leaked, a quick, knee-jerk reaction makes sense. The document is immediately recognizable to the company, and there’s a clear basis upon which to have it removed. Decisive action, even if it turns out to be contrary to what the company ultimately decides to do, inflicts potentially less harm than inaction.
You’re welcome to your opinion, but I don’t think you should attempt to invalidate those of another with such broad strokes. I think, in the end, you are imagining a false dichotomy where none exists.
Do you have real and tangible proof that GW did indeed took action to pull these copies off the net? If not, your whole post is just another attempt to justify something that has no real back-up information, just like TT article.
So your theory is that someone spent the considerable time to create the fake document, posted it on the internet, and then rapidly removed it to make it look like Games Workshop took it down really fast?
You don’t have any tangible proof either. All anyone is doing here is speculating, but the interpretation you would have us believe is premised on a set of assumptions that are not particularly reasonable.
There’s no tangible proof that aliens beamed down the document as part of a plot to ruin Games Workshop either. However, I think we can agree that a scenario involving aliens is relatively improbable.
Are you really arguing that a hoax makes more sense given what we know about the situation than that the document was leaked from Games Workshop? I won’t go so far as to say it could not be a hoax, but someone would have to be incredibly motivated to pull off such a hoax, and there seems to be little in the way of motivation.
It’s almost like arguing that the post office deliberately withheld delivering you a package for an extra two weeks because they wanted to make you quit buying things on Ebay. If all you know is that the package arrived two weeks late, that would be a much more unreasonable scenario than many other possibilities. Wouldn’t it be more likely that the seller forgot to mail the package?
Having not fully read all 100+ pages, so far I do not like the PDF, and I hope it is a fake. I have been playing since early 3rd, and I can tell you so far these changes bring more complex rules than what was already in 5th.
There are some small things I like, like wound allocation, but others do more to slow the game down. Personally it seems like it was written for by a Tau/Nid player as most of the changes seems to favor those two armies, and cuts the feet out of the top tier armies.
I disagree!
Most mechanics stay the same, only new wording or small tweaks.
Are the rules more complex? YES!
Will they give me more tactical options? YES!
Are the rules unplayable? H**L NO!
We brought it down because it is garbage.
Ah, but is it your garbage?
The plot thickens. So, TT, what was this thing? Is it an alternate track for game testing from GW?
you say its fake yet provide ZERO evidence. So this whole post is pointless.
No rumor guy in the history of Warhammer has provided anything more then “A source told me.” That goes for all the guys people inexplicably trust on Warseer and Dakka. This is as valid as any rumors they have on it.
It may well be a fake, but your attempts at “investigation” are pretty much worthless.
No offense.
Not only are the rules God-awful in many respects(All monstrous creatures are S10? Blasts become larger because they’re directed at swarms? Really?), there’s one big assumption the belevers are making – that GW has had anything to do whatsoever with the removal of them from whatever sites they’ve been hosted on. I’d wager an awful lot that it’s just people concerned about the possible implications of them being real when a company somewhat renowned for throwing it’s weight around on occasion is involved. WE HAVE LITERALLY NO EVIDENCE THAT GW IS INVOLVED.
Pitty.. I really liked these rules. What proof do you have that they are fake?
GW said exactly the same thing about the leaked 5th edition rules, and they proved to be real.
I couldn’t see much that hasn’t already been mentioned though one thing i noticed is when you look at the bottom of the supposed 6th edition pages it says ‘Warhammer 40,000 rules’when in every other rulebook/codex it says something like ‘The rules section:unit types’ Now i find it likely that an editor would add the ‘the rules section: unit types’ part in but still that caught my eye, so anyone have any opinions on this?