So here’s what happened- turns out it was Thursday and I didn’t even know it and forgot to write my normal “Gaming on a Budget” post for the blog I still care about writing on. So then I open my inbox and see a link to some serious shenanigans over on 3++ sent to me by Artemi. Given that I missed my normal post and had nothing better to do, I was all like ‘fuck it, I’ll write a fuckin’ FNIF, but this time I’m going to fucking swear a lot or at least as much as normal, since people really seem to take you more seriously when you cuss.’ It didn’t hurt that many of the All Stars of FNIF show up on this as well.
Now this is going to be extra funny because because this post will be concerned with the “leak” of the 6th ed 40k rules and:
a) I have not read the leak
b) could not possibly care less about reading the leak
c)think it absolutely fucking daft that everyone is crawling around with sand in their vaginas about something that is likely not true or at least not entirely true
d) can honestly wait until the real book is released in print where I can buy it and read the real rules. At least then, I’ll know I’m not wasting several hours hemming and hawing over an incomplete, unsubstantiated document.
e) did not read Abuse Puppy’s article, just the comments. I think I’ve pretty well extrapolated the gist of it from the nearly 300 comments on it though.
Looks like you’ll be getting all of the ordinary well reasoned commentary you’ve come to expect from dethtron then, no?
As always none of the names have been changed to protect the innocent, but their avatars have been for my own amusement. Things will be heavily edited to the point where time and space no longer have meaning, post order may be altered, and most participants will look like complete assholes. All of the text is the property of the morons who said it originally except the stuff snow-mobiled in in red text which is my own Pulitzer prize winning commentary.
Well, we may as well get this shit rolling.
Saramoff- We are angry for a good reason;~forgot you co-authored this because people won’t shut the hell up about it already and clinging to this leak as if the Messiah descended from the heavens and blessed their nutsack with holy seed. ~your version of religion sounds way more fun than that snake handling cult I was in.
One of his latter statements applies. “Idiocy like believing this is exactly why I threw out some fake rumors of my own, because I knew that people would swallow like a sorority low on cash despite them being both absurd and without any reason to think they would be true.”
blacksly– Heh. I’m with Ron on this. The Internets and playing with toy soldiers must be seriously serious business for grown men to get so angry about. ~real fucking serious business For, obviously “a good reason”.
Hyperbole and angry language does not increase the relevance of the leak in any way ~I think the use of hyperbole here was intended to decrease the relevance of the leak. Good luck being the biggest moron ever (not hyperbole): it just showcases how important a little joke is when played upon serious people who are engaged in serious business, in a serious medium.
Seriously, why so serious? ~ok, so here goes. Fuck Christopher Nolan. Fuck the new Batman Franchise. Terrible film making from an awful, plagiarizing piece of shit who couldn’t direct his way out of Hitchcock’s hitch…cock Ligthen up, leave off the angry language and hyperbole, and just say “It’s obviously a fake”, and let it go.~you let it go. and seriously, after having somebody who’d never read my shit before get all mean at me for cussing, I simply can’t possibly hope to understand why the fuck people get so pissed off about profanity in blogging. It’s not a cop-out, it’s a way of life. Fucking get the fuck over it you fucking fucks.
ReductioAbsurdum- Have you considered you might be wrong. ~have you considered that you are also a pompous ass. Seriously, I’ve gone into the future of this thread and seen that you are the world’s biggest ass.I mean not just about this but about a lot of things. ~abuse puppy, you’re living a lie I’m just saying that with the stance you are taking, using a broad indefensible statements and what i can only assume is a lack of pattern recognition, you may well lack the ability to make reasoned arguments.
Supporting people that won’t shut up about the people they claim won’t shut up about the “leak” seems to speak directly to that. ~try again, bud. but next time, it might behoove you to make a modicum of sense It kinda keeps the discussion going so neither side shuts up about something that doesn’t affect either of side unless you let it. And may well all be an irrelevant waste of time, depending on what 6th actually looks like. ~well, glad you’ve dedicated so much time to getting pissed off about somebody spouting on about a maybe not true rule set to let him know that you think he’s wasting his time talking about a maybe not true rule set
Maybe you should seek anger management and I don’t know a logic class.~well I could already tell that you don’t know a logic class, but perhaps you might also want to check into a course on English syntax
Thalenchar- Not that I particularly agree or disagree with you (haven’t read the rules yet and arn’t planning to) ~so great, you’ve got even less reason than an asshat like say… me to contribute to this. well played sirbut isn’t getting this worked up over this ‘leak’ just as silly as getting all fanboiWTFwow!!1! over them?If it’s a fake, it’s a fake. If it’s real and it’s an early playtest version, than so what? Let’s just all wait and see how 6th turns out… ~you and your accursed logic should get the hell out of here now, before somebody goes all internet on you
ReductioAbsurdum- I put forth that pursuant to furthering ~I put forth that pursuant to your attempts to use big words to try and sound smart, you are a giant fucking cuntyour points in a way that will bring people around to your way of thinking, rather than simply invoking the knee jerks cheers from the already like minded and the predictable boos from the already entrenched opposition, there is little difference.
abusepuppy- You are correct, this article was not written to further honest, open dialogue and advance the frontiers of man’s knowledge. ~shit, I thought that’s the only reason we all blog It was written to provide an emotional catharsis for reads by embodying the frustration at the gullibility, shortsightedness, and willful blindness that the current rash of 6E articles make so plain. ~I’ve always found that blatantly insulting your audience is always the best policy too. Hey readers, Fuck You All! I hate you!I did not think there was any point to, or any chance of, having a real discussion about these rules.~I’m sure you could have a reasoned discussion, but where’s the fun and point in that?
jasonc– ~wow and I thought they gave up on Jason X Its hard to take your rant seriously though when you get quite a few of the rules wrong (eg serg is a cha, ~ 1, 2 cha cha cha so everyone can attempt to regroup as long as alive, you fall back again in your movement phase, and only after that you die if within 12 etc) and you don’t address any pros ~newsflash, not discussing pros is now classified as getting rules wrong. More news at…wait, how many times have I used that same joke now? (no contesting and needing to be outside vehicles to capture does mitigate mech spam somewhat).Not that I think they are without problems, but a kirby analysis over a stelek rant any day of the week, please.
As for Sergeants, he addressed that with using Covering Fire every turn to generate Directed hits.~so you’re saying that Jason is not only a douche, but quite wrong to boot?
jasonc- Oh I know that, I’m just saying this isn’t the style I appreciate from kirbys blog (and conversely…) ~wah wah, something doesn’t suit me and now I’m upset. I’ll never shop here again. Let me talk to your manager.
abusepuppy-I know sarges are characters, but it’s super-easy to snipe them out with Covering Fire so that’s irrelevant. Sarge and HW guy will be the first to go.Could be wrong on the fallback thing, I only read through the rules once. ~one read too many if you ask me. When I write my rant about (maybe) fake 6th ed, I’m going to hit myself in the head with a hammer first so as to forget the little I know about the new (possible) rules changes
I didn’t list positive facets of the rules because… why would I? I’m arguing against these being real or good. I don’t need to work to undermine my own position.~listen man, it’s not a real internet debate or rant until you completely contradict or refute your own argument. Where did you attend internet school anyway?
ReductioAbsurdum-“I’m arguing against these being real or good. I don’t need to work to undermine my own position.”But you see you aren’t arguing at that point. You are ranting.~I feel to see the validity, relevance, or necessity of your continued posting and/or existence For an argument to happen you have to be willing to hear, or present both sides. ~not doing the dictionary thing today, but you’re pretty much an idiot. oh, and you’re wrong to boot If you look at it as undermining your own position, if that really is a worry, then you have already admitted you have a weak argument from the git go. ~or… hold up a fucking minute, you just undermined your own “argument” that isn’t really an argument. You win sir An argument that isn’t to be discarded out of hand needs to be able to stand up to scrutiny and challenge. ~again, I can’t stress this enough- you suck at life. Also, one is not under any obligation to present counterarguments to one’s own point when arguing, debating, or such like
For this rule set to be declared “a Whole mound of bullshit” there you would actually need to argue convincingly that the bad did in fact out weigh the good.~careful statistical analysis seems to point to “fuck you and the horse you rode in on!” By presenting only the bad and ascribing the intellectual capacity of a rodent (my inference) to those who might see the good you have invalidated your argument and made it an unverifiable rant. ~please just keep mangling logic and reason. It’s too entertaining.
Admitting to only a passing familiarity with the rules, basically equal to my own, ~why are you still here. You claim to have no interest (my inference :p) in these rules either you have further weakened your stance. You cannot take rules out of context and assume they are bad without the frame work. ~we’ll take anything we want out of context. I am highly offended by your racist use of the word “frame” Not to mention that this kind of treatment has been given to every official rule set out there, by that standard you have moved a step further in actually legitimizing this rule set as you have joined into what has been the age old argument that follow the release of a rule set, the only difference being the questionable (and most likely un-offical) provenance of the rules.
The point is on this topic, your kung-fu is weak.~note nearly as weak as your Jujitsu. Oh and by the way, 1998 called. It wants its catch phrases back. Hey dethtron, 2003 called, it wants its jokes back
>. For an argument to happen you have to be willing to hear, or present both sides.
Hear, yes, but not present. ~you are the biggest idiot ever for continuing to feed this fire>For this rule set to be declared “a Whole mound of bullshit” there you would actually need to argue convincingly that the bad did in fact out weigh the good
Presuming that the argument has several participants (and if it doesn’t it’s not much of an argument), no, I don’t. If I am arguing the negative, my “job” is to present the bad things about it; it is the other side’s “job” to present the good. ~where’s the fun in unerstanding things correctly? AP you disapoint It benefits me to be aware of the good facets because I can work show why they are irrelevant, overvalued, etc, but if I feel I don’t need to do that, I’m under no obligation to point them out ~nope, it’s the law. you must present both sides (for example, if I think my opponent in the argument isn’t aware of them.)>Admitting to only a passing familiarity with the rules, basically equal to my own
Familiarity and understanding are not the same thing. When people say “modifiers don’t slow the game down any” or “these rules are simpler” or “changing the turn order doesn’t really matter,” those are all evidence that they have judged the rules poorly and don’t understand the implications of what many of the changes do. Most anyone who has read the rules has about the same level of familiarity, but not everyone has the same level of comprehension.
SageoftheTimes- Puppy’s right here. This isn’t a forum,~everything’s different in a forum. You have to argue against yourself there. Not on a blog, though this is a blog, where a few who have proven they are competent are allowed a voice. But there are also comments, where people can comment (as long as they’re courteous and/or not spamming) which aren’t modded (aka deleted if you violate the author’s obvious godlike wisdom, *coughstelekcough*). ~anybody counting crotchety references to stelek here?
whitestar333-Have you playtested this at all or is this all initial impressions? Your reactions seem vehement enough that I suspect you haven’t played a game with these rules. ~well that certainly makes sense I haven’t tried it yet but just like everything else that seems “OMG STUPID BROKEN” when a new codex comes out, I’m curious to see how these rules actually play.~why the hell would you ask somebody you’re accusing of not playtesting rules how the rules playtested?
abusepuppy- No, I have not playtested this, ~aha, you’ve been caught. all of your writing ever is now invalidated but (to be a bit more polite than Pro Fluffer) even a cursory glance tells me it is amateurish and poorly-written.If I become immortal and learn to freeze time, I will be willing to invest as much effort as necessary into completely evaluating every single claim that comes across my path and exhaustively disproving it. ~I know the secret. E-mail me Until that time, however, I will be forced to ration my efforts based on the likelihood of their not being complete and utter horseshit. This “leak” does not meet that requirement; even the couple of hours it took me to read it and write this article feel almost wasted.~welcome to my life…
SageoftheTimes- And if you want to see Puppy do a complete and neutral review of it, feel free to pay him! Everyone has their price, and I’m sure Puppy would enjoy using exact language to explain it’s shit for cash.~or better yet, pay me to do anything else that would be more worthwhile than continuing to discuss this nonsense
ReductioAbsurdum- TLDR: ~wait wait wait. YOU HAVE SPENT ALL THIS TIME AND EFFORT AND MADE ASPERSIONS AGAINST AP ON AN ARTICLE YOU DIDN’T EVEN BOTHER TO FUCKING READ! God damnit I hate you I am angry that some people on the internet disagree with my stance on the “leaked” rules of unknown Provenance. It seems clear to me that anyone who disagrees with me is dumb and cannot have any valid points. ~well now you’re getting it at least. still think you suck, though I have proved this with a series of invective and expletive laced assertions that clearly show my bias beyond a doubt and should obviously be taken at face value because I wrote them in an angry tone. ~oooh nice fucking sarcasm there bro. Let’s go off and grow ironic mustaches together.Again and I can’t stress this enough if you don’t agree with me, thereby justifying my personal sense of my own flawless analytical ability, you are definitely wrong and dumber than me. I’m leaving it to the reader to infer why I actually wrote this as i haven’t made a reasoned argument. Perhaps I just need to be right or I don’t like potential change, please discuss. ~TL;DR
I do need to warn you however any defense of these rules with even a modicum of the intensity of my post will mark you as a fanboy and invalidate your arguments. Actually now that I think about I may not recognize irony either. ~TL;DR
STILL TLDR? Ima picka fight on the internet because someone likes something I don’t. One of us has to be wrong, clearly it’s you. Agree with me.~TL;DR
abusepuppy- No one posting about how wonderful the leaked rules were made any kind of rational analysis; I didn’t really feel the need to, either.~OMG the new roolz were so awesome I came in my pants.
jasonc-Seriously? Since when would a blog like this not be at least attempting to provide rational analysis? That’s really the way you want to argue this?The *best* part of this blog is getting a balanced opinion on gaming issues that you may not already be aware of. ~well I’m glad that your narrow band of things you approve of on this blog dictates what can be written here. That is why we read it, needless abuse isn’t, regardless of the argument. ~if you want some needless abuse why don’t you come read my blog, you shit head?
This really is poor, whatever man. ~speaking of poor, what the hell was going on with that last sentence? I hope you learn something from this. So many of your articles are *awesome* reads because you intelligently, rationally provide useful analysis. A useful analysis of this topic would be awesome. Just think about that.
ReductioAbsurdum- you are probably right by using the caveat “posting about how wonderful the leaked rules were” how ever I am sure if you looked you would find more sober and clear minded assessments of them. ~pics or it doesn’t exist more on that later…For now you have made the conscious choice to further the false zero sum game on the topic of this particular rule set. ~I am so sick of you trying to convince everyone of how smart you are when you are clearly insane and probably have the brain damage there is a middle road and two low roads, you just took the left fork justifying it by pointing at the people who took the right fork.
I’m just saying this article serves more to feed the hilarity of a hyperbole laden rage fest than actually further any real point. ~well at least you almost understand it now
What i’m trying to say (and I’m sorry for borrowing your thing) is that everyone but me is wrong.~well that clearly validates your argument.
SageoftheTimes- And you’re not using evidence to contradict Puppy, you’re attacking him personally.~where is the evidence of him attacking AP? Oh, right. EverywhereSuch a great way to show you know what you’re talking about.Now, you can type, don’t have too many grammatical errors, and seem to have a functioning brain, ~really? so why don’t you talk about the merits of the system, answer his negative points he’s hitting on, and discuss the positive points about the ‘leak’, and the one or two things in there you’d LIKE to see added in. ~sounds too much like real debate to me. Not interested
Are you going to be hypocritical or not? Think you’re better then Puppy? Prove it
ReductioAbsurdum- A direct Ad Homiminem and an unverifiable claim. ~to qualify as a direct attack it would need to be directed at someone specific, no? Wow, I mean you really…..Y’know what it’s not worth it, I was gonna make a round about, pointed, and preferably funny statement inferring that you had the comprehension capacity of a 13 year old and how it might explain why stating something as fact something no one on this site can currently prove conclusively might in fact make you look like an idiot. But the truth is I’m not sure you would get it.~TL;DR
The really hilarious part is that you seem to think I’m interested in discussion on the topic or that I’d care about anything you said on the matter. ~I think we passed up hilarious a ways back missyWhen the person responsible for the fake comes out and admits it or the real 6th comes out and exposes this as the bullshit that it obviously is I’ll be proved right. So… I don’t feel the need to explain my reasoning because I know I’m right. ~now we’ve got a real argument on our hands
ReductioAbsurdum- I’m fairly certain based on this and your previous post that your cognitive functions may well be below what is recommended for operating on the internet. ~ugh That you don’t care what people say about you on the internet is commendable but immediately undermined by the fact you felt the need to defend yourself to me ~sounds just like everything you’ve posted so far, which has though I’m sure you won’t notice, painted yourself into a rhetorical corner of being wrong no matter what you say. ~not if she takes your prior advice from your great treatise (see I can use big words too fuck head) on arguing and refudiates her own argument Though it would not come as a surprise to me that you are both familiar with this position and oblivious to how it occurred.But that said I feel it needs pointing out that you seem to also lack the basic pattern recognition that other previous posters also failed to achieve. ~I can almost taste the colors man. shapes. taste the rainbow. if I didn’t know any better I’d guess that you’re actually high off your tits right now And now it would seem that you are continuing to back up your unprovable assertion with the famed and dubious ” i’m right cause I’m right” rhetorical technique, which has served so well on playgrounds throughout history though for some reason has failed to be elevated successfully to the halls of rational adult conversation.
But basically you probably should work on your rhetorical technique and further response would most likely only expose the depth of your lack of understanding about what I just said.~more likely it would result in further self-righteous and equally irrational rhetoric from you
ReductioAbsurdum- i would actually say that you have just confirmed what I said, and in trying to play it off as “being a troll” you have further made yourself look foolish after so clearly stating that you don’t care what people say on the internet. ~dear god please strike this idiot downBut since you seem to be the slow sort I’ll give you an opportunity to look carefully at the things i have said in this thread, especially to people who seem to be you intellectual equals based on the composition of tier response posts and ask your self, trying not to sprain anything.~have they invented a way to choke somebody through the internet yet?… U mad bro? ~no, but she a girl, dawg