Thasmodious
First Post
However, 4e is a system of the kind that I mentioned in my post: one that is unclear and generally nebulous. You want to say that the RAI says one thing, but the system is so muddled that my interpretation could be equally supported by the "RAI." Because of the unclear RAW, we can't see the RAI.
To you. The rules are not at all muddled or unclear to me, nor to many, many others here and all around the world who are playing this edition. I think its the clearest, most concise ruleset I've seen for D&D. And I think most of your whinging comes from exactly what the OP is talking about - a willful intent to be contrary just for the sake of being contrary. The RAI is obvious in most every case and the RAW is simple and clear. Some people choose to make it "nebulous" and argue that it is nebulous even when no one other than themselves seems to have any problem understading the words on the page.
The inability of some people to comprehend what they are reading does not constitute failure on the part of the writer, not when most other people can read and understand it just fine.