Egres said:I have seen many times people on these boards using the old 3.0 FAQ in order to answer to 3.5 questions, and I have used them too.
But, do we have an official source that states that we can use them for 3.5 issues?
Please, CustServ=C**p.IcyCool said:Well, some folks around here also consider CustServ to be official as well, so just email them until you get an answer you like.
Egres said:I have seen many times people on these boards using the old 3.0 FAQ in order to answer to 3.5 questions, and I have used them too.
But, do we have an official source that states that we can use them for 3.5 issues?
Some people still play 3.0 and so they answer with what they have and know. Sometimes the OP will specifically request a 3.0 ruling. Otherwise, I think the default assumption is D&D 3.5 (not 3.0 or d20 3.5).Egres said:I have seen many times people on these boards using the old 3.0 FAQ in order to answer to 3.5 questions, and I have used them too.
No. However, the 3.5 FAQ is explicitly written to cover 3.0, so if you play 3.0, you can use the entire 3.5 FAQ unless it is specifically marked "Revision Alert."Egres said:But, do we have an official source that states that we can use them for 3.5 issues?
3.5 Main FAQ 07/28/05 said:This version of the D&D FAQ uses the 3.5 revision of the core rules and also contains questions covering material from a variety of books (such as Savage Species and Epic Level Handbook). If you haven’t yet adopted the revision, don’t worry—in the rare instance that the answer is different between 3rd edition and the 3.5 revision, we’ll bring it to your attention with a call out that says “Revision Alert.”
Damn.Infiniti2000 said:
I remember reading that, too. Perhaps it was in an on-line interview somewhere?dcollins said:My understanding is that one of the D&D designers said that the 3.0 FAQ still applies for all topics not changed by the 3.5 rules. I don't personally have a citation for that.
That's exactly the kind of thing I'm searching for.Infiniti2000 said:I remember reading that, too. Perhaps it was in an on-line interview somewhere?