Can the FAQ be used to issue errata (create new rules)?

[Anubis]

No, I am saying that the FAQ is a valid source for rules errata ... as is this board.

This board is not a source for rules errata. If it was, WotC would have said so. As such, this board is nothing more than a place you can possibly go to ask questions and get unofficial answers and/or quoted official answers by those who do have the power to say so, i.e. designers or WotC reps.

So no, this board is not a valid source for rules errata. Can we find correct information here? Sure. If someone posts their own rules change, however, it is not official, which means this can't be a source for official errata, but rather a place you might find official errata quoted.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I'll have you know that everything I post is Official I2K Rules Commentary. There. It's official now.

 

[irdeggman]

He's not.

Correct I was not.

But you've got to give me credit for checking and fessing up to my mistake

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Anubis
I fully understand your stance in this matter and you have convinced me....in no way shape or form will you consider alternate meanings for 'source' or 'official'.

Nor, for that matter, will you consider any other option than the all or nothing approach to FAQ = Errata.

I have made it clear, in precise language, that you appear to be arguing something completely different than those who have posted in reply.

Your Stance:
All FAQ is Official Errata and takes precedence over previously published RAW.
Those who disagree have no right because 'WOTC HATH SPOKEN'

My Stance:
Some FAQ answers turn into Errata when incorperated into the RAW. Other FAQ answers are in conflict with the RAW and are in error. Even other FAQ answers should be treated as sugestions or House Rules.
Those who disagree do so because of a difference in the use of the words 'source' and 'official' {as mentioned multiple times with no answer from you beyond 'I dont care what a dictionary says'}

Its impossible to debate with a person who:
A> refuses to even entertain the possiblity that they might be working from a different set of assumptions.
B> refuses to answer beyond a restatement of thier stance.

I considered taking the time to reply only with previously unanswered quotes from upthread... but, before I take another step down the slippery slope that Caliban and Infiniti have already plunged, I will agree to disagree and bow out.

I highly suggest to any other posters on this thread to take the time to review every challange already made to you in the 4 other threads in order to avoid re-using a challange that you have deigned to not respond to already or neglected to read the post in full.

I highly suggest to you, Anubis, that you rethink your tone in your posts as well as your debate methods. More usefull discussions would be possible with some changes to your approach.

Gone 10-7, bye bye

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

But you've got to give me credit for checking and fessing up to my mistake

Darn right! Mad ups to irdeggman!

 

[Anubis]

AnubisYour Stance:
All FAQ is Official Errata and takes precedence over previously published RAW.
Those who disagree have no right because 'WOTC HATH SPOKEN'

How can anything else matter? It's their intellectual property, so they deem when and where changes are made. WotC says the FAQ is an official source of errata, so it is. They do not say EN World is an official source of errata, so it isn't. Can't get more clear than that.

I don't always agree with the rules myself. I've got a crapload of house rules. At least I admit my house rules are house rules, though. If people ask a question about the official rules, I give them the official answer (assuming one exists). If a new issue is brought up, I can give my thoughts on it, but until WotC verifies something I say, it means nothing because I'm not a source of errata. I can give logical opinions on matters WotC has not addressed, but I can't give the official word.

The thing is, WotC has given official word here, so the subject should be moot. I'd say Andy Collins is the ultimate primary source in any of these cases since he's the designated go-to man for rules questions, changes, and clarifications. How do we know this? They officially endorce everything he says on it, that's how.

Furthermore, when and if this changes, then I would accept that as well. As of right now, though, the FAQ is errata until WotC says otherwise, because they have called it such.

 

[Coredump]

As of right now, though, the FAQ is errata until WotC says otherwise, because one CustServ Rep have called it such.

There ya go.

 

[Anubis]

Two.

One said it's errata directly, while another said everything (with no qualifiers) in the FAQ is official (which would overlap over to saying the FAQ's changes are equal to errata as they are official).

I don't see any stating outright that it isn't. Even Trevor gave a most vague answer that could go either way.

 

[Caliban]

Two.

One said it's errata directly, while another said everything (with no qualifiers) in the FAQ is official (which would overlap over to saying the FAQ's changes are equal to errata as they are official).

I don't see any stating outright that it isn't. Even Trevor gave a most vague answer that could go either way.

Doesn't matter. Cust Serv doesn't mean anything when it comes to the rules. They are wrong far to often.

 

[glass]

Andy Collins > Anyone at EN World who doesn't work for WotC

I don't necesarily accept your inequality, but for the sake of argument lets say I do, it's still not the whole story. It can be expanded thus:

PHB > Andy Collins > Anyone at EN World who doesn't work for WotC

Everything in the previous paragraph shows us that, we may think he's wrong and we may disagree, but that doesn't matter. He's been given the authority by WotC, and nothing anyone here at this FAN SITE says can do a dang thing about it.

He's not wrong because we say he's wrong. He's wrong because the PHB (as modified by the errata where applicable) says he's wrong.

Nobody; not you, or me, or AC, or the Hasbro board has the power to change what the word 'errata' means and what the abreviation 'FAQ' means. Only a general consensus in the English speaking world can do that.


glass.