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

[Anubis]

Extremely insulting post removed.

 

[Caliban]

The acid/sonic/force ignoring hardness thing was not a typo. The original ruling was made by Skip Williams when he was the Sage, and was later reversed by Andy Collins when he became the Sage.

Andy simply neglected to correct all the entries where this was referenced when he changed the ruling. That's not a typo either, it's poor editing.

 

[Pielorinho]

You people are insane.

Moderator's Notes:

Anubis, I have noticed that you have been pretty insulting to other posters lately. It's time to stop with that. I don't want you to post any more in this thread, and I want you to IMMEDIATELY change your posting habits, so that you don't make any disparaging comments whatsoever about other posters.

If you have any questions or comments about this, please email me or report this post with your concerns: do not post them in this thread.

Daniel

 

[Caliban]

Lately?

 

[Pielorinho]

Lately?

Caliban, this is not an opportunity for you to gloat or to make snarky comments. Please drop it; if you have questions about either this post or my preceding post, email me or report it.

Daniel

 

[Caliban]

Just asking a question. Part of your post confused me.

 

[KarinsDad]

Common sense, of course, is hardly common.

Precisely.

Why should I ask them to fix this, when they already have a rule that covers it? The primary source rule tells me that when the FAQ contradicts the primary source, the FAQ is wrong.

Precisely.

 

[Cheiromancer]

I think we have to try to show more respect for each other, and for WotC employees. Even (especially?) the Sage and the Customer Service Representatives. Even when we are convinced that they are [insert bad adjectives] there is no need, imho, to vent all over the place.

This would apply too to people who use the different rules resources in different ways. If someone asks a rules question, but says they don't use Cust Serv, well, a response shouldn't be to insist that they use Cust Serv. Oftentimes a Cust Serv answer can be "repackaged" and backed up using sources that the OP regards as authoritative. No need to blast them for using rules resources in the "wrong" way. I think it is well worth the extra time for us to try to be a little more courteous to others.

Incidentally, what do people think of starting our own FAQ? It could be frequently asked questions (topics that keep coming up in the forum) and it could also be a commentary on the official FAQ and cust serv answers, pointing out areas that are problematic (like the varying hit points of the bastard sword, or the sonic hardness issue). I think it would help people who don't trust the current FAQ and cust serv answers. It might mildly suggest rulings on these issues and others that are regarded as contentious.

We would probably have to nominate people to serve as the maintainers of the document. Folks like Hypersmurf would be involved (I hope!). If people are interested in such things, that is. But since many incredibly rules savvy people already post on all kinds of rules questions, I think it possible that they might be willing to maintain a Rules FAQ based on EN World.

It would also be a nice way of addressing the question currently preoccupying this thread, since the Enworld rules FAQ would be a FAQ that does not and could not issue errata. The most it could do would be to suggest rulings to DMs.

 

[Dinkeldog]

It would also be a nice way of addressing the question currently preoccupying this thread, since the Enworld rules FAQ would be a FAQ that does not and could not issue errata. The most it could do would be to suggest rulings to DMs.

Of course, the way that the rules are in any gaming situation, at best the rules as written in any context have only one goal: to suggest rulings to DMs.

It is ultimately up to DMs to be consistent in their own campaigns in such a way as to facilitate their own campaigns and maximize the value for themselves and their players. Any attempt to portray the RAW on the level of some holy text or to create parties of individuals that create platform statements as to how to interpret the RAW is really disingenuous.

Some people will look at individual Rules (from the PHB/DMG/MM), campaign sourcebooks (Eberron Campaign Setting), Wizards-published books (Races of Stone), the Errata (remember the original "errata" fixed typos at the level of "we forgot the comma here, the period here, and to capitalize this word,"), non-Wizards-published books (Mongoose's classbooks), and the like with varying levels of authority.

There is no One True Ruleset.

Let me repeat that.

There is no One True Ruleset.

Ultimately, the FAQ is only issuing suggestions. So is the Errata. So are the PHB and DMG. It is up to the players to decide how they have the most fun.

Trying to argue otherwise is trying to inject politics and religion into the forums. It's just a different spin on it. The level of calumny, spite, baiting, insulting, and rudeness here attests to that.

I'll let you all in on another little tidbit. This forum generates far more reported threads than any other. That will end. Now. Otherwise people are going to start taking mandatory timeouts.

If you think you're right, you're not.*

If you think you have the authoritative ruling, you don't.*

If you think you can "win" some "debate," you can't.*

This goes for everyone.

If a rules question comes up, feel free to say how you would rule/interpret rules, and leave it at that. You can also discuss calmly and rationally why you differ in opinion from someone else as to a ruling/rule interpretation.

However, the heat and divisiveness, condescension and sniping, the outright nastiness and hostility are ending forumwide right now. Or you can take a few days off and reconsider your behavior.

Everyone here is a guest in Morrus' living room. I suggest all start acting in a manner that does not lead toward the bouncers showing them the door.

*The sole exception is Morrus. If there is One True Right Person here, it is he. If there's a next in line, Piratecat and Henry are there.

 

[KarinsDad]

There is no One True Ruleset.

Let me repeat that.

There is no One True Ruleset.

Ultimately, the FAQ is only issuing suggestions. So is the Errata. So are the PHB and DMG. It is up to the players to decide how they have the most fun.

I disagree.

There is one true ruleset. The core books: PHB, MM, and DMG.

There are different rules in different games and every player decides for themselves how to have fun, but that is not the same as a ruleset.

The one true ruleset is the common ground for which all players can relate to, regardless of how they interpret or adapt that ruleset for their game. Without that common ground, it would be more difficult for people to go from one game to another.


Chess too has a ruleset. Not every game of chess follows it. Many do.


This is a rules forum. I come here to discuss rules. I do not come here to discuss house rules (although that often happens). I prefer house rule topics and general discussion topics to move to the appropriate forums.

Some rules are borderline and subject to a variety of interpretations. That cannot be helped. Many rules, though, are explicit.

I choose to not throw out the baby with the bathwater, even if you do not. Many rules are rules. And when it is illustrated that I am wrong on a rule, I will admit it and "change sides" (although many others will not).

Please do not come to Morrus' Rules Forum and tell us it is ok for it to be a House Rules Forum (i.e. there is no one authority for rules). If Morrus wants to do that, it is his perogative.

Please feel free to come to Morrus' Rules Forum and tell us when we are misbehaving. Two different topics, even if bad behavior does sometimes result from being passionate about the rules. Fix and correct the behavior problem. Do not attempt to fix the passion about the rules and their nuances and their consistency. That's what makes the game great for some of us.