Ruin Explorer
Legend
That's the point! You establish RAW as a baseline, which is often a stupid baseline. But very often with RPGs people don't even understand what's been written, or don't remember what's been written.But this exactly highlights why "RAW" is stupid.
This is staggeringly obvious whenever people list "house rules" for their game in one of those threads - inevitably a bunch of stuff that people list as "house rules" is actual game rules they've just forgotten are actual rules - or never knew were, but came up with an identical approach.
Yup. Except it's not pointless, because misrepresenting what the RAW is causes a lot of confusion, because when people say RAW, they mean what is written. And it's always worth noting what isn't written - but that's not RAW, that's just missing rules.Because some rules actually aren't written. As @Paul Farquhar points out... they don't think there actually is a rule written in this case for the Boom. Which makes it doubly pointless to care about it, let along spend multiple posts arguing about it.
No. This is an unhelpful way of looking at things and harmful to communication. This is the second time in this thread you've tried to change the meaning of an acronym. That's unhelpful. Words have agreed meanings so humans can understand each other. When you try to unilaterally change that, you're harming communication, not helping it.Everything in this game is RAI-- Rules As Interpreted.
Next up, the guy who tried to tell me CRPG stood for "classic RPG" not "computer RPG".
RAI means Rules as Intended. You don't have to like that, but don't try and make the acronym mean something else. If there's no creator to confirm the RAI, there is no RAI, just something more like RAYTAI (Rules As You Think Are Intended), which is still a bit different to "Rules as Interpreted". Rules as Interpreted, in plain English, suggests something much closer to RAW, and which still might not be RAI.