Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Siberys" data-source="post: 6398216" data-attributes="member: 30619">I am very late to this thread, so apologies if I'm covering already-thoroughly-tread ground;RAW is exceptionally important. Without it, I have to resort to continuously asking my GM questions just to make a character, let alone play.I've been playing a lot of Pathfinder lately. I've repeatedly found myself asking the GM inane questions that were nevertheless important for character building. Most of the questions were, at their heart, "This is how it works RAW, but I know GMs rule this differently in their home games, or ignore this or that rule. I need to ask about this or I will create a bad experience down the road either for myself or for the GM." The rules are intentionally fuzzy, and it causes me no end of problems. And I at least have direct access to my GMs! Suppose I were playing PFS - how would I deal with those situations? Make a call and then not enjoy myself when a GM I've otherwise never met rules against me?Keep in mind, I'm talking about largely trivial things - for example, the Cestus in Pathfinder has the following rules text;What is a "precision-based task" - a skill check? Ranged attacks? Do Sneak Attacks or casting spells count? RAW it only seems - to me, mind - like it'd apply to skill checks, but it's arguable. RAI is totally unclear, and if I had to rely on that I'd just end up choosing something else.In short, working off of RAI is poor design, because it leads to situations like the one above, where fuzzy "natural" wording that tries to leave room for interpretation instead makes that interpretation necessary.</blockquote>

Verification