Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MadMaligor" data-source="post: 4834753" data-attributes="member: 66102">Here, let me put it to you a different way. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />&nbsp;Lets say Winter, Gygax, and a host of other designers were asked about house rules.&nbsp; After all the Q&amp;A is over, and we discover that so many of them see the Dungeons and Dragons rule sets differently, and each see them as &quot;flawed&quot; in some fashion, do we then assume that the RAW are not meant to be used as written.&nbsp;Of course not.&nbsp;The RAW is written in all its flawed glory on purpose.&nbsp; You can use the RAW just as it is and its perfectly reasonable to say &quot;I'm playing D&amp;D.&quot;&nbsp; You can also disregard just about any single rule you want too, and still say &quot;I'm playing D&amp;D.&quot; It is meant to be molded and shaped by the likes and dislikes of each DM and player group.&nbsp; It is meant to accomodate to the broadest current base of Dungeons and Dragons players within the vision of its game designers (for whatever version, each having its unique and freshly marketable ideas).&nbsp;For example, just because Gygax or Winter (lets say for examples sake) really hate grappling, does not mean that grappling isn't a part of D&amp;D or wasn't meant to be used.&nbsp; Heck there are things about D&amp;D that are implied and never even mentioned in a single rulebook.&nbsp;Cheetos for example were created specifically to thwart the Dungeons and Dragons gaming community.&nbsp;Mal&nbsp;<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing&nbsp; &nbsp; :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="MadMaligor, post: 4834753, member: 66102"] Here, let me put it to you a different way. :) Lets say Winter, Gygax, and a host of other designers were asked about house rules. After all the Q&A is over, and we discover that so many of them see the Dungeons and Dragons rule sets differently, and each see them as "flawed" in some fashion, do we then assume that the RAW are not meant to be used as written. Of course not. The RAW is written in all its flawed glory on purpose. You can use the RAW just as it is and its perfectly reasonable to say "I'm playing D&D." You can also disregard just about any single rule you want too, and still say "I'm playing D&D." It is meant to be molded and shaped by the likes and dislikes of each DM and player group. It is meant to accomodate to the broadest current base of Dungeons and Dragons players within the vision of its game designers (for whatever version, each having its unique and freshly marketable ideas). For example, just because Gygax or Winter (lets say for examples sake) really hate grappling, does not mean that grappling isn't a part of D&D or wasn't meant to be used. Heck there are things about D&D that are implied and never even mentioned in a single rulebook. Cheetos for example were created specifically to thwart the Dungeons and Dragons gaming community. Mal :lol: [/QUOTE]

Verification