Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Artoomis" data-source="post: 3179665" data-attributes="member: 111">No, actually there are a couple an different analyses that need to take place:1.&nbsp; What words are used, and what do they mean IN THE CONTEXT of WotC rules. 2.&nbsp; What was the intent of the rules?&nbsp; What did the designers mean to have happen here.The first is a RAW analysis, where one is looking at the words themselves only, plus evidence throughout the rules to discern the meaning of the words.&nbsp; A pure dictionary definition is only used if the rules do not help us decide what the word(s) mean in a WotC core rules context.&nbsp; Using a pure dictionary definition is not the best way to go, usually.&nbsp; There are often many defintions, and it varies according to which dictionary one uses, etc.The second is where we look at all evidence on intent - how sentences are structured, interviews with designers, history of how the rules developed, etc., etc. to attempt ti divine the orginal intent of the rule.Frankly, where you draw the line between &quot;RAW&quot; and intent is far from crystal clear and an especially value-added debate.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Artoomis, post: 3179665, member: 111"] No, actually there are a couple an different analyses that need to take place: 1. What words are used, and what do they mean IN THE CONTEXT of WotC rules. 2. What was the intent of the rules? What did the designers mean to have happen here. The first is a RAW analysis, where one is looking at the words themselves only, plus evidence throughout the rules to discern the meaning of the words. A pure dictionary definition is only used if the rules do not help us decide what the word(s) mean in a WotC core rules context. Using a pure dictionary definition is not the best way to go, usually. There are often many defintions, and it varies according to which dictionary one uses, etc. The second is where we look at all evidence on intent - how sentences are structured, interviews with designers, history of how the rules developed, etc., etc. to attempt ti divine the orginal intent of the rule. Frankly, where you draw the line between "RAW" and intent is far from crystal clear and an especially value-added debate. [/QUOTE]

Verification