Errata is not proof, it's reinforcement of original intention of the design team.
Errata is most often correction of errors in the original.
Errata is not proof, it's reinforcement of original intention of the design team.
If something is promptly fixed, there's no longer anything wrong with it. No, errata is not evidence that there's something wrong, it's evidence that there's less wrong than there was before the errata. Conversely, absence of errata doesn't mean there's nothing wrong - it could just mean there's no commitment to fixing what's wrong.Errata is most often correction of errors in the original.
If something is promptly fixed, there's no longer anything wrong with it.
Errata is most often correction of errors in the original.
Seriously though, my reply to your original statement was granted only because you saw the need to snark The better answer is the one you were given by Tony Vargas; good show on his part.
Anyone else get the 2nd Ed. vibe of having to argue with the DM over every little action, when playing Next, or is it just me? I really want this to be the uniting thing for roleplaying, but it just seems really vague, crunch-wise...