Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="IcyCool" data-source="post: 2631816" data-attributes="member: 20308">[Cowboy Accent]Best check that attitude at the door, son, before someone takes offense.[/Cowboy Accent] <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I'm not telling people what they can and can't discuss.&nbsp; I'm calling a cat a cat.&nbsp; I'm simply pointing out what the rules actually say, and alerting others on the board that what someone is posting as RAW, isn't.&nbsp; Feel free to point out where I was in error (about what the rules say).&nbsp; If not, kindly don't tell me what I can and can't post.House rule is not a &quot;bad word&quot;.&nbsp; Neither is it any less valid than the RAW (sometimes more valid even!)&nbsp; Why you treat it like that, I don't understand.&nbsp; Perhaps we need a new term to describe this sort of thing, because &quot;one of several personal interpretations of a rule to make it make sense, all of which are valid&quot; will just get tiring to type.&nbsp; A player can reasonably expect to go from one group to another (all of whom follow RAW with some House Rules) and have a grasp of the rules.&nbsp; But if they've come to understand someone's &quot;Personal Interpretation&quot; as RAW, they could be in for a surprise.Do you see where I'm coming from?&nbsp; If not, I can try to explain further.I'm not insisting on RAW only discussions.&nbsp; I am saying that people should call a house rule a house rule, not RAW.&nbsp; And by doing that, I'm helping people understand what the rules actually say.I told the OP what the RAW said, and then gave him my interpretation.&nbsp; I didn't pass my interpretation off as RAW.You go ahead and point out where I am telling folks that they can only discuss RAW.&nbsp; Go on, give it a shot.&nbsp; I double dog dare you. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Once again, point out where I told you that you couldn't post your interpretation here.You've accused me of copping some sort of &quot;attitude&quot;, you've accused me of telling people what they can and cannot discuss, and you've accused me of telling you that you can't post your interpretation.&nbsp; I'm calling you out.&nbsp; Show where I did these things.&nbsp; I'll be waiting for an apology when you get tired of looking.But I won't hold my breath. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />(I'm not looking for a flamewar here Caliban, but you've said some pretty strong things with no reason.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="IcyCool, post: 2631816, member: 20308"] [Cowboy Accent]Best check that attitude at the door, son, before someone takes offense.[/Cowboy Accent] ;) I'm not telling people what they can and can't discuss. I'm calling a cat a cat. I'm simply pointing out what the rules actually [b]say[/b], and alerting others on the board that what someone is posting as RAW, isn't. Feel free to point out where I was in error (about what the rules say). If not, kindly don't tell me what I can and can't post. House rule is not a "bad word". Neither is it any less valid than the RAW (sometimes more valid even!) Why you treat it like that, I don't understand. Perhaps we need a new term to describe this sort of thing, because "one of several personal interpretations of a rule to make it make sense, all of which are valid" will just get tiring to type. A player can reasonably expect to go from one group to another (all of whom follow RAW with some House Rules) and have a grasp of the rules. But if they've come to understand someone's "Personal Interpretation" as RAW, they could be in for a surprise. Do you see where I'm coming from? If not, I can try to explain further. I'm not insisting on RAW only discussions. I am saying that people should call a house rule a house rule, not RAW. And by doing that, I'm helping people understand what the rules actually [b]say[/b]. I told the OP what the RAW said, and then gave him my interpretation. I didn't pass my interpretation off as RAW. You go ahead and point out where I am telling folks that they can only discuss RAW. Go on, give it a shot. I [i] double dog dare[/i] you. ;) Once again, point out where I told you that you couldn't post your interpretation here. You've accused me of copping some sort of "attitude", you've accused me of telling people what they can and cannot discuss, and you've accused me of telling you that you can't post your interpretation. I'm calling you out. Show where I did these things. I'll be waiting for an apology when you get tired of looking. But I won't hold my breath. :D (I'm not looking for a flamewar here Caliban, but you've said some pretty strong things with no reason.) [/QUOTE]

Verification