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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Felix" data-source="post: 3226949" data-attributes="member: 3929">On the internet, where discussion of the rules is an intellectual pursuit, where there is no game being played, and where unanimity is indeed unnecessary does the FAQ hold no sway. I don't know that I've been arguing anything else this entire time: the OP [ranted] saying not to dismiss the FAQ in rules arguments, but messageboard arguments are a place where the FAQ is entirely unsuited to function. Your own analysis seems to support that conclusion.Indeed you did. As did I. Hard to get clearer than "Yes" or "No".Quite right. And their purpose for doing so is expediency and play-facilitation. Neither of which are virtues on messageboard discussions. Again, the FAQ's place is not in rules discussions here, and that is largely because it only answers and does not explain. Most threads here are looking for explanation, and when you answer a rules quesiton with a "yes" or "no", the OP will generally ask for a citation so they can duplicate the argument back in their own game.In which case I believe you err in thinking that authoratiaive resolution is wanted in every rules dispute. Rules discussions here are intellectual pursuits; they are made not to play and thus expediency and facilitatation are not virtues; they do not require unanimity; reason and argument are more important than brevity.In such an environment as this, the FAQ's virtues count for nothing. At this point, the FAQ becomes something a gamer would reference when a quick answer is needed during play, after which they might come to a board such as this to decide what the rule is according to the RAW and not just the FAQ. So to cite the FAQ again is farily well unhelpful.And yet the authority of a particular game is the DM; his research into what the rules say will render his opinion on what the rule will be for his game. When needs must, he could consult the FAQ for a quick ruling. If he wanted to be more thorough after the game, ENWorld is such a place that he could find out what the RAW says about the subject. From which he will render his final decision. The DM, via his ability to enforce rulings, is the authority; neither the FAQ or WotC are.I understand the utility of an authority.The DM is a game's authority, and his rulings facilitate play. If you're gaming with others you don't know well and you need to establish a standard. (at conventions) If you're gaming with others you don't make contact with. (Living games)None of those conditions are present in rules discussions on this messageboard. The FAQ loses the utility it might have elsewhere in rules discussions on this messageboard. Here it indeed is no more than a data point, and a known inaccurate one at that.---So if you're not arguing for the use of the FAQ as conclusive evidence on messageboard discussions, which is what the OP asserts and what I thought this thread was about, then what are you arguing for? That it's not wholly useless? I'd agree with that. But would you agree its uses have no place here?</blockquote>

Verification