Sage Advice

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Just happened to be poking around Wizards site for the first time in... months?... and I took a look at Sage Advice. It's an interesting little format they used there. In fact, I think it's BRILLIANT. It is what Sage Advice should have become long ago and should continue to be into the future. By that I mean that it should NOT be "These are THE RULES. This is the OFFICIAL WAY. Do as WE INSTRUCT HERE." It should be a gathering of a variety of (preferrably informed) opinions but chosen for slightly differing emphases, preferences, and opinions of "the sages".

Heck, they could simply leave the official post of "The Sage" empty or at least non-public. Have the sage advice questions submitted as usual and then choose which will be put up for public comment. Let people submit their opinions, staff and public alike, and then choose the best responses to accompany the question. Rotate questions weekly.

Yeah, it's not much different than simply submitting questions to an open rules forum except that they maintain editorial control since they choose the responses THEY like best. But the point is that it becomes ADVICE - not rules dictation. It would also have the advantage of freeing an official "Sage" from the occasional embarrassment of simply getting things wrong. THIS would be a Sage Advice feature that I would regularly read.

 

[Darkwolf71]

I disagree. Opening the 'Sage' to the input of just whoever can do the best job of presenting their case is a good way to come up with some wonky interpretations.

I think Sage Advise should be exactly what you hate. The rules. It should be implemented differently, though. Answers should not come from one person, any more than they should come from just anybody. They should find a way to ensure that the person who, ya know, actually designed the rule in question is available to clarify as per the original vision.

Of course, acceptance or rejection of any Sage Advise is, as with anything, the discretion of the DM.

 

[delericho]

I disagree. Opening the 'Sage' to the input of just whoever can do the best job of presenting their case is a good way to come up with some wonky interpretations.

I think Sage Advise should be exactly what you hate. The rules.

Yeah, I'm with Darkwolf71. When I'm running a game, I'm entirely capable of making a ruling that suits me. If I'm going to ask a question about the rules, then I want the actual rule clarified, and not just "here's what sounds good to me today."

It should be implemented differently, though. Answers should not come from one person, any more than they should come from just anybody. They should find a way to ensure that the person who, ya know, actually designed the rule in question is available to clarify as per the original vision.

Not sure about this part, though. Given that so much is done by freelancers, it would seem more sensible (to me) to have a dedicated person or group responsible for maintaining the integrity of the ruleset as a whole... and it is that group who should discuss Sage Advice questions and reply accordingly.

 

[green slime]

Nah, it should be resolved by popular vote. With me being popular.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Who needs the Sage? We've got Hypersmurf.

 

[Thurbane]

If you want rule by majority, post your questions here, or on another RPG forum.

If you want a (pesudo-) official answer, I'd prefer one clear voice from "The Sage"...