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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Caliban" data-source="post: 1325401" data-attributes="member: 284">How many bad rulings are we talking here, exactly? What constitutes a majority in this case?  Most of them he probably doesn't believe are bad rulings. What is obvious to one person is not obvious to another, as has been seen many times on these very boards. Disagree with the Sage, but don't make the mistake of thinking he's stupid or wrong-headed just because he reads something differently than you or I.  Actually, I don't think he's an official spokesman for WOTC, at least not anymore. He's certainly not employed by them, they don't pay him anything for his Sage Advice column. It's the magazine that pays him for that, and Dragon isn't owned by WOTC, it's owned by Piazo publishing.  I don't have a problem with people using the Sage Advice to support their answers. Some people do that with Hypersmurf's answers now, and in the past some people used to quote me over the Sage. The only thing that's really "Official" is whatever makes it into the FAQ, and even that has problems.  Since the actual R&D team refuses to issue actual errata in a timely matter or respond to e-mails more often than once in a blue moon, we are pretty much left hanging. Skip Williams has at least tried to communicate with the players and clear up rules ambiguities, which is more than anyone else from the company has done. (Andy Collins answered questions for a brief period after the release of 3.5, then stopped.) Skip isn't perfect, but he's better than the wall of silence we usually get from WOTC. However, I do take his answers with a larger grain of salt these days. He's not on the design team anymore, and doesn't have the inside information about the intent of the authors that he used to. With the "changing of the guard" on the design team that accompanied with 3.5, the "designers intent" seems to have changed in a few areas of the rules, and he's probably biased towards the 3.0 designers intent when he has to make a call. I'm just saying that he deserves a little more respect than all this knee-jerk Sage bashing everytime somone disagrees with an answer of his.</blockquote>

Verification