Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aulirophile" data-source="post: 5468178" data-attributes="member: 86312">/shrug. CS is consistently wrong on rules question, including disagreeing with FAQs (and actual rules, but hey). Your anecdotal experience notwithstanding. And, as mentioned, CS doesn't actually work for WotC. They are a third-party company. It is worth noting that the sole arena where CS was considered official decided to disregard them for incompetence. Somehow that seems relevant to a discussion of whether CS is trustworthy, that an entire organization said "No, these people are incompetent more often then not." Because they are, a fact that is easily evident if you frequent the rules Q&A forum on WotC's site and see even half the <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> they post that is just flat our wrong. Beats the hell out of anecdotal evidence. Well, for starters, you could ask someone who works for the company that makes the game. CS doesn't, Freelancers don't. Good try though!Yeah, name dropping is not a good argument. Particularly as actual devs have said things that are incorrect. There was a dev who said a weapon wielded 2-handed was a 2-handed weapon (in fairness this was an off-hand comment). Not only was he wrong, a month later they errata'd every single Barbarian power that was causing the issue that caused the question to be asked in the first place. Real answers go through a vetting process for precisely this reason.But honestly? They'd need to rewrite the rules, because they are abundantly clear. So... any rules update would be fine. Think you can swing that, just to be right post-facto?</blockquote>

Verification