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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 2589005" data-attributes="member: 32740">But the FAQ is official recommendation and really as far as WotC is concerned FAQ and Sage responses to questions ARE THE SAME THING as RAW.  If there is an unanswered question, an ambiguity, a direct contradiction anywhere in the RAW (at least insofar as you are defining that) then the FAQ and Sage are official interpretations and solutions.  If "official" is unpalatable to you or still insufficient for your needs unless you're playing in a tournament or something there is nothing that keeps anyone from even adhering to RAW.For any and all practical purposes, yes they are RAW.The FAQ and Sage are imperfect.  The RAW are imperfect.  Nobody should be claiming they are.  The entire point of publishing errata, of creating a FAQ, of maintaining ongoing Sage responses is to provide solutions that can be defaulted to on a common basis.  If people want to disagree with any amount of all those "official" and RAW levels of being able to answer those questions, fine.  But again, the reason they are there is to provide some kind of, "The buck stops here," finality.Honestly, after having written the above, I'm not sure why I'm bothering to respond.  It's manifestly obvious what the purpose and usefulness is of errata, FAQ's, Sage Advice responses, and clear statements about priority of sources.  These are good-faith efforts from WotC to provide OFFICIAL answers - which are required only when the DM is unable (such as because of time constraints) or unwilling to derive those answers personally.  All those things are provided to ease that responsibility of DM's to get those very answers.  Use them as you wish because there AREN'T any gaming police that are forcing you to accept even the PH as being some kind of Holy Writ graven in stone.  But anyone who continues to carp about, "Well that's only OFFICIAL it's not the same thing as RAW," seems to me to simply be rules-lawyering and being argumentative for its own sake and are thus demonstrably NOT interested in assisting anyone with finding real, useful, or even in any way definitive answers to their questions.</blockquote>

Verification