Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 3635260" data-attributes="member: 22779">A term is without descriptive value when the term can be interpreted in various, and mutually exclusive, ways.&nbsp; Saying that you have or don't have Magic Walmarts doesn't actually tell me anything.&nbsp; Does it mean that you have/don't have large central locations?&nbsp; Does it mean that you allow/don't allow free trade in magic items?&nbsp; And that's just taking the most benign versions.Yes, a word which is ambiguous lacks descriptive value.&nbsp; Perhaps you would like to define ambiguous?No, actually it isn't.&nbsp; RAW neither states, nor implies any mechanics as to how magic items are bought and sold.&nbsp; RAW is completely silent on the issue.&nbsp; How can RAW be read to mean something it doesn't actually say?&nbsp; RAW states that magic items can usually be bought and sold.&nbsp; Period.&nbsp; Anything beyond that is moving beyond RAW.&nbsp; Thus, while Magic Marts might be one idea, it is certainly not the only one, none of which is actually supported, or denied by RAW.Actually, I do agree this is a mildly negative term.&nbsp; It's certainly less than say 3etard.&nbsp; But, again, why use a negatively loaded term when you don't have to?&nbsp; Unless, of course, you mean the negative connotations.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 3635260, member: 22779"] A term is without descriptive value when the term can be interpreted in various, and mutually exclusive, ways. Saying that you have or don't have Magic Walmarts doesn't actually tell me anything. Does it mean that you have/don't have large central locations? Does it mean that you allow/don't allow free trade in magic items? And that's just taking the most benign versions. Yes, a word which is ambiguous lacks descriptive value. Perhaps you would like to define ambiguous? No, actually it isn't. RAW neither states, nor implies any mechanics as to how magic items are bought and sold. RAW is completely silent on the issue. How can RAW be read to mean something it doesn't actually say? RAW states that magic items can usually be bought and sold. Period. Anything beyond that is moving beyond RAW. Thus, while Magic Marts might be one idea, it is certainly not the only one, none of which is actually supported, or denied by RAW. Actually, I do agree this is a mildly negative term. It's certainly less than say 3etard. But, again, why use a negatively loaded term when you don't have to? Unless, of course, you mean the negative connotations. [/QUOTE]

Verification