Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="PrecociousApprentice" data-source="post: 4353581" data-attributes="member: 61449">While I agree that there is no one way to play, there is definitely a one way to read many of the rules in the rulebooks (I will not say all because I hate to use absolutes <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />). There is somewhat of a lack of reading comprehension in the general population, and while gamers are typically are better than others, many gamers are still terrible. Add to this the relatively poor editing of the core books, and you have a recipe for arguments. Your point PlaneSailing is generally good about being civil. I heartilly agree. That does not mean that when there is an argument about what the text says, that any interpretation is right. There is one right way to interpret what it says. There may be many interpretations about what the meaning was intended to be, but the text says what it says, and that is that. Whether you have to use the rules as they are written is an obvious &quot;no&quot;, but the rules as written are still a good thing to think about.I think that it is funny that there are repeated arguments about what the texts say that are based on what people think that the rules should say and not what it actually does. It is obvious that you can play with whatever rules that you want, but the rules that are written in the books, in the way that they are written, are the official rules. Anything else is a house rule. I like house rules, but I can admit when one is a house rule, and be OK with that.EDIT: By the way, the thread title can almost not help but make this into an edition war. Just the way it is.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="PrecociousApprentice, post: 4353581, member: 61449"] While I agree that there is no one way to play, there is definitely a one way to read many of the rules in the rulebooks (I will not say all because I hate to use absolutes :)). There is somewhat of a lack of reading comprehension in the general population, and while gamers are typically are better than others, many gamers are still terrible. Add to this the relatively poor editing of the core books, and you have a recipe for arguments. Your point PlaneSailing is generally good about being civil. I heartilly agree. That does not mean that when there is an argument about what the text says, that any interpretation is right. There is one right way to interpret what it says. There may be many interpretations about what the meaning was intended to be, but the text says what it says, and that is that. Whether you have to use the rules as they are written is an obvious "no", but the rules as written are still a good thing to think about. I think that it is funny that there are repeated arguments about what the texts say that are based on what people think that the rules should say and not what it actually does. It is obvious that you can play with whatever rules that you want, but the rules that are written in the books, in the way that they are written, are the official rules. Anything else is a house rule. I like house rules, but I can admit when one is a house rule, and be OK with that. EDIT: By the way, the thread title can almost not help but make this into an edition war. Just the way it is. [/QUOTE]

Verification