Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
To RAW or not to RAW...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cedric" data-source="post: 3059909" data-attributes="member: 2044"><p>First of all, excellent feedback, thank you. I see what you mean. Everything is subject to interpretation, what is clear to some will be ambiguous to others (if nothing else this thread should make that clear, heh). My intention here was that you use the "Rules as Written" as precisely as you can determine them. Even if that leaves a loophole or obvious conflict, you stick with it, because it's written that way. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I agree (and have said so in other posts in this thread) that casual was not the 'best' word, but that I had been unable to think of one that fits more precisely. Maybe "interpretted rules" instead of casual rules? But I don't think that works better. </p><p></p><p>So, in essence I described what I meant by casual and provided some examples which were not intended to be all inclusive. That was the best I felt I could do. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I tried to provide a distinction between my terminology 'casual rules' and the subsequent term 'house rules'. In that, while both are deviations from the "Rules as Written" the latter represents a degree of deviation that extends far beyond the former. Again I provided an example that was not intended to be all inclusive. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In this case I really think the difficulty stems from the fact that the terms have multiple definitions and multiple uses. The uses that exist in your game environment are obviously different from the manner in which I used the terms for this poll. I would implore people to look beyond the actual terminology of the selection to the explanations and examples. And from that make their choice. </p><p></p><p>That having been said though, the poll results have come out largely as I expected they would. </p><p></p><p>1. Very few people precisely use the "rules as they are written". </p><p>2. A large group of people play the game as they can best determine the rules were meant to be used. </p><p>3. Most people add aspects to their game that go beyond the strict (core) published material in some distinct and notable faction. </p><p>4. There are a small group of people who have taken the existing game and altered it to be a significant and fundamentally different game, with some elements or aspects of the underlying game remaining intact. </p><p></p><p>(Each of the above corresponds to the order of choices in my poll). </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Provided other posters and moderators do not mind I would absolutely support a second poll with what someone considered to be better options as they understand the game, the rules and the use of both.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cedric, post: 3059909, member: 2044"] First of all, excellent feedback, thank you. I see what you mean. Everything is subject to interpretation, what is clear to some will be ambiguous to others (if nothing else this thread should make that clear, heh). My intention here was that you use the "Rules as Written" as precisely as you can determine them. Even if that leaves a loophole or obvious conflict, you stick with it, because it's written that way. I agree (and have said so in other posts in this thread) that casual was not the 'best' word, but that I had been unable to think of one that fits more precisely. Maybe "interpretted rules" instead of casual rules? But I don't think that works better. So, in essence I described what I meant by casual and provided some examples which were not intended to be all inclusive. That was the best I felt I could do. I tried to provide a distinction between my terminology 'casual rules' and the subsequent term 'house rules'. In that, while both are deviations from the "Rules as Written" the latter represents a degree of deviation that extends far beyond the former. Again I provided an example that was not intended to be all inclusive. In this case I really think the difficulty stems from the fact that the terms have multiple definitions and multiple uses. The uses that exist in your game environment are obviously different from the manner in which I used the terms for this poll. I would implore people to look beyond the actual terminology of the selection to the explanations and examples. And from that make their choice. That having been said though, the poll results have come out largely as I expected they would. 1. Very few people precisely use the "rules as they are written". 2. A large group of people play the game as they can best determine the rules were meant to be used. 3. Most people add aspects to their game that go beyond the strict (core) published material in some distinct and notable faction. 4. There are a small group of people who have taken the existing game and altered it to be a significant and fundamentally different game, with some elements or aspects of the underlying game remaining intact. (Each of the above corresponds to the order of choices in my poll). Provided other posters and moderators do not mind I would absolutely support a second poll with what someone considered to be better options as they understand the game, the rules and the use of both. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
To RAW or not to RAW...
Top