Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 5044776" data-attributes="member: 80487">Not quite in the literal and punctilious sense that (as seems at least to be the representation) could conceivably apply to 3e. &quot;By the book&quot; is a bit different when the book's instruction is to use your own best judgment! However much or little one might make of them, there are ambiguities -- such as the imponderable &quot;whichever is applicable&quot; -- in AD&amp;D.The DMG in particular was (IIRC the statement) a huge typewritten manuscript. What that entails might be lost on folks not quite clear on what a typewriter was, but suffice to say that changes were not so easily made and tracked as in the digital age. There are things almost certainly omitted accidentally, or confused by typo, or just not as polished or in harmony with other parts as Gygax himself might have liked.(TSR made some corrections in later printings. They tried moving art and the like to make room, but found that it was just not practical to fit everything in the existing space. Adding pages meant adding a whole signature, so they went ahead and added more appendices.)Nor was the &quot;Advanced&quot; title just nonsense. Right from the first volume, the MM, the work was referred to as the &quot;second part&quot; of the new D&amp;D releases. It was addressed primarily to people who already knew how to play D&amp;D, who already understood that &quot;it is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important.&quot;WotC nearly reversed that maxim, and in any case devoted a great deal of effort to making the letter of the 3e rules not only comprehensive but clear. With the 3.5 revision, some things (it seems to me) were revised for greater uniformity at the expense of some &quot;simulation&quot; factors in the earlier formulas.&quot;Never hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you, if it goes against the obvious intent of the game.&quot; The trouble in AD&amp;D is that the intent is not so obvious to everyone -- and even people who get it might not like it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ariosto, post: 5044776, member: 80487"] Not quite in the literal and punctilious sense that (as seems at least to be the representation) could conceivably apply to 3e. "By the book" is a bit different when the book's instruction is to use your own best judgment! However much or little one might make of them, there are ambiguities -- such as the imponderable "whichever is applicable" -- in AD&D. The DMG in particular was (IIRC the statement) a [I]huge[/I] typewritten manuscript. What that entails might be lost on folks not quite clear on what a typewriter was, but suffice to say that changes were not so easily made and tracked as in the digital age. There are things almost certainly omitted accidentally, or confused by typo, or just not as polished or in harmony with other parts as Gygax himself might have liked. (TSR made some corrections in later printings. They tried moving art and the like to make room, but found that it was just not practical to fit everything in the existing space. Adding pages meant adding a whole signature, so they went ahead and added more appendices.) Nor was the "Advanced" title just nonsense. Right from the first volume, the MM, the work was referred to as the "second part" of the new D&D releases. It was addressed primarily to people who [I]already knew[/I] how to play D&D, who [I]already understood[/I] that "it is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important." WotC nearly reversed that maxim, and in any case devoted a great deal of effort to making the letter of the 3e rules not only comprehensive but clear. With the 3.5 revision, some things (it seems to me) were revised for greater uniformity at the expense of some "simulation" factors in the earlier formulas. "Never hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you, if it goes against the obvious intent of the game." The trouble in AD&D is that the intent is not so obvious to everyone -- and even people who get it might not like it. [/QUOTE]

Verification