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.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What do you consider generally unquestionable sources of rules interpretation?
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="Lonely Tylenol" data-source="post: 2584243" data-attributes="member: 18549"><p>But that would be contradicting Monopoly's RAW. It's not an interpretation or alternative ruling. It's patently against the RAW. Much in the way that the Sage often is. I don't think that anyone but the Sage is proposing that personal rulings that are contradicted by the RAW should be considered official, or even that they should be considered anything more than house rules. I'm not sure where the Sage got the idea that his job was to contradict the rules, but he does it with gusto. Gatling Wand. 'nuff said.</p><p></p><p>But really, I think you should address my second point there, which is, if someone on this board comes up with a ruling based on the RAW, which that someone can demonstrate by citation is in line with the rules, and then the Sage goes and makes a contradictory ruling, then there are two official, contradictory rulings: the RAW, as spelled out by Hyp, or Patryn, or whomever...and the Sage. Since the RAW is a primary rules source, it takes precedence over the Sage. So if the someone on these boards posts a RAW-prescribed ruling, then his ruling is not just official, but primary. Because it's the RAW.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps we should consider the Sage's rulings that agree with the RAW to be official (they were already official before he made them, since they agree with the RAW), and his rulings that contradict the RAW to be the "official WotC contradictions." That might solve some problems.</p><p></p><p>edit: I think I should also mention that I don't think the RAW always speaks for itself. Sometimes it requires work to winnow out what it says because the references are buried. This is why people like Hypersmurf can make official rulings...he's just pointing out what the rules actually say.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lonely Tylenol, post: 2584243, member: 18549"] But that would be contradicting Monopoly's RAW. It's not an interpretation or alternative ruling. It's patently against the RAW. Much in the way that the Sage often is. I don't think that anyone but the Sage is proposing that personal rulings that are contradicted by the RAW should be considered official, or even that they should be considered anything more than house rules. I'm not sure where the Sage got the idea that his job was to contradict the rules, but he does it with gusto. Gatling Wand. 'nuff said. But really, I think you should address my second point there, which is, if someone on this board comes up with a ruling based on the RAW, which that someone can demonstrate by citation is in line with the rules, and then the Sage goes and makes a contradictory ruling, then there are two official, contradictory rulings: the RAW, as spelled out by Hyp, or Patryn, or whomever...and the Sage. Since the RAW is a primary rules source, it takes precedence over the Sage. So if the someone on these boards posts a RAW-prescribed ruling, then his ruling is not just official, but primary. Because it's the RAW. Perhaps we should consider the Sage's rulings that agree with the RAW to be official (they were already official before he made them, since they agree with the RAW), and his rulings that contradict the RAW to be the "official WotC contradictions." That might solve some problems. edit: I think I should also mention that I don't think the RAW always speaks for itself. Sometimes it requires work to winnow out what it says because the references are buried. This is why people like Hypersmurf can make official rulings...he's just pointing out what the rules actually say. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What do you consider generally unquestionable sources of rules interpretation?
Top
