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
*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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What do you think of the faq?
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="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 5275387" data-attributes="member: 32740"><p>This is a bad way to start since it gets right to the heart of the issue at hand.</p><p>The FAQ is incorporated into WotC's approach to dealing with rules questions. If pressed they might let it slip that you <em>could</em> do what you like with the rules, but the overwhelming emphasis was that <em>their</em> answers to questions were the official and correct answers, and that you should consult <em>them</em> before doing something so brazen as coming up with an answer on your own.</p><p> </p><p>If the D&D rules FAQ isn't treated like other FAQs. The way WotC used both the FAQ and Sage Advice is as a permanent, expanding list of NEW rules to fill in constantly-revealed omissions, contradictions, errors, or to just flatly re-write whatever wasn't working. All, of course, presented in a way to more easily let people believe that this was how it was meant to be all along.</p><p> </p><p>Note that the official <em>errata</em> was more along the lines of correcting typos and references that were in genuine error that had failed to be altered in the original process of editing multiple versions into the original documented rules. It was the FAQ and especially Sage Advice that continued to expand the rules themselves beyond the RAW.</p><p> </p><p>Rules interpretation in earlier versions was supposed to be something handled specifically by the DM. Rules simply could not be created to cover everything (and Gary was smart enough not to try) so part of what made a good DM was gaining the experience at rules adjudication, learning to make such decisions for himself in the middle of a game and craft his own long-term solutions tailored to fit ones own game. This was replaced by a mindset where players would end up telling the DM how to run the game by waving official rules at him. WotC may not have set out with that intention but that's frankly what they got. Their approach to answering D&D rules questions was taken from their approach to handling rules for their CCG's. The error was in choosing to overlook the fact that the CCG's were directly, unalterably competititve games whereas D&D was born and bred as a cooperative exercise and only secondarily adaptible to competitive tournaments where unified sets of OFFICIAL rules to be applied over multiple games actually mattered.</p><p> </p><p>Actually, that should have been a sensible INITIAL response to have been followed by a <em>suggested</em> solution.</p><p> </p><p></p><p>There's nothing wrong with using the FAQ as a resource to inform your decision-making process, but no, I STRENUOUSLY believe that treating either it or Sage Advice as <em>anything</em> more than well-meaning suggestions is to do a disservice to yourself and your players by not actively honing your own skills as a DM.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Man in the Funny Hat, post: 5275387, member: 32740"] This is a bad way to start since it gets right to the heart of the issue at hand. The FAQ is incorporated into WotC's approach to dealing with rules questions. If pressed they might let it slip that you [I]could[/I] do what you like with the rules, but the overwhelming emphasis was that [I]their[/I] answers to questions were the official and correct answers, and that you should consult [I]them[/I] before doing something so brazen as coming up with an answer on your own. If the D&D rules FAQ isn't treated like other FAQs. The way WotC used both the FAQ and Sage Advice is as a permanent, expanding list of NEW rules to fill in constantly-revealed omissions, contradictions, errors, or to just flatly re-write whatever wasn't working. All, of course, presented in a way to more easily let people believe that this was how it was meant to be all along. Note that the official [I]errata[/I] was more along the lines of correcting typos and references that were in genuine error that had failed to be altered in the original process of editing multiple versions into the original documented rules. It was the FAQ and especially Sage Advice that continued to expand the rules themselves beyond the RAW. Rules interpretation in earlier versions was supposed to be something handled specifically by the DM. Rules simply could not be created to cover everything (and Gary was smart enough not to try) so part of what made a good DM was gaining the experience at rules adjudication, learning to make such decisions for himself in the middle of a game and craft his own long-term solutions tailored to fit ones own game. This was replaced by a mindset where players would end up telling the DM how to run the game by waving official rules at him. WotC may not have set out with that intention but that's frankly what they got. Their approach to answering D&D rules questions was taken from their approach to handling rules for their CCG's. The error was in choosing to overlook the fact that the CCG's were directly, unalterably competititve games whereas D&D was born and bred as a cooperative exercise and only secondarily adaptible to competitive tournaments where unified sets of OFFICIAL rules to be applied over multiple games actually mattered. Actually, that should have been a sensible INITIAL response to have been followed by a [I]suggested[/I] solution. There's nothing wrong with using the FAQ as a resource to inform your decision-making process, but no, I STRENUOUSLY believe that treating either it or Sage Advice as [I]anything[/I] more than well-meaning suggestions is to do a disservice to yourself and your players by not actively honing your own skills as a DM. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
What do you think of the faq?
Top