Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9391376" data-attributes="member: 7006">We know that... and Jeremy knows that.  But so many people out there never did know that and still constantly asked and asked and asked about all these ridiculous rules scenarios, despite the repeated statements of "It's your game, you can make a ruling that fits your table".  A statement that everybody seemingly ignored or just didn't want to hear and thus wouldn't stop asking for clarifications anyway.  And as a result... Jeremy would tend to answer the questions as bare-boned as possible.  If the rule said something specifically, he told people that what was written down in the book is what it said... even if he (and other people) probably thought by that point the rules could have been written better.  But because they had already made a company decision to not write pages upon pages of errata to fix the rules intention of every single thing like they had in 4E... what was written down was what the "official" decision was.And players could either use that "official WotC decision" if using "official" rules meant that much to them... or they could do exactly what Jeremy and the rest of WotC wanted, and just made up and used rules changes they wanted that made more sense to them and their table-- to Hell with what WotC wrote down in their books.Unfortunately, and with a grand sigh from all those involved... too many players still went with the former, regardless of how much they disliked the results.  Better to use "official" rules that they hated so they didn't have to explain themselves to anyone else, then make their own corrections to rules they didn't agree with and then have to talk to their fellow players to justify their changes.</blockquote>

Verification