|2 people marked this as a favorite.|
Many people go to the rules forum to find out how the rules are intended to work in the game. I think that is the majority intention of most who ask questions there.
As we know sometimes what they rules say, and what the rules mean do no match up well. The recent flying skill FAQ is an example of that.
This discussion however is not about the words not matching up. It is about the posters.
Sample Conversation:I am going to use an extreme example, but focus on the point which I will state afterwards.
Poster A: Can I take actions after I die.
Poster B: When you die your character is out of play. The devs assumed we had enough common sense to know that so they didn't state it like they did for the paralyzed condition.
Poster C: The rules do not say you are not allowed to have your actions so you do not lose them.
.......Poster C continue to argue this point vs other posters for several pages
Poster B: Do you play it that way at home?
Poster C: I was just arguing what the book says. I know it does not work that way.
Now it is obvious that poster A and poster B were discussing how things were intended to actually work in gameplay.
Poster C is arguing the most literal interpretation.
A discussion on what the rules say, and what the rules are supposed to do at the table are two very different arguments in many cases.
If you as poster know that someone is asking how things are expected to play out in a game, and you argue from a different viewpoint then you should acknowledge that. Otherwise due to the differing goals, there will never be a consensus. It is just common sense.
What is the point of entering the discussion from that angle and not acknowledge it?
I have my opinion, but I would like to hear someone who has done this explain it.
Possible answers are:
A. The rules to me are what is in the book, not what Paizo intends them to mean.
B. I honestly didn't think people wanted intent.
C. I just wanted to play devil's advocate, and thought it would be better if nobody knew I actually understood the rule.
D. other reason not mentioned