Well, not that they're unanswered. Just that the devs thought there was no need for clarification. Sometimes that's useful for figuring out the intent or what the devs think about it (with a little extrapolation, granted).
The FAQs are separate from current errata; it's just that a FAQ question leads to a change in the printed book, in which case we call out the to-be-errata in the FAQ response.
Actually, this is not such a bad idea. I remember back in 3.5 days many folks were wanting to run old 3.0 PrCs- even after all the 3.5 “splatbooks” has come out. My question was when does the fact that you have NOT redone a PrC mean that it is dead or dropped. Andy was nice enough to respond to my post saying that yes, they need to come up with that list (and that yes, those PrCs were dead), but then 4th ED happened.
So, there are not critical but still unanswered queries that should be answered, like what happens to a eidolons gear when it dies?
Instead of a FAQ what would be nice is a list of “not official but still good” answers from Devs on such questions, like the one Cheapy linked to.
How about we call it "Frequently Asked Questions - Unanswered" or FAQ-U?
Cheapy wrote:
Well, not that they're unanswered. Just that the devs thought there was no need for clarification.
So more sort of Officially Refused Further Explanation : or FAQ-ORFE for short?
Actually, being able to browse a list of posts that resulted in a response that had Staff response: no reply required. could be pretty useful for preventing duplicates. I guess the question is, have duplicates become irritating yet?
Sean K Reynolds
Designer, RPG Superstar Judge
brock
