Poll

How much do you like the FAQ? How canon do you consider it?

I love the FAQ! It is central to the most holy RAW! It must not be defiled! Without it, there would be ...
4 (8.5%)
I like the FAQ except the part over here... I'd like to enforce it as RAW in my games except...
8 (17%)
I like much of the FAQ but it isn't RAW. It's just a guide-line. I'll use it if I feel like it. I don't know when. Ease up already!
26 (55.3%)
I dislike the FAQ except that one good ruling ... I'd like to throw it out except for this great quote...
3 (6.4%)
I hate the FAQ! It is an abomination of convoluted, good for nothing... My players will only use its words in hushed tones behind my back!
6 (12.8%)

Total Members Voted: 47

Author Topic: 3.5 FAQ and you  (Read 10347 times)

Offline PlzBreakMyCampaign

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1669
  • Immune to Critical Hits as a Fairness Elemental
  • Respect: +28
    • View Profile
3.5 FAQ and you
« Topic Start: March 06, 2013, 05:20:32 PM »
Will you all throw tomatoes if I mention the Pirate's code?

EDIT: my purpose is not to piss off soro. In fact his replies are hilarious and I always enjoy reading them. Cheers to a healthy discussion and do vote in the other polls here!

Offline zook1shoe

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4428
  • Feeling the Bern
  • Respect: +40
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #1: March 06, 2013, 09:16:12 PM »
#2 because they help with quite a few things, but some they totally blow up.
add me on Steam- zook1shoe
- All Spells
- playground

Offline linklord231

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3220
  • The dice are trying to kill me
  • Respect: +47
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #2: March 06, 2013, 09:21:17 PM »
The FAQ is not errata.  It does not have the authority to contradict what the rules actually say.  It is an excellent tool that clarifies designer intent in places where the rules are unclear, but it's still just advice.
I'm not arguing, I'm explaining why I'm right.

Offline zook1shoe

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4428
  • Feeling the Bern
  • Respect: +40
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #3: March 06, 2013, 09:30:34 PM »
I feel I was kind of stuck in between 2 and 3. I had to choose one ;)
add me on Steam- zook1shoe
- All Spells
- playground

Offline wotmaniac

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1545
  • Procrastinator in Chief
  • Respect: +20
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #4: March 06, 2013, 09:56:35 PM »
stuck between 2 & 3. (went with 2)


Will you all throw tomatoes if I mention the Pirate's code?




wait .... why is that relevant?

Offline SorO_Lost

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 5754
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
  • Respect: +126
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #5: March 06, 2013, 10:23:24 PM »
Where is my option? Basically you've got extremist for (it's the holy bible!) and four options about how I should disagree with it.

You know, there is things I disagree with in the Books, Monks should be proficient with Unarmed Strikes, Flaming should stack with Flaming Burst, drowning shouldn't heal you, UMD shouldn't expend Turning Usages you don't have, Barbarians shouldn't be one of the weakest Classes in the game, Dread Necros shouldn't have an infinite Fear effect, Swordsage should maintain his AC Bonus while unarmored, a Colossal Creature shouldn't have the same Balance DC for standing on an inch wide beam as a Tiny Fey, and so on. This list is friggin endless.

I guess where I'm going with this, there is a lot of stuff in the game rules I disagree with, but my disagreeance isn't an excuse to blacklist an entire book. It'd be like saying a Spell to Power Erudite is a myth, because everyone thinks Complete Psionic is trash. Or there is no such thing as a Warblade, because the general view is the ToB is too animaish. The FAQ, Errata, SRD, and Update booklets are all part of the D&D rule structure in addition to the hard cover printed books. Who am I to claim an entire source is illrelavent because I don't like a single ruling? And if I am God and thus have the power to do this, exactly where should I draw the line to stop?
What would happen if you were to climb to what you think my ego is and jump to what your post says your IQ is?
Neutrality is harder than you think.

Offline wotmaniac

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1545
  • Procrastinator in Chief
  • Respect: +20
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #6: March 06, 2013, 10:28:51 PM »
+1
did you forget to take your meds, SorO?

Offline Bauglir

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Constrained
  • Respect: +16
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #7: March 07, 2013, 12:35:12 AM »
There's a fairly clear continuum from, "Strongly Agree", "Agree", "Neither Agree Nor Disagree", "Disagree", "Disagree Strongly", SorO. It's... pretty standard polling practice. There is literally nothing in the poll to get upset over if you can accept the validity of a multiple choice poll as a thing, with the possible exception that the wording of each choice is oversimplified as a joke, in a way that in no fashion obscures the meaning.

Anyway, they're more guidelines than actual rules.

Offline Concerned Ninja Citizen

  • Legendary Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1581
  • I am Concerned
  • Respect: +9
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #8: March 07, 2013, 02:29:24 AM »
+1
SorO's issue seems to be that only the "strongly agree" option involves acknowledging FAQ as RAW. Even the next most positive option says "I'd like to enforce it as RAW except...."

There's a difference between saying "this piece of RAW is stupid" and "this is stupid, therefore it isn't RAW" and while pretty much everyone acknowledges that casting the "Darkness" spell to reduce total blackness to shadowy illumination is RAW, this poll seems to be of the opinion that the FAQ is not RAW. Only the holy bible level believers acknowledge it as RAW.

So if you agree with this quote:

The FAQ, Errata, SRD, and Update booklets are all part of the D&D rule structure in addition to the hard cover printed books.

The only option you have is "holy bible true believer" which is basically making fun of anyone who picks it. I can see getting upset over that.

Offline SorO_Lost

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 5754
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
  • Respect: +126
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #9: March 07, 2013, 09:06:44 AM »
did you forget to take your meds, SorO?
As any salesmen will tell you, it's how you word a question is how you'll get an answer to it.

I love the FAQ! It is central to the most holy RAW! It must not be defiled! Without it, there would be ...
I can't say I'm in love with it any more than I am with Savage Species or any other book. And as noted, I have tons of problems with the entire D&D structure. And without it would the world end? No, 99% of the FAQ's rulings are for stupid people unable to read. So guess this option isn't for me even through I consider an integral part of the rule structure.

I like the FAQ except the part over here... I'd like to enforce it as RAW in my games except...
I like the FAQ but it isn't used in my games. At. All. And this is the #2 option? What a load of BS.

I like much of the FAQ but it isn't RAW. It's just a guide-line. I'll use it if I feel like it. I don't know when. Ease up already!
Now it's a guideline I never use. Great...

And it only goes down from there. One fifth the options are stick up the ass paladin and the other four are "fuck it".
Biaist much?

***

The forums them selves use a standard rule set, this consistency to which everyone acknowledges allows us to communicate with each other under probable assumptions.  For example, DM permission for PrC access, ignorance on multiclass XP gains, all WotC official allowed, cross campaign material, etc. When someone posts for specific build help they are list any home brew and allowed content so that we can tailor our answers to their specific rule set.

Which brings us to the real problem. Why is the boards screwing with it's own style in what is or which allowed in general context? IE why is the FAQ kicked out of a thread when certain people show up? That traces back to stupid ignorant dumbasses. There is no other title for it to me so you'll just have to deal with that title.

Recall some of the FAQ's rulings and rants that followed.
* Deepwarden has always stated you use your Con instead of Dex to AC, this is a replacement and obeys all rules as such. Claiming it ignores MDB in armor because the title is "Dexterity" has it's own fancy fallacy title.
* Precarious Apprentice doesn't meet requirements to cast 2nd level spells, this is stated in fact within the Feat. While the FAQ has a roundabout way of explaining it that would seem as a weak argument on the forums, it doesn't change the fact the outcome is still the same.
* And more recently, Empower Spell increases Attack Rolls. Which simultaneously had four of five people chipping in other wise. However, an offhand comment the FAQ already said no devolves into a flame war and these series of threads.

In every one of those cases the "FAQ" has gotten a bad name and several threads it's insulted. Why?

Well, people that fail to read the rules and post stupid stuff like that tend to be extremely argumentative and unable to ever admit they are wrong. So arguments devolve into a screaming match as each tries to prove there way is the one and only way to interpret things. The FAQ contains a number of paraphrased Questions & Answers to frequently seen, discussed, asked, and debated rules on their forums and emails. WotC essentially has used it to officially side with certain debates and declare it the official way to handle things. So to one half the debaters the FAQ becomes a short answer to shut up old arguments, while the other half can only play Sour Grapes.

If you haven't heard of the story of Sour Grapes. The entire thing is an euphemism for explaining a psychological tend. The story is about a wolf that desires grapes and fails to get them no matter how hard he tries. So in the end he says they were sour anyway.  The trend is when something is placed out of reach, either it or the objects in the way are devalued as a method of self defense. This can actually be seen in that Empower Spell discussion. Even through several people have chimed in, some stating reasons thereof, Zook does not even acknowledge them. In his eyes they are incorrect and him in his infinite wisdom has the one true answer. However, the FAQ was mentioned and it does in fact have the weight to say he is incorrect. So suddenly he throws the entire set of rules out the window insulting them. It's stupid, you should ignore it.

The topic then shifted from Empower Spell works like this or not (with the majority of people agreeing it don't) to a strawman that the FAQ should be ignored. - Minor tanget question for you, would you argue Complete Adventurer is wrong and Barbarians cannot enter Frenzy? Because in equivalence that's what that strawman amounts to. - And yet, the post was humored. And this stupid derailing happens all the goddamn time. In appearance, because of people like that, the FAQ plays a weak link and quick side track to distract people from the real discussion rather than obtaining any real resolve. And this happens every single time.

Which boils back down to one single question.
Why the hell do you tolerate it?

You think I'm out of line with my strict adherence to the FAQ? You people allow others to derail threads, you build this concept that rules can be ignored, you continue to side with the gray area that breeds this. If anyone is trolling the forums with FAQ related posts. It's you. So I hope you're happy with them. I'm not, that much is obvious I'm sure.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2013, 09:22:00 AM by SorO_Lost »
What would happen if you were to climb to what you think my ego is and jump to what your post says your IQ is?
Neutrality is harder than you think.

Offline zook1shoe

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4428
  • Feeling the Bern
  • Respect: +40
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #10: March 07, 2013, 12:12:15 PM »
Why did you call me out specifically? I chose not to argue anymore about the FAQ thing here or in a certain other thread.
add me on Steam- zook1shoe
- All Spells
- playground

Offline SorO_Lost

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 5754
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
  • Respect: +126
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #11: March 07, 2013, 12:55:16 PM »
Why did you call me out specifically? I chose not to argue anymore about the FAQ thing here or in a certain other thread.
You'd be happy to know it has little to do with you personally per se. But that little debate is a specific instance that at this current time is fresh in the minds of the would be several viewers.

I was tempted to simply pull of Plz's other thread, but decided that was a can of worms not worth opening. It's better to point and laugh.
What would happen if you were to climb to what you think my ego is and jump to what your post says your IQ is?
Neutrality is harder than you think.

Offline zook1shoe

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4428
  • Feeling the Bern
  • Respect: +40
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #12: March 07, 2013, 01:03:18 PM »
 :cool k well i'm glad
add me on Steam- zook1shoe
- All Spells
- playground

Offline wotmaniac

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1545
  • Procrastinator in Chief
  • Respect: +20
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #13: March 07, 2013, 06:56:34 PM »
@ SorO:
a simple "yes" would have sufficed.   :p


seriously though -- I know exactly what you're talking about.   It's the internet -- meh.

Offline SorO_Lost

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 5754
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
  • Respect: +126
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #14: March 07, 2013, 08:04:18 PM »
@ SorO:
a simple "yes" would have sufficed.   :p
Solo, not SorO, is in charge of the one liners.  ;)
What would happen if you were to climb to what you think my ego is and jump to what your post says your IQ is?
Neutrality is harder than you think.

Offline wotmaniac

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1545
  • Procrastinator in Chief
  • Respect: +20
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #15: March 07, 2013, 08:11:42 PM »
@ SorO:
a simple "yes" would have sufficed.   :p
Solo, not SorO, is in charge of the one liners.  ;)

 :lol :clap

Offline Nunkuruji

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ***
  • Posts: 880
  • I shall bring great terror
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #16: March 13, 2013, 05:12:09 PM »
Who does #2 work for

Offline SorO_Lost

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 5754
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
  • Respect: +126
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #17: March 13, 2013, 08:14:18 PM »
The poopieman?
What would happen if you were to climb to what you think my ego is and jump to what your post says your IQ is?
Neutrality is harder than you think.

Offline zook1shoe

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4428
  • Feeling the Bern
  • Respect: +40
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #18: March 13, 2013, 09:24:48 PM »
Who does #2 work for

you show that turd who's the boss!
add me on Steam- zook1shoe
- All Spells
- playground

Offline PlzBreakMyCampaign

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 1669
  • Immune to Critical Hits as a Fairness Elemental
  • Respect: +28
    • View Profile
Re: 3.5 FAQ and you
« Reply #19: March 14, 2013, 08:39:07 PM »
Just bite you lip and give it Hell! Er, back to the thread:

I was tempted to simply pull of Plz's other thread, but decided that was a can of worms not worth opening. It's better to point and laugh.
Ah yes the high road. I did meant that seriously but it sounded sarcastic when I read it back. I don't understand the bolded part, but thanks for waiting out that thread. If I manage a 'here's to everyone can reconcile things' entry in that thread's second post, feel free to PM me about it. I might not like the heavy-handedness of your tone, but I do respect your opinion.

You people allow others to derail threads, you build this concept that rules can be ignored, you continue to side with the gray area that breeds this. If anyone is trolling the forums with FAQ related posts. It's you. So I hope you're happy
Ouch. But okay I'll fess up. It's all my fault ;)

About the bias... I haven't voted yet. Would you like me to? For the record I don't have a dog in the 3 examples listed (deepwarden, Precocious Apprentise and Empower spell). I do however have a really cool way of looking at metamagic.

Edit: I should also mention that ALL of the entries are slight parodies. You'll notice that the neutral option is very 'chill out dude!' rather than druid-like 'THY LEFT HAND SHALL COMPROMISE WITH THY RIGHT HAND.' I was going with humor, which I feel was heavier on the far negative position than the far positive one...