Some of our recent rules discussions have become heated (5 locked threads just on the first page of the +OR+ ) and this is really due to the deficiences of RAW. It doesn't always work for everyone. Heck, RAW doesn't always work. See the recent thread on Everliving/Reanimation Protocols. This is not to turn into a GW-rules-writing-bashing thread. That GW's rules are not written to a legal standard is both true and unimportant. See the below quote from Sir Karl Popper:
Even judges utilize not just the naked letter of the law, but also the context of the law as a whole and how it relates to related laws, and the intent of the legislators to make their decisions.
Always remember that it is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood: there will always be some who misunderstand you.
Said another way, we've been placing so much emphasis on what the books say that we've forgotten what they mean is the really important part. I am not advocating that the +OR+ become a "house rules" forum, but we're really hamstringing ourselves (and doing a disservice to casual readers of the B&C) if we're forced to say things like the Resurrection Orb flatly does not work for models with Everliving- when clearly it is supposed to work. Are we really going to force Necron opponents to live by the mistaken RAW of their codex? Of course not. We're going to give it to our opponent that the rules of their codex weren't written to a legal standard and allow their wargear to work as intended with their special rules.
Our +OR+ contributors have good heads on their shoulders. Our B&C brothers and sisters do a great job of following the current +OR+ rules of discussing and addressing the pure RAW, while also sneaking comments of what the "rules as fair" really are. I believe that it will be beneficial to all of us if common sense has a place in our +OR+ discussions. RAW, as ever, needs to be the basis for what we discuss or we're just inventing house rules, but I feel that we should be able to offer RAI interpretations. Like thade intelligently bears in his signature:
Can we discuss 40k RAW and leave the door open to RAI as well, so we can bring actual played-on-the-tabletop solutions to our rules discussions? Should we open the door to more than RAW in our discussions?
There are a lot of rules that are so well understood in this game that they forget to make a point of them in the books.
I think so. What do you think?
Edited by Something Wycked, 10 January 2012 - 05:08 PM.