[projectaon] Re: Outstanding Errata Sprint (Week 6)
- From: Chris Neilson <crusty.chris@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: projectaon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2011 16:39:27 +1200
On Wed, 2011-06-29 at 02:35 +0000, John TFS wrote:
>
> Well, that's probably not going to happen. There's always room for
> some level of ambiguity. There is no possible way to use footnotes to
> account for every conceivable interpretation of Joe Dever's language.
> Since these are Project Aon books, we have the Project Aon forum. The
> best the footnotes can do is deal with the more common ambiguities.
>
But you could cover all these issues mentioned in the last few days with
one note somewhere generic like in the Rules section. "Note: bonuses to
RNT choices, CS and EP are assumed to stack unless otherwise stated".
Actually I have just seen the Reader's Handbook. This is exactly the
sort of place it should go if you're worried about cluttering up the
books with footnotes. Just add a General Rules section at the front that
talks about RNT choices and the assumption that any bonuses you gain can
be stacked by default.
Then at least you have somewhere you can refer people to if they
question The Rules.
OMG. I even think the handbook is a wiki so I could go and do that ...
>
> Because it strikes me as absurd that Dever would create a bonus that
> caters exclusively to those players who refuse to master the Bow at
> Mentora level and beyond.
>
And I find its absurd that Nexus at Archmaster only aids you against one
type of creature (Ictakko) and one you dont even have to fight. Does
that mean I should make up my own version of the rules?
There is no way that you can enforce people to play by your
interpretation of the rules, but some people like playing by the rules
even if they are broken/stupid (or at least knowing what the rule should
be).
~~~~~~
Manage your subscription at //www.freelists.org/list/projectaon
Other related posts:
