Albo, while I have your attention. Fix this goddamn weapon vs armor table from Chainmail in Wight-Box. You just stole it from Gygax who also got that wrong. See https://t.co/84CtIIjLXF
Firstly, cool off. Do you need attention so much that you find calling some stranger you disagree with "retarded" an ok behavior? That's pathetic.
We can disagree whether words have objective meaning, but that was not my main point.
Which interpretation would be "correct"? I believe neither. But one definitely would be closer to reality and what I meant. And it won't be the RAW interpretation.
@ViktorGorchev I oppose the notion of treating literal interpretations as the only valid ones to establish the meaning of the text. There are other approaches (e.g. comparative, intentionalist, diegetic, playful, etc.) that are immensely useful.
The term "common language of RAW" is a misnomer. The text has no inherit meaning. We give it meaning by the process of interpretation. RAW aka the literalistic approach is one of many. Posing it as a common/objective/neutral is an idealistic bias.
@UltraTtrpger@DM_Blackwall@threelinestudio My point was explicitly 'Do whatever the hell you want in your games, but if I'm DISCUSSING a game I bought I'd personally prefer we all use the common language of RAW so we're all on the same page.'
@ViktorGorchev I agree that when you want to discuss the text of the book, no one should bring up other books. And sure, literal interpretations will usually differ only slightly. But that's beside my point.
@rfleury@realVBC@AutismCapital Could you give another example of FCC pressuring a private media company to suspend a show host for their political commentary?
@to_on_dera Ojej, ale po co ten paternalizm? Będąc szczerym to kiedyś moje lewactwo było bliższe ***** *** i libleftowi, więc nie wiem, do czego się odnosisz.
Natomiast twierdzenie, że PiSowcy są siłą rewolucyjną jest tak absurdalne, że zasługuje jedynie na reakcję "ha ha".