RAW, what is?

[Darklord Xavez]

I have seen quite a few threads/posts mentioning RAW but not saying what it stands for. Somebody please tell me.
-Xavez

[Protecar]

The Rules as they are Written. It means that you go by the rules of each book of DnD as it is written down(as opposed to RaI--which is the Rules as they were Intended to be interpreted).

Edit: This comes up a lot because some rules or feats or items or classes or whatever have some vague wordings in certain books that can cause for exploitation. Hence, the RaI--which sometimes can be exploited too. :smallbiggrin:

[Darklord Xavez]

Thanks.
-Xavez

[JaronK]

The important thing here is that RAW is the literal interpretation of the Rules as Written. For example, by RAW humanoid Monks are not proficient with unarmed strikes. Why? Because except for humanoids, all creatures are proficient with their natural attacks... but humanoids are proficient with all simple weapons unless they have a character class, in which case they have the proficiencies of their class. If you look at the Monk class, unarmed strikes (which are a simple weapon) are not listed. Furthermore, none of the Monk abilities actually gives proficiency. So by RAW, they're not proficient.

This is one of the few cases where RAI (Rules as Intended) is clear... RAI is that they're proficient. But other than the most obvious of cases (which this is) on the boards we generally discuss RAW by default unless you specifically say you're doing something else. It's worthless to discuss anything else, because RAI is all about interpretation and different people will interpret it differently, and everybody has different house rules, but everyone plays with the same RAW. So it's fine to say "In my game we have a House Rule that says that Wizards can't cast anything from the Polymorph line of spells" but it's inappropriate on the forums to say "Wizards can't cast Polymorph." The first statement is true because you've just made it clear that you're talking about a house rule, and the second statement is false because the assumption is by RAW and by RAW Wizards can indeed cast Polymorph.

Is that clear?

JaronK

[Darklord Xavez]

The important thing here is that RAW is the literal interpretation of the Rules as Written. For example, by RAW humanoid Monks are not proficient with unarmed strikes. Why? Because except for humanoids, all creatures are proficient with their natural attacks... but humanoids are proficient with all simple weapons unless they have a character class, in which case they have the proficiencies of their class. If you look at the Monk class, unarmed strikes (which are a simple weapon) are not listed. Furthermore, none of the Monk abilities actually gives proficiency. So by RAW, they're not proficient.

This is one of the few cases where RAI (Rules as Intended) is clear... RAI is that they're proficient. But other than the most obvious of cases (which this is) on the boards we generally discuss RAW by default unless you specifically say you're doing something else. It's worthless to discuss anything else, because RAI is all about interpretation and different people will interpret it differently, and everybody has different house rules, but everyone plays with the same RAW. So it's fine to say "In my game we have a House Rule that says that Wizards can't cast anything from the Polymorph line of spells" but it's inappropriate on the forums to say "Wizards can't cast Polymorph." The first statement is true because you've just made it clear that you're talking about a house rule, and the second statement is false because the assumption is by RAW and by RAW Wizards can indeed cast Polymorph.

Is that clear?

JaronK

Actually, all characters are proficient with simple weapons, so monks ARE proficient with unarmed strikes.
-Xavez

[Ernir]

Actually, all characters are proficient with simple weapons
What's your source on that? :smallconfused:

[marjan]

Actually, all characters are proficient with simple weapons, so monks ARE proficient with unarmed strikes.
-Xavez

If that was true, they wouldn't list quarterstaff as on of the weapons monk is proficient with.

[Optimystik]

I'm convinced that stickying a thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18512) is the best way to keep people from reading it. :smalltongue:


Actually, all characters are proficient with simple weapons, so monks ARE proficient with unarmed strikes.
-Xavez

Some classes have their own proficiency list - wizards and monks are two of those.

[Kobold-Bard]

Also by RAW we have the Schrödinger's Dragon Disciple.

- At Level 10 it becomes a Half-Dragon, but Half-Dragons can't qualify for the Dragon Disciple class.
- So upon reaching Level 10 he loses all class features, including being a Half-Dragon.
- Since he's not a Half-Dragon anymore he gets all his class features back, including being a Half-Dragon, so he loses them again, just to get them back again, just to lose them again...

10th Level Dragon Disciples are basically a never ending seizure.

[Darklord Xavez]

I'm convinced that stickying a thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18512) is the best way to keep people from reading it. :smalltongue:





That link doesn't say what stickying a thread is. What is stickying, exactly?
-Xavez

[JaronK]

Actually, all characters are proficient with simple weapons, so monks ARE proficient with unarmed strikes.
-Xavez

False. Proficiencies are only listed by type and by class. The Humanoid type gives very specific proficiencies... feel free to read them in the Monster Manual on page 310. The Monk class gives proficiencies too... check them out too, in the Player's Handbook of course.

Many characters (Monks and Wizards) are not proficient with all simple weapons. IIRC Rogues aren't either. If they're of a type other than humanoid, this all changes. If you disagree with anything I've said here, please give a page reference.

JaronK

[Kobold-Bard]

That link doesn't say what stickying a thread is. What is stickying, exactly?
-Xavez

It gets stuck at the top of the list of threads so it never gets lost.
Stickying is for any forum, not just this one.

[Silly Wizard]

Lil Wayne's newest mixtape is pretty raw

[Optimystik]

That link doesn't say what stickying a thread is. What is stickying, exactly?
-Xavez

The mods pin a thread to the top of a forum so that it never gets lost. Generally such threads contain useful information, that anyone inexperienced should read.

One of the threads linked in the sticky at the top of this forum goes through many if not all of the abbreviations we commonly use here - the same thread I linked to save you a click.


Lil Wayne's newest mixtape is pretty raw

Ha. Ha.