Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

[Kelb_Panthera]

Why would the company even bother to issue FAQ if they were not just as binding as rule errata? It makes no sense to treat anything that comes from Wizards as NOT being part of RAW. If it's something like a former Wizards employee writing on his blog about his intended changes to the book he wrote, I can see an argument for disregarding that opinion, even though it comes straight from the author. But anything from Wotco comes straight from the entire publication department, and has presumably been approved. If you can just disregard it as "not RAW", why does it exist?

The FAQ only exists to give semi-official answers based on a reading of the rules done by a customer relations employee.

That's read; someone with no more to go on than we do, except maybe a vague memory of what was intended by one of the designers that's got his mind on the current project, if (s)he's lucky.

Then of course there's the fact that they've made suggestions that are blatantly against the rules as they were most likely intended, nevermind the actuall rules as they appear in the books.

It's a simple matter of credibility really.