: Personally i think there are some things in GURPS that
: are part of the design docs and therefore canon; BUT
: because we cannot point these things out from the
: hilarious speculation and other non-canon, we just
: have to sit here and determine it's contents as
: debatable, but deutero-canon.
Agreed. I only prefer not using the term "canon" to describe anything that isn't purely canon. Maybe we can brainstorm on other potential terms. Though, I do like "pseudo-canon" and "deutero-canon," as you have. :-)
: and by that I mean a second, but lesser canon; ready,
: willing, and able to be refuted by the Games and
: Manuals and disregarded from that point on like a used
: piece of tiolet paper.
Lol, agreed.
: but until then, I personally can assume, like archer
: proposed, that the material therein is a *second*
: canon, a pseudo-canon of sorts.
Agreed.
: but don't ask sili to accept this, his views appear to be
: far different on the 'wavering' of platforms when in
: fact it is the simple modification of details and
: interpretations, not the platform of personal law
: itself.
Mmhmm, that's true.
: besides, sili, you're insufferable ;^D [just to prevent
: that comment from coming back to bite me in the ass:
: it was a joke] :D
Lol; it's funny because it's true :-D.
: NOTE THIS: even if we did have the actual design
: docs,
which are useless anyway, it seems,
: right there on our screens in all their unedited, 100%
: canonical glory, we'd *still* argue because our
: *personal interpretations* of that very material would
: differ, just as our interpretations differ on the
: matters of in-game string lists, the narrations, etc.
: and so forth.
That's right. Very well put, Welly.
: and on that, my friends, you *must* agree ;P
I most asuredly do! I'm glad we can work together in the future with little or no discord on this topic, Welly :-).
