See how he says the latter, then the former latter further down, presumably (I dunno) as a reference to how only I see them as seperate? But the former and latter are different things – though he clearly wants to differ on that.
You can’t really get into special magical definitions if you want to deal with other people. Or atleast from what I’ve observed you can’t without grating against other people. If I don’t understand what the heck you mean (even if somehow the two things are the same), were not working together.
I’ll clarify the distinction again: If your making up an NPC and the rules say ‘decide as GM if he has power attack or not’, when you decide if he has power attack, your just following rules. Your not house ruling, your just following rules! Just like players do when they make characters.
Now if you say to everyone ‘Hey, I want NPC’s to have the option of’ bludgeoning murder’ as a feat they could have as well!? How about it!’
This is house ruling. Specifically it’s actually asking people if they want it as a house rule.
So what happens if you blur the two?
Well apparently you start one line quoting the other guy on RPG.net and giving clipped replies.
I don’t think he wants to talk to me. Which is fine…except for the actually still talking to me part.
How do you deal with that? I said he can ask me a question, if he wants to keep talking. That’s all I could think of.