Horror Factor (Necromancer) can it be turned off?

[eliakon]

And it is stated "suitable for rifts" contradicting the statement by a "contributing" creator and individual with whom KS AUTHORIZED the creation of.

"suitable for rifts" and "compatible with rifts" are not "official for rifts"
It is not part of the official rifts setting, and its rules are not official rifts rules, nor do they over ride rifts rules.

[Hawk258]

And it is stated "suitable for rifts" contradicting the statement by a "contributing" creator and individual with whom KS AUTHORIZED the creation of.

"suitable for rifts" and "compatible with rifts" are not "official for rifts"
It is not part of the official rifts setting, and its rules are not official rifts rules, nor do they over ride rifts rules.

Just stop... your double speak is terrible. Either they work or don't...

[dreicunan]

The Necromancer Planktal-Nakton contradicts that statement

Horror/Awe Factor: 11 (+5 to vampires and their minions)
when people realize who he is.

Greetings and Salutations. The books often contradict each other. With that said, if you can actually provide a book and page number, I'd happily look at Planktal-Nakton to see what's written. I like to verify sources, which is why I also provide a book and page number with my quotes. Sometimes a line or two is missed (or taken out of context), and sometimes it's exactly what the person says. But I do like making an informed decision. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

First, Prysus, thank you for those very on point references in your earlier post.

Vampire Sourcebook p. 41. In the case of Planktal-Nakton we clearly have something else going on, as a lvl 13 necromancer would have a horror factor of 12, not 11. (It is worth noting that the 15th level Aramis Knight has the correct horror factor of 13). A logical conclusion would be to note that this is not merely a horror factor, but a horror/awe factor. The "when people realize who he is" part could be rather key here. An interpretation of the situation would be that he still has a horror factor of 12 when people don't realize who he is, but an awe factor of 11 and a horror factor of 16 to the appropriate people/vampires who do realize who he is.

As for your argument Hawk258, we now have multiple canon rift sources showing that a Necromancer can't turn his horror factor off and it is an all the time thing, in comparison to your potential black swan, Planktal-Nakton. The question here deals with Necromancers, not dragon hatchlings or shape-shifting D-Bees, so neither of them are pertinent to the conversation (though Carlotta certainly can be cited as evidence that a dragon hatchling's HF is purely appearance based).

So, weight of evidence from Rifts only sources indicates that it is always on. Weight of evidence from across the megaverse indicates that it is always on. So, do you have any specific evidence to offer from that article which states that their HF is not always on?

[Hawk258]

The Necromancer Planktal-Nakton contradicts that statement

Horror/Awe Factor: 11 (+5 to vampires and their minions)
when people realize who he is.

Greetings and Salutations. The books often contradict each other. With that said, if you can actually provide a book and page number, I'd happily look at Planktal-Nakton to see what's written. I like to verify sources, which is why I also provide a book and page number with my quotes. Sometimes a line or two is missed (or taken out of context), and sometimes it's exactly what the person says. But I do like making an informed decision. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

First, Prysus, thank you for those very on point references in your earlier post.

Vampire Sourcebook p. 41. In the case of Planktal-Nakton we clearly have something else going on, as a lvl 13 necromancer would have a horror factor of 12, not 11. (It is worth noting that the 15th level Aramis Knight has the correct horror factor of 13). A logical conclusion would be to note that this is not merely a horror factor, but a horror/awe factor. The "when people realize who he is" part could be rather key here. An interpretation of the situation would be that he still has a horror factor of 12 when people don't realize who he is, but an awe factor of 11 and a horror factor of 16 to the appropriate people/vampires who do realize who he is.

As for your argument Hawk258, we now have multiple canon rift sources showing that a Necromancer can't turn his horror factor off and it is an all the time thing, in comparison to your potential black swan, Planktal-Nakton. The question here deals with Necromancers, not dragon hatchlings or shape-shifting D-Bees, so neither of them are pertinent to the conversation (though Carlotta certainly can be cited as evidence that a dragon hatchling's HF is purely appearance based).

So, weight of evidence from Rifts only sources indicates that it is always on. Weight of evidence from across the megaverse indicates that it is always on. So, do you have any specific evidence to offer from that article which states that their HF is not always on?

That is your interpretation of the rules... does "awe" overcome horror?

How do you go from feared to loved and actively practicing necromancy? And not hide it?

People would die at his command

[eliakon]

And it is stated "suitable for rifts" contradicting the statement by a "contributing" creator and individual with whom KS AUTHORIZED the creation of.

"suitable for rifts" and "compatible with rifts" are not "official for rifts"
It is not part of the official rifts setting, and its rules are not official rifts rules, nor do they over ride rifts rules.

Just stop... your double speak is terrible. Either they work or don't...

It isn't double speak.
The rules can work for it. But they are unofficial for settings other than the ones that they are official for.
If they were official for Rifts it would say that they were official for Rifts.
The text couldn't be any clearer. They are offical rules for 3 games and unofficial for other games.

[Hawk258]

Okay let's do this dance again.

If a necromancer Player character is optional at the GM's approval is true

The horror factor rules the GM's choice is true

And "rules" suitable (official or otherwise) for rifts are the GM's choice is true.

Then its GM's choice and a valid reference to guide a game.

And a valid point of consideration.

A gm is under zero obligation to use your interpretation of the rules.

[Shark_Force]

you really still haven't provided any evidence that a necromancer doesn't always radiate horror factor. other sources have indicated that they do, unless it is somehow covered up.

and no, not one of those examples of necromancers having regular jobs is actual proof. horror factor has a pretty minimal effect. it doesn't make you run away shrieking at the top of your lungs. it doesn't announce anyone to be anything more than sufficiently horrifying that when a combat situation occurs, you will be slightly delayed in your reactions for a brief period of time.

so who cares if necromancers can have regular jobs. plenty of people find undertakers, embalmers, gravediggers, etc creepy, and have for a long time. there are going to be plenty of people who think "huh, that doctor who does autopsies for the police sure was creepy" and just move on with their life without thinking much more about it, because that really isn't conclusive evidence of ANYTHING let alone the fact that the doctor must be a necromancer.

horror factor is not a giant neon sign flashing on and off over the person's head while a mariachi band follows them around playing a song called "this person is obviously a supernatural monster and you should either flee for your life or run them out of town".

[eliakon]

Okay let's do this dance again.

okay

If a necromancer Player character is optional at the GM's approval is true

Irrelivant.
This is not about PCs.
This is about Necromancers.

The horror factor rules the GM's choice is true

Incorrect. The default is that the rules are the ones that are in the books unless rule zero changes them.

And "rules" suitable (official or otherwise) for rifts are the GM's choice is true.

Again incorrect. The rules are those that are for the particular game.

Then its GM's choice and a valid reference to guide a game.

A GM can use rule zero to change the rules for their game as they see fit yes. But that is changing the game from the RAW and outside the realms of what we can really discuss here.

And a valid point of consideration.

No not really "The GM can change the rules as they see fit" isn't really a valid reason to consider that the rules are not what are printed.

A gm is under zero obligation to use your interpretation of the rules.

Again two problems here
1) I am not saying that they are required to do anything. What I am saying is what the RAW is. What the GM chooses to do is up to them.
2) It is not my interpretation. I am simply looking at what we have printed in the rules. And for Rifts what we have printed is that material that is in the rifts rules.

[dreicunan]

horror factor is not a giant neon sign flashing on and off over the person's head while a mariachi band follows them around playing a song called "this person is obviously a supernatural monster and you should either flee for your life or run them out of town".

Well, usually it isn't. On the other hand, sometimes you see the picture on p. 35 of VKr!

[Hawk258]

Actually let's look at the question and make sure we are staying in context to the question.

Since Vampire Sourcebook allows for Good Necromancers. I was wondering about the Horror Factor. Not the one against Vampires, but the one against everyone else. Are there rule for turning it off? Or is your 'aura of evil power of undeath' on no matter what? Would the Alter Aura spell/power be sufficient in this case? Like if you just want to go into town to the general store? Or do you have to send a carrier pigeon zombie? 

Cheers!

1 first: not "good" but Unprincipled or Anarchist can be.
2: turn off? No, hide yes. (There are abilities that necromancer have access to that can minimize it) (hide among dead and charismatic aura are two of them)
3: the horror factor "shouldn't" be an issue for the average civilian setting as long as you try blending in. Or have earned the trust of that community.
4: there are "options" for ways to handle horror factor and necromancers. There are 2 "optional" ways to handle both listed in rifter

[Blue_Lion]

The level 5 spell horror pg 106 -107 of Bom Shows aura based horror has a range it take affect at. So if a dragons horror factor was aura based logically it would have a range like AD&D dragons fear.

What is the "range" of a Gunslinger or Gunfighter's HF aura, then, if your premise is true?

It also negates the augment that has been used by some posters(including you if I recall right Axelmania) to justify the CS shooting every thing they encounter in some opps. Because they would only need to shoot kids that have a horror factor to kill hiding dragons and demons hiding as children.

The CS justification might be that the children are dragons/demons shapeshifted and using Charismatic Aura like the Necromancer, no dice.

I believe that this nonmagical disguise is able to override the horror factor.

Would you even need to override it? Don't Xiticix have their own HF anyway? Being less scary might make you look MORE suspicious.

The gun slinger HF is self counterdicting. It calls it a social stigma, aura, and requires a known gunslinger. So his HF seams to be about reputation not a true aura. If it was an aura it would have a range that people are affected and would not require that the gunslinger be known. (so as a reputation is required that does not seam to be a magical aura of fear.

You are doing allot of dancing that requires the cs to all know about magic.

[Hawk258]

If it was an aura it would have a range that people are affected

You make a great point:
What is the range of a necromancer's horror factor?

I mean admittedly a level 1 wild vampire has the same horror factor as a lvl 15 necromancer.

[Blue_Lion]

And if you knew it was canon but were deliberately obfuscating that with a sidetrack about how the Rifter is a source that we should consider then you were not providing information.
You were trolling and trying to play 'gotcha'

No, there was no troll, I never claimed either way. The issue of canon has "never" been a part of my posts other than "I don't care"

The issue of "canon" and official was thrown in to disregard it as a valid argument

People asked about its official value you went on a rant about all rules being optional, even to the point that you seamed to be trying to argue optional information over official cannon. Because you countered statements explaining cannon by saying every rule is optional and that rifer has more value than posters discussing a topic. So yea that does kind of have the appearance of trolling. More so given what was just pointed out. (More so given that you did the same thing in multiple threads.)


The issue of Canon was asked about to determine the validity of a source not disregard the source. When people ask about it they are trying to determine the validity of the source.

[Hawk258]

And if you knew it was canon but were deliberately obfuscating that with a sidetrack about how the Rifter is a source that we should consider then you were not providing information.
You were trolling and trying to play 'gotcha'

No, there was no troll, I never claimed either way. The issue of canon has "never" been a part of my posts other than "I don't care"

The issue of "canon" and official was thrown in to disregard it as a valid argument

People asked about its official value you went on a rant about all rules being optional, even to the point that you seamed to be trying to argue optional information over official cannon. Because you countered statements explaining cannon by saying every rule is optional and that rifer has more value than posters discussing a topic. So yea that does kind of have the appearance of trolling. More so given what was just pointed out. (More so given that you did the same thing in multiple threads.)


The issue of Canon was asked about to determine the validity of a source not disregard the source. When people ask about it they are trying to determine the validity of the source.

So rifter isn't valid? If it's in rifter doesn't that kind of make it valid?

I mean it's not like I said "this is the only answer" I stated it was an "option". At which point it was placed into debate of "validity".

Additionally... Rifts and many of the palladium works are designed to be flexible. (Canon) to adapt for many types of GM/players. RIFTER was designed to allow for expanding on those game systems (canon). And for questions like this to have more than 1 answer.

It is designed to be ran using sdc instead of mdc... to have more "optional" combat rules... and allow GM's to address contradictory information the way they wish. And to include elements from other game system.

It is "canon" to chose the rules that fit the settings the best.

Rifter falls under RAI (adapt as you wish) RAW (don't like it don't use it) and canon (this system is flexible feel free to add other palladium elements into your game)

[Blue_Lion]

And if you knew it was canon but were deliberately obfuscating that with a sidetrack about how the Rifter is a source that we should consider then you were not providing information.
You were trolling and trying to play 'gotcha'

No, there was no troll, I never claimed either way. The issue of canon has "never" been a part of my posts other than "I don't care"

The issue of "canon" and official was thrown in to disregard it as a valid argument

People asked about its official value you went on a rant about all rules being optional, even to the point that you seamed to be trying to argue optional information over official cannon. Because you countered statements explaining cannon by saying every rule is optional and that rifer has more value than posters discussing a topic. So yea that does kind of have the appearance of trolling. More so given what was just pointed out. (More so given that you did the same thing in multiple threads.)


The issue of Canon was asked about to determine the validity of a source not disregard the source. When people ask about it they are trying to determine the validity of the source.

So rifter isn't valid? If it's in rifter doesn't that kind of make it valid?

I mean it's not like I said "this is the only answer" I stated it was an "option". At which point it was placed into debate of "validity".

Additionally... Rifts and many of the palladium works are designed to be flexible. (Canon) to adapt for many types of GM/players. RIFTER was designed to allow for expanding on those game systems (canon). And for questions like this to have more than 1 answer.

It is designed to be ran using sdc instead of mdc... to have more "optional" combat rules... and allow GM's to address contradictory information the way they wish. And to include elements from other game system.

It is "canon" to chose the rules that fit the settings the best.

Rifter falls under RAI (adapt as you wish) RAW (don't like it don't use it) and canon (this system is flexible feel free to add other palladium elements into your game)

Official information in rifter is valid canon. And applies to debates. Optional information is not part of the canon and not be valid to in a debate on canon.

[Hawk258]

And if you knew it was canon but were deliberately obfuscating that with a sidetrack about how the Rifter is a source that we should consider then you were not providing information.
You were trolling and trying to play 'gotcha'

No, there was no troll, I never claimed either way. The issue of canon has "never" been a part of my posts other than "I don't care"

The issue of "canon" and official was thrown in to disregard it as a valid argument

People asked about its official value you went on a rant about all rules being optional, even to the point that you seamed to be trying to argue optional information over official cannon. Because you countered statements explaining cannon by saying every rule is optional and that rifer has more value than posters discussing a topic. So yea that does kind of have the appearance of trolling. More so given what was just pointed out. (More so given that you did the same thing in multiple threads.)


The issue of Canon was asked about to determine the validity of a source not disregard the source. When people ask about it they are trying to determine the validity of the source.

So rifter isn't valid? If it's in rifter doesn't that kind of make it valid?

I mean it's not like I said "this is the only answer" I stated it was an "option". At which point it was placed into debate of "validity".

Additionally... Rifts and many of the palladium works are designed to be flexible. (Canon) to adapt for many types of GM/players. RIFTER was designed to allow for expanding on those game systems (canon). And for questions like this to have more than 1 answer.

It is designed to be ran using sdc instead of mdc... to have more "optional" combat rules... and allow GM's to address contradictory information the way they wish. And to include elements from other game system.

It is "canon" to chose the rules that fit the settings the best.

Rifter falls under RAI (adapt as you wish) RAW (don't like it don't use it) and canon (this system is flexible feel free to add other palladium elements into your game)

Official information in rifter is valid canon. And applies to debates. Optional information is not part of the canon and not be valid to in a debate on canon.

I disagree. As KS designed the game to allow flexibility of the GM to use the rules and materials they wish... rifter is one such tool.

The op did not ask "if it is canon/official or otherwise."

Someone else put that in and even they say "rule zero it"

In fact every other "book" is "optional"

The Rifts® World Books are designed to help give gamers a foundation to work with by providing them with ideas, inspiration and op-
tions via the setting and/or specific villains, people, magic and events. World Books are not absolutely necessary nor are they canon written in stone. RUE page 372

[guardiandashi]

Official information in rifter is valid canon. And applies to debates. Optional information is not part of the canon and not be valid to in a debate on canon.

I have to partially disagree.

anything official in a rifter is official True
anything labeled as Optional in a rifter is optional material that can be integrated or not, depending on the group.
that does not automatically make it non canon, it just makes it exactly what it says, Optional

[DD The Shmey]

Greetings and Salutations. I figured I'd post a few references I didn't see mentioned earlier ...

... as a result, even the less extreme and well intentioned Death Mages radiate with a Horror Factor!

"Death Mage" here refers to Necromancers, as this is in the Necromancer write-up (under Horror Factor). This tells us even if "well intentioned" the character will still radiate a Horror Factor.

A non-Rifts source also worth note can be found in Palladium Fantasy ...

All necromancers are inherently frightening, even if their profession is unknown to observers.

So, in this case, even if you don't know a Necromancer is a Necromancer you'll still deal with the Horror Factor. This same quote can also be found in Bizantium and the Northern Islands (also for PF). As this is for Palladium Fantasy (not Rifts), this can be given as much or as little weight as one sees fit.

Hawk, I think Prysus's examples here have us dead to rights.

I hadn't realized that the description under Horror Factor for the necromancer OCC was updated in Mystic Russia compared with the original in Africa. Rifts Africa made no mention of an Aura, or anything radiating, it simply said that necromancers were frighting. This was my strongest argument that the source of the necromancers HF was his appearance and reputation, which of course could be easily masked with a disguise. With the addition of the phrase "... even less extreme and well intentioned Death Mages radiate with a Horror Factor" in Mystic Russia, I am now convinced that they have an aura that would be more difficult to cover up.

This citation was a particularly strong point because it came directly from the OCC description under the heading explaining the necromancers horror factor power. It wasn't some one off example from an NPC write-up, or something tangentially aligned with the social impact of of necromancers having a constant radiating horror factor. It was right at the source where the game mechanics of the horror factor was introduced for the necromancers.

I still think in my games, when I have a necromancer in disguise, I don't want to give away the pooch too early. I plan to play more loosely with the HF mechanic, and only use the HF as a cinematic tool for foreshadowing and what not. At least until we actually have a battle where the necromancer reveals his true colors.

I really need to be careful though, because I've got a bunch of Metagamers in my group. One time I had my secret villain flash an "evil grin" to one of the party members, and that was all it took for the rest of the game, everybody was certain that my NPC was the bad guy, and went out of their way to spoil his (My) plans.

[MadGreenSon]

I really need to be careful though, because I've got a bunch of Metagamers in my group. One time I had my secret villain flash an "evil grin" to one of the party members, and that was all it took for the rest of the game, everybody was certain that my NPC was the bad guy, and went out of their way to spoil his (My) plans.

If that's how they roll you should have Mr Evil Grin turn out to be Big Daddy Moneybags who overpays for simple missions and hasn't had an evil thought in his entire generous life and the real mastermind is whomever it is that sells them eclips/oatmeal/beer that they barely acknowledge the presence of.

But since they were going out of their way to mess with Mr Moneybags, they get less of that and their beer guy can express sympathy for what they have to put up with while setting them up to be his fall guys.

That kind of metagaming nonsense has to be punished, preferably with embarrassment.

[Hawk258]

Greetings and Salutations. I figured I'd post a few references I didn't see mentioned earlier ...

... as a result, even the less extreme and well intentioned Death Mages radiate with a Horror Factor!

"Death Mage" here refers to Necromancers, as this is in the Necromancer write-up (under Horror Factor). This tells us even if "well intentioned" the character will still radiate a Horror Factor.

A non-Rifts source also worth note can be found in Palladium Fantasy ...

All necromancers are inherently frightening, even if their profession is unknown to observers.

So, in this case, even if you don't know a Necromancer is a Necromancer you'll still deal with the Horror Factor. This same quote can also be found in Bizantium and the Northern Islands (also for PF). As this is for Palladium Fantasy (not Rifts), this can be given as much or as little weight as one sees fit.

Hawk, I think Prysus's examples here have us dead to rights.

I hadn't realized that the description under Horror Factor for the necromancer OCC was updated in Mystic Russia compared with the original in Africa. Rifts Africa made no mention of an Aura, or anything radiating, it simply said that necromancers were frighting. This was my strongest argument that the source of the necromancers HF was his appearance and reputation, which of course could be easily masked with a disguise. With the addition of the phrase "... even less extreme and well intentioned Death Mages radiate with a Horror Factor" in Mystic Russia, I am now convinced that they have an aura that would be more difficult to cover up.

This citation was a particularly strong point because it came directly from the OCC description under the heading explaining the necromancers horror factor power. It wasn't some one off example from an NPC write-up, or something tangentially aligned with the social impact of of necromancers having a constant radiating horror factor. It was right at the source where the game mechanics of the horror factor was introduced for the necromancers.

I still think in my games, when I have a necromancer in disguise, I don't want to give away the pooch too early. I plan to play more loosely with the HF mechanic, and only use the HF as a cinematic tool for foreshadowing and what not. At least until we actually have a battle where the necromancer reveals his true colors.

I really need to be careful though, because I've got a bunch of Metagamers in my group. One time I had my secret villain flash an "evil grin" to one of the party members, and that was all it took for the rest of the game, everybody was certain that my NPC was the bad guy, and went out of their way to spoil his (My) plans.

I don't think there is a right answer. That's your call in this case you are the one setting the stage.

But I agree, there is no crime shifting gears.

[Hawk258]

I really need to be careful though, because I've got a bunch of Metagamers in my group. One time I had my secret villain flash an "evil grin" to one of the party members, and that was all it took for the rest of the game, everybody was certain that my NPC was the bad guy, and went out of their way to spoil his (My) plans.

If that's how they roll you should have Mr Evil Grin turn out to be Big Daddy Moneybags who overpays for simple missions and hasn't had an evil thought in his entire generous life and the real mastermind is whomever it is that sells them eclips/oatmeal/beer that they barely acknowledge the presence of.

But since they were going out of their way to mess with Mr Moneybags, they get less of that and their beer guy can express sympathy for what they have to put up with while setting them up to be his fall guys.

That kind of metagaming nonsense has to be punished, preferably with embarrassment.

I agree
This is one of those times where it comes down to "can you prove it? And what if you are wrong?"

[taalismn]

[
But I agree, there is no crime shifting gears.

Okay then...because a necromancer being able to turn on and off the ol' Horror Factor makes for some fun possibilities.
Like if you(the necromancer) wanna get out of a date that's going badly...
One moment, captive audience to somebody casually comparing you to their previous lovers....next moment, TAXIDERMIST FROM HELL who's measuring that somebody for a place on your wall.
Real fun at birthday parties too.
Unless all the local kids are jaded little snarkers…
"Gee, wow, Alice's dad went necro again....man, when people get old they get BOOORRRIIINNNGGGG."

[Blue_Lion]

Official information in rifter is valid canon. And applies to debates. Optional information is not part of the canon and not be valid to in a debate on canon.

I have to partially disagree.

anything official in a rifter is official True
anything labeled as Optional in a rifter is optional material that can be integrated or not, depending on the group.
that does not automatically make it non canon, it just makes it exactly what it says, Optional

If it is optional it is not part of the official canon, it is just an idea on how you can tweak canon. While more valid than a home brewed rule, it is not how things are by default. So it is more of just things for people information and not evidence of something being canon.

[guardiandashi]

Official information in rifter is valid canon. And applies to debates. Optional information is not part of the canon and not be valid to in a debate on canon.

I have to partially disagree.

anything official in a rifter is official True
anything labeled as Optional in a rifter is optional material that can be integrated or not, depending on the group.
that does not automatically make it non canon, it just makes it exactly what it says, Optional

If it is optional it is not part of the official canon, it is just an idea on how you can tweak canon. While more valid than a home brewed rule, it is not how things are by default. So it is more of just things for people information and not evidence of something being canon.

my point is the optional aspect means it is in this example, the optional aspect does NOT change the canon, it just inserts an alternate interpretation of how things happen.

to use an example from another game (battletech) the default rule only allows you to get critical hits on the location that corresponds to 2 on 2d6. There is an optional rule that changes it to note the critical chance, then reroll location. In reality that makes it so critical hits can go to any hit location which is more realistic.

[Blue_Lion]

Official information in rifter is valid canon. And applies to debates. Optional information is not part of the canon and not be valid to in a debate on canon.

I have to partially disagree.

anything official in a rifter is official True
anything labeled as Optional in a rifter is optional material that can be integrated or not, depending on the group.
that does not automatically make it non canon, it just makes it exactly what it says, Optional

If it is optional it is not part of the official canon, it is just an idea on how you can tweak canon. While more valid than a home brewed rule, it is not how things are by default. So it is more of just things for people information and not evidence of something being canon.

my point is the optional aspect means it is in this example, the optional aspect does NOT change the canon, it just inserts an alternate interpretation of how things happen.

to use an example from another game (battletech) the default rule only allows you to get critical hits on the location that corresponds to 2 on 2d6. There is an optional rule that changes it to note the critical chance, then reroll location. In reality that makes it so critical hits can go to any hit location which is more realistic.

Basically what you are saying now seams to be optional is not canon but a change to how things work.

Did I get that correctly?
If so how is it relevant to saying that optional is not canon?

[Hawk258]

You want to debate canon vs official vs optional start a new post.

[Blue_Lion]

You want to debate canon vs official vs optional start a new post.

Honestly I think at this almost every thing relevant has been said. All I did was asked for clarification on what he was saying.

(You do relies that this is a new post right here. Every message people send is a new post. Is perhaps what you intended was a request to start a new thread instead of derailing this one? The ironic part is you are one of the people that is responsible for it getting derailed like this.)