Do caster out of combat options matter?

[Aimeryan]

Regarding DC determination, I don't see WotC ever helping in that regard. It's firmly entrenched in Rulings not Rules - more than any other aspect of the game.

This is also two different points, albeit here they are related to each other in very tangled ways. 1) What is WotC likely to do? 2) What should WotC do from a non-WotC view point?

With the first point, WotC is likely to do whatever makes them the most amount of profit. To this end, slogans and 'three words' can be quite effective at causing people to not act in their best interest. In this case, 'Rulings not Rules' is right up there on that - WotC whole job is to make rules, they don't make rulings - you do. If they make less rules, they don't make more rulings - you do. If you take this to the extreme, they would handle you a blank piece of paper, ask for $50, and laugh all the while you recite to yourself 'Rulings not Rules'. If you don't take them to account for this, they'll take you to the bank.

On the second point, and you can see how this is related, WotC should make rules. It is literally what you buy the books for. What if you don't think they are good at it? Then don't buy the books. What if you think your rulings are better than their rules? Then... don't buy the books.

Now, there is a limit here; each additional rule they add is likely to be of lower quality than the last - fatigue, existing view points being fully utilised, constrictions placed by previous rules, etc. As such, there IS a point at which the addition of more rules are likely to fall below a valuation point at which you should pay more money for - even further it might be a detraction of value due to bloat. However, it should be noted that this is subject dependent; if there are few rules on something in particular then the addition of rules there are, all other things being equal, highly likely to be of greater value than adding rules elsewhere. As such, '[less rules] than any other aspect of the game' is actually in favour of more rules, not less.

Lastly, 'Rulings not Rules' is itself a nonsensical argument - rules do not prohibit rulings. It would be like saying 'Bananas not Cars' - it makes no sense.