RAW refers to the "Rules As Written" in DnD, so a "RAW exploit" amounts to "The rules say <something>, so that must mean <ridiculous extrapolation of one specific interpretation of that.>" In other words, general rules-lawyering.
i see. personally i don't really understand what the big deal about rules lawyering is (like i'm relatively new to dnd, and yeah i prefer prioritizing fun over doing exactly what the books say you can or can't do - like short rests should be allowed to be shorter than an hour, and i think verbal and somatic spell components are stupid - but i genuinely don't understand why "following the rules" gets such a bad rap.) especially since it only ever seems to be bad when the players do it. i hear stories all the time of dms doing literally whatever they want, game rules be damned, but as soon as a player wants to do something out there, dms are like "does it say you can do that? do you have the components? are you in the exact range?" like why do they get to do it but not players? if you're playing a campaign that's willing to play fast and loose with what the books say, then it's up to the dm to set that expectation.
also "exploit" sounds like finding a way around "rules as written" and that doesn't sound too bad, that sounds creative?
